nach oben

Journal of Business Economics

Erschienen in:

18.07.2017 | Original Paper

Stakeholder Pressures, Environmental Practice Adoption and Economic Performance in the German Third-party Logistics Industry—A Contingency Perspective

verfasst von: Steffen Maas, Tassilo Schuster, Evi Hartmann

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Economics | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This study explores how companies adopt environmental practices when they are exposed to stakeholder pressures and how those practices affect economic performance within the German third-party logistics industry. The relationships are tested against a random sample of 192 German third-party logistics providers by using a higher-order partial least squares approach. The study reveals that perceived stakeholder pressures, especially internal, market, and regulatory pressures, strongly influence third-party logistics providers’ environmental practice adoption and that environmental practice adoption improves economic performance. Moreover, by introducing complexity of service offerings as an important firm-related contextual variable, the study advances our knowledge as it highlights that companies with basic service offerings can benefit more from adopting environmental practices than companies with advanced service offerings.

Vorheriger Artikel Do family investors differ from other investors? Similarity, experience, and professionalism in the light of family investee firm challenges

Nächster Artikel Corporate governance, capital market orientation and firm performance: empirical evidence for large publicly traded German corporations

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Journal of Business Economics

From January 2013, the Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft (ZfB) is published in English under the title Journal of Business Economics (JBE). The Journal of Business Economics (JBE) aims at encouraging theoretical and applied research in the field of business economics and business administration, promoting the exchange of ideas between science and practice.

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ambec S, Lanoie P (2008) Does it pay to be green? A systematic overview. Acad Manag Perspect 22:45–62CrossRef

Andersson D, Norrman A (2002) Procurement of logistics services—a minutes work or a multi-year project? Eur J Purch Supply Manag 8:3–14CrossRef

Aragón-Correa JA (1998) Strategic proactivity and firm approach to the natural environment. Acad Manag J 41:556–567CrossRef

Aragón-Correa JA, Sharma S (2003) A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Acad Manag Rev 28:71–88

Barnett ML (2007) Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Rev 32:794–816CrossRef

Barnett ML, Salomon RM (2012) Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strateg Manag J 33:1304–1320CrossRef

Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17:99–120

Bask AH (2001) Relationships among TPL providers and members of supply chains—a strategic perspective. J Bus Ind Mark 16:470–486CrossRef

Berglund M, Van Laarhoven P, Sharman G, Wandel S (1999) Third-party logistics: is there a future? Int J Logist Manag 10:59–70CrossRef

Beuthe M, Gasca J, Greene D et al (2007) Transport and its infrastructure. In: Metz B, Davidson O (eds) Climate change 2007—mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 323–385

Bocquet R, Le Bas C, Mothe C, Poussing N (2013) Are firms with different CSR profiles equally innovative? Empirical analysis with survey data. Eur Manag J 31:642–654CrossRef

Branco MC, Rodrigues LL (2006) Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. J Bus Ethics 69:111–132CrossRef

Busse C (2016) Doing well by doing good? The self-interest of buying firms and sustainable supply chain management. J Supply Chain Manag 52:28–47CrossRef

Buysse K, Verbeke A (2003) Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strateg Manag J 24:453–470CrossRef

CapGemini (2016) 2016 third-party logistics study: the state of logistics outsourcing. https://www.fr.capgemini-consulting.com/sites/default/files/resource/pdf/3pl_report-final_reduced_size.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2017

Carroll AB, Shabana KM (2010) The business case for corporate social responsibility: a review of concepts, research and practice. Int J Manag Rev 12:85–105CrossRef

Carter CR, Carter JR (1998) Interorganizational determinants of environmental purchasing: initial evidence from the consumer products industries. Decis Sci 29:659–684CrossRef

Chang S-J, van Witteloostuijn A, Eden L (2010) From the editors: common method variance in international business research. J Int Bus Stud 41:178–184CrossRef

Cho JJ-K, Ozment J, Sink H (2008) Logistics capability, logistics outsourcing and firm performance in an e-commerce market. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 38:336–359CrossRef

Christmann P (2000) Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: the role of complementary assets. Acad Manag J 43:663–680CrossRef

Claver E, Lopez MD, Molina JF, Tarí JJ (2007) Environmental management and firm performance: a case study. J Environ Manag 84:606–619CrossRef

Claver-Cortés E, Pertusa-Ortega EM, Molina-Azorín JF (2012) Characteristics of organizational structure relating to hybrid competitive strategy: implications for performance. J Bus Res 65:993–1002CrossRef

Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psychol Bull 112:155–159CrossRef

Colicchia C, Marchet G, Melacini M, Perotti S (2013) Building environmental sustainability: empirical evidence from Logistics Service Providers. J Clean Prod 59:197–209CrossRef

Cordeiro JJ, Sarkis J (1997) Environmental proactivism and firm performance: evidence from security analyst earnings forecasts. Bus Strateg Environ 6:104–114CrossRef

Craighead CW, Ketchen DJ, Dunn KS, Hult GTM (2011) Addressing common method variance: guidelines for survey research on information technology, operations, and supply chain management. Eng Manag IEEE Trans 58:578–588CrossRef

Cullinane S, Edwards J (2010) Benefits and costs of switching to alternative fuels. In: McKinnon AC, Cullinane SL, Browne M, Whiteing A (eds) Green logistics: improving the environmental sustainability of logistics. Kogan Page Limited, London, pp 306–321

Dahlmann F, Brammer S, Millington A (2008) Environmental management in the United Kingdom: new survey evidence. Manag Decis 46:264–283CrossRef

Darnall N, Edwards D (2006) Predicting the cost of environmental management system adoption: the role of capabilities, resources and ownership structure. Strateg Manag J 27:301–320CrossRef

Darnall N, Henriques I, Sadorsky P (2010) Adopting proactive environmental strategy: the influence of stakeholders and firm size. J Manag Stud 47:1072–1094CrossRef

de Bakker F, Nijhof A (2002) Responsible chain management: a capability assessment framework. Bus Strateg Environ 11:63–75CrossRef

de Winter J, Dodou D, Wieringa P (2009) Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivar Behav Res 44:147–181CrossRef

Delfmann W, Albers S, Gehring M (2002) The impact of electronic commerce on logistics service providers. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 32:203–222CrossRef

Delmas MA, Pekovic S (2015) Resource efficiency strategies and market conditions. Long Range Plan 48:80–94CrossRef

Delmas M, Toffel MW (2004) Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Bus Strateg Environ 13:209–222CrossRef

Delmas MA, Toffel MW (2008) Organizational responses to environmental demands: opening the black box. Strateg Manag J 29:1027–1055CrossRef

Delmas M, Hoffmann VH, Kuss M (2011) Under the tip of the iceberg: absorptive capacity, environmental strategy, and competitive advantage. Bus Soc 50:116–154CrossRef

Dess GG, Robinson RB (1984) Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: the case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strateg Manag J 5:265–273CrossRef

Diamantopoulos A, Winklhofer HM (2001) Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development. J Mark Res 38:269–277CrossRef

Dixon-Fowler HR, Slater DJ, Johnson JL et al (2013) Beyond “does it pay to be green?” A meta-analysis of moderators of the CEP–CFP relationship. J Bus Ethics 112:353–366CrossRef

Donaldson L (2001) The contingency theory of organizations. SAGE Publications, Thousand OaksCrossRef

Eberl M (2010) An application of PLS in multi-group analysis: the need for differentiated corporate-level marketing in the mobile communications industry. In: Vinzi V, Chin WW, Henseler J, Wang H (eds) Handbook of partial least squares: concepts, methods and applications. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 487–514CrossRef

Endrikat J, Guenther E, Hoppe H (2014) Making sense of conflicting empirical findings: a meta-analytic review of the relationship between corporate environmental and financial performance. Eur Manag J 32:735–751CrossRef

Fisher RJ (1993) Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. J Consum Res 20:303–315CrossRef

Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18:39–50CrossRef

Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. University Press, Cambridge

Gadenne DL, Kennedy J, McKeiver C (2009) An empirical study of environmental awareness and practices in SMEs. J Bus Ethics 84:45–63CrossRef

Garcés-Ayerbe C, Rivera-Torres P, Murillo-Luna JL (2012) Stakeholder pressure and environmental proactivity: moderating effect of competitive advantage expectations. Manag Decis 50:189–206CrossRef

Gilley KM, Worrell DL, Davidson WN, El-Jelly A (2000) Corporate environmental initiatives and anticipated firm performance: the differential effects of process-driven versus product-driven greening initiatives. J Manag 26:1199–1216

Giunipero LC, Pearcy DH (2000) World-class purchasing skills: an empirical investigation. J Supply Chain Manag 36:4–13CrossRef

Golicic SL, Smith CD (2013) A meta-analysis of environmentally sustainable supply chain management practices and firm performance. J Supply Chain Manag 49:78–95CrossRef

González-Benito J, González-Benito Ó (2006) The role of stakeholder pressure and managerial values in the implementation of environmental logistics practices. Int J Prod Res 44:1353–1373CrossRef

González-Benito J, González-Benito Ó (2010) A study of determinant factors of stakeholder environmental pressure perceived by industrial companies. Bus Strateg Environ 19:164–181

Graf NFS, Rothlauf F (2012) Firm-NGO collaborations: a resource-based perspective. J Bus Econ 82:103–125CrossRef

Graf C, Wirl F (2014) Corporate social responsibility: a strategic and profitable response to entry? J Bus Econ 84:917–927CrossRef

Green KW Jr, Zelbst PJ, Meacham J, Bhadauria VS (2012) Green supply chain management practices: impact on performance. Supply Chain Manag Int J 17:290–305CrossRef

Grewatsch S, Kleindienst I (2015) When does it pay to be good? Moderators and mediators in the corporate sustainability-corporate financial performance relationship: a critical review. J Bus Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2852-5

Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2011) PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J Mark Theory Pract 19:139–151CrossRef

Hair JF Jr, Hult GTM, Ringle C, Sarstedt M (2016) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks

Hall J, Wagner M (2012) Integrating sustainability into firms’ processes: performance effects and the moderating role of business models and innovation. Bus Strateg Environ 21:183–196CrossRef

Halldorsson A, Kovács G (2010) The sustainable agenda and energy efficiency: logistics solutions and supply chains in times of climate change. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 40:5–13CrossRef

Halldorsson A, Skjøtt-Larsen T (2004) Developing logistics competencies through third party logistics relationships. Int J Oper Prod Manag 24:192–206CrossRef

Halldorsson A, Kotzab H, Mikkola JH, Skjøtt-Larsen T (2007) Complementary theories to supply chain management. Supply Chain Manag Int J 12:284–296CrossRef

Harman HH (1976) Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Hart SL (1995) A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Acad Manag Rev 20:986–1014

Hart SL, Dowell G (2010) A natural-resource-based view of the firm: fifteen years after. J Manag 37:1464–1479

Henriques I, Sadorsky P (1999) The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Acad Manag J 42:87–99CrossRef

Henseler J (2012) PLS-MGA: a non-parametric approach to partial least squares-based multi-group analysis. In: Gaul W, Geyer-Schulz A, Schmidt-Thieme L, Kunze J (eds) Challenges at the interface of data analysis, computer science, and optimization. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 495–501CrossRef

Henseler J, Sarstedt M (2013) Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Comput Stat 28:565–580CrossRef

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR (2009) The use of partial least squares path modelling in international marketing. Adv Int Mark 20:277–319

Hertz S, Alfredsson M (2003) Strategic development of third party logistics providers. Ind Mark Manag 32:139–149CrossRef

Hulland J (1999) Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strateg Manag J 20:195–204CrossRef

Husted BW (2000) A contingency theory of corporate social performance. Bus Soc 39:24–48CrossRef

Javed M, Rashid MA, Hussain G (2016) When does it pay to be good–a contingency perspective on corporate social and financial performance: would it work? J Clean Prod 133:1062–1073CrossRef

Kassinis G, Vafeas N (2006) Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Acad Manag J 49:145–159CrossRef

Kim E, Nam D, Stimpert JL (2004) The applicability of Porter’s generic strategies in the digital age: assumptions, conjectures, and suggestions. J Manag 30:569–589

King AA, Lenox MJ (2001) Does it really pay to be green? An empirical study of firm environmental and financial performance: an empirical study of firm environmental and financial performance. J Ind Ecol 5:105–116CrossRef

Klassen RD, McLaughlin CP (1996) The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Manage Sci 42:1199–1214CrossRef

Klassen RD, Whybark DC (1999) The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Acad Manag J 42:599–615CrossRef

Konar S, Cohen MA (2001) Does the market value environmental performance? Rev Econ Stat 83:281–289CrossRef

Kumar K, Subramanian R (1997) Porter’s strategic types: differences in internal processes and their impact on performance. J Appl Bus Res 14:107–124CrossRef

Lankoski L (2008) Corporate responsibility activities and economic performance: a theory of why and how they are connected. Bus Strateg Environ 17:536–547CrossRef

Leuschner R, Carter CR, Goldsby TJ, Rogers ZS (2014) Third-party logistics: a meta-analytic review and investigation of its impact on performance. J Supply Chain Manag 50:21–43CrossRef

Lieb RC (1992) The use of third-party logistics services by large American manufacturers. J Bus Logist 13:29–42

Lieb KJ, Lieb RC (2010) Environmental sustainability in the third-party logistics (3PL) industry. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 40:524–533CrossRef

Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2001) Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J Appl Psychol 86:114–121CrossRef

Litz RA (1996) A resource-based-view of the socially responsible firm: stakeholder interdependence, ethical awareness, and issue responsiveness as strategic assets. J Bus Ethics 15:1355–1363CrossRef

Maas S, Schuster T, Hartmann E (2014) Pollution prevention and service stewardship strategies in the third-party logistics industry: effects on firm differentiation and the moderating role of environmental communication. Bus Strateg Environ 23:38–55CrossRef

Malhotra NK, Kim SS, Patil A (2006) Common method variance in IS research: a comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Manag Sci 52:1865–1883CrossRef

Marasco A (2008) Third-party logistics: a literature review. Int J Prod Econ 113:127–147CrossRef

McCarthy-Byrne TM, Mentzer JT (2011) Integrating supply chain infrastructure and process to create joint value. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 41:135–161CrossRef

McKinnon A (2010) Environmental sustainability: a new priority for logistics managers. In: Cullinane S, Brown M, Whiteing A (eds) Green logistics: improving the environmental sustainability of logistics. Kogan Page Limited, London, pp 3–30

Meixell MJ, Luoma P (2015) Stakeholder pressure in sustainable supply chain management. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 45:69–89CrossRef

Meznar MB, Nigh D (1995) Buffer or bridge? Environmental and organizational determinants of public affairs activities in American firms. Acad Manag J 38:975–996CrossRef

Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22:853–886

Murillo-Luna JL, Garcés-Ayerbe C, Rivera-Torres P (2008) Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach. Strateg Manag J 29:1225–1240CrossRef

Newbert SL (2007) Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strateg Manag J 28:121–146CrossRef

Nunally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychonometric theory. McGraw-Hill Publishers, New York

Oberhofer P, Dieplinger M (2014) Sustainability in the transport and logistics sector: lacking environmental measures. Bus Strateg Environ 23:236–253CrossRef

Orlitzky M, Schmidt FL, Rynes SL (2003) Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organ Stud 24:403–441CrossRef

Paulraj A (2011) Understanding the relationships between internal resources and capabilities, sustainable supply management and organizational sustainability. J Supply Chain Manag 47:19–37CrossRef

Pertusa-Ortega EM, Molina-Azorín JF, Claver-Cortés E (2009) Competitive strategies and firm performance: a comparative analysis of pure, hybrid and “stuck-in-the-middle” strategies in Spanish firms. Br J Manag 20:508–523CrossRef

Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J Manag 12:531–544

Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88:879–903CrossRef

Porter ME (1980) Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press, New York

Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment–competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9:97–118CrossRef

Prockl G, Pflaum A, Kotzab H (2012) 3PL factories or lernstatts? Value-creation models for 3PL service providers. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 42:544–561CrossRef

Rao P, Singh AK, la O’Castillo O et al (2009) A metric for corporate environmental indicators… for small and medium enterprises in the Philippines. Bus Strateg Environ 18:14–31CrossRef

Reinartz W, Haenlein M, Henseler J (2009) An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. Int J Res Mark 26:332–344CrossRef

Reuter C, Foerstl K, Hartmann E, Blome C (2010) Sustainable global supplier management: the role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage. J Supply Chain Manag 46:45–63CrossRef

Ringle CM, Wende S, Becker J-M (2015) SmartPLS 3 Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH. http://www.smartpls.com. Accessed 2 Jan 2017

Rueda-Manzanares A, Aragón-Correa JA, Sharma S (2008) The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: the moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. Br J Manag 19:185–203CrossRef

Ruhnke K, Gabriel A (2013) Determinants of voluntary assurance on sustainability reports: an empirical analysis. J Bus Econ 83:1063–1091CrossRef

Russo MV, Fouts PA (1997) A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Acad Manag J 40:534–559CrossRef

Sahay BS, Halldorsson A, Skjøtt-Larsen T (2006) Dynamics of relationship governance in TPL arrangements-a dyadic perspective. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 36:490–506CrossRef

Sarkis J, Gonzalez-Torre P, Adenso-Diaz B (2010) Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental practices: the mediating effect of training. J Oper Manag 28:163–176CrossRef

Sarstedt M, Henseler J, Ringle CM (2011) Multigroup analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modeling: alternative methods and empirical results. Adv Int Mark 22:195–218CrossRef

Scherer AG, Palazzo G, Seidl D (2013) Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous environments: sustainable development in a globalized world. J Manag Stud 50:259–284CrossRef

Schoenherr T, Modi SB, Talluri S, Hult GTM (2014) Antecedents and performance outcomes of strategic environmental sourcing: an investigation of resource-based process and contingency effects. J Bus Logist 35:172–190CrossRef

Selviaridis K, Spring M (2007) Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda. Int J Logist Manag 18:125–150CrossRef

Sharma S (2000) Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Acad Manag J 43:681–697CrossRef

Sharma S, Henriques I (2005) Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strateg Manag J 26:159–180CrossRef

Sharma S, Aragón-Correa JA, Rueda-Manzanares A (2007) The contingent influence of organizational capabilities on proactive environmental strategy in the service sector: an analysis of North American and European ski resorts. Can J Adm Sci Can des Sci l’Administration 24:268–283CrossRef

Sink HL, Langley CJ Jr (1997) A managerial framework for the acquisition of third-party logistics services. J Bus Logist 18:163–190

Söllner A (2014) Globalization, greed, and exploitation. How to break the baleful path? J Bus Econ 84:1211–1235CrossRef

Sprengel DC, Busch T (2011) Stakeholder engagement and environmental strategy—the case of climate change. Bus Strateg Environ 20:351–364

Stanwick PA, Stanwick SD (1998) The relationship between corporate social performance, and organizational size, financial performance, and environmental performance: an empirical examination. J Bus Ethics 17:195–204CrossRef

Sum C-C, Teo C-B (1999) Strategic posture of logistics service providers in Singapore. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 29:588–605CrossRef

Surroca J, Tribó JA, Waddock S (2010) Corporate responsibility and financial performance: the role of intangible resources. Strateg Manag J 31:463–490CrossRef

Tosi HL, Slocum JW (1984) Contingency theory: some suggested directions. J Manag 10:9–26

Touboulic A, Walker H (2015) Theories in sustainable supply chain management: a structured literature review. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 45:16–42CrossRef

Turban DB, Greening DW (1997) Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Acad Manag J 40:658–672CrossRef

Van de Ven AH, Ganco M, Hinings CR (2013) Returning to the frontier of contingency theory of organizational and institutional designs. Acad Manag Ann 7:393–440CrossRef

Van Wassenhove LN, Besiou M (2013) Complex problems with multiple stakeholders: how to bridge the gap between reality and OR/MS? J Bus Econ 83:87–97CrossRef

Wagner M (2010) The role of corporate sustainability performance for economic performance: a firm-level analysis of moderation effects. Ecol Econ 69:1553–1560CrossRef

Wagner M (2011) Corporate performance implications of extended stakeholder management: new insights on mediation and moderation effects. Ecol Econ 70:942–950CrossRef

Wagner M (2015) The link of environmental and economic performance: drivers and limitations of sustainability integration. J Bus Res 68:1306–1317CrossRef

Wagner SM, Kemmerling R (2010) Handling nonresponse in logistics research. J Bus Logist 31:357–381CrossRef

Wagner SM, Rau C, Lindemann E (2010) Multiple informant methodology: a critical review and recommendations. Sociol Methods Res 38:582–618CrossRef

Wang Q, Dou J, Jia S (2015) A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance the moderating effect of contextual factors. Bus Soc 55:1083–1121CrossRef

Whiteman G, Walker B, Perego P (2013) Planetary boundaries: ecological foundations for corporate sustainability. J Manag Stud 50:307–336CrossRef

Wolf C, Seuring S (2010) Environmental impacts as buying criteria for third party logistical services. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 40:84–102CrossRef

Zhao M, Dröge C, Stank TP (2001) The effects of logistics capabilities on firm performance: customer-focused versus information-focused capabilities. J Bus Logist 22:91–107CrossRef

Zhu Q, Sarkis J (2004) Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. J Oper Manag 22:265–289CrossRef

Titel: Stakeholder Pressures, Environmental Practice Adoption and Economic Performance in the German Third-party Logistics Industry—A Contingency Perspective
verfasst von: Steffen Maas
Tassilo Schuster
Evi Hartmann
Publikationsdatum: 18.07.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Economics / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0044-2372
Elektronische ISSN: 1861-8928
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0872-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Journal of Business Economics

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner