Distribution Management Master Supply Chain Management
Learning Goals & Exam Questions Author: Andreas S. Melisse
Lecture 1 – Making Sustainability Sustainable (Montabon et al., 2016)
Learning Goals
Compare and contrast the traditional instrumental logic with the ecologically dominant logic and their
contrasting views on economic, social and ecological priorities in the context of supply chains.
- Instrumental logic is defined as treating the social and environmental aspects discretely and sequentially as
if such issues are emerging distractions and they explain that this logic has its foundations in stakeholder
theory, which places the firm in the centre of a stakeholder network and views these stakeholders as either
enables or inhibitors of the firm’s primary goal of creating wealth. The key to instrumental logic is that
economic performance is the goal, not sustainability. This inside-out logic limits the stakeholders and
impacts that the firm considers and pushes the supply chain to focus on win-win opportunities in the guise
of total quality environmental management, shared value and the like. These decisions tend to focus on
incremental changes to the supply chains that are done with relatively short time horizons. The end result is
organized irresponsibility where the improvements made lead to bring less unsustainable but cannot lead
to sustainability because the trade-offs inherent in sustainability are never fully addressed.
- The Ecologically Dominant logic is explicit in its priorities when trade-offs are encountered and is aimed at
crating a truly sustainable supply chain, not at reducing the harm from a single focal firm. Here, economic
and social systems exist inside of and depend upon environmental systems. Only the Ecologically Dominant
logic can lead to the development of sustainable supply chains. This outside-in logic leads to the
consideration of a wide range of stakeholders and outcomes and forces the supply chain to focus on doing
no harm. In order to survive economically, a supply chain functioning under this logic will have to significantly
alter both what they do and how they do it. In so doing, they will also likely identify opportunities to refocus
existing practices toward harm elimination instead of profit maximization. These changes require a long time
horizon and a willingness to take responsibility for the organization, even when that means not satisfying
certain customer demands. Following this trajectory can lead to solutions to the complex problems of
sustainability and does not lead to organized irresponsibility; rather, it leads to sustainable supply chains.
The normative Ecologically Dominant Logic provides a clear nested hierarchy for the elements of the TBL.
Evaluate how sustainable development dimensions are operationalized in the context of supply chain processes.
- Changing societies: consumer demand for transparency, fairness and eco-friendliness of business processes.
- Disruptive technologies: social, mobile, cloud, big-data, and green technologies.
- Global economy: high levels of off-shore production with low impact on global income equality.
- Environmental issues: breaking levels of pollution overexploitation of resources and growing resource
scarcity.
- Stringent policies: compliance and anti-corruption measures, social and environmental standards for
businesses.
Evaluate the difficulties companies face while transitioning towards more sustainable practices in their supply
chains and develop innovative solutions.
- Barriers and challenges: (1) financial cost and low ROI; (2) lack of top management commitment and
resources; (3) shortage of skills and knowledge on green product design, low carbon economy, etc.; (4) lack
of visibility and high complexity of supply chains; (5) insufficient communication in supply chains; (6) poor
supplier commitment (due to size, location, skills and culture); (7) firm’s previous sustainability experiences;
and (8) product prices. Key barrier: (9) achieving supply chain visibility.
Evaluate the role of supplier codes of conduct for implementing sustainability across the supply chains (from the
perspective of the leading firm).
- The traditional model: (1) external pressures from NGOs etc.; (2) global brands; (3) codes of conduct; (4)
monitoring/factory audits; (5a) brands exit factories or (5b) improved working conditions.
- Supplier Codes of Conduct: (1) two-third of the suppliers did not comply because Chinese suppliers
successfully deceived monitors; and (2) corporate codes have a role to play in improving labour standards,
but are currently doing little to challenge existing commercial practices or embedded social relations that
underpin poor labour standards in global production systems.
- Supplier Codes of Conduct alone seems to be insufficient, but: (1) combined with collaboration, it can create
significant change; (2) collaboration with suppliers is essential for effective implementation; and (3) the
driving factor of supplier compliance was the cooperative relationship buyer.
1
, Distribution Management Master Supply Chain Management
Learning Goals & Exam Questions Author: Andreas S. Melisse
Lecture 2 – Design for sustainability (DFS) (Arnette et al, 2014) & Green
innovation games (Westerlund et al., 2014)
Learning Goals
Investigate product and service design.
- Product Design with Suppliers: (1) task complexity, difficulty of designing a component that will accomplish
the task; (2) task interdependence, the extent to which accomplishing one task is dependent on others; (3)
component interdependence, the extent to which the design of one component is dependent on others; (4)
component integration, is easy when component interdependence is low, components can be designed and
developed in isolation; (5) inter-organizational interdependence, the extent to which an organization is
dependent on the other; and (6) inter-organizational integration, is easy when inter-organizational
interdependence is low, organizations can work with little information sharing.
- Four types of innovation: core design concept: basic knowledge underlying components and interfaces:
linkages between components.
- A service is a process consisting of a series of more or less intangible activities that normally, but not
necessarily always, take place in interactions between the customer and service employees and/or physical
resources or goods and/or systems of the service provider, which are provided as solutions to customer
problems.
- Products: are tangible, can be demonstrated before the purchase, can be stored, production occurs before
consumption, buyer produces, and can be transported.
- Services: are intangible, are more difficult to demonstrate (not available), cannot be stored, production and
consumption are simultaneous, buyer and customer takes part in production, and cannot be transported
(but the producer and customer can move).
Analyze the green aspect of product and service design.
- Green Facilitating Service: the service offering that takes account of environmental impact in the provision
of a bundle of tangible products and intangible services with the aim to satisfy customer needs and reduce
operations costs.
- Green Innovation Games: innovation type: Evolutionary <-> Revolutionary and interdependency: Systemic
<-> Autonomous. Interdependencies among: environmental, social and economic.
Interpret Life Cycle Analysis.
- Product Life Cycle: all the activities from design to the end of life (manufacture, assembly, testing,
distribution, operation, services, reuse, remanufacturing, recycling, and disposal).
- The Life Cycle Assessment/Analysis: assessment and evaluation of the environmental, occupational health
and resource-related consequences of a product through all phases of product’s (or process’) life, i.e.
extracting and processing raw materials, production, transportation and distribution, use, remanufacturing,
recycling and final disposal.
- Three elements: Life Cycle Inventory Analysis, Life Cycle Impact Analysis and Life Cycle Improvement Analysis
Sample Exam Questions
What are the four types of innovation?
1) Incremental Innovation; unchanged interfaces & reinforced core design concepts (phone software update).
2) Modular Innovation; unchanged interfaces & overturned core design concepts (phone chip replacement).
3) Architectural Innovation; changed interfaces & reinforced core design concepts (second camera lens).
4) Radical Innovation; changed interfaces & overturned core design concepts (Apple watch).
What are the four types of innovation games?
1) Rationality Game; value creation through eco-efficiencies and evolutionary green innovations.
Evolutionary type of innovation & autonomous interdependency.
2) Collaboration Game; value creation by scaling through external partnerships.
Evolutionary type of innovation & systemic interdependency.
3) Radical Game; value creation by experimenting with revolutionary green innovations.
Revolutionary type of innovation & autonomous interdependency.
4) Clarity Game; rewriting the rules of an industry.
Revolutionary type of innovation & systemic interdependency.
2
