Managing knowledge in supply chains: a catalyst to triple bottom line sustainability

Abstract

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) has attracted the attention of researchers in recent years. Arguably the interest in SSCM is stimulated by the triple bottom line (TBL) which itself has received significant attention. In addition, knowledge management (KM) and its positive role in improving facets of supply chain development and performance have been topics of interest to academics. Despite all this positive development there is a paucity of theoretical and empirical studies identifying the broad capabilities that affect a firm's ability to simultaneously pursue economic, environmental and social success. In this paper we use the natural-resource-based view (NRBV) and the knowledge-based view (KBV) to develop a series of propositions linking KM capability to strategic and operational supply chain sustainability and competiveness. We further test the veracity of these propositions by ascertaining the perceptions of 275 practicing managers using a survey instrument. The paper offers a systematic analysis of KM's role in the development of sustainable supply chain (SSC) strategies and operations respectively. The findings confirm the credibility of a set of theoretical propositions derived from the extant literature, and also identify how different KM processes specifically facilitate strategic or operational development of SSCs. The paper provides researchers with a framework and understanding to guide future research on KM as a catalyst to the TBL in supply chains.

Supply Chain Practitioners’ Perception on Sustainability: An Empirical Study

“…Though all the factors of the three sustainability dimensions are important for sustainable supply chain management, this study also suggests that there are some factors in each dimension that are perceived to be relatively more important than other factors by the practitioners. This finding is in line with one study, which emphasizes that within the environmental, social, and economic dimension of sustainability, the relative importance of sub-indicators varies from a triple bottom line perspective [20].…”

“…These findings are in line with the findings of another study, which concludes that the firm's environmental, social, and economic aspects need to be considered by the firm when reengineering or designing sustainable supply chain operations and improved decision-making and business performance [30,36]. These findings are also aligned with the results of research conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which proposes that for a sustainable supply chain to be effective, sustainable strategies are important and these strategies should include factors from all three indicators of the TBL [19] Additionally, it is consistent with the results of the findings of He et al, which indicate that practicing managers' perception supports strategies that are found from the lens of the TBL [20]. Though all the factors of the three sustainability dimensions are important for sustainable supply chain management, this study also suggests that there are some factors in each dimension that are perceived to be relatively more important than other factors by the practitioners.…”

“…Table 1 illustrates a summarized form of the literature. Green HR Zaid et al [13] Green HR Baah et al [14] Green et al [15] JIT, TQM Carter et al [16] Montabon et al [17] Markman et al [18] Karmaker et al [19] Finances HE et al [20] Knowledge Management Radi et al [21] Social media analytics Dong et al [22] Behavioral aspect Kusi-Sarpong [23] Innovation Mgmt. Walker et al [24] UK Martins et al [25] Brazillion Ghoushchi et al [26] GP-DAE Chabra et al [27] Indian Halkos et al [28] CSR Chu et al [29] Organizational culture La Scalia et al [30] Ecological impact Plambeck et al [31] Clean energy Khan et al [32] Clean energy Helo et al [33] Clean energy Hojnik et al [34] Yachting Industry Stindt et al [35] Planning Vasileiou et al [36] Potatoes, UK Zailani et al [37] Malaysia Kalenoja et al [38] Clean energy Colicchia et al [39] Benchmarking Kim et al [40] Modica et al [41] Hospital Industry Cervellon et al [42] Fashion Industry Xu et al [43] Attitude & Behavior Ahmed et al [45] Manufacturing Industry Babu et al [46] Hotel Industry Lu et al [47] Container Terminal Gouda et al [48] OECD countries Harms et al [49] German Supplier Dev.…”

The Status quo of Knowledge Management and Sustainability Knowledge

“…Meilnschmidt, Foerstl and Kirchoff (2016) propose exploratory learning to search "what is out there" as an important component of sustainability knowledge learning. He, et al (2019) mention knowledge identification; however, their research does not focus on the actual development of a KM framework.…”

“…In other words, organizations often recognize their need for sustainability knowledge, but not what it is they need, and who may have the required information and expertise. Robinson, et al (2006) also pointed out that organizations often lack a methodical approach for managing sustainability knowledge, while He, et al (2019) recognize that there is little understanding as to how KM supports the development of sustainable supply chains.…”