With the emergence of the sustainability movement, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a key concern for managers. In 2011, ninety-five percent of the 250 largest companies (G250 companies) and sixty-four percent of top 100 companies (N100) reported on their corporate responsibility activities showing an increasing trend in comparison to previous years (KMPG, 2011). Among the activities that firms report one set of practices that has shown an increasing attention is Supply Chain Management (SCM). The main reason for this increasing relevance is that managers have realized that the boundary of responsibility extends beyond the reach of their corporations' ownership (Kytle and Ruggie, 2005): Firms are held responsible not only for the effects of their actions but also for the effects of other members of their supply chains. Sustainable SCM refers to a firm's plans and activities that integrate environmental and social issues into SCM in order to improve the company's environmental and social performance and that of its suppliers and customers without compromising its economic performance (de Ron 1998; Seuring and Muller 2008; Pagell and Gobeli 2009). This definition implies that firms adopt programmes to improve the environmental and social impacts of their internal processes (e.g., the production processes within their plants) and initiatives to improve the impact of their suppliers' and customers' processes (Gimenez et al., 2012). As a result, we aim to address these gaps by analyzing the effect of both internal and supplier development social practices on firms' economic/operational and social performance (we will consider also the suppliers' social performance improvent). More specifically, in this study we test the following hypotheses (due to word count restrictions the development of each hypothesis is omitted): H1a: Internal social practices are positively associated with social performance. H1b: Internal social practices are positively associated with operational performance. H2: Social supplier development practices are positively associated with suppliers' social performance. H2a: Suppliers' social performance is positively associated with the firm's social performance. H2b: Suppliers' social performance is positively associated with the firm's operational performance. H3: The firm's social performance is positively associated with its operational performance.

ESADE

Back to home

Giménez Thomsen, Cristina; Sierra Olivera, Vicenta; Kazeminia, Ali

Firms' social performance: The effect of supplier development programmes and internal practices

With the emergence of the sustainability movement, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a key concern for managers. In 2011, ninety-five percent of the 250 largest companies (G250 companies) and sixty-four percent of top 100 companies (N100) reported on their corporate responsibility activities showing an increasing trend in comparison to previous years (KMPG, 2011). Among the activities that firms report one set of practices that has shown an increasing attention is Supply Chain Management (SCM). The main reason for this increasing relevance is that managers have realized that the boundary of responsibility extends beyond the reach of their corporations' ownership (Kytle and Ruggie, 2005): Firms are held responsible not only for the effects of their actions but also for the effects of other members of their supply chains. Sustainable SCM refers to a firm's plans and activities that integrate environmental and social issues into SCM in order to improve the company's environmental and social performance and that of its suppliers and customers without compromising its economic performance (de Ron 1998; Seuring and Muller 2008; Pagell and Gobeli 2009). This definition implies that firms adopt programmes to improve the environmental and social impacts of their internal processes (e.g., the production processes within their plants) and initiatives to improve the impact of their suppliers' and customers' processes (Gimenez et al., 2012). As a result, we aim to address these gaps by analyzing the effect of both internal and supplier development social practices on firms' economic/operational and social performance (we will consider also the suppliers' social performance improvent). More specifically, in this study we test the following hypotheses (due to word count restrictions the development of each hypothesis is omitted): H1a: Internal social practices are positively associated with social performance. H1b: Internal social practices are positively associated with operational performance. H2: Social supplier development practices are positively associated with suppliers' social performance. H2a: Suppliers' social performance is positively associated with the firm's social performance. H2b: Suppliers' social performance is positively associated with the firm's operational performance. H3: The firm's social performance is positively associated with its operational performance.
More Knowledge
Firms' social performance: The effect of supplier development programmes and internal practices
Giménez Thomsen, Cristina; Sierra Olivera, Vicenta; Kazeminia, Ali
EBEN Annual Conference 2012
EBEN España
Madrid (Spain), 19/09/2012 - 22/09/2012

Related publications

Back to home