Asia Pacific Academy of Science Pte. Ltd. (APACSCI) specializes in international journal publishing. APACSCI adopts the open access publishing model and provides an important communication bridge for academic groups whose interest fields include engineering, technology, medicine, computer, mathematics, agriculture and forestry, and environment.
The analysis of lean and agile supply chain strategy on environmental performance with mediating of supply chain responsiveness: Evidence from manufacturing industries in Malaysia
Vol 1, Issue 3, 2023
VIEWS - 2567 (Abstract)
Download PDF
Abstract
Environmental concerns have garnered increasing global attention, prompting discussions on how to integrate these issues into business operations and strategies. While lean supply chain strategy (LSC) and agile supply chain strategy (ASC) are recognized for their environmental benefits to organizations, the impact of LSC and ASC on the environmental performance of firms remains relatively unexplored. This study aims to analyze the influence of LSC and ASC within various functional areas of manufacturing firms on their environmental performance. To gather data, a quantitative survey methodology was employed, involving 299 manufacturing firms in Malaysia. Out of the collected responses, 231 were deemed usable for analysis. The survey results reveal that lean supply chain strategy and agile supply chain strategy positively affect environmental performance. Moreover, supply chain responsiveness (SCR) partially mediates the relationship between LSC and ASC on environmental performance. This study contributes to the existing literature and practices in supply chain management strategy and sustainable performance in manufacturing industries.
Keywords
References
1. Ngu HJ, Lee MD, Bin Osman MS. Review on current challenges and future opportunities in Malaysia sustainable manufacturing: Remanufacturing industries. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020; 273: 123071. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123071
2. Abdul-Rashid SH, Sakundarini N, Raja Ghazilla RA, Thurasamy R. The impact of sustainable manufacturing practices on sustainability performance: Empirical evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 2017; 37(2): 182–204. doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-04-2015-0223
3. Rozar NM, Mahmood WHW, Ibrahim A, Razik MA. A study of success factors in green supply chain management in manufacturing industries in Malaysia. Journal of Economics, Business and Management 2015; 3(2): 287–291. doi: 10.7763/JOEBM.2015.V3.196
4. Mallak SK, Ishak MB, Mohamed AF, Iranmanesh M. Toward sustainable solid waste minimization by manufacturing firms in Malaysia: Strengths and weaknesses. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2018; 190(10): 575–581. doi: 10.1007/s10661-018-6935-5
5. MIDA. Inspiring technological transformation. Malaysia Investment Performance Report 2018 2018; 53(9): 1689–1699.
6. Venugopal V, Saleeshya PG. Manufacturing system sustainability through lean and agile initiatives. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 2019; 12(3): 159–173. doi: 10.1080/19397038.2019.1566411
7. Ciccullo F, Pero M, Caridi M, et al. Integrating the environmental and social sustainability pillars into the lean and agile supply chain management paradigms: A literature review and future research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018; 172: 2336–2350. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.176
8. Martínez-Jurado PJ, Moyano-Fuentes J. Lean management, supply chain management and sustainability: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2014; 85: 134–150. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.042
9. Pearce D, Dora M, Wesana J, Gellynck X. Determining factors driving sustainable performance through the application of lean management practices in horticultural primary production. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018; 203: 400–417. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.170
10. Mathiyazhagan K, Agarwal V, Appolloni A, et al. Integrating lean and agile practices for achieving global sustainability goals in Indian manufacturing industries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2021; 171: 120982. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120982
11. Larson T, Greenwood R. Perfect complements: Synergies between lean production and eco-sustainability initiatives. Environmental Quality Management 2004; 13(4): 27–36. doi: 10.1002/tqem.20013
12. Sawhney R, Teparakul P, Bagchi A, Li X. En-Lean: A framework to align lean and green manufacturing in the metal cutting supply chain. International Journal of Enterprise Network Management 2007; 1(3): 238–260. doi: 10.1504/IJENM.2007.012757
13. Payne T, Peters MJ. What is the right supply chain for your products? The International Journal of Logistics Management 2004; 15(2): 77–92. doi: 10.1108/09574090410700310
14. Navid BJ, Ismaeli S. Analyzing effective elements in agile supply chain. Management Science Letters 2012; 2(1): 369–378. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2011.07.008
15. Creswell JW. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 4th ed. Pearson; 2012.
16. Barney JB. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management 2001; 27(6): 643–650. doi: 10.1177/014920630102700602
17. Roh J, Hong P, Min H. Implementation of a responsive supply chain strategy in global complexity: The case of manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Economics 2014; 147(Part B): 198–210. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.04.013
18. Qi Y, Huo B, Wang Z, Yeung HYJ. The impact of operations and supply chain strategies on integration and performance. International Journal of Production Economics 2017; 185: 162–174. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.028
19. Rajagopal P, Azar NAZ, Bahrin AS, et al. Determinants of supply chain responsiveness among firms in the manufacturing industry in Malaysia. International Journal of Supply Chain Management 2016; 5(3): 18–24.
20. Haq AN, Boddu V. Analysis of enablers for the implementation of leagile supply chain management using an integrated fuzzy QFD approach. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 2017; 28(1): 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s10845-014-0957-9
21. Ariadi G, Surachman S, Rohman F. The effect of lean and agile supply chain strategy on financial performance with mediating of strategic supplier integration & strategic customer integration: Evidence from bottled drinking-water industry in Indonesia. Cogent Business and Management 2021; 8(1): 1930500. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1930500
22. Dyer JH, Singh H. The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganiational competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Review 1998; 23(4): 660–679. doi: 10.2307/259056
23. Arora A, Arora AS, Sivakumar K. Relationships among supply chain strategies, organizational performance, and technological and market turbulences. The International Journal of Logistics Management 2016; 27(1): 206–232. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-09-2013-0103
24. Carter CR, Kosmol T, Kaufmann L. Toward a supply chain practice view. Journal of Supply Chain Management 2017; 53(1): 114–122. doi: 10.1111/jscm.12130
25. Moreira F, Alves AC, Sousa RM. Towards eco-efficient lean production systems. In: Ortiz Á, Franco RD, Gasquet PG (editors). Balanced Automation Systems for Future Manufacturing Networks, Proceedings of the BASYS 2010. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; 21–23 June 2010; Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer; 2010. Volume 322, pp. 100–108.
26. Mohammaddust F, Rezapour S, Farahani RZ, et al. Developing lean and responsive supply chains: A robust model for alternative risk mitigation strategies in supply chain designs. International Journal of Production Economics 2017; 183: 632–653. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.09.012
27. Yang MG, Hong P, Modi SB. Impact of lean manufacturing and environmental management on business performance: An empirical study of manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Economics 2011; 129(2): 251–261. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.10.017
28. Qi Y, Boyer KK, Zhao X. Supply chain strategy, product characteristics, and performance impact: Evidence from Chinese manufacturers. Decision Sciences 2009; 40(4): 667–695. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2009.00246.x
29. Jasti NVK, Kurra S. An empirical investigation on lean supply chain management frameworks in Indian manufacturing industry. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 2017; 66(6): 699–723. doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-12-2015-0185
30. Khorasani ST, Cross J, Maghazei O. Lean supply chain management in healthcare: A systematic review and meta-study. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2020; 11(1): 1–34. doi: 10.1108/IJLSS-07-2018-0069
31. Tortorella GL, Miorando R, Marodin G. Lean supply chain management: Empirical research on practices, contexts and performance. International Journal of Production Economics 2017; 193: 98–112. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.07.006
32. Galankashi MR, Helmi SA. Assessment of hybrid lean-agile (leagile) supply chain strategies. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2016; 27(4), 470–482. doi: 10.1108/JMTM-08-2015-0069
33. Jafarnejad A, Rokhi AS, Abad AKS, et al. The effects of supply chain strategies on supply chain performance of malaysian manufacturing companies with moderation of six sigma and lean production. Business Management Dynamics 2017; 6(11): 16–27.
34. Piercy N, Rich N. The relationship between lean operations and sustainable operations. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 2015; 35(2): 282–315. doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-03-2014-0143
35. Ahmed W, Huma S. Impact of lean and agile strategies on supply chain risk management. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence 2018; 32(1–2): 33–56. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2018.1529558
36. Environment Protection Authority. Environment Protection Authority Annual Report: 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011. Environment Protection Authority; 2011.
37. Dieste M, Panizzolo R, Garza-Reyes JA, Anosike A. The relationship between lean and environmental performance: Practices and measures. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019; 224: 120–131. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.243
38. Henao R, Sarache W, Gómez I. Lean manufacturing and sustainable performance: Trends and future challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019; 208: 99–116. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.116
39. Degroote SE, Marx TG. The impact of IT on supply chain agility and firm performance: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Information Management 2013; 33(6): 909–916. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.09.001
40. Gligor DM. The role of demand management in achieving supply chain agility. Supply Chain Management 2014; 19(5/6): 577–591. doi: 10.1108/SCM-10-2013-0363
41. Tse YK, Zhang M, Akhtar P, Macbryde J. Embracing supply chain agility: An investigation in the electronics industry. Supply Chain Management 2016; 21(1): 140–156. doi: 10.1108/SCM-06-2015-0237
42. Dubey R, Altay N, Gunasekaran A, et al. Supply chain agility, adaptability and alignment: Empirical evidence from the Indian auto components industry. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 2018; 38(1): 129–148. doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-04-2016-0173
43. Gligor DM, Holcomb MC. Understanding the role of logistics capabilities in achieving supply chain agility: A systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management 2012; 17(4): 438–453. doi: 10.1108/13598541211246594
44. Bargshady G, Zahraee SM, Ahmadi M, Parto A. The effect of information technology on the agility of the supply chain in the Iranian power plant industry. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2016; 27(3): 427–442. doi: 10.1108/JMTM-11-2015-0093
45. Gilal FG, Zhang J, Gilal RG, et al. Supply chain management practices and product development: A moderated mediation model of supply chain responsiveness, organization structure, and research and development. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems 2017; 16(1): 35–56. doi: 10.1142/S0219686717500032
46. Yang J, Xie H, Yu G, Liu M. Turning responsible purchasing and supply into supply chain responsiveness. Industrial Management & Data Systems 2019; 119(9): 1988–2005. doi: 10.1108/IMDS-01-2019-0029
47. Hajmohammad S, Vachon S, Klassen RD, Gavronski I. Lean management and supply management: Their role in green practices and performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2013; 39: 312–320. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.028
48. Zhu Q, Sarkis J. Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Journal of Operations Management 2004; 22(3): 265–289. doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2004.01.005
49. Environmental Protection Agency. National Waste Report 2010. Environmental Protection Agency; 2010. 386p.
50. Cherrafi A, Elfezazi S, Govindan K, et al. A framework for the integration of green and lean six sigma for superior sustainability performance. International Journal of Production Research 2017; 55(15): 4481–4515. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2016.1266406
51. Iranmanesh M, Zailani S, Hyun SS, et al. Impact of lean manufacturing practices on firms’ sustainable performance: Lean culture as a moderator. Sustainability 2019; 11(4): 1093–1112. doi: 10.3390/su11041112
52. Tuna AK, Swinney R. Sustainability implications of supply chain responsiveness. Available online: https://people.duke.edu/~rps23/SustainableResponsiveness.pdf (accessed on 9 September 2023).
53. Ayoub HF, Abdallah AB. The effect of supply chain agility on export performance: The mediating roles of supply chain responsiveness and innovativeness. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2019; 30(5): 821–839. doi: 10.1108/JMTM-08-2018-0229
54. Tarafdar M, Qrunfleh S. Agile supply chain strategy and supply chain performance: Complementary roles of supply chain practices and information systems capability for agility. International Journal of Production Research 2017; 55(4): 925–938. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2016.1203079
55. Shekarian M, Reza Nooraie SV, Parast MM. An examination of the impact of flexibility and agility on mitigating supply chain disruptions. International Journal of Production Economics 2020; 220: 107438. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.011
56. Azevedo SG, Carvalho H, Cruz-Machado V. LARG index: A benchmarking tool for improving the leanness, agility, resilience and greenness of the automotive supply chain. Benchmarking: An International Journal 2016; 23(6): 1472–1499. doi: 10.1108/BIJ-07-2014-0072
57. Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers. Malaysian Industries FMM Directory 2017, 48th ed. Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers; 2017. p. 6858.
58. Sekaran U, Bougie R. Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 7th ed. John Wily & Sons; 2016. 448p.
59. Gangolells M, Casals M, Forcada N, Macarulla M. Analysis of the implementation of effective waste management practices in construction projects and sites. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2014; 93: 99–111. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.10.006
60. Oluwagbemiga OE, Olugbenga OM, Zaccheaus SA. Cost management practices and firm’s performance of manufacturing organizations. International Journal of Economics and Finance 2014; 6(6): 234–239. doi: 10.5539/ijef.v6n6p234
61. Ateke BW, Iruka CH. Investigating the relationship between customer involvement management and marketing performance in the manufacturing industry. International Journal of Research in Business Studies and Management 2015; 2(9): 22–34.
62. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 1981; 18(3): 382–388. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800313
63. Gold S, Hahn R, Seuring S. Sustainable supply chain management in “Base of the Pyramid” food projects—A path to triple bottom line approaches for multinationals?. International Business Review 2013; 22(5): 784–799. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2012.12.006
64. Dijkstra TK, Henseler J. Consistent and asymptotically normal PLS estimators for linear structural equations. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 2015; 81: 10–23. doi: 10.1016/j.csda.2014.07.008
65. Nawanir G, Lim KT, Othman SN. Lean manufacturing practices in Indonesian manufacturing firms: Are there business performance effects? International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2016; 7(2): 149–170. doi: 10.1108/IJLSS-06-2014-0013
66. Huo B, Gu M, Wang Z. Green or lean? A supply chain approach to sustainable performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019; 216: 152–166. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.141
67. Sandberg E, Jafari H. Retail supply chain responsiveness: Towards a retail-specific framework and a future research agenda. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 2018; 67(9): 1977–1993. doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-11-2017-0315
68. Ugarte GM, Golden JS, Dooley KJ. Lean versus green: The impact of lean logistics on greenhouse gas emissions in consumer goods supply chains. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 2016; 22(2): 98–109. doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2015.09.002
69. Sundram VPK, Bahrin AS, Abdul Munir ZB, Zolait AH. The effect of supply chain information management and information system infrastructure: The mediating role of supply chain integration towards manufacturing performance in Malaysia. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 2018; 31(5): 751–770. doi: 10.1108/JEIM-06-2017-0084
70. Asamoah D, Nuertey D, Agyei-Owusu B, Akyeh J. The effect of supply chain responsiveness on customer development. The International Journal of Logistics Management 2021; 32(4): 1190–1213. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-03-2020-0133
71. Sundram VPK, Rajagopal P, Azar NAZ, et al. Supply chain responsiveness in an Asian global electronic manufacturing firm: ABX Energy (M). International Journal of Supply Chain Management 2018; 7(2): 23–31. doi: 10.59160/ijscm.v7i2.1875
72. Kovilage MP. Influence of lean–green practices on organizational sustainable performance. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies 2021; 28(2): 121–142. doi: 10.1108/JABES-11-2019-0115
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Istimaroh Istimaroh, Idham Cholid, Bambang Setiaji, Noor Aslinda Abu Seman
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Prof. Kittisak Jermsittiparsert
University of City Island, Cyprus
Processing Speed
-
-
-
- ＜5 days from submission to initial review decision;
- 62% acceptance rate
-
-
