William Diebel, Jury Gualandris, Robert D. Klassen
{"title":"供应商如何应对制度的复杂性?研究全球制造业供应网络中的自愿公开环境信息披露","authors":"William Diebel, Jury Gualandris, Robert D. Klassen","doi":"10.1002/joom.1293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>When making decisions about their commitments to environmental practices and performance, suppliers face heterogenous institutional logics and their diverse prescriptions for action. How do suppliers respond to such institutional complexity? We examine this question in the context of suppliers' voluntary public environmental disclosures (disclosure). Specifically, our study assembles a unique panel data set of global manufacturing suppliers and their annual contractual relationships with buyers. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature, we hypothesize that suppliers selectively mimic the disclosure of their buyers by following market, corporate, and sustainability logics. Our study contributes to the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature by indicating that in the context of disclosure, market and sustainability logics both actively shape suppliers' responses to institutional complexity. Furthermore, we find support for mimicry as a mechanism of buyer influence that can lead to disclosure heterogeneity across suppliers even when they follow the same logic, which opens new avenues for research. Our findings can be leveraged by buyers, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in advancing transparency and sustainability in supply networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"70 2","pages":"285-315"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1293","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do suppliers respond to institutional complexity? Examining voluntary public environmental disclosure in a global manufacturing supply network\",\"authors\":\"William Diebel, Jury Gualandris, Robert D. Klassen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/joom.1293\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>When making decisions about their commitments to environmental practices and performance, suppliers face heterogenous institutional logics and their diverse prescriptions for action. How do suppliers respond to such institutional complexity? We examine this question in the context of suppliers' voluntary public environmental disclosures (disclosure). Specifically, our study assembles a unique panel data set of global manufacturing suppliers and their annual contractual relationships with buyers. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature, we hypothesize that suppliers selectively mimic the disclosure of their buyers by following market, corporate, and sustainability logics. Our study contributes to the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature by indicating that in the context of disclosure, market and sustainability logics both actively shape suppliers' responses to institutional complexity. Furthermore, we find support for mimicry as a mechanism of buyer influence that can lead to disclosure heterogeneity across suppliers even when they follow the same logic, which opens new avenues for research. Our findings can be leveraged by buyers, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in advancing transparency and sustainability in supply networks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Operations Management\",\"volume\":\"70 2\",\"pages\":\"285-315\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1293\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Operations Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1293\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1293","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
How do suppliers respond to institutional complexity? Examining voluntary public environmental disclosure in a global manufacturing supply network
When making decisions about their commitments to environmental practices and performance, suppliers face heterogenous institutional logics and their diverse prescriptions for action. How do suppliers respond to such institutional complexity? We examine this question in the context of suppliers' voluntary public environmental disclosures (disclosure). Specifically, our study assembles a unique panel data set of global manufacturing suppliers and their annual contractual relationships with buyers. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature, we hypothesize that suppliers selectively mimic the disclosure of their buyers by following market, corporate, and sustainability logics. Our study contributes to the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature by indicating that in the context of disclosure, market and sustainability logics both actively shape suppliers' responses to institutional complexity. Furthermore, we find support for mimicry as a mechanism of buyer influence that can lead to disclosure heterogeneity across suppliers even when they follow the same logic, which opens new avenues for research. Our findings can be leveraged by buyers, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in advancing transparency and sustainability in supply networks.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading academic publication dedicated to advancing the field of operations management (OM) through rigorous and original research. The journal's primary audience is the academic community, although it also values contributions that attract the interest of practitioners. However, it does not publish articles that are primarily aimed at practitioners, as academic relevance is a fundamental requirement.
JOM focuses on the management aspects of various types of operations, including manufacturing, service, and supply chain operations. The journal's scope is broad, covering both profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. The core criterion for publication is that the research question must be centered around operations management, rather than merely using operations as a context. For instance, a study on charismatic leadership in a manufacturing setting would only be within JOM's scope if it directly relates to the management of operations; the mere setting of the study is not enough.
Published papers in JOM are expected to address real-world operational questions and challenges. While not all research must be driven by practical concerns, there must be a credible link to practice that is considered from the outset of the research, not as an afterthought. Authors are cautioned against assuming that academic knowledge can be easily translated into practical applications without proper justification.
JOM's articles are abstracted and indexed by several prestigious databases and services, including Engineering Information, Inc.; Executive Sciences Institute; INSPEC; International Abstracts in Operations Research; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; SciSearch/Science Citation Index; CompuMath Citation Index; Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology; Information Access Company; and Social Sciences Citation Index. This ensures that the journal's research is widely accessible and recognized within the academic and professional communities.