Engagement in corporate environmentalism has become increasingly important across all tiers of the supply chain, from upstream raw material suppliers to downstream retailers. However, the contextual role of a firm's supply chain position (SCP) on the adoption of green supply chain management (GSCM) practices and their performance implications has not been empirically explored. We derive a conceptual model combining the contingent natural resource‐based view (NRBV) with stakeholder theory. The resulting hypotheses are tested using cross‐industry data of 284 firms utilizing primary and secondary data. Findings reveal a phenomenon we term the Supply Chain Position Paradox: The closer a company is located toward the end consumer, the higher its GSCM practice levels. Conversely, performance gains decrease with company proximity to the end consumer. This paradox is grounded in a mismatch between the level of five specific GSCM practice categories and their respective performance implications. The introduction of SCP as an overlooked contextual factor adds new insights into the “GSCM practice–performance link” and extends current GSCM research. Moreover, our results yield insights to supply chain management executives in optimizing their GSCM practice portfolios.

No abstract

Green investments are crucial mechanisms for translating green operation strategies into managerial action. We examine the impact of external pressures on green investment patterns in terms of their scope, type and time horizon across 251 German and US managers. A scenario-based experiment was conducted using a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design in which managers were assigned to high and low consumer, community, and resource treatment groups before being asked to make green investment decisions. Our hypotheses are developed based on resource advantage theory and tested in a number of regression models. The results demonstrate that German and US managers respond differently to external pressures in their green investment decisions. Regarding the scope of green investments, German and US managers invest differently if end consumer pressure increases and partially differently if resource scarcity increases, but they act in a similar way if community pressure increases. Moreover, we detected specific variations in the type and time horizon of green investments across US and German managers. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings for green operations management research and for firms operating in multinational settings are explained.

No abstract

No abstract