Text2fa - Ir Green Supply Chain Management Practices

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Emerald Article: Green supply chain management practices: impact on

performance
Kenneth W. Green Jr, Pamela J. Zelbst, Jeramy Meacham, Vikram S. Bhadauria
Article information:
To cite this document: Kenneth W. Green Jr, Pamela J. Zelbst, Jeramy Meacham, Vikram S. Bhadauria, (2012),"Green supply chain
management practices: impact on performance", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 Iss: 3 pp. 290 - 305
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598541211227126
Downloaded on: 23-10-2012
References: This document contains references to 77 other documents
To copy this document: [email protected]
Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Joseph Sarkis, (2012),"A boundaries and flows perspective of green supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, Vol. 17 Iss: 2 pp. 202 - 216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598541211212924
Victor Guang Shi, S.C. Lenny Koh, James Baldwin, Federica Cucchiella, (2012),"Natural resource based green supply chain
management", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 Iss: 1 pp. 54 - 67
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598541211212203
Maria Björklund, Uni Martinsen, Mats Abrahamsson, (2012),"Performance measurements in the greening of supply chains", Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 Iss: 1 pp. 29 - 39
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13598541211212186
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by LINKOPINGS UNIVERSITET
For Authors:
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.
Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in
business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as
well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is
a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Green supply chain management practices:
impact on performance
Kenneth W. Green Jr
Department of Management, Marketing, and Management Information Systems, Southern Arkansas University, Magnolia, Arkansas, USA
Pamela J. Zelbst
Department of Management and Marketing, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA, and
Jeramy Meacham and Vikram S. Bhadauria
Department of Management, Marketing, and Management Information Systems, Southern Arkansas University, Magnolia, Arkansas, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The aim is to contribute significantly to the first wave of empirical investigations related to the impact of green supply chain management
(GSCM) practices on performance. The paper also aims to theorize and empirically assess a comprehensive GSCM practices and performance model.
The model incorporates green supply chain practices that link manufacturers with supply chain partners (both suppliers and customers) to support
environmental sustainability throughout the supply chain.
Design/methodology/approach – Data collected from 159 manufacturing managers were analyzed using a structural equation modeling
methodology. Manufacturing managers provide data reflecting the degree to which their organizations work with suppliers and customers to improve
environmental sustainability of the supply chain.
Findings – Generally, the adoption of GSCM practices by manufacturing organizations leads to improved environmental performance and economic
performance, which, in turn, positively impact operational performance. Operational performance enhances organizational performance.
Research limitations/implications – As a first wave empirical investigation of the impact of GSCM practices on performance, the study is by
necessity exploratory.
Practical implications – Practitioners are provided with a framework for assessing the synergistic impact of GSCM practices on performance. Internal
environmental management and green information systems are identified as necessary precursors to the implementation of green purchasing,
cooperation with customers, eco-design, and investment recovery.
Originality/value – A comprehensive GSCM practices performance model is proposed and empirically assessed. The results of this investigation
support the proposition that GSCM practices are both environmentally necessary and good business. A structured two-wave approach to the
implementation of GSCM practices is recommended.
Keywords Green supply chain management, Green information systems, Environmental performance, Economic performance,
Operational performance, Organizational performance
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction chain level and a focus on the changing demands of final

customers, it is necessary to identify and adopt practices that
Supply chain management (SCM) requires the integration yield competitive advantage at the supply chain level which, in
and coordination of business processes and strategy alignment turn, yield improved performance for the individual supply
throughout the supply chain for the purpose of satisfying the chain partners (Green et al., 2008). Environmental
final customers of the supply chain (Green et al., 2008, 2006; sustainability is a supply chain imperative rather than an
Cohen and Roussel, 2005; Ho et al., 2002). Business
organizational imperative (Vachon and Klassen, 2007; Vachon
processes that must be integrated and coordinated include
and Klassen, 2006; Vasileiou and Morris, 2006).
purchasing, manufacturing, marketing, logistics, and
Development of environmentally friendly processes,
information systems. Strategic imperatives that must be
products, and services requires a unified effort by all
aligned include customer focus, efficiency, quality, and
members of the supply chain to avoid sub-optimization at
responsiveness (Zelbst et al., 2010), and most recently
environmental sustainability. With competition at the supply the partner level (Vasileiou and Morris, 2006).
Manufacturing organizations have begun to implement
green supply chain management (GSCM) practices in
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at response to customer demand for products and services that
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-8546.htm
Received: 10 August 2011

Revised: 1 September 2011
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
17/3 (2012) 290– 305 1 December 2011
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546] 3 January 2012
[DOI 10.1108/13598541211227126] Accepted: 6 January 2012
290
Green supply chain management practices: impact on performance Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Kenneth W. Green Jr et al. Volume 17 · Number 3 · 2012 · 290 –305
are environmentally sustainable and that are created through 2. Literature review and hypotheses development
environmentally sustainable practices and in response to
governmental environmental regulations (Murray, 2000; The broad view of sustainability incorporates the concepts of
Green et al., 1998). These practices require that economic, social, and environmental performance (Carter
manufacturers work in concert with suppliers and customers and Easton, 2011; Carter and Rogers, 2008). The literature
to enhance environmental sustainability. The implementation related to sustainability is relatively well developed (Carter
of GSCM practices is expected to result in improved and Easton, 2011; Carter and Rogers, 2008). Our focus is on
environmental performance as measured by reductions in air the environmental performance component of sustainability.
emissions, effluent waste, solid waste, and the consumption of The focus of environmental management has moved from the
toxic materials. There is concern, however, whether such organization level to the supply chain level (Linton et al.,
environmental sustainability efforts will ultimately translate 2007; Preuss, 2002). Seuring (2004) describes
into improved market share and profitability. Ultimately, “environmental supply chain management” as the
manufacturing managers are responsible for the performance managerial integration of material and information flows
of the organizations for which they work (Green et al., 2008). throughout the supply chain to satisfy the demand of
How best can they improve organizational performance customers for green products and services produced by
within the context of their supply chains? Local managers green processes.
must make decisions that support the supply chain first and Supply chains strive to maintain internal health and
their organizations second (Green et al., 2008). In short, environmental sustainability using the capability to self
managers must “globalize to localize.” Success at the supply correct based on information from the external environment
chain level leads to success at the organizational level (Chopra (Vachon, 2007). As the organizations making up a supply
and Meindl, 2004). Since customers and governmental chain become aware of customer demands for products and
entities have begun to demand that processes, products, and services provided without damage to the environment,
services be environmentally friendly, it is important that managers will make decisions that support the integration
managers identify and implement environmental and coordination of GSCM practices throughout the supply
sustainability practices that extend throughout the supply chain (Vachon and Klassen, 2007; Vachon and Klassen,
chain. 2006). Supply chains and organizations can gain competitive
Klassen (1993) and Preuss (2002) argue for integrating advantage by being the first to adopt environmental
environmental issues into the mainstream of SCM. Handfield sustainability and implement GSCM practices (Sen, 2009;
et al. (1997) suggest that environmental sustainability efforts Barratt and Oke, 2007; Handfield et al., 1997). Preuss (2001,
be integrated throughout the value chain. Linton et al. (2007) 2002) emphasizes the “boundary-spanning” role of SCM as
assert that the focus of environmental management has key to the implementation of environmental strategies both
moved from the organization level to the supply chain level. downstream and upstream through the supply chain. He
Whether going “green” really pays has been investigated with describes the possibility of a “green multiplier effect” resulting
inconclusive results (King and Lenox, 2001; Rao and Holt, from the collaboration of supply chain partners concerning
2005; Zhu and Sarkis, 2004). Seuring (2004) questions environmental issues. Seuring (2001) cautions that
whether the adoption of environmental sustainability results transaction costs associated with interactions among supply
in a win-win situation or environmental and economic chain partners must be considered as the partners work to
tradeoffs for the supply chain partners. There is a lack of improve the environmental sustainability of the supply chain.
empirical research that looks into this phenomenon from a In addition to customer requirements, environmental
holistic and integrated perspective that could be used as a legislation and regulation have been identified as drivers of
foundation for both theory building and theory testing. the adoption of green practices (Preuss, 2002). There is not a
We contribute to the GSCM literature by incorporating clear consensus of the impact of environmental legislation on
recently developed constructs (Zhu et al., 2008a; Green and firm competitiveness. Jorgensen and Wilcoxen (1990)
Inman, 2005; Esty and Winston, 2006) in a comprehensive quantify the impact of the costs of pollution controls on
GSCM practices model and providing early empirical costs of goods and services in the US economy. While they
evidence concerning the efficacy of the model. Generally, estimate that pollution abatement may account for as much as
we propose that manufacturing organizations should adopt 10 percent of the total costs of some goods and services, they
environmental sustainability as a strategic imperative and do not assess the benefits associated with a cleaner
expand existing enterprise information system capabilities to environment. There is concern that firms may lose
monitor environmental sustainability activities and outcomes competitive advantage due to the increased costs from
prior to implementation of GSCM practices. Further, we implementation of environmental sustainability guidelines.
propose that successful implementation of GSCM practices Jaffe et al. (1995) conclude that there is little evidence to
such as green purchasing, cooperation with customers, eco- support the proposition that environmental regulations
design, and investment recovery will lead to improved damage competitiveness. More empirical research is
environmental and economic performance which support necessary to definitively establish the impact of
improved operational and organizational performance. A environmental sustainability legislation on the
theorized model is assessed using data from a national sample competitiveness of business firms.
of 159 managers working for US manufacturing The literature specifically related to GSCM is in the early
organizations. The managers responded to survey items stages of development, with related articles dealing primarily
related to the internal environmental practices of their with theoretical discussions and anecdotal evidence (Quazi,
organizations and to the environmental practices 2001). In addition, a number of authors have done
coordinated and integrated with both suppliers and preliminary work in developing measurement scales related
customers. to environmental sustainability (Zhu et al., 2008a; Vachon
291
and Klassen, 2006; Wee and Quazi, 2005). King and Lenox Adoption of environmental sustainability as a strategic
(2001) raise the question of whether or not embracing imperative requires that organizations develop and
environmental sustainability really pays. They do not find a implement green information systems. A strategic focus on
strong and conclusive link between environmental GSCM necessitates the need to monitor manufacturing,
sustainability practices and environmental and financial purchasing, and selling processes to ensure environmental
performance and call for further empirical investigation. sustainability (Preuss, 2002). Information systems are not just
The existing research provides some direction but remains enablers of interconnectedness; they can also be used to
inconclusive (Rao and Holt, 2005; Zhu and Sarkis, 2004). enhance trust and commitment among the supply chain
partners (Welty and Becerra-Fernandez, 2001). Information
2.1 Theoretical model systems are primarily used by organizations for providing
Each of the hypotheses depicted in Figure 1 is theorized as tools, techniques, and mechanisms for collaboration. Jiang
being direct and positive. Definitions of the constructs and Klein (1999) found that management support was a
incorporated in the model are provided in Table I. Generally, necessary precursor to successful information system
GSCM practices are the focal constructs in the theorized implementation:
model with internal environmental management and green
information systems as antecedents and environmental, H1. Internal environmental management directly and
economic, operational, and organizational performance as positively impacts green information systems.
consequences. In addition, green information systems provide
the information necessary to make decisions about green 2.2.2 Internal environmental management and green supply chain
purchasing, the level of cooperation with customers, design of practices
the product, and investment recovery. Changes made as a Once environmental sustainability has been adopted as a
result of internal environmental management or green strategic imperative and the imperative receives the
information systems impact the ability to implement green commitment and support from top and mid-level
supply chain practices which will impact environmental management, the organization can proceed with the
performance, economic performance, operational implementation of the GSCM practices of green
performance, and organizational performance. purchasing, cooperation with customers, eco-design, and
investment recovery. The incorporation of the imperative into
2.2 Hypotheses the overall strategy of the organization is a necessary precursor
2.2.1 Internal environmental management and green information to successful implementation of the practices (Murray, 2000).
systems Top-management support is a key driver of the successful
Once firms adopt environmental sustainability as a strategic adoption and implementation of innovations, including new
imperative, they can proceed to develop green information technologies, programs, and activities (Hamel and Prahalad,
systems capabilities. Information systems are essential for 1989). To ensure environmental excellence, top management
creation, maintenance, and survival of supply chains. must be totally committed (Rice, 2003; Zsidisin and Siferd,
Figure 1 Comprehensive green supply chain management practices performance model with hypotheses
292
Table I Construct definitions

Construct Definition
Internal environmental management Internal environmental management is the practice of developing green supply chain management as a strategic
organizational imperative through commitment and support of the imperative from senior and mid-level
managers (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Green information systems Green information systems are information systems that have been modified and are used to monitor
environmental practices and outcomes (Esty and Winston, 2006)
Green purchasing Green purchasing focuses on cooperating with suppliers for the purpose of developing products that are
environmentally sustainable (Zhu et al., 2008a; Carter and Carter, 1998)
Cooperation with customers Cooperation with customers requires working with customers to design cleaner production processes that
produce environmentally sustainable products with green packaging (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Eco-design Eco-design requires that manufacturers design products that minimize consumption of materials and energy, that
facilitate the reuse, recycle, and recovery of component materials and parts, and that avoid or reduce the use of
hazardous products within the manufacturing process (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Investment recovery Investment recovery requires the sale of excess inventories, scrap and used materials, and excess capital
equipment (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Environmental performance Environmental performance relates the ability of manufacturing plants to reduce air emissions, effluent waste,
and solid wastes and the ability to decrease consumption of hazardous and toxic materials (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Economic performance Economic performance relates to the manufacturing plant’s ability to reduce costs associated with purchased
materials, energy consumption, waste treatment, waste discharge, and fines for environmental accidents (Zhu
et al., 2008a).
Operational performance Operational performance relates to the manufacturing plant’s capabilities to more efficiently produce and deliver
products to customers (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Organizational performance Financial and marketing performance of the organization as compared to the industry average (Green and Inman,
2005)
2001; de Bakker et al., 2002). Zhu et al. (2008b) found that stakeholders (El-Gayar and Fritz, 2006). Green information
organizational learning and management support positively systems provide the information needed for coordinating with
affect the implementation of GSCM practices. According to customers in terms of eco-design, production, packaging, and
Klassen and McLaughlin (1993), environmental excellence transportation. Information sharing, through the use of green
starts during the initial product and process design. information systems, is a key enabler for SCM in terms of
Management commitment to an environmental integration and coordination (Chandra et al., 2007). Frohlich
sustainability strategy is necessary to ensure that a full green and Westbrook (2001) proposed that the concept of logistical
life-cycle approach is adopted (Byrne and Deeb, 1993; integration includes the extent of cooperation in managing basic
Herod, 1989; Klassen and McLaughlin, 1993; Zsidisin and informational and material flows along the supply chain. Based
Hendrick, 1998): on a case study of the food industry, Hamprecht et al. (2005)
H2a. Internal environmental management directly and argue the importance of incorporating environmental controls
positively impacts green purchasing. with other quality controls within the information system that
H2b. Internal environmental management directly and extends throughout the food supply chain. Green information
positively impacts cooperation with customers. systems will provide the information necessary to make
H2c. Internal environmental management directly and decisions about eco-design, in terms of material and energy
positively impacts eco-design. consumption, reuse, recycling and recovery of materials. Green
H2d. Internal environmental management directly and information systems also provide the information necessary to
positively impacts investment recovery. recover the organization’s investment in excess inventories,
scrap, and excess capital equipment:
2.2.3 Green information systems and green supply chain H3a. Green information systems directly and positively
management practices impacts green purchasing.
The successful implementation of the GSCM practices H3b. Green information systems directly and positively
depends on the capability of the organization’s information impacts cooperation with customers.
systems to capture data related to the environmental H3c. Green information systems directly and positively
sustainability efforts and outcomes of the organization’s impacts eco-design.
manufacturing, purchasing, selling, and logistics processes H3d. Green information systems directly and positively
(Preuss, 2002). The data can then be analyzed to generate the impacts investment recovery.
information necessary to make decisions that lead to improved
environmental sustainability throughout the supply chain 2.2.4 Green supply chain management practices and
(Preuss, 2002). In effect, green information systems represent environmental performance
the backbone of environmental management efforts by We argue that GSCM is now a strategic imperative based on
supporting the firm’s internal environmental management customer demands for products that are environmentally
systems and by meeting the reporting needs for various sustainable themselves and that have been produced by
293
processes that are designed and operated to enhance H5c. Eco-design directly and positively impacts economic
environmentally sustainability. Based on an analysis the performance.
Xerox, Ltd. product life cycle, McIntyre et al. (1998) propose H5d. Investment recovery directly and positively impacts
evaluating the environmental performance outcomes of the economic performance.
various stages of the product life cycle using an environmental
performance matrix that assesses the collective impact of 2.2.6 Environmental, economic, operational, and organizational
environmental practices throughout the supply chain. Zhu performance
and Sarkis (2004) found a positive relationship between The cost saving nature of environmental performance should
adoption of green supply chain practices and improvements in lead to improved economic performance and both
environmental and economic performance. Geffen and environmental performance and economic performance
Rothenberg (2000) found that, in the manufacturing should yield improve operational efficiency. Environmental,
setting, strong relationships and close collaboration with the economic, and operational performance generate cost savings
suppliers results in improved environmental performance. and reflect an organization’s ability to satisfy changing
Preuss (2001) describes the possibility of a “green multiplier customer demands for environmentally sustainable products
effect” that results from the extension of green purchasing and services. The cost and marketing implications of
practices from immediate suppliers to second and third tier environmental, economic, and operational performance
suppliers’ suppliers. Based on anecdotal evidence, Green et al. should lead to improvement in the overall financial and
(1998) argue that green purchasing and supply policies are marketing performance of the organization:
likely to result in improved environmental performance.
H6a. Environmental performance directly and positively
GSCM practices are developed specifically to improve the
impacts economic performance.
environmental performance of manufacturing firms.
H6b. Environmental performance directly and positively
Practices, such as green purchasing, cooperation with
impacts operational performance.
customers, eco-design, and investment recovery, are
H6c. Environmental performance directly and positively
designed to positively impact environmental performance.
impacts organizational performance.
Diabat and Govindan (2011) studied various drivers that H7a. Economic performance directly and positively
affect the implementation of green supply chains and found impacts operational performance.
that green design positively influences the performance of H7b. Economic performance directly and positively
green supply chains. The aim of eco-design is the reduction of impacts organizational performance.
a product’s environmental impact without creating a negative H8. Operational performance directly and positively
trade-off with other design criteria, such as costs and impacts organizational performance.
functionality. Eco-friendly design and an emphasis on
investment recovery will directly and positively influence
environmental performance as the impetus of the designers 3. Methodology
will be on reducing the environmental impact of the design:
The GSCM practices performance model is theorized and the
H4a. Green purchasing directly and positively impacts
constructs included in the model are defined and described
environmental performance.
with a focus on manufacturing organizations. Considering this
H4b. Cooperation with customers directly and positively
manufacturing focus, data were collected from a sample of
impacts environmental performance.
plant-level managers working for US manufacturing
H4c. Eco-design directly and positively impacts
organizations. It should be noted that the GSCM practices
and environmental performance scales were originally
H4d. Investment recovery directly and positively impacts
assessed for validity using a sample of Chinese
manufacturers (Zhu et al., 2008a). Zhu et al. (2008a)
recommend that validation of measurement scales be fully
2.2.5 Green supply chain management practices and economic established through a series of studies testing the scales across
performance industries and countries. The US sample provides an
GSCM practices focus on the elimination of wastes associated important contrast to the Chinese sample supporting
with environmental sustainability. Such waste minimization validation and generalization. While we appreciate the
should lead to reduced costs resulting in improved economic importance of considering the environmental impact of
performance. Rao and Holt (2005) demonstrated a link processes and products as they extend fully through first-
between green supply chains and economic performance. order and second-order supply chains as emphasized by
They also found that GSCM practices led to competitiveness Svensson (2007) and Preuss (2001), we necessarily adopt a
and better economic performance. Klassen and McLaughlin more limited view of the supply chain incorporating
(1996) studied the effect of announcements of winning manufacturing firms, immediate suppliers, and immediate
environmental awards by the organizations on stock prices. customers for practical reasons. The available GSCM
They found evidence that the market valued such recognition practices measurement scales support surveying
and duly awarded the firms with increased valuations as manufacturers concerning environmental relationships with
reflected by higher stock prices. We argue that GSCM immediate suppliers and customers. The data were collected
practices enhance economic performance: during the spring of 2010 via an on-line data service
H5a. Green purchasing directly and positively impacts (Zoomerang through MarketTools, Inc.) following a data
economic performance. collection process similar to the one employed by Inman et al.
H5b. Cooperation with customers directly and positively (2009). This data collection process was managed by
impacts economic performance. Zoomerang and was structured to ensure unique responses
294
from validated members of the manufacturing panel. Two Table II Sample demographics summary
waves of requests to participate in the study were sent to
2,325 members of the panel. Screening questions were in Number
place to identify only plant-level manufacturing managers Title
working for US manufacturing organizations. Plant manager 35
A total of 2,325 managers were contacted via an e-mail Operations manager 52
process, 342 were screened out as non-managers and 255 Purchasing manager 12
managers completed the survey. Of the 255 respondents, 96
Logistics manager 7
selected the “other manager” category. Because of concerns
Sales manager 14
related to a lack of knowledge of GSCM practices and plant
Engineering manager 16
and organizational performance, data from the 96 were not
Industrial waste manager 1
included in the dataset analyzed. Data from 159
manufacturing managers likely to have the necessary Supply chain manager 7
knowledge to fully complete the survey were included in the Information systems manager 15
dataset subsequently analyzed. The effective response rate is 8 Total 159
percent (159/(2325-342)). Industry category
All of the respondents hold plant-level management Food manufacturing 8
positions in manufacturing organizations. The majority (55 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 4
percent) are plant and operations managers. The respondents Textile mills 1
selected 20 different industry categories representing a diverse Apparel manufacturing 2
array of manufacturing organizations. The respondents are Leather and allied product manufacturing 1
experienced having been in their current positions an average Wood product manufacturing 9
of 10.85 years. They work for plants that have an average of Paper manufacturing 4
497 employees and firms with an average of 15,573 Printing and related support activities 9
employees. The sample is diverse as intended and is made Petroleum and coal products manufacturing 2
up of individuals with knowledge of their plant’s GSCM
Chemical manufacturing 8
practices and plant and organizational performance. Table II
Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 13
displays the sample demographics.
Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing 2
Respondents were categorized as responding to either the
Primary metal manufacturing 10
initial or follow-up requests that were sent approximately two
weeks later. Of the respondents, 64 percent (101) were Fabricated metal product manufacturing 25
categorized as early respondents and 36 percent (58) were Machinery manufacturing 8
categorized as late respondents. A comparison of the means of Computer and electronic product manufacturing 6
the demographic variables and the summary variables for the Electrical equipment, appliance, and component
two groups was conducted using one-way ANOVA. The manufacturing 6
comparisons resulted in statistically non-significant Transportation equipment manufacturing 5
differences at the 0.01 level. Because non-respondents have Furniture and related product manufacturing 1
been found to descriptively resemble late respondents Miscellaneous manufacturing 35
(Armstrong and Overton, 1977; Lambert and Harrington, Total 159
1990), this finding of general equality between early and late Mean years in current position 10.85
respondents indicates that non-response bias has not Mean number of plant employees 497.37
negatively impacted the assembled data set. Mean number of firm employees 15,573.27
The internal environmental management, green
purchasing, cooperation with customers, eco-design,
investment recovery, environmental performance, economic the measurement scales exceed the recommended 0.70 level
performance, and operational performance scales were indicating sufficient reliability (Garver and Mentzer, 1999).
developed and assessed by Zhu et al. (2008a). The The scales are also assessed within the context of the full
organizational performance scale was previously used and measurement model using confirmatory factor analysis
assessed by Green and Inman (2005). The green information
(Koufteros, 1999). The results of this confirmatory factor
systems scale was developed from items identified by Esty
analysis are displayed in Table III. The measurement model
and Winston (2006). The scales are displayed in the
fits the data well with a relative chi-square value of 1.507, an
Appendix.
Since all scales were taken directly from prior research (Zhu RMSEA value of 0.057, a CFI value of 0.990, and an NNFI
et al., 2008a; Green and Inman, 2005; Esty and Winston, value of 0.988.
2006), content validity is assumed. Chi-square difference tests Lindell and Brandt (2000) recommend that the smallest
for pairings of each scale with other study scales returned correlation among the variables be used as a proxy for
significant differences at the 0.01 level, indicating sufficient common method variation. Following this approach, the
discriminant validity for all scales (Garver and Mentzer, 1999; smallest correlation among the study variables is 0.316
Ahire et al., 1996; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). The between environmental performance and organizational
standardized coefficients for scale items presented in Table III performance. The smallest correlation among the
exceed the recommended 0.70 minimum and are significant relationships specified in the structural model is 0.512 for
at the 0.01 level indicating sufficient convergent validity eco-design and economic performance. Substituting these
(Garver and Mentzer, 1999). Cronbach alpha values for all of correlations into the formulas provided by Malhotra et al.
295
Table III Measurement model results

Construct/measures Alpha Standardized coefficients t-values
Internal environmental management 0.947
IEM1 0.92 15.02
IEM2 0.92 14.89
IEM3 0.86 13.44
IEM4 0.86 13.36
Green information systems 0.956
GIS5 0.88 14.08
GIS6 0.88 14.02
GIS8 0.85 13.20
GIS9 0.91 14.70
GIS10 0.91 14.68
Green purchasing 0.953
GP1 0.85 13.32
GP2 0.88 13.91
GP3 0.88 14.07
GP5 0.89 14.38
GP6 0.91 14.87
Cooperation with customers 0.956
CWC1 0.90 14.43
CWC2 0.90 14.43
CWC3 0.92 15.18
CWC4 0.89 14.28
Eco-design 0.903
ED1 0.81 12.11
ED2 0.93 15.00
ED3 0.97 13.44
Investment recovery 0.816
IR1 0.78 11.10
IR2 0.79 11.29
IR3 0.80 11.53
Environmental performance 0.920
ENP1 0.83 12.62
ENP3 0.83 12.74
ENP4 0.85 13.09
ENP6 0.91 14.69
Economic performance 0.904
ECP3 0.87 13.57
ECP4 0.92 14.87
ECP5 0.81 12.04
Operational performance 0.895
OPP4 0.77 11.20
OPP5 0.92 14.84
OPP6 0.89 13.95
Organizational performance 0.938
ORP2 0.90 14.30
ORP3 0.93 15.19
ORP4 0.88 13.88
ORP7 0.82 12.52
Notes: Chi-square ratio ¼ 1:507; RMSEA ¼ 0:057; NFI ¼ 0:971; NNFI ¼ 0:988; CFI ¼ 0:990; IFI ¼ 0:990
(2007) the computed z-score is 3.69. This computed z-score problems associated with common method bias are not
corresponds with significance at the 0.01 level. Adjusting for considered significant (Lindell and Whitney, 2001).
common method variance using the smallest correlation Summary variables, descriptive statistics, and correlation
(0.316), the smallest correlation among the hypothesized coefficients are computed. The theorized model is assessed
relationships (0.512) remains significantly different from zero following a structural equation modeling methodology. Hair
at the 0.01 level. Based on the results of the proxy test, et al. (2006) argue that sample sizes from 150 to 400 are
296
generally suitable for structural equation modeling analysis green information systems are necessary precursors to
with sample size varying according to the complexity of the implementation of GSCM practices. H4a through H4d,
model and the number of parameters to be estimated. In this which predict positive associations between the GSCM
case, because of the number of constructs embedded in the practices and environmental performance, are positive and
theoretical model, it was necessary to reduce the total number significant as expected with the exception of the green
of measurement items by removing those items with purchasing to environmental performance link. H5a through
standardized coefficients less than 0.75 from the H5d, which predict positive associations between the GSCM
measurement model. The traditional path analysis practices and economic performance, are not positive and
methodology based on regression analysis described by significant with the exception of the green purchasing to
Kline (1998) is also considered as an appropriate model economic performance link. Cooperation with customers and
testing methodology. investment recovery do not impact economic performance,
Because of our objective to assess the theorized model as a while eco-design negatively impacts economic performance.
whole, in spite of the small sample size and the large number H6a, H7a and H6b are positive and significant as expected
of constructs, we opted to assess the model using structural indicating that environmental and economic performance
equation modeling techniques. LISREL 17.0 software was positively impact operational performance. Of H6c, H7b, and
used do perform both the confirmatory factor analysis H8, only the hypothesized positive link between operational
necessary to assess the measurement model and the performance and organizational performance (H8) is
structural analysis necessary to assess the structural model supported. Environmental and economic performance do
because of the important model fit information available. not directly impact organizational performance, rather they
indirectly impact organizational performance through
operational performance.
4. Results
4.1 Structural equation modeling results 4.2 Interpretation of results
Summary values for the study variables were computed by Internal environmental management is positively associated
averaging the items in the scales. Descriptive statistics are with green information systems and both appear as
presented in Table IV. All variables are sufficiently normally antecedents to successful implementation of green
distributed with skewness and kurtosis coefficients within the purchasing, cooperation with customers, eco-design, and
2 2.00 and þ2.00 range. The correlations are presented in investment recovery. Manufacturing organizations first adopt
Table V. Correlation coefficients are positive and significant at environmental sustainability as a strategic imperative before
the 0.01 level for all variable pairings. modifying existing information systems to capture data and
Figure 2 illustrates the model with the structural equation generate information related to environmental sustainability
modeling results specified in the LISREL 8.7 output. Results initiatives and outcomes. The first stage in implementing
relating to fit of the model generally support a claim of good GSCM practices is to embrace the strategy organizationally
fit. The relative chi-square (chi-square/degrees of freedom) and to modify existing enterprise resource planning (ERP)
value of 1.67 is less than the 3.00 maximum recommended by information systems to monitor environmental initiatives. The
Kline (1998) and the root mean square error of second stage includes implementation of green purchasing,
approximation (0.07) is below the recommended maximum cooperation with customers, eco-design, and investment
of 0.08 (Schumacker and Lomax, 2004). While the GFI recovery practices. The associations between the stage one
(0.73) is below the 0.90 level recommended by Byrne (1998), and stage two practices are all positive and significant
it is more heavily impacted by a small sample size and, as supporting the proposition that the practices should be
Byrne (1998) points out, the Comparative-Fit Index (CFI) implemented in stages.
and Incremental-Fit Index (IFI) are more appropriate when The results linking the stage two GSCM practices to
the sample size is small. The CFI (0.99) and IFI (0.99) both environmental and economic performance are not as clear
exceed the recommended 0.90 level (Byrne, 1998). cut. Environmental performance is focused on decreases in
Hypotheses test results are presented in Table VI. H1 the levels of environmental pollutants, while economic
through H3d are positive and significant as expected performance is focused on reductions in environmentally
indicating that internal environmental management and related costs such as materials purchases and energy
Table IV Descriptive statistics

Variable Minimum Maximum Mean Std deviation Skewness Kurtosis
Internal environmental management 1.00 5.00 3.201 1.294 20.278 21.026
Green information systems 1.00 5.00 3.198 1.102 20.301 20.542
Green purchasing 1.00 5.00 2.909 1.319 20.012 21.161
Cooperation with customers 1.00 5.00 3.222 1.341 20.235 21.188
Eco-design 1.00 5.00 3.421 1.279 20.493 20.828
Investment recovery 1.00 5.00 3.776 1.147 20.916 20.032
Environmental performance 1.00 5.00 3.539 1.030 20.607 0.119
Economic performance 1.00 5.00 3.294 1.177 20.391 20.684
Operational performance 1.00 5.00 3.637 1.016 20.584 20.005
Organizational performance 1.00 5.00 3.384 0.924 20.289 0.139
297
Table V Correlation matrix

IEM GIS GP CWC ED IR ENP ECP OPP ORP
IEM 1
GIS 0.665 * 1
GP 0.715 * 0.783 * 1
CWC 0.694 * 0.732 * 0.828 * 1
ED 0.610 * 0.599 * 0.680 * 0.704 * 1
IR 0.550 * 0.496 * 0.562 * 0.568 * 0.629 * 1
ENP 0.657 * 0.666 * 0.665 * 0.748 * 0.691 * 0.640 * 1
ECP 0.625 * 0.663 * 0.616 * 0.625 * 0.512 * 0.533 * 0.736 * 1
OPP 0.547 * 0.547 * 0.553 * 0.532 * 0.482 * 0.543 * 0.657 * 0.662 * 1
ORP 0.423 * 0.435 * 0.436 * 0.391 * 0.330 * 0.332 * 0.316 * 0.382 * 0.557 * 1
Notes: * indicates significance at the 0.01 level; IEM ¼ Internal environmental management; GIS ¼ Green information systems; GP ¼ Green purchasing;
CWC ¼ Cooperation with customers; ED ¼ Eco-design; IR ¼ Investment recovery; ENP ¼ Environmental performance; ECP ¼ Economic performance; OPP ¼
Operational performance; ORP ¼ Organizational performance
Figure 2 Comprehensive green supply chain management practices performance model with SEM results
consumption. Green purchasing is not significantly linked to Investment recovery is positively associated with
environmental performance but is positively linked to environmental performance but not economic performance.
economic performance. Cooperation with customers is It should be noted each of the stage two practices is positively
positively associated with both environmental and associated with either environmental performance or
economic performance. Eco-design is positively linked to economic performance. Only eco-design is negatively and
environmental performance but is negatively associated with significantly associated to either performance measure.
economic performance. Eco-design capability to reduce The performance constructs are related as hypothesized
environmental pollutants is counterbalanced by increases in with two exceptions. Neither environmental performance nor
associated costs perhaps related to materials purchases. economic performance is directly related to organizational
298
Table VI Structural model results supported, the general model holds together reasonably
well. The significance and strength of the positive links among
Model link Std coefficients Support the stage one and stage two GSCM practices suggest the
Hypotheses tests importance of a staged implementation of the practices.
IEM ! These results are straightforward leaving little doubt as to the
GIS 0.72 * H1: supported recommended ordering.
GP 0.39 * H2a: supported As the model depicts, environmental sustainability must
first be adopted as a strategic imperative. This requires that
CWC 0.39 * H2b: supported
top-level management work to incorporate environmental
ED 0.45 * H2c: supported
sustainability as a key part of the organization’s mission
IR 0.52 * H2d: supported
statement and that the necessity to develop processes and
GIS !
deliver products and services that are environmentally friendly
GP 0.59 * H3a: supported be communicated throughout all levels of the organization.
CWC 0.54 * H3b: supported There is considerable evidence linking supply chain success to
ED 0.36 * H3c: supported the ability of ERP information systems to facilitate
IR 0.22 * H3d: supported information sharing among supply chain partners (Green
GP ! et al., 2007). Because environmental sustainability is a supply
ENP 20.04ns H4a: not supported chain level imperative (Vachon and Klassen, 2007), it is
ECP 0.40 * H5a: supported important that organizations develop information systems
CWC ! capable of integrating and coordinating environmental
ENP 0.49 * H4b: supported sustainability initiatives with suppliers and customers (Esty
ECP 20.10ns H5b: not supported and Winston, 2006). Adoption of environmental
ED ! sustainability as strategy through the implementation of
ENP 0.24 * H4c: supported internal environmental management practices both directly
ECP 20.23 * H5c: not supported and indirectly (through green information systems) impacts
IR ! the stage two GSCM practices. As the firm’s SCM strategy
ENP 0.32 * H4d: supported expands to incorporate the environmental sustainability
ECP 0.04ns H5d: not supported imperative, the firm’s ERP system must expand to monitor
ENP ! environmental efforts and outcomes in cooperation with
ECP 0.76 * H6a: supported customers and suppliers.
OPP 0.28 * H6b: supported The impact of the stage two practices on environmental
ORP 20.19ns H6c: not supported
performance and economic performance is less clear cut.
Specifically, the results associated with eco-design are
ECP !
problematic. Grote et al. (2007, p. 4100) state the aim of
OPP 0.52 * H7a: supported
eco-design as “the reduction of a product’s environmental
ORP 0.10ns H7b: not supported
impact without creating a negative trade-off with other design
OPP !
criteria, such as costs and functionality.” While eco-design is
ORP 0.68 * H8: supported positively associated with environmental performance
Notes: * Significant at 0.01 level; Chi-square ratio ¼ 1.672; (beta ¼ 0:24, sig. at 0.01 level), it is negatively associated
RMSEA ¼ 0.067; NFI ¼ 0.967; NNFI ¼ 0.985; CFI ¼ 0.987; IFI ¼ 0.987; with economic performance (beta ¼ 20:23, sig. at the 0.01
IEM ¼ Internal Environmental management; ENP ¼ Environmental level). It appears then that eco-design is not fully
performance; GIS ¼ Green information systems; OPP ¼ Operational accomplishing the intended aim. Grote et al. (2007) argue
performance; GP ¼ Green purchasing; ORP ¼ Organizational that this may be because eco-design methodologies require
performance; CWC ¼ Cooperation with customers; ED ¼ Eco-design; further development and improvement.
IR ¼ Investment recovery Also surprising is the result that green purchasing does not
significantly impact environmental performance, while
significantly impacting economic performance. These results
performance. Both environmental performance and economic are in line with the Zhu and Sarkis (2007) findings for
performance are positively associated with operational Chinese firms under competitive pressure. As in the Zhu and
performance which, in turn, is strongly associated with Sarkis (2007) study, the measurement scales for
organizational performance. Operational performance reflects environmental and economic performance were completed
the organization’s ability to satisfy customers in terms of on- by manufacturing managers focusing on the plant level. As
time delivery of quality products and the ability to do so more measured, the environmental impact of green purchasing may
efficiently through reduced inventory and scrap levels. lie with the supplier rather than manufacturer, while still
Environmental performance and economic performance positively impacting economic performance for the
enhance operational performance which enhances manufacturer. As Zhu and Sarkis (2007) argue green
organizational performance. purchasing is less costly for manufacturers to implement
that other green practices such as eco-design.
5. Conclusions Cooperation with customers directly impacts environmental
performance but does not directly impact economic
5.1 Discussion of findings performance. Instead, cooperation with customers indirectly
We theorize and assess a comprehensive GSCM practices impacts economic performance through environmental
model. While all of the individual hypotheses are not performance. Of the four green constructs linked to
299
environmental performance in the model, cooperation has the to ensure that the degrees of freedom exceed the number of
largest impact followed by investment recovery and eco- parameters estimated.
design. Zhu and Sarkis (2007) did not find cooperation with
customers to be significantly associated with either 5.3 Future research
environmental or economic performance for manufacturers Because this is the first testing of the comprehensive
under pressure from customers to adopt environmental theoretical model, it is important that the model be assessed
practices in China. The difference in results may be using data from additional samples. In comparing the results
attributed to differences in the samples employed. Our with those reported by Zhu and Sarkis (2007) differences
sample is made up of a diverse group US manufacturers, were noted concerning the impact of cooperation with
while the sample used by Zhu and Sarkis (2007) and Zhu et al. customers and investment recovery on environmental and
(2008a) is made up of a more focused group of Chinese economic performance. The differences may be attributable
manufacturers. Our use of a diverse group from a different to differences in the sample, US manufacturers for this study
country serves to establish the validity of the measurement and Chinese manufacturers in the Zhu and Sarkis (2007)
scales across manufacturers and countries as recommended study. Further research is necessary to reconcile these
by Zhu et al. (2008a). It may be that US manufacturers are differences. It is also important to verify the findings using a
more market oriented and, therefore, are more responsive to larger sample. In addition, this research focuses on the
changes in customer demand related to environmental implementation of GSCM practices by manufacturing
expectations. As Zhou et al. (2008) note, Chinese firms organizations. The model should be modified to reflect
have only recently begun to embrace market orientation as a other organization types, such as wholesalers and retailers,
means to survive intensified competition. This may explain and data should be collected to assess the impact of supply
the finding that cooperation with customers is strongly chain practices on the organizational performance of these
associated with environmental performance for the US different types of organizations.
sample. We developed a GSCM model focusing on GSCM
Investment recovery directly impacts environmental practices implemented by manufacturing organizations to
performance but does not directly impact economic integrate and coordinate environmental sustainability efforts
performance as hypothesized for the US sample. Zhu and with immediate supply chain partners and the impact of those
Sarkis (2007) did not find a positive association for practices on performance. While it is important to evaluate
investment recovery with environmental performance for the each of the individual associations depicted within the model,
Chinese sample. They also found that investment recovery it is more important to consider the model as a whole and
positively impacts economic performance under conditions of how well the model reflects reality. The model level results
regulatory and competitive pressures but not market pressure. imply that the implementation of GSCM practices should be
We generally found the opposite for the US sample. considered within the context of the supply chain and the
Investment recovery leads to significant environmental existing functioning business processes that extend
improvement but does not directly impact economic throughout the supply chain. Considering the contextual
performance. The impact of investment recovery on approach, it is important to assess constructs representing
other improvement programs such as JIT, TQM, lean
economic performance is indirect through environmental
manufacturing, and agile manufacturing as potential
performance. These contradictory results may also be
antecedents to GSCM practices. For example, it is likely
explained by differences in the samples. As Zhu et al.
that the capability that JIT organizations have to eliminate
(2008c, p. 331) note, “[investment recovery] has received
wastes will support efforts to eliminate environmental wastes.
much less attention in China than in other countries such as
the U.S. and Germany.”
5.4 Implications for practitioners
Because all of the stage two practices are positively
We argue that environmental sustainability is a supply chain
associated with either environmental performance or
level imperative and provide evidence supporting the need for
economic performance, we assert that this portion of the
manufacturing organizations to implement GSCM practices
model also holds promise. Finally, the relationships among
in collaboration with suppliers and customers. Manufacturing
the performance constructs seem to make logical sense.
managers have had to develop SCM knowledge and skills in
Environmental performance and economic performance addition to the knowledge and skills necessary to manage at
leverage improved operational performance which leads to the organizational level. Manufacturing managers must now
improved organizational performance. focus on improving the supply chain in order to improve
organizational performance. We reiterate the importance that
5.2 Limitations of the study organizations adopt SCM strategies and work to improve the
We propose and assess a comprehensive GSCM practices processes that extend throughout the supply chain to better
performance model. It is our belief that the primary satisfy the final customers of the supply chain. From a very
contribution of this study lies in the comprehensive nature practical view, however, manufacturing managers are held
of the model as opposed to parsing and assessing pieces of the responsible for the performance of their organizations. If
model. This approach stretches the limits of the sample, improving the supply chain and satisfying final customers
however. Rather than adopt the traditional path analysis finally results in improved organizational performance,
methodology indicated by the large number of constructs organizational managers will adopt such an approach. We
compared to the small sample size, we have chosen to push set out to discover whether the adoption of GSCM practices
the limits of structural equation modeling in an effort to assess focused on collaboration with suppliers and customers will
the fit of the entire model to the data. It was necessary to lead to improved environmental performance and
reduce the number of measurement scale items from 57 to 38 consequently improved organizational performance.
300
The theorized and empirically supported model offers a Carter, C.R. and Easton, P.L. (2011), “Sustainable supply
structured approach to the successful implementation of an chain management: evolution and future directions”,
environmental sustainability strategy that requires that International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
manufacturers work directly with both suppliers and Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 46-62.
customers to achieve desired results – an improved Carter, C.R. and Rogers, D.S. (2008), “A framework of
environment with an accompanying improvement in firm sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new
performance. It is important to adopt environmental
theory”, International Journal of Physical Distribution
sustainability as a strategic imperative and to modify
& Logistics Management, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 360-87.
existing enterprise information systems to monitor the
Carter, R.C. and Carter, J.R. (1998), “Interorganizational
processes and outcomes related to the organization’s
sustainability initiatives prior to the implementation of the determinants of environmental purchasing: initial evidence
green practices. Once environmental sustainability has from the consumer products industry”, Decision Sciences,
become a strategic focus and information systems have been Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 28-38.
modified to monitor efforts to become environmentally Chandra, C., Grabis, J. and Tumanyan, A. (2007), “Problem
sustainable, manufacturers can begin to implement taxonomy: a step towards effective information sharing in
sustainability practices with some degree of confidence that supply chain management”, International Journal of
the practices will yield not only improved environmental and Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 11, pp. 2507-44.
economic performance but improved operational and Chopra, S. and Meindl, P. (2004), Supply Chain Management:
organizational performance. The adoption of GSCM Strategy, Planning, and Operation, 2nd ed., Pearson Prentice
practices improves the organization’s capabilities to sustain Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
the environment and to strengthen the organization’s Cohen, S. and Roussel, J. (2005), Strategic Supply Chain
economic viability. Management: The Five Disciplines for Top Performance,
Major manufacturers have begun to implement
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
comprehensive programs to control environmental practices
de Bakker, F., Fisscher, O. and Brack, A. (2002), “Organizing
throughout their supply chains (Vachon, 2007). Specific
activities that support environmental collaboration, product-oriented environmental management from a firm’s
monitoring, and control include: perspective”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 10 No. 5,
.
monitoring reverse flows of materials; pp. 455-64.
.
sharing techniques and knowledge related to Diabat, A. and Govindan, K. (2011), “An analysis of the
environmental management with supply chain partners; drivers affecting the implementation of green supply chain
.
working to control the environmental risk associated with management”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 55
suppliers’ operations; and No. 6, pp. 659-67.
.
working to assure proper product use (Vachon, 2007). El-Gayar, O.F. and Fritz, B.D. (2006), “Environmental
Vachon (2007, p. 4357) asserts, “Ultimately, such activities management information system (EMIS) for sustainable
with suppliers or with customers can affect environmental development: a conceptual overview”, Communications of
management decisions within any particular manufacturing AIS, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 2-49.
plant.” The items in the GSCM practices scales (Appendix) Esty, D. and Winston, A. (2006), Green to Gold: How Smart
developed by Zhu et al. (2008a) also delineate characteristics Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create
of manufacturers that practice environmental collaboration Value, and Build Competitive Advantage, Yale University
and monitoring with suppliers and customers. These Press, New Haven, CT.
characteristics provide more specific direction to Frohlich, M.T. and Westbrook, R. (2001), “Arcs of
manufacturers working to extend environmental practices integration: an international study of supply chain
throughout their supply chains. strategies”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19
No. 2, pp. 185-200.
References Garver, M.S. and Mentzer, J.T. (1999), “Logistics research
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y. and Waller, M.A. (1996), methods: employing structural equation modeling to test
“Development and validation of TQM implementation for construct validity”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 20
constructs”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 23-56. No. 1, pp. 33-57.
Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977), “Estimating Geffen, C. and Rothenberg, S. (2000), “Suppliers and
nonresponse bias in mail surveys”, Journal of Marketing environmental innovation: the automotive paint process”,
Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 396-402. International Journal of Operations & Production
Barratt, M. and Oke, A. (2007), “Antecedents of supply chain Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 166-86.
visibility in retail supply chains: a resource-based theory Gerbing, D.W. and Anderson, J.C. (1988), “An updated
perspective”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25 paradigm for scale development incorporating
No. 6, pp. 1217-33. unidimensionality and its assessment”, Journal of
Byrne, B.M. (1998), Structural Equation Modeling with Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 186-92.
LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS, Lawrence Erlbaum Green, K., Morton, B. and New, S. (1998), “Green
Associates, Mahwah, NJ. purchasing and supply policies: do they improve
Byrne, P.M. and Deeb, A. (1993), “Logistics must meet the companies’ environmental performance?”, Supply Chain
‘green’ challenge”, Transportation & Distribution, Vol. 34 Management: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 2,
No. 2, pp. 33-7. pp. 89-95.
301
Green, K.W. Jr and Inman, R.A. (2005), “Using a just-in- production and environmental performance”, Production
time selling strategy to strengthen supply chain linkages”, and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 244-56.
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 43 No. 16, Klassen, R.D. (1993), “The integration of environmental
pp. 3437-53. issues into manufacturing: toward an interactive open-
Green, K.W. Jr, McGaughey, R. and Casey, K.M. (2006), systems model”, Production & Inventory Management
“Does supply chain management strategy mediate the Journal, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 82-8.
association between market orientation and organizational Klassen, R.D. and McLaughlin, C.P. (1993), “TQM and
performance?”, Supply Chain Management: An International environmental excellence in manufacturing”, Industrial
Journal, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 407-14. Management & Data Systems, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 14-22.
Green, K.W. Jr, Whitten, D. and Inman, R.A. (2007), “The Klassen, R.D. and McLaughlin, C.P. (1996), “The impact of
impact of timely information on organizational performance environmental management on firm performance”,
in a supply chain”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 18 Management Science, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1199-213.
No. 4, pp. 274-82. Kline, R.B. (1998), Principles and Practice of Structural
Green, K.W. Jr, Whitten, D. and Inman, R.A. (2008), “The Equation Modeling, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
impact of logistics performance on organizational Koufteros, X.A. (1999), “Testing a model of pull production:
performance in a supply chain context”, Supply Chain a paradigm for manufacturing research using structural
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, equation modeling”, Journal of Operations Management,
pp. 317-27. Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 467-88.
Grote, C., Jones, R., Blount, G., Goodyer, J.J. and Shayler, Lambert, D.M. and Harrington, T.C. (1990), “Measuring
M.M. (2007), “An approach to the EuP Directive and the nonresponse bias in customer service mail surveys”, Journal
application of the economic eco-design for complex of Business Logistics, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 5-25.
products”, International Journal of Production Research, Lindell, M.K. and Brandt, C.J. (2000), “Climate quality and
Vol. 45 Nos 18/19, pp. 4099-117. climate consensus as mediators of the relationship between
Hair, J.F. Jr, Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and organizational antecedents and outcomes”, Journal of
Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed., Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 331-48.
Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Lindell, M.K. and Whitney, D.J. (2001), “Accounting for
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. (1989), “Strategic intent”, common method variance in cross-sectional research
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 63-76. designs”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 1,
Hamprecht, J., Corsten, D., Noll, M. and Meier, E. (2005), pp. 114-21.
“Controlling the sustainability of food supply chains”, Linton, J.D., Klassen, R. and Jayaraman, V. (2007),
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 “Sustainable supply chains: an introduction”, Journal of
No. 1, pp. 7-10. Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 1075-82.
Handfield, R., Walton, S., Seegers, L. and Melnyk, S. (1997), McIntyre, K., Smith, H., Henham, A. and Pretlove, J. (1998),
“‘Green’ value chain practices in the furniture industry”, “Environmental performance indicators for integrated
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, supply chains: the case of Xerox Ltd”, Supply Chain
pp. 293-315. Management: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 3,
Herod, T. (1989), “Waste behind the waste”, Risk pp. 149-56.
Management, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 80-4. Malhotra, N.K., Patil, A. and Kim, S.S. (2007), “Bias
Ho, D.C.K., Au, K.F. and Newton, E. (2002), “Empirical breakdown”, Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 24-9.
research on supply chain management: a critical review and Murray, G. (2000), “Effects of a green purchasing strategy:
recommendations”, International Journal of Production the case of Belfast City Council”, Supply Chain
Research, Vol. 40 No. 17, pp. 4415-30. Management: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 1,
Inman, R.A., Sale, M.L. and Green, K.W. Jr (2009), “Jr pp. 37-44.
Analysis of the relationships among TOC use, TOC Preuss, L. (2001), “In dirty chains? Purchasing and greener
outcomes, and organizational performance”, International manufacturing”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 34 No. 3
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 29 and 4, pp. 345-59.
No. 4, pp. 341-56. Preuss, L.L. (2002), “Green light for greener supply”,
Jaffe, A.B., Peterson, S., Portney, P. and Stavins, R. (1995), Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 11 No. 4,
“Environmental regulation and the competitiveness of US pp. 308-17.
manufacturing: what does the evidence tell us?”, Journal of Quazi, H.A. (2001), “Sustainable development: integrating
Economic Literature, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 132-63. environmental issues into strategic planning”, Industrial
Jiang, J.J. and Klein, G. (1999), “Project selection criteria by Management & Data Systems, Vol. 101 No. 2, pp. 64-70.
strategic orientation”, Information and Management, Vol. 36 Rao, P. and Holt, D. (2005), “Do green supply chains lead to
No. 2, pp. 63-75. competitiveness and economic performance?”, International
Jorgensen, D.W. and Wilcoxen, P.J. (1990), “Environmental Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25
regulation and US economic growth”, Rand Journal of No. 9 and 10, pp. 898-916.
Economics, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 314-40. Rice, S. (2003), “Commitment to excellence: practical
King, A.A. and Lenox, M.J. (2001), “Lean and green? An approaches to environmental leadership”, Environmental
empirical examination of the relationship between lean Quality Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 9-22.
302
Schumacker, R.E. and Lomax, R.G. (2004), A Beginner’s practices implementation”, International Journal of
Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, Lawrence Erlbaum Production Economics, Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 261-73.
Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Cordeiro, J.J. and Lai, K. (2008b), “Firm-
Sen, S. (2009), “Linking green supply chain management and level correlates of emergent green supply chain
shareholder value creation”, The IUP Journal of Supply management practices in the Chinese context”, Omega –
Chain Management, Vol. 7 No. 3 and 4, pp. 95-109. The International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 36
Seuring, S. (2001), “Green supply chain costing: joint cost No. 4, pp. 577-91.
management in polyester linings supply chain”, Greener Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K. and Geng, Y. (2008c), “The role
Management International, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 71-80. of organizational size in the adoption of green supply chain
Seuring, S. (2004), “Industrial ecology, life cycles, supply management practices in China”, Corporate Social
chains: differences and interrelations”, Business Strategy Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15
& The Environment, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 306-19. No. 6, pp. 322-37.
Svensson, G. (2007), “Aspects of sustainable supply chain Zsidisin, G.A. and Hendrick, T.E. (1998), “Purchasing’s
management (SSCM): conceptual framework and involvement in environmental issues: a multi-country
empirical example”, Supply Chain Management: An perspective”, Industrial Management & Data Systems,
International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 262-6. Vol. 98 No. 7, pp. 313-20.
Vachon, S. (2007), “Green supply chain practices and the Zsidisin, G.A. and Siferd, S.P. (2001), “Environmental
selection of environmental technologies”, International purchasing: a framework for theory development”,
European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 18 and 19,
Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 61-73.
pp. 4357-79.
Vachon, S. and Klassen, R. (2007), “Supply chain
management and environmental technologies: the role of Further reading
integration”, International Journal of Production Research, Malhotra, A., Melville, N.P. and Watson, R.T. (2010),
Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 401-23. “Information systems and environmental sustainability”,
Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2006), “Extending green MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 429-30.
practices across the supply chain: the impact of upstream Miller, J.G. (1978), Living Systems, McGraw-Hill Publishing,
integration”, International Journal of Operations & Production New York, NY.
Management, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 795-821. Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in
Vasileiou, K. and Morris, J. (2006), “The sustainability of the organizational research: problems and prospects”, Journal
supply chain for fresh potatoes in Britain”, Supply Chain of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-44.
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, Watson, R.T., Boudreau, M.-C., Chen, A. and Huber, M.H.
pp. 317-27. (2008), “Green IS: building sustainable business practices”,
Wee, Y.O. and Quazi, H.A. (2005), “Development and in Watson, R.T. (Ed.), Information Systems, Global Text
validation of critical factors of environmental Project, Athens, GA.
management”, Industrial Management & Data Systems,
Vol. 105 No. 1, pp. 96-114. Appendix. Measurement scales
Welty, B. and Becerra-Fernandez, I. (2001), “Managing trust
and commitment in collaborative supply chain Internal environmental management (Zhu et al., 2008a)
relationships”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 44 No. 6, Please indicate the extent to which you perceive that your
plant is implementing each of the following. (Five-point scale:
pp. 67-73.
1 ¼ not considering it; 2 ¼ planning to consider it; 3 ¼
Zelbst, P., Green, K. Jr, Sower, V. and Abshire, R. (2010),
considering it currently; 4 ¼ initiating implementation; 5 ¼
“Relationships among market orientation, JIT, TQM, and implementing successfully)
agility”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 .
Commitment of GSCM from senior managers.
No. 5, pp. 637-58. .
Support for GSCM from mid-level managers.
Zhou, K., Li, J., Zhou, N. and Su, C. (2008), “Market .
Cross-functional cooperation for environmental
orientation, job satisfaction, product quality, and firm improvements.
performance: evidence from China”, Strategic Management .
Total quality environmental management.
Journal, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 985-1000. .
Environmental compliance and auditing programs.
Zhu, Q. and Sarkis, J. (2004), “Relationships between .
ISO 14001 certification.
operational practices and performance among early
. Environmental Management Systems.
adopters of green supply chain management practices in
Green information systems (Esty and Winston, 2006)
Chinese manufacturing enterprises”, Journal of Operations
Please indicate the extent to which your organization’s
Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 265-89. information system is used for each of the following
Zhu, Q. and Sarkis, J. (2007), “The moderating effects of (1 ¼ not used at all; 5 ¼ used to a great extent).
institutional pressures on emergent green supply chain . Reducing transportation costs.
practices and performance”, International Journal of .
Supporting team work and meetings of globally
Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 18 and 19, pp. 4333-55. distributed employees to limit their air travel.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K. (2008a), “Confirmation of a .
Tracking environmental information (such as toxicity,
measurement model for green supply chain management energy used, water used, air pollution.
303
.
Monitoring emissions and waste production. Environmental performance (Zhu et al., 2008a)
.
Providing information to encourage green choices by Please indicate the extent to which you perceive that your
consumers. plant has achieved each of the following during the past year.
.
Improving decision making by executives by highlighting (Five-point scale: 1 ¼ not at all; 2 ¼ a little bit; 3 ¼ to some
sustainability issues. degree; 4 ¼ relatively significant; 5 ¼ significant).
.
Reducing energy consumption. .
Reduction of air emissions.
.
Supporting the generation and distribution of renewable .
Reduction of effluent waste.
energy. .
Reduction of solid wastes.
.
Limiting carbon and other emissions. .
Decrease in consumption for hazardous/harmful/toxic
.
Identifying the role of IS in energy policy. materials.
.
Decrease in frequency for environmental accidents.
.
Improvement in an enterprise’s environmental situation.
Green purchasing (Zhu et al., 2008a)
Please indicate the extent to which you perceive that your
Economic performance (Zhu et al., 2008a)
1 ¼ not considering it; 2 ¼ planning to consider it; 3 ¼
plant has achieved each of the following during the past year.
considering it currently; 4 ¼ initiating implementation; 5 ¼
(Five-point scale: 1 ¼ not at all; 2 ¼ a little bit; 3 ¼ to some
implementing successfully).
degree; 4 ¼ relatively significant; 5 ¼ significant).
.
Eco labeling of products. .
Decrease in cost of materials purchasing.
.
Cooperation with suppliers for environmental objectives. .
Decrease in cost for energy consumption.
.
Environmental audit of suppliers’ internal management. .
Decrease in fee for waste treatment.
.
Suppliers’ ISO 14000 certification. .
Decrease in fee for waste discharge.
.
Second-tier supplier environmentally friendly practice .
Decrease in fine for environmental accidents.
evaluation.
.
Providing design specification to suppliers that include
environmental requirements for purchased item. Operational performance (Zhu et al., 2008a)
plant has achieved each of the following during the past year.
Cooperation with customers (Zhu et al., 2008a) (Five-point scale: 1 ¼ not at all; 2 ¼ a little bit; 3 ¼ to some
Please indicate the extent to which you perceive that your degree; 4 ¼ relatively significant; 5 ¼ significant).
plant is implementing each of the following. (Five-point scale: .
Increase in the amount of goods delivered on time.
1 ¼ not considering it; 2 ¼ planning to consider it; 3 ¼ .
Decrease in inventory levels.
considering it currently; 4 ¼ initiating implementation; 5 ¼ .
Decrease in scrap rate.
implementing successfully). .
Increase in product quality.
.
Cooperation with customers for eco design. .
Increase in product line.
.
Cooperation with customers for cleaner production. .
Improved capacity utilization.
.
Cooperation with customers for green packaging.
. Cooperation with customers for using less energy during Organizational performance (Green and Inman, 2005)
product transportation. Please rate your organization’s performance in each of the
following areas as compared to the industry average (1 ¼ well
Eco-design (Zhu et al., 2008a) below industry average, 5 ¼ well above industry average).
.
Average return on investment over the past three years.
.
Average profit over the past three years.
.
Profit growth over the past three years.
1 ¼ not considering it; 2 ¼ planning to consider it; 3 ¼ .
Average return on sales over the past three years.
considering it currently; 4 ¼ initiating implementation; 5 ¼ .
Average market share growth over the past three years.
implementing successfully). .
Average sales volume growth over the past three years.
.
Design of products for reduced consumption of material/ .
Average sales (in dollars) growth over the past three years.
energy.
.
Design of products for reuse, recycle, recovery of material
and/or component parts. About the authors
.
Design of products to avoid or reduce use of hazardous
products and/or their manufacturing process. Kenneth W. Green Jr is a DBA from Louisiana Tech
University and the LeMay Professor of Technology at
Southern Arkansas University. His research appears in
Investment recovery (Zhu et al., 2008a) Journal of Operations Management, International Journal of
Please indicate the extent to which you perceive that your Operations & Production Management, International Journal of
plant is implementing each of the following during the past Production Research, Industrial Marketing Management,
year. (Five-point scale: 1 ¼ not considering it; 2 ¼ planning International Journal of Human Resource Management, Supply
to consider it; 3 ¼ considering it currently; 4 ¼ initiating Chain Management: An International Journal, Production
implementation; 5 ¼ implementing successfully). Planning and Control, Industrial Management & Data Systems,
.
Investment recovery (sale) of excess inventories/materials. Journal of Computer Information Systems, and Management
.
Sale of scrap and used materials. Research Review. Kenneth W. Green Jr is the corresponding
.
Sale of excess capital equipment. author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
304
Pamela J. Zelbst is a PhD from University of Texas at information systems, supply chain management, knowledge
Arlington and is an Associate Professor of Management at management, and healthcare quality and outcomes. His
Sam Houston State University. Her research appears in the research has appeared in the Journal of Information and
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Knowledge Management. He has presented several research
Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, Industrial papers in leading national conferences.
Management & Data Systems, Journal of Business and Industrial Vikram S. Bhadauria is a PhD from University of Texas at
Marketing, Management Research Review, and International Arlington and is an Assistant Professor of Management
Journal Management in Education. Information Systems at Southern Arkansas University. He has
Jeramy Meacham is a PhD from Jackson State University presented several papers at the Americas Conference of
and is an Assistant Professor of Management at Southern Information Systems, the annual conferences of the Decision
Arkansas University. His research interests include Sciences Institute, and other regional conferences.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
305

Text2fa - Ir Green Supply Chain Management Practices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Text2fa - Ir Green Supply Chain Management Practices

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Text2fa - Ir Green Supply Chain Management Practices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Emerald Article: Green supply chain management practices: impact on

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction chain level and a focus on the changing demands of final

Received: 10 August 2011

Table I Construct definitions

Table III Measurement model results

Table IV Descriptive statistics

Table V Correlation matrix

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

You might also like