Intensidad de la rivalidad entre competidores de un sector Se refiere al número de empresas que compiten directamente con la misma industria y

With a view to transfer the knowledge to future generations, firms should describe the process in depth and update it accordingly. Therefore, new employees or decision makers can be trained and they can enhance the process standardization. One of the issues observed during the audit at the Firm B is the language communication barrier found between the end customer’s specification in German language, the tier one translation in Slovakian and the tier two translation in Chinese. Thus, Firm B (tier two) misunderstood a product’s specification because of a translation failure. During the on-site audit, the Chinese firm was encouraged to actively contact its customer for any doubts or questions during the manufacturing or contractual review process. Also, the Chinese firm was recommended to write its specifications as clear as possible and clarify them before processing the customer order. Control plans, failure mode effects analysis (FMEA) and production part approval process (PPAP) reports and processes were not implemented at that time, so the competence transfer involved was more difficult for external providers. This study highlights the relevance of categorize and differentiate external providers with regards to their material groups’ requirements. Thus, requirements concerning PCB manufacturing are different to the ones for injection molding activities.

The supplier evaluation process suggests that the framework is comprehensive and includes the key considerations highlighted in the interviews, thus offering some insight into possible outcomes for decision makers. The framework is coupled with a decision matrix collecting the information defined in the framework, such as the factors and areas for the operationalization of the process. As observed in the multiple case study, while the relevance of environmental factors is greater than economic factors. The social and environmental criteria were not considered in previous supplier evaluation assessments and, at the beginning, they were underestimated by some participants. However, once they understood the meaning of CSR and its positive influence on firm performance, the social and environmental criteria were adopted.

The research presented in this paper has significant theoretical and practical implications in the supply chain in general and procurement management in particular. Although past literature reviews provide valuable results, they were based upon the assessment of supplier evaluation decisions and did not consider the TBL model in combination with other criteria based on strategic or resource position viewpoints, like Gualandris, Klassen, Vachon and Kalchschmidt (2015). They proposed a sustainable evaluation and verification (SEV) model with three interrelated dimensions: inclusivity, scope, and disclosure. Unlike Winter and Lasch (2016), who stated that the sustainability criteria are less important in supplier evaluation than other criteria, this research assumes that the relevance of social and environmental criteria should be assigned depending on each case study and can be even more relevant than the rest of criteria. Additionally, they did not consider criteria like green energy and energy management, which are highly relevant for environmental responsibility. The supplier evaluation and selection problem has been studied extensively in the literature. However, this paper aims to contribute to the study of the sustainable supplier evaluation literature on supply chain management through the graphical representation of why and how supplier evaluations are made. The proposed framework was successful in the evaluation of the most suitable green external provider and helping decision makers to analyze the suppliers who did not fit with the firm’s policy.

The sustainable supplier evaluation framework presented is intended to address the trends identified in the literature by covering relevant factors considered in supplier evaluation decisions. The objective is to provide a graphical representation of relevant dimensions which need to be studied when examining external provider evaluation decisions. One of the article’s main contributions is the integration of the framework into real-life situations. The consistency of the proposed methodology is confirmed based on two case studies of electronics firms. The carbon emissions reduction is particularly important to bring a more sustainable living environment especially in industrial countries like China. This is supported by Yin, Li, Dong, and Xing (2017) in China and these regulations were observed during the second party audit performed at the Firm B in Shenzhen. Government regulations like water restrictions play an important role. Whereas social conditions are also relevant to guarantee the sustainability, they forgot to consider them in their research.

This framework not only includes relevant factors to be considered, but also provides a structure to investigate these factors and design a practical decision matrix with a pairwise comparison methodology for the practical operationalization of the framework. In contrast to

the approach proposed by Sevkli et al. (2007), this thesis develops a framework including sustainability criteria for practitioners and academics to deepen their knowledge in the supplier evaluation field. Results reviewed in the multiple case study support the idea that green supplier evaluation in manufacturing can be effectively addressed with the proposed framework. Additionally, it takes into account the need to determine the weightings of decision makers, as seen in the case studies and comprehensively and understandably document the completed supplier evaluation process through the project sheet and a project report. Further testing of the tool involving the parameters defined in the designed framework are addressed during its operationalization.

In contrast to the research works of Kumar, Agarwal, and Sharma (2016); Kumar, Singh and Vaish (2017); and Hashim, Nazam, Yao, Baig, Abrar and Zia-ur-Rehman (2017) who understood the sustainability concept on supply chain in terms of environmental considerations, this study extends this concept by additionally assessing social criteria on supplier evaluations. This study provides a long-term framework for actions in many policy areas and it aims to increase certainty for investment and innovation and ensure that all relevant policies take account of resource efficiency in a balanced manner. Identifying best practices for integrating corporate social responsibility involves the evaluation of external providers’ certification according to the ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 50001 and ISO 45001 standards. Accepting the firm’s code of conduct and monitoring it throughout the whole supply chain phase are relevant factors to be considered in order to ensure procurement sustainability.

The perfect integration of the framework within the proposed tool can be used as a guideline to provide managers, practitioners and academics with a practical solution to make external provider evaluation decisions in a more structured and consistent manner. As observed in the multiple case studies, a better understanding of the lessons learned and improvement potentials should be considered for every future decision, especially by setting a goal which is consistent with the relevance and weighting of the clusters. Hence, practitioners can learn from past failures by adapting future requirements and continuously updating the proposed framework and tool. Therefore, it should be perceived as a support tool for the sustainable evaluation of external providers. The framework will involve a two-stage decision process: (1) the sourcing decision and (2) the managerial actions required to implement the decision. Notwithstanding the above findings and contributions, this study faces a number of limitations and so do its outcomes. Firstly, a potential limitation of this study stems from the

fact that the in-depth analysis focused exclusively on two case studies. As a consequence, the comparison with other case studies was not evaluated. Secondly, the integration of the TBL methodology into the proposed framework had not been evaluated in the past, which means more evaluations would be required. However, the findings seem to provide a valuable understanding of the current situation in this research field. The present study equally suggests several future research strands which may encourage more intensive studies in this important area.

According to the findings, this article can prove useful for researchers and decision makers, since new trends are emerging in both areas that will probably lead to future research and implementation in firms. Hopefully, the present paper will give rise to a new approach to studying sustainable supplier evaluation practices. It must be added that the results provide practical guidelines to adopt a sourcing strategy based on the relevance of various determinants for the firm. There is clearly still plenty of room for growth and improvement in the sustainable supplier evaluation literature. Another chance for future researchers is empirically validating other case studies within the proposed theoretical framework.

Admittedly, the research topics listed below have already been investigated. Nevertheless, it is my conviction that a need exists to continue updating what is known about sustainable supplier evaluation decision. What considerations are borne in mind during the sustainable procurement decision process? To what extent does the right supplier evaluation have an impact on firms’ operational performance? These and other similar questions should be asked for improving supplier evaluation practices from a sustainable viewpoint.

4.7 References

Assari, A., Mahesh, T. and Assari, E. (2012). Role of public participation in sustainability of historical city: usage of TOPSIS method. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, pp. 2289-2294.

Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of

Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 99-120.

Boran, F. E., Genç, S., Kurt, M. and Akay, D. (2009). A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method, Expert Systems with

Chaharsooghi, S. K. and Ashrafi, M. (2014). Sustainable Supplier Performance Evaluation and Selection with Neofuzzy TOPSIS Method, International Scholarly Research Notices, Vol. 2014, Article ID 434168, 10 pages.

Chen, C.-T., Lin, C.-T. and Huang, S.-F. (2006). A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management, Int. J. Production Economics, Vol. 102, pp. 289- 301.

Coase, R. H. (1937). The Nature of the Firm, Economica, Vol. 4, No. 16, pp. 386-405.

Deng, H., Yeh, C. H. and Willis, R. J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights, Computers & Operations Research, Vol. 27, pp. 963-973. Dibbern, J., Goles, T., Hirschheim, R. and Jayatilaka, B. (2004). Information Systems Outsourcing: A Survey and Analysis of the Literature, ACM SIGMIS, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 6- 102.

EcoVadis, (2018). Sustainability Ratings Solution for Supply Chains. http://www.ecovadis.com/de/uber-uns/activity-report/. Access on: 05.11.2018.

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review, Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 57-74.

Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: win–win–win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 90-100. Fudenberg, D. and Tirole, J. (1990). Noncooperative Game Theory for Industrial Organization, In Handbook of Industrial Organizations, R. Schmalensee and R. D. Willig (Ed.), Vol.1, New York, Oxford, Tokyo, pp. 259-327.

Handbook of Industrial Organizations, R. Schmalensee and R. D. Willig (Ed.), Vol.1, New York, Oxford, Tokyo, pp. 259-327.

Gencer, C. and Gürpinar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm, Applied Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 31, No. 11, pp. 2475-2486. Gimenez, C., Sierra, V. and Rodon, J. (2012). Sustainable operations: Their impact on the triple bottom line, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 140, No. 1, pp. 149- 159.

Gualandris, J., Klassen, R. D., Vachon, S. and Kalchschmidt, M. (2015). Sustainable evaluation and verification in supply chains: Aligning and leveraging accountability to stakeholders, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 38, pp. 1-13.

Hwang, C.L., Lai, Y.J. and Liu, T.Y. (1993). A new approach for multiple objective decision making, Computers and Operational Research, Vol. 20, pp. 889-899. DOI:10.1016/0305- 0548(93)90109-v.

Hashim, M., Nazam, M., Yao, L., Baig, S. A., Abrar, M. and Zia-ur-Rehman, M. (2017). Application of Multi-Objective Optimization Based on Genetic Algorithm for Sustainable Strategic Supplier Selection under Fuzzy Environment, Journal of Industrial Engineering and

Management, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 73-89.

Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.

ISO 26000 (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility and Guidance on Social Responsibility. https://www.iso.org/iso-26000-social-responsibility.html. Access on: 05.11.2018.

Jackson, A., Boswell, K. and Davis, D. (2011). Sustainability and triple bottom line reporting – What is it all about? International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 55-59.

Kou, G., Ergu, D. and Shang, J. (2014). Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: Adapting Hadamard model to mitigate judgment contradiction, European Journal of

Operational Research, Vol. 236, pp. 261-271.

Kumar BR, R., Agarwal, A., Sharma, M. K. (2016) "Lean management – a step towards sustainable green supply chain", Competitiveness Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp.311-331.

Kumar, P., Singh, R. K. and Vaish, A. (2017) Suppliers’ green performance evaluation using fuzzy extended ELECTRE approach, Clean Techn Environ Policy, Vol. 19, pp. 809-821. Miles, M. and Huberman, M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis, London: Sage Publications. Öztürk, B. A. and Özçelik, F. (2014). Sustainable Supplier Selection with A Fuzzy Multi- Criteria Decision Making Method Based on Triple Bottom Line, Business and Economics

Research Journal, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 129-147.

Penrose, E. T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New York: Blackwell.

Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective, New York: Harper & Row.

Sarkis, J. and Dhavale, D. G. (2015). Supplier selection for sustainable operations: A triple- bottom-line approach using a Bayesian framework, International Journal of Production

Economics, Vol. 166, pp. 177-191.

Sevkli, M., Koh, S. C. L., Zaim, S., Demirbağ, M. and Tatoglu, E. (2007). An application of data envelopment analytic hierarchy process for supplier selection: a case study of BEKO in Turkey, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, No. 9, pp. 1973-2003.

Temuçin, T., ToTemuzan, H., Valíček, J. and Harničárová, M. (2013). A Fuzzy based decision support model for non-traditional machining process selection, Technical Gazette, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 787-793.

Thompson, R. L. (1967). Organizations in Action, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment, Psychological Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 273-286.

Tsai, H.-Y., Huang, B.-H. and Wang A. S. (2008). Combining ANP and TOPSIS Concepts for Evaluation the Performance of Property-Liability Insurance Companies, Journal of Social

Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 56-61.

Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies, Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization, New York: Free Press.

Williamson, O. E. (1981). The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach,

American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 548-577.

Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, New York, London: Free Press, Collier Macmillan.

Winter, S. and Lasch, R. (2016). Environmental and social criteria in supplier evaluation-- Lessons from the fashion and apparel industry, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 139, pp. 175-190.

Yin, S., Li, B., Dong, H., and Xing, Z. (2017). A New Dynamic Multicriteria Decision- Making Approach for Green Supplier Selection in Construction Projects under Time Sequence, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Vol. 2017, 13 pages.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research, London: Sage Publications.

Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications, Design and Methods (Sixth Edition),

Sage Publications, London.

Yoon, K. (1987). A reconciliation among discrete compromise situations. Journal of

5

EXPLORING SUSTAINABLE

SUPPLY CHAIN PRACTICES:

A CASE STUDY FROM THE

GERMAN INDUSTRY

5. Exploring sustainable supply chain practices: a case study from the