{"title":"从悖论的感官制造中学习看待供应链中的现代奴隶制","authors":"Bruce Pinnington, Joanne Meehan","doi":"10.1111/jscm.12309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mandatory annual reporting, to improve transparency of working conditions in firms’ supply chains, is the favoured approach of UK policymakers for reducing modern slavery risks in supply chains. Despite legislation and extensive guidance, annual corporate statements are disappointing, providing little evidence of substantive action. So far though, there has been little primary research of managers’ understanding of the phenomenon, or their perceived agency in tackling modern slavery. In a qualitative study, employing template analysis, data were drawn from multiple sources, including interviews with 32 managers from three large UK firms in a complex, high‐risk sector (construction). Four focus groups were used to establish credibility of the findings. As managers struggle with how to make sense of where to look, how to look, and what to see, they adopt narrowed perspectives and analogies that inhibit immediate, compelling action. Improved awareness of UK labour supply chain issues has distanced managers further from action relating to global materials supply chains. Through analogy with health and safety legislation, which developed over a considerable period, managers justify a wait‐and‐see approach, deferring action. Such convenience framing helps them to avoid issues relating to complexity, control, cost and (in)visibility. This framing needs to be disrupted for meaningful action to result. Drawing on sensemaking theory relating to paradoxical financial and sustainability objectives, the study suggests how extended legislation and governance may drive more substantive responses that transcend the constraints of business‐case logic.","PeriodicalId":51392,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Supply Chain Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Learning to See Modern Slavery in Supply Chains through Paradoxical Sensemaking\",\"authors\":\"Bruce Pinnington, Joanne Meehan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jscm.12309\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Mandatory annual reporting, to improve transparency of working conditions in firms’ supply chains, is the favoured approach of UK policymakers for reducing modern slavery risks in supply chains. Despite legislation and extensive guidance, annual corporate statements are disappointing, providing little evidence of substantive action. So far though, there has been little primary research of managers’ understanding of the phenomenon, or their perceived agency in tackling modern slavery. In a qualitative study, employing template analysis, data were drawn from multiple sources, including interviews with 32 managers from three large UK firms in a complex, high‐risk sector (construction). Four focus groups were used to establish credibility of the findings. As managers struggle with how to make sense of where to look, how to look, and what to see, they adopt narrowed perspectives and analogies that inhibit immediate, compelling action. Improved awareness of UK labour supply chain issues has distanced managers further from action relating to global materials supply chains. Through analogy with health and safety legislation, which developed over a considerable period, managers justify a wait‐and‐see approach, deferring action. Such convenience framing helps them to avoid issues relating to complexity, control, cost and (in)visibility. This framing needs to be disrupted for meaningful action to result. Drawing on sensemaking theory relating to paradoxical financial and sustainability objectives, the study suggests how extended legislation and governance may drive more substantive responses that transcend the constraints of business‐case logic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Supply Chain Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Supply Chain Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12309\",\"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 Supply Chain Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12309","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Learning to See Modern Slavery in Supply Chains through Paradoxical Sensemaking
Mandatory annual reporting, to improve transparency of working conditions in firms’ supply chains, is the favoured approach of UK policymakers for reducing modern slavery risks in supply chains. Despite legislation and extensive guidance, annual corporate statements are disappointing, providing little evidence of substantive action. So far though, there has been little primary research of managers’ understanding of the phenomenon, or their perceived agency in tackling modern slavery. In a qualitative study, employing template analysis, data were drawn from multiple sources, including interviews with 32 managers from three large UK firms in a complex, high‐risk sector (construction). Four focus groups were used to establish credibility of the findings. As managers struggle with how to make sense of where to look, how to look, and what to see, they adopt narrowed perspectives and analogies that inhibit immediate, compelling action. Improved awareness of UK labour supply chain issues has distanced managers further from action relating to global materials supply chains. Through analogy with health and safety legislation, which developed over a considerable period, managers justify a wait‐and‐see approach, deferring action. Such convenience framing helps them to avoid issues relating to complexity, control, cost and (in)visibility. This framing needs to be disrupted for meaningful action to result. Drawing on sensemaking theory relating to paradoxical financial and sustainability objectives, the study suggests how extended legislation and governance may drive more substantive responses that transcend the constraints of business‐case logic.
期刊介绍:
ournal of Supply Chain Management
Mission:
The mission of the Journal of Supply Chain Management (JSCM) is to be the premier choice among supply chain management scholars from various disciplines. It aims to attract high-quality, impactful behavioral research that focuses on theory building and employs rigorous empirical methodologies.
Article Requirements:
An article published in JSCM must make a significant contribution to supply chain management theory. This contribution can be achieved through either an inductive, theory-building process or a deductive, theory-testing approach. This contribution may manifest in various ways, such as falsification of conventional understanding, theory-building through conceptual development, inductive or qualitative research, initial empirical testing of a theory, theoretically-based meta-analysis, or constructive replication that clarifies the boundaries or range of a theory.
Theoretical Contribution:
Manuscripts should explicitly convey the theoretical contribution relative to the existing supply chain management literature, and when appropriate, to the literature outside of supply chain management (e.g., management theory, psychology, economics).
Empirical Contribution:
Manuscripts published in JSCM must also provide strong empirical contributions. While conceptual manuscripts are welcomed, they must significantly advance theory in the field of supply chain management and be firmly grounded in existing theory and relevant literature. For empirical manuscripts, authors must adequately assess validity, which is essential for empirical research, whether quantitative or qualitative.