CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY REPORTS:

A THEMATIC ANALYSIS RELATED TO SUPPLY

CHAIN MANAGEMENT
WENDY L. TATE
University of Tennessee

LISA M. ELLRAM
Miami University

JON F. KIRCHOFF
University of Tennessee

Firms are increasingly under pressure from stakeholders to incorporate the

triple-bottom line of social, environmental and economic responsibility
considerations into operations and supply chain management strategies. This
research uses content analysis software that performed centering resonance
analysis to examine corporate communication to stakeholders through cor-
porate social responsibility (CSR) reports. The intent is to determine how
supply chain strategies factor in to the triple-bottom line of 100 socially and
environmentally responsible global companies. This research compares and
contrasts the influential words in the CSR reports of firms from a range of
industries, sizes and geographical regions. The content analysis revealed ten
themes that provide a snapshot of how top global companies integrate and
improve the triple-bottom line in internal operations and external supply
chains. Findings indicated that while institutional pressure is the major
driving force behind strategy development for all of the industries studied,
companies emphasize different facets of social, environmental and economic
responsibility upstream and downstream in supply chains based on industry,
size and geographic location. The analysis revealed unique insights regarding
corporate communications that other methodologies would not find.

Keywords: centering resonance analysis; content analysis; corporate social responsibility

reports; Crawdad software; global; operations; supply chain; sustainability; sustainable
supply chain management

INTRODUCTION clining state of the earth’s physical and ecological systems

As the scale and scope of human-generated activity has
put immense pressure on natural systems, companies,
governments and citizens have become concerned about
the well-being of society and the environment (Hart
1995). Industrial activities have been linked to the de-
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Kevin Dooley
for his guidance and advice in using Crawdad software and center-
ing resonance analysis, and Audrey LaSalle for her assistance in
converting and cleaning the data used in the analysis.
and ultimately long-term environmental, health and
safety (EHS) issues (Hoffman 2000; Rosen 2001). In-
creasing global industrial activity raises the demand for
finite natural resources (Beamon 1999; Srivastava 2007),
reduces availability, creates scarcity and drives up prices
(Commoner 1990; Hart 1995; Shrivastava 1995; Tsoulfas
and Pappis 2006).
Companies are beginning to recognize how greater
social and environmental responsibility can improve
firm performance (Porter and van der Linde 1995; Zadek

January 2010 19
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
2004). This includes contributing to communities, im-
proving workplace conditions, eliminating waste and
using resources more efficiently. For example, Anheuser-
Busch partnered with suppliers to redesign its cans to
reduce wall thickness, while maintaining quality stan-
dards. The redesign reduced annual aluminum usage in
2006 by nearly 12 million pounds and improved the
organization’s bottom line (Anheuser-Busch 2006). New
approaches to improving corporate responsibility in
worldwide operations are emerging as a means for
companies to improve economic, social and environ-
mental performance; a focus on what Elkington (1998)
calls the triple-bottom line. This focus is in response to a
number of challenges and opportunities, including
greater stakeholder demands, more government regula-
tions, criticism from nongovernment organizations
(NGOs) and increasing competitive pressure (Sarkis
1998).
As corporate social and environmental issues become
more salient to stakeholders, the stakeholders seek to
understand how corporate strategies integrate social and
environmental improvement into the economic goals of
the firm (Zadek 2004). Consumers are demanding that
companies produce high-quality, safe and environmen-
tally friendly products with manufacturing processes that
are less harmful to the environment and to communities
(Lash and Wellington 2007). An organization’s ability to
effectively communicate corporate social responsibility
(CSR) strategies and policies can enhance stakeholder
satisfaction (Esrock and Leichty 1998).
Many companies have responded to stakeholder ex-
pectations by publishing annual CSR reports that com-
municate the activities and strategies being used to address
social and environmental issues (Esrock and Leichty
1998). These reports are often referred to as sustainability
reports. The reports serve as a barometer of an organiza-
tion’s attitudes toward social and environmental respon-
sibility, strategic planning and the level of integration in
the organization’s business strategic plans, both at the
corporate level and functional levels (Kolk 2003; Jose and
Lee 2007) such as supply chain management.
Despite interest from both academics and practitioners,
there is limited research to understand how companies
communicate operations and supply chain social and
environmental strategies through CSR reports. Further-
more, there is limited published research exploring how
companies position CSR reports and what these reports
indicate about the companies publishing them. CSR re-
ports serve as a rich source of secondary data to under-
stand better the companies’ intentions, strategies and
activities, as well as the results of corporate social and
environmental responsibility both at the corporate and
supply chain level.
This research attempts to address three different supply-
chain-related issues. First, by utilizing secondary data
from the CSR reports, it seeks to fill a gap in the corporate
20 Volume 46, Number 1
responsibility strategy research and provide insight into
how companies are addressing social and environmental
issues. Second, it looks at the interface between the issues
companies emphasize in CSR reports and supply chain
management (SCM). Finally, it introduces Crawdad’s
content analysis techniques to the supply chain man-
agement literature. The research questions addressed are:
(1) What environmental, economic and social themes
are leading organizations in sustainability empha-
sizing in CSR reports?
(2) How do these leaders in sustainability view or inte-
grate SCM into sustainability practices?
(3) Are variations in the organizations’ emphasis related
to organization location, industry sector or size?
This paper begins with a discussion of the current lit-
erature streams related to corporate environmental re-
porting. That is followed by a detailed description of the
research methodology, Crawdad and Centering Reso-
nance Analysis (CRA). The research’s results and impli-
cations are explored. Finally, limitations and future
research opportunities are identified.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The three existing research streams of corporate social
and environmental strategy, CSR reports and corporate
social image, provide the foundation of this research.
These streams of literature help to explain what motivates
companies to engage in socially and environmentally
responsible activities. They also explore why and how
these activities are reported by the organization to the
public.
Corporate Social and Environmental Strategy
Corporate social and environmental responsibility de-
scribes the actions by companies to maintain the cultural
and ethical norms of the societies in which companies
operate (Carroll 1979). Early researchers reached differ-
ent conclusions on the role of social and environmental
responsibility in the firm (Carroll 1979). For example,
Friedman (1962) stated that a firm’s only responsibility
to society is to make a profit. Alternatively, Manne and
Wallich (1972) concluded altruistic goals and behavior
should be present in the corporation, but viewed sepa-
rately from its economic pursuits. Carroll (1979) and
Steiner (1975) argued social, environmental and eco-
nomic responsibilities are not mutually exclusive or op-
posing forces. They created a framework that defines CSR
as the integration of ‘‘economic, legal, ethical and dis-
cretionary categories of business performance’’ (Carroll
1979, p. 499).
Carroll’s framework suggests that firms not only need
to engage in socially responsible behavior, but also that
positive financial gains can be realized in the process
(Arlow and Gannon 1982). Research in the strategy lit-
erature finds that as firms integrate corporate social and
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
environmental responsibility with economic strategies,
benefits can be realized through cost savings from re-
source reduction and efficiency and revenue generation
from improved stakeholder relations and brand image
(Hart 1995; Hoffman and Ventresca 1999; Hoffman
2000). The development of social and environmental
responsibility strategies has helped to usher in a new
paradigm for how businesses view responsibilities to
society, in relation to the overall strategies and goals of
the firm.
Researchers posit that companies fall along a contin-
uum, with respect to their social and environmental
strategies, ranging from resistant or defensive to seeking
value and competitive advantage (Porter and van der
Linde 1995; Russo and Fouts 1997; Grayson and Hodges
2004; Zadek 2004; Porter and Kramer 2006). The strategy
continuum concept predicts that companies will realize
the potential gain from adopting more proactive social
and environmental strategies. Ultimately, companies will
progress until reaching a value and competitive advan-
tage-seeking stage (Porter and van der Linde 1995;
Ramus 2002; Porter and Kramer 2006).
Most research into corporate responsibility supports a
positive link between proactive corporate social and en-
vironmental strategies and improved financial perfor-
mance (Azzone and Bertelè 1994; McWilliams and Siegel
2000; Aragon-Correa and Sharma 2003; Porter and Kra-
mer 2006). Empirical studies show evidence of the pos-
itive link using a range of methodologies, including
mixed methods (Sharma and Vredenburg 1998; Sharma
2000), multiple-site case studies (Maxwell, Rothenberg,
Briscoe and Marcus 1997) and surveys (Klassen and
McLaughlin 1996; Russo and Fouts 1997). Studies
showing a negative relationship between social and en-
vironmental strategies and firm performance have typi-
cally been limited in scope and have not accurately
measured both social and financial performance (Wad-
dock and Graves 1997).
Members of the top 200 global companies reported
having social and environmental responsibility strategies
to meet corporate goals and satisfy stakeholder demands
(Handfield, Sroufe and Walton 2005), as stakeholders
increasingly influence corporate social and environmen-
tal responsibility strategies. Consumers and shareholders
insist the strategies are based on measurable financial
goals including cost reductions, increased market share,
higher quality, improved manufacturing performance
and continuous innovation (Wood and Jones 1995;
Russo and Fouts 1997; Buysse and Verbeke 2003).
Members of the supply chain are asked to work with
companies to help construct and support corporate re-
sponsibility strategies to meet strategic goals (Handfield
et al. 2005). Government also plays an important role in
the development of corporate social and environmental
responsibility strategies. An organization’s ability to work
with government regulation to create innovative strate-
January 2010
gies can lead to higher firm performance (Porter and van
der Linde 1995).
CSR Reports
To make stakeholders aware of social and environ-
mental activities and strategies, companies are increas-
ingly issuing easily accessible CSR reports (Deegan and
Gordon 1996; Morhardt, Baird and Freeman 2002; Kolk
2003). Nearly 60% of the top 200 global companies
reported having CSR reports on their corporate websites
(Jose and Lee 2007). Use of these reports is growing
among investors, governments, NGOs, customers and
other concerned stakeholders (Solomon and Lewis
2002). Investors, insurers and underwriters use CSR re-
ports to gather information about socially and envi-
ronmentally responsible business investments and
possible risks such as fines for noncompliance. Safety
information, such as the number of days lost due to
injury, is looked at carefully by regulatory and watchdog
groups to determine if firms are taking care of workers.
Consumers, government and NGOs use the information
contained in the CSR reports to gauge involvement in
and commitment to social and environmental issues by
comparing the reports among firms and industries
(Solomon and Lewis 2002). NGOs, environmental
lobbyists and other concerned stakeholders examine the
reports’ language and statements to determine how
proactive companies are in social and environmental
actions (Wilmshurst and Frost 2000).
A concern among academics and practitioners is how
statements in CSR reports compare with the actual cor-
porate commitment of addressing social and environ-
mental issues. While the firm’s level of commitment
should be clear in the reports (Jose and Lee 2007), Kolk
(2003) found it difficult to determine whether an orga-
nization was actually implementing the strategies and
management actions or merely reporting to appease
stakeholders. Similarly, Cerin (2002) identified discrep-
ancies between the actual actions of the reporting firms
and what actions are reported in CSR reports and annual
reports. Cerin (2002) further noted that the lack of CSR
report guidelines leads to great variety and some confu-
sion in the reports’ contents. For example, few incentives
exist to disclose negative or potentially harmful infor-
mation (Solomon and Lewis 2002). Conversely, Monta-
bon, Sroufe and Narashimhan (2007) found CSR reports
to be a good indicator of the relationship between cor-
porate responsibility reporting and firm performance.
Corporate Social Image
Pressure from internal actors and external stakeholders
strongly influences companies to maintain a positive,
socially responsible image (Hatch and Schultz 1997;
Gioia, Schultz and Corley 2000; Aguilera, Rupp, Williams
and Ganapathi 2007). The image that the organization
projects to stakeholders and other interested parties is a
21
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
strategic-level decision that affects management behavior
(Gioia et al. 2000; Brown, Dacin, Pratt and Whetten
2006). Control of an organization’s image by top man-
agement through communication is described by Hatch
and Schultz (1997, p. 359) as ‘‘deliberate attempts to
influence public impression.’’ Companies are aware of the
positive link between an image of strong social respon-
sibility and consumers’ preferences. Conversely, there is a
negative link between poor social responsibility image
and consumers’ reactions to that organization’s products
(Sen and Bhattacharya 2001).
Cerin’s (2002) case study analysis indicated that firms
issue CSR reports as a marketing tool to enhance brand
image among stakeholders. Firms seek and obtain legiti-
macy from stakeholders by proactively discussing social
and environmental responsibility and performance
(Wilmshurst and Frost 2000; Cerin 2002). Legitimacy
theory suggests companies publish CSR reports to benefit
from an improved corporate image among stakeholders
and other concerned parties (Wilmshurst and Frost 2000).
While companies strive to project a positive image to
stakeholders (Russo and Fouts 1997; Esrock and Leichty
1998), reputation is the stakeholders’ actual view of the
firm (Brown et al. 2006). Thus, companies seek to en-
hance image in order to create a positive reputation. This
reputation may also correlate to higher long-run orga-
nizational performance (Fombrun and Shanley 1990).
Using survey methodology, Russo and Fouts (1997)
found that an organization’s social and environmental
reputation can act as an intangible, inimitable resource
for the firm. Similarly, Fombrun and Shanley (1990)
found a positive correlation between corporate reputa-
tion and an organization’s greater social responsibility
and contributions to social welfare. Both of these studies
suggest that companies seek to attain or maintain a
positive corporate social reputation as part of corporate
goals. For example, Sharp, in a 2006 Environmental and
Social Responsibility Report, specifically notes that it is
‘‘earning the trust of society through corporate social re-
sponsibility’’ (Sharp 2006, p. 4).
METHODOLOGY
Content analysis was used to assess the information in
100 carefully selected companies’ CSR reports. Content
analysis is typically used to systematically evaluate the
theme of recorded communications (Kolbe and Burnett
1991). Content analysis allows researchers to synthesize
texts with a large number of words into smaller categories
(Weber 1990; Stemler 2001). This research uses CRA, a
specific type of content analysis, which is discussed in
detail in the paragraphs below.
Organization Selection
Like Pagell and Wu (2009), this research focused on
companies that are relatively advanced in their sustain-
22 Volume 46, Number 1
ability activities, in order to report on what leaders in this
area are doing. Thus, companies were first identified
based on membership in the Global Environmental
Manufacturing Initiative (GEMI 2008), mention in the
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI 2008) and frequent
mention in the public press. Additional candidate com-
panies were also identified using the data from Roberts
Environmental Center, specifically in the under-repre-
sented industries such as Utilities and Finance. Once
identified, availability of the CSR reports was verified at
corporateregister.com (Corporate Register 2008). When
possible, the level of sustainability activities and perfor-
mance was verified using the scores posted at Roberts
Environmental Center. This center has developed strict
criteria for scoring the CSR reports using the Claremont
College’s Pacific Sustainability Index (Roberts Environ-
mental Center 2008). The scoring includes an evaluation
of the firm’s environmental and social intent, reporting
and performance based on a set of predetermined crite-
ria. When companies had similar scores, preference was
given to those with frequent citing as good environ-
mental citizens in academic and practitioner literature, as
well as the public press.
The candidate companies were selected iteratively, until
it appeared the database was saturated with companies
that were actively engaged in sustainable supply chain
management practices. This saturation occurred when it
became difficult to identify additional firms in an in-
dustry based on mention in any of the above data
sources. Companies were then classified by industry
using information based on SIC/NAICS code categories,
as identified for each organization in the MergentOnline
Business database (MergentOnline 2008). Our sample
contained firms from the following industry segments:
Consumer Goods (15 total firms), Financial Services (8),
Healthcare (13), Industrial Goods (14), Materials (13),
Services (11), Technology (15) and Utilities (11) (see
Table I). After the list of candidate companies was final-
ized, the most recent CSR report was downloaded from
corporateregister.com1.
Content Analysis
The CSR reports analyzed here averaged approximately
65 PDF pages for each organization. Therefore, content
analysis was the appropriate methodology to examine
over 6,500 PDF pages, categorize the material into more
manageable segments and analyze the documents to
determine what patterns existed. Content analysis is
useful for gaining valid inferences and understanding the
focus of written text in three ways (Weber 1990):
 Inferences about the creator of the text, in this case the
organizations whose reports are analyzed;
1
A complete list of the CSR reports used for this analysis is available
from the first author upon request.
 TABLE I
Organization and Industry Included in Sample

Industry Consumer Services Industrial Finance Utility Materials Healthcare Technology

Goods Goods

Adidas Amtrak Agilent ABN AMRO Alliant 3M Abbott DELL

Anheuser-Busch BNSF Cargill Bank of American Electric- Advanced Micro Allergan Freescale
America Power Devices
BMW Carnival Caterpillar Barclays Centrica Alcan AstraZeneca HP
Cadbury- McDonalds Deere and Co. Citigroup Consolidated Ashland Baxter IBM
Schweppes Edison
Coca-Cola Office DENSO Credit Suisse Duke-Cinergy BASF Bayer AG Intel
Depot
Con Agra Foods Starbucks International Goldman Endesa Bemis Bristol-Myers Motorola
Paper Sachs Squibb
General Mills Target Johnson Morgan XCEL Chevron Eli Lilly NEC
Controls Stanley
Herman Miller Tesco Louisiana Wells Fargo Exelon Dow GlaxoSmithKline Nokia
Pacific

January 2010
Honda UPS Obayashi Florida Power and DuPont Johnson and Ricoh
Light Johnson
Kimberly-Clark Verizon Rockwell- National Grid Eka Merck Roche
Collins
Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

Kodak Wal-Mart Rohm and Southern Company Koch Pfizer Sanyo

Hass
Kraft Smithfield Oxy Schering-Plough Sony
Foods
Nike Visteon Owens Corning Wyeth Texas
Instrument
Procter and Weyerhaeuser Toshiba
Gamble
Toyota Xerox
Total 15 11 14 8 11 13 13 15

23
 Journal of Supply Chain Management

 Inferences about the text itself, in this case what is said
in the CSR reports;
 Inferences about the audience of the message in the
text, in this case stakeholders and members of the sup-
ply chain.
Content analysis provides an empirical starting point
for generating new research evidence about the nature
and effect of specific communications (Kolbe and Bur-
nett 1991).
CRA
A recent and relatively sophisticated type of content
analysis methodology is CRA (Corman, Kuhn, Mcphee
and Dooley 2002). Crawdad is an analytical software
package developed specifically to perform CRA. CRA was
chosen to analyze the reports because it interpreted the
meaning of specific texts (Holsti 1969). To interpret
meaning, CRA uses a combination of linguistics and
network theory and methodology that builds upon in-
ference, position of words and representation of concepts
(Lee and James 2007).
CRA is a form of content analysis suitable for studying
formal written communication (Corman et al. 2002)
such as the published CSR reports. Using CRA, words
and phrases are analyzed together in meaningful ways to
form a network of nouns and noun phrases to represent
main concepts, their influence and their inter-relation-
ships (Corman et al. 2002; McPhee, Corman and Dooley
2002). Previous text analysis of codes has relied on fre-
quency counts of words or phrases, which does not take
into account the influence of words in relationship to
other words. CRA considers a word to have more influ-
ence or prominence within a text if it ties other words
together in the text network and facilitates meaning
(Canary and Jennings 2008); an influence score is as-
signed accordingly. Influence values of 0.01 are consid-
ered significant, while a value above 0.05 is considered
very significant (Corman and Dooley 2006).
Text Analysis
First, the PDF files were downloaded and converted
into readable text documents. Then, each file was as-
sessed for organization-specific terminology, such as or-
ganization name and specific brand names. A global
search and replace was performed to insert words that
were generic and common across all files. For example, a
specific organization name was replaced with ‘‘Com-
pany.’’ The PDF for each organization was cleansed and
processed individually in the Crawdad system, and then
they were processed together. Crawdad creates network
maps of the words for each organization and then assigns
influence values between 0 and 1 to words using the
principles of CRA, as explained above. To demonstrate
this concept better, a CRA network map for one
organization and its top influential words are shown in
Figure 1.
The parameters in Crawdad were set to identify the 300
most influential words that were common across the
sustainability reports of two or more organizations. The
goal was to identify the highly important words across
the pool of 100 organizations. These influential words
were then used to formulate factors or themes.
Theme Development
Theme development commenced with an exploratory
factor analysis (EFA) using principal component analysis

FIGURE 1
Crawdad Word Network Example

Word Value
3M

24 Volume 46, Number 1

 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
with varimax rotation. The themes that emerged during
the EFA revealed some fairly coherent groups of words
and provided a starting point for naming the themes and
further latent coding. Using the initial EFA as a starting
point, each researcher independently developed names
for each theme.
Rather than strictly relying on the results from the EFA,
one of the Crawdad software developers recommended
using additional latent coding. According to Neuman
(2000), latent coding allows researchers to look for un-
derlying implicit meaning in the text. The secondary la-
tent coding used in this research helped to logically
connect words to themes and strengthen the face validity
of the theme. Crawdad links words rather than constructs
(Dooley 2007) and looks at the relationship between
words. Users of Crawdad have found that because of the
emphasis on influential words, rather than contextual
phrases, complete reliance on traditional factor analysis
does not provide a holistic and meaningful picture.
Using the consensus regarding the theme name, or a
description of the grouping of words, the researchers
then independently performed latent coding and as-
sessed the appropriateness of each word in that theme.
Seventy-nine out of the initial 300 influential words were
eliminated (26.3% of total) due to very low loadings in
the EFA. For example, artificial constructions such as
‘‘company’’ were removed as were terms that lacked a
specific fit for a theme (‘‘strong’’ could fit any theme,
whereas ‘‘golf’’ did not fit any theme) (Canary and Jen-
nings 2008). Words were also recoded from the original
EFA loading to a different theme because of better in-
terpretability and a logical fit, or to improve face validity.
Two of the initial themes, ‘‘Supplier’’ and ‘‘Supply Chain
Inputs’’ were combined due to their similarity in focus.
Because of the subjectivity involved in this phase of the
coding process, the research team thoroughly discussed
differences in interpretations until there was a high level
of reliability and consensus. Ultimately, the themes were
adjusted. The final themes and its associated words are
shown in Table II.
Each word has an individual influence value at each
organization. To compare the influence values across all
100 firms better, the influences’ values for each word were
summed by theme and by organization. This summation
of values was then sorted by industry. Table III shows the
relative value of each theme as it relates to a particular
industry. Beyond the level of 0.01 where a value has
significance, Crawdad generates relative values that pro-
vide a basis of comparison for the particular analysis
(Dooley 2007). The application of the themes and in-
fluence values are discussed in greater depth in the results
section.
Validity of CRA
To accomplish the complex task of CRA, Crawdad
Version 1.1 text analysis system was used. Crawdad is
January 2010
able to quickly facilitate the processing of large amounts
of data, using a content analysis process based on CRA
(Dooley, Corman, McPhee and Khun 2003). Corman
et al. (2002) validated the use of Crawdad as an effective
tool for utilizing CRA. Crawdad’s validity exceeds that of
earlier text analysis tools because it allows for better in-
formation retrieval, assists researchers with network vi-
sualization and enables secondary analyses (Lee and
James 2007). Furthermore, the use of Crawdad to per-
form CRA has been validated in a variety of scholarly and
applied research. Several papers analyzing written cor-
porate communication using Crawdad have been pub-
lished in leading communication-oriented journals
(Corman et al. 2002; McPhee et al. 2002; Dooley et al.
2003; Lichtenstein, Dooley and Lumpkin 2006). There
has been other research including a Journal of Business
Ethics, study by Canary and Jennings (2008), which an-
alyzed corporate codes of ethics before and after Sar-
banes-Oxley implementation to identify similarities and
differences in reporting. The Strategic Management Journal
also recently published a study (Lee and James 2007) that
used CRA to analyze the public press regarding the an-
nouncement of newly appointed male and female CEOs;
the study analyzed thousands of news releases and stories
to compare the content of the articles. The use of CRA
and Crawdad is growing in acceptance across a number
of fields and prestigious journals. This research represents
a first step in applying CRA to the field of supply chain
management.
RESULTS
The themes that emerged from the data can be viewed
through the lens of the triple-bottom line that defines
sustainability in supply chain management. The triple-
bottom line refers to a holistic evaluation of a firm’s
overall performance, measured by the integration of its
environmental, social and economic sustainability
(Elkington 1998). Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) define
environmental sustainability performance as the con-
sumption of natural resources at a rate that can be nat-
urally replenished and the emissions of waste at a rate
that can be absorbed by nature. They also discuss social
sustainability performance as adding value to human
capital that is consumed for industrial purposes. Eco-
nomic sustainability performance is successfully manag-
ing financial, tangible and intangible capital, while
producing an above average rate to shareholders. The
intersection and integration of environmental, social and
economic performance is sustainability in the firm
(Dyllick and Hockerts 2002).
Carter and Rogers (2008) provide a theoretical frame-
work to apply the triple-bottom line in defining sus-
tainable supply chain management. The framework rests
upon the premise that firms incorporate long-term
sustainability strategies and vision throughout the supply
25
26
TABLE II
Themes and Associated Words
Supply Institutional Community Consumer External Risk Measures Energy Health Green
Pressure Focus Orientation Environment Management Building

1 Material Lumber Environmental Program Product System Emission Year Energy Safety Facility
2 Development Farmer Employee Community Management New Water Percent State Health Site
3 Supplier Packaging Business City Use Global Process Good Technology Patient Building
4 Store Coffee United States Area Equipment Service Waste Report Plant Medicine Reduction
5 Chemical Cotton Customer Performance People Corporate Information Effort Project Pharmaceutical Roofing
6 Standard Home Environment Organization Quality Operation Activity Constraint Gas Disease Construction
7 Forest Supply Group Local Consumer World Bank Initiative Power Research Office
8 Factory Battery Industry Child Substance Responsibility Policy Goal Nuclear Care Green
9 Seafood Design Sustainability Center Value Data Client Time Engine Animal Conservation
10 Food Association Financial School Way Market Social Total Fuel Drug
11 Training Electronics Discipline Education Nutrition Award Risk Opportunity Plan Treatment
12 High Land National Park Right Fiscal Issue Need Coal HIV/Aids
13 Resource Tree Compliance Public Brand Diversity International Result Cost Healthcare
14 Team Ingredient Stakeholder Support Director Change Country Control Electric Life
15 Aluminum Natural Sustainable Habitat Requirement Sale Air Action Refinery Clinical
16 Seedling Potential Commitment Foundation Fat Innovation Impact Day Oil Vaccine
17 Production Benefit Key Member Merchandise Responsible Number Significant Insulation Medical

Volume 46, Number 1

18 Manufacturing Sourcing Economic Student China Asbestos Utility Pain
19 Practice Farm Leadership Performed Improvement Electricity
20 Paper Computer Environment Protection Investment Efficiency
Journal of Supply Chain Management

21 Partner Affiliate Government Loan Carbon

22 Resin Source Strategy Partnership Wastewater
23 Recycling Board Family
24 Approach Charity
25 Shareholder Event
26 Committee Annual
27 Council Art
28 Communication
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

chain to create a competitive advantage for the firm.

Building

0.0258

0.0510

0.0267
0.0333
0.0398

0.0481
0.0712

0.0415

0.0437
Green
Development of a long-term strategy for firm perfor-
mance supports the understanding that short-term eco-
nomic gains alone are not sufficient for the firm to
0.0926 0.0158 remain viable and achieve sustainable growth (Elkington

0.0734

0.0318
0.0328
0.0674 0.0502

0.0852 0.0486

0.0663
0.0479 0.1994

0.0541
Health

1998; Dyllick and Hockerts 2002).

In many organizations, SCM participates in environ-
mental sustainability more than any other function
0.0963
0.0639

0.2542
0.0934
0.0680
Measures Energy

through a choice of suppliers, materials, technologies,

manufacturing and transport modes. Financial sustain-
ability is strongly influenced by SCM, particularly in
manufacturing sectors such as automotive, consumer
0.0924

0.0975
0.1058

0.0979
0.0929

0.0964

0.0945
0.0820
0.0944

products and electronics, where 70% of the organiza-

tion’s value-added may be purchased from other orga-
nizations. Finally, SCM can influence social sustainability
through selecting suppliers who meet the firm’s em-
Management

ployment, health and safety guidelines.

0.2161

0.1116
0.1059

0.1131
0.1340

0.1205

0.1254
0.1155
0.1171
Risk

The analysis of data yielded 10 major themes in the

CSR reports. All the themes are related to one of the three
areas of sustainability in supply chain management:
economic, environmental or social. The amount of rel-
Average Theme Value by Industry

ative influence that each theme has on an organization or

Environment

industry is reflected in its CSR report as one indicator of

External

0.1283
0.1458

0.1161

0.1083
0.1130

0.1731

0.1306
0.1397
0.1210

the firm’s emphasis. This emphasis will have an impact

on SCM and other areas within the firm. Because the
central focus of this paper is SCM, we introduce the SCM
TABLE III

theme first, followed by the other themes in order of

influence (defined as a sum of the influence value of all
the words that relate to that theme).
Orientation
Consumer

0.1225
0.0806

0.0686
0.2013

0.1457

0.1343
0.1459
0.1489
0.1184

ANOVA was used to identify any statistically significant

differences in influence value of a particular theme
among industries. The Tukey post hoc test was conducted
with the ANOVA to compare all possible means, with
minimal risk of inflating the alpha value. Table IV lists
the industry and the companies with the highest influ-
Community

ence value for each theme and Table V shows the average
0.2542

0.2004

0.1757
0.1760

0.1617

0.1749
0.1560
0.1545
0.1523
Focus

theme value sorted by industry and significant industry

differences sorted by theme.

Supply Chain
The theme of Supply Chain includes issues related to
Institutional
Pressure

‘‘suppliers,’’ ‘‘materials,’’ ‘‘inputs,’’ ‘‘manufacturing,’’ ‘‘de-

0.2606

0.2277
0.2421

0.2630

0.3684
0.2458
0.2176
0.2105
0.2014

velopment’’ and ‘‘sourcing.’’ The Supply Chain theme has

very similar weights in the Services, Industrial Goods and
Consumer Goods sectors, with Services having the
highest weight (Table V). The only meaningful difference
in this theme is that the influence of Supply Chain is
0.1470
0.1706

0.1821

0.0812
0.1435
0.0983

0.1965
0.1430
0.1032
Supply
Chain

statistically higher for the Services and Industrial Goods

sectors than for the Utilities sector at p < 0.05 (Table V).
All of these industries rely intensely on supply chains to
be successful. Success is measured in the performance of
Technology

the supply chain as a whole. Firms present environ-

Healthcare
Consumer

Materials
Industrial

mental and social performance information about their

Average
Services
Finance
Industry

Utilities
Goods

Goods
Theme

Grand

supply chains in CSR reports to help to convey a positive

image to stakeholders (Russo and Fouts 1997). Poor
social, financial and environmental performance reflect

January 2010 27
 Journal of Supply Chain Management

TABLE IV
Top Industry and Top Organizations in Each Theme

Theme Top Industry Top Companies

Company Value Industry

Supply Chain Services Adidas 0.55 Consumer Goods

Wal-Mart 0.54 Services
International Paper 0.46 Industrial Goods
Institutional Pressure Utilities FPL Group 1.45 Utilities
National Grid 0.49 Utilities
Adidas 0.44 Consumer Goods
Community Focus Finance Morgan Stanley 0.89 Finance
Bemis 0.79 Materials
Wells Fargo 0.37 Finance
Consumer Orientation Consumer Goods ConAgra 0.62 Consumer Goods
Kraft 0.301 Consumer Goods
Owens Corning 0.299 Materials
External Environment Industrial Goods Visteon 0.69 Industrial Goods
National Grid 0.2406 Utilities
Johnson Controls 0.2403 Industrial Goods
Risk Management Finance Goldman Sachs 0.37 Finance
Bank of America 0.33 Finance
Credit Suisse 0.29 Finance
Measures Services BNSF 0.21 Services
Herman Miller 0.17 Consumer Goods
General Mills 0.15 Consumer Goods
Energy Utilities Xcel 0.46 Utilities
Alliant 0.45 Utilities
Southern Company 0.42 Utilities
Health Healthcare Pfizer 0.44 Healthcare
Eli Lilly 0.28 Healthcare
Abbott 0.26 Healthcare
Green Building Industrial Goods Obayashi 0.38 Industrial Goods
Allergan 0.128 Healthcare
Toshiba 0.126 Technology

more on the focal firm and less on individual suppliers
(Handfield et al. 2005; Seuring and Müller 2008). Ac-
tions by other supply chain members that negatively
impact the environment or violate labor laws may
damage the reputation of the focal firm, hurt sales and
increase scrutiny from stakeholders (Spekman and Davis
2004).
Adidas, International Paper and Wal-Mart are compa-
nies with a high Supply Chain theme influence value.
The bulk of Wal-Mart’s CSR report addresses sustain-
ability issues across the supply chain, including supplier
management, packaging reduction, development of en-
vironmentally friendly packaging, product design and
the conservation of inputs such as energy and water (Wal-
Mart Inc. 2006). The report provides details of Wal-Mart’s
sourcing policies, supplier evaluation rules and supplier
requirements. Thus, we see all the elements of the triple-
bottom line in the supply chain. Wal-Mart’s legally
binding Supplier Agreement requires proper EHS stan-
dards in supplier’s operations; supplier EDI capabilities
and compatible information exchange software; the right
for Wal-Mart to conduct unannounced supplier factory
EHS audits; and the supplier’s strict adherence to Wal-
Mart’s requirements for lead-time, quality, customer ser-
vice, transportation and logistics.
Institutional Pressure
The Institutional Pressure theme focuses on handling
internal and external pressure that the companies feel
from ‘‘stakeholders’’ which include ‘‘customers,’’ ‘‘gov-
ernment,’’ ‘‘employees’’ and ‘‘shareholders.’’ Institutional
Pressure also has a strong component of planning

28 Volume 46, Number 1

 TABLE V
Average Theme Value Sorted By Industry and Significant Industry Differences by Theme
Consumer Supply Chain Institutional Consumer Community Risk External Measures Energy Health Green
Goods Management Building

0.1706 0.2421 0.2013 0.176 0.134 0.113 0.0929 0.0674 0.0502 0.0398
ns ns Utilities ns Finance ns ns Utilities Health ns
Finance
Healthcare

Finance External Institutional Community Risk Supply Energy Measures Consumer Green Health
Management Chain Building
0.1458 0.2606 0.2542 0.2161 0.0983 0.0926 0.0924 0.0806 0.0258 0.0158
ns ns ns All Industries ns Utilities ns Consumer ns Healthcare
Goods
Healthcare External Institutional Health Community Consumer Risk Supply Chain Measures Green Energy
Management Building
0.121 0.2014 0.1994 0.1523 0.1184 0.1171 0.1032 0.0944 0.0481 0.0479
ns Utilities All Industries ns Consumer Finance ns ns ns Utilities
 Goods
Industrial Community Institutional Supply External Consumer Risk Measures Energy Green Health
Goods Chain Management Building
0.1617 0.263 0.1821 0.1731 0.1457 0.1205 0.0964 0.0852 0.0712 0.0486
ns ns Utilities ns ns Finance ns Utilities ns Healthcare
Materials Consumer Institutional Community Supply External Risk Measures Energy Health Green

January 2010
Chain Management Building
0.1225 0.2277 0.2004 0.147 0.1161 0.1116 0.0975 0.0963 0.0734 0.051
ns ns ns ns ns Finance ns Utilities Healthcare ns
Services Consumer Institutional Supply Community External Risk Measures Energy Green Health
Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

Chain Management Building

0.1459 0.2176 0.1965 0.156 0.1283 0.1059 0.1058 0.0639 0.0333 0.0328
ns ns Utilities ns ns Finance ns Utilities ns Healthcare
Technology Supply Chain Institutional Community Consumer External Risk Measures Energy Health Green
Management Building
0.143 0.2105 0.1545 0.1489 0.1397 0.1155 0.082 0.068 0.0541 0.0415
ns Utilities ns ns ns Finance ns Utilities Healthcare ns
Utilities Risk Institutional Energy Community External Measures Supply Chain Consumer Health Green
Management Building
0.1131 0.3684 0.2542 0.1757 0.1083 0.0979 0.0812 0.0686 0.0318 0.0267
Finance Healthcare All ns ns Finance Industrial Consumer Health ns
Technology Industries Goods Goods
Services

Results of ANOVA with multiple comparison post hoc tests:

5Significant at 0.05
ns5Not significant
Significant at 0.01

29
 Journal of Supply Chain Management

through ‘‘strategy’’ and ‘‘approach’’ as well as an interest cost. Socially, SCM is expected to enforce the organiza-
in a socially responsible corporate image. This is evi- tion’s values and standards with its suppliers.
denced by the words ‘‘compliance,’’ ‘‘environment’’ and
‘‘sustainability.’’ Creating a positive image is a goal of
Community Focus
management to preempt stakeholder concern about the
The Community Focus theme emphasizes thinking
social and environmental performance of the firm
locally and includes ‘‘schools,’’ ‘‘parks,’’ ‘‘charities’’ and
(Hatch and Schultz 1997; Esrock and Leichty 1998).
‘‘habitats’’ with an emphasis on good works in the
Pressure from stakeholders and institutions are taken
community. Showing concern for local communities in
seriously by firms and necessitate proactive corporate
CSR reports is important to global firms. Scrutiny of
social and environmental responsibility strategies (Gioia
globalization has led to stakeholder backlash against
et al. 2000; Brown et al. 2006). This is congruent with the
global firms for ignoring the communities where the
social and environmental strategy continuum; firms un-
firm’s operations are based (Drezner 2000). Global
derstand that stakeholder satisfaction is a benefit of
companies that focus on local communities can diffuse
having proactive, rather than reactive, social and envi-
some of the angst leveled at them and create a sustain-
ronmental responsibility strategies (Fowler and Hope
able positive image (Drezner 2000). A firm’s treatment of
2007). Issuing CSR reports is a way for firms to provide
its community is often viewed as a barometer for how it
the evidence of this (Kolk 2003).
will treat customers (Sen and Bhattacharya 2001).
Institutional Pressure has the greatest influence value
While not significantly different in any industry,
for every industry sector studied here, as shown in Table
Community Focus has the highest relative weight in the
V. This relationship is in line with the general findings
Financial sector. Some of the high-ranking companies on
based on institutional theory that institutional pressures
this factor include Morgan Stanley, Bemis and Wells
are the major driver of sustainability (Brown et al. 2006;
Fargo. Wells Fargo identifies one of its core values as
Fowler and Hope 2007). The only meaningful difference
supporting initiatives that benefit ethnically diverse
is that the influence of Institutional Pressure is statisti-
communities (Wells Fargo 2006). A significant part of
cally higher for Utilities than for the Healthcare or
these initiatives includes investing significant resources
Technology sectors at p < 01 (see Table V). While Insti-
(over US$1 billion annually) into Supplier Diversity
tutional Pressure has the lowest influence in the
programs. In this program, first- and second-tier suppli-
Healthcare sector, it still has a stronger influence for the
ers throughout different business units are all considered
Healthcare sector than the other themes. Institutional
potential recipients of the program. From an SCM per-
Pressure has the highest absolute weight for Utilities.
spective, the community focus of Wells Fargo is reflected
Within Utilities, Florida Power and Light (FPL) and Na-
primarily in terms of social issues that concern the
tional Grid have the highest weight for Institutional
communities in which the organization’s supply chain
Pressure.
conducts business. As a result, Wells Fargo recognizes the
To illustrate the importance placed on the Institutional
importance of maintaining a supply base made up of
Pressure theme, the first two pages of FPL’s sustainability
locally and regionally based suppliers, logistics providers
report emphasize making all stakeholders happy (FPL
and manufacturers throughout the communities in
Group 2006). Stakeholder satisfaction highlights FPL’s
which the organization’s supply chain operates.
concern for institutional pressures to supply alternative
fuels as part of the overall product mix. For example, FPL
discusses supplying cleaner energy at an affordable and Consumer Orientation
stable price, while at the same time recognizing the need This theme focuses on ‘‘brand,’’ ‘‘consumers,’’ ‘‘prod-
to maintain a reliable and efficient supply chain of ucts’’ and ‘‘quality.’’ Consumer Orientation can be a
conventional fuels. FPL also discusses meeting and ex- marketing theme for firms. It emphasizes the firm’s
ceeding government-mandated air quality standards and product end users. Firms seek legitimacy from consumers
addressing the concerns of NGOs and customers over and tend to focus on them with specific consumer-ori-
coal-burning power plants and nuclear energy. Given the ented information in CSR reports (Saha and Darnton
utility industry’s history of regulation and external pres- 2005). ConAgra’s emphasis on the downstream supply
sure from other stakeholders, it is logical for FPL to chain reveals corporate understanding that customer
emphasize a balanced portfolio of alternative energy and service is at the core of a supply chain that provides value
efficient energy from traditional sources. to the firm (Christopher 1998). Firms believe that con-
A high level of pressure from stakeholders influences sumers respond to assurances of product safety and
SCM in a number of ways. Environmentally, SCM is ex- quality in CSR reports; hence they are used as a mar-
pected to hold its suppliers accountable for a high level keting tool (Cerin 2002). Not surprisingly, Consumer
of environmental compliance. Economically, it is ex- Orientation is statistically more influential in Consumer
pected to choose those suppliers, locations and processes Goods than Utilities, Finance (both at p < 0.05) or
that provide value to an organization at a competitive Healthcare (p < 0.01). The companies with the highest

30 Volume 46, Number 1

 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
Consumer Orientation theme value are ConAgra, Kraft
and Owens Corning.
To illustrate the Consumer Orientation theme, Con-
Agra’s Corporate Responsibility Report dedicates nearly
50% of its content to the consumers and customers that
make up its downstream supply chain (ConAgra 2005).
ConAgra works to create a positive image of their prod-
ucts as safe, responsibly produced, high quality and
healthy. Supply chain managers must be aware of these
goals in order to support them through supplier selection
and development decisions. For example, ConAgra has
been recognized as a leader in promoting food safety for
its consumers, a role in which suppliers and SCM are
critical, as seen in the recent issues with the Chinese food
supply chain (Roth, Tsay, Pullman and Gray 2008). The
social goals of food safety cannot be sacrificed for the
economic goals of low supply chain cost. ConAgra has
also been working with its raw material suppliers to
improve the nutritional value of its foods, in response to
customer demands for healthier choices. These examples
point to a more holistic understanding of supply chain
value, commitment to customer service through im-
provements in upstream supplier relationships and
product controls.
External Environment
The External Environment theme encompasses the
firms’ operating environment; it includes ‘‘global,’’
‘‘market,’’ ‘‘world,’’ ‘‘responsibility’’ and ‘‘system.’’ Balanc-
ing global expansion and corporate responsibility is a
challenging but imperative goal for firms with global
supply chains (Handfield et al. 2005). The terms ‘‘inno-
vation,’’ ‘‘change’’ and ‘‘diversity’’ point to an awareness
of the dynamic global operating environment. Industrial
Goods have a slightly higher influence value, but all in-
dustries score similarly with no statistically significant
differences. Visteon and Johnson Controls have high
scores for this theme.
As an automotive parts manufacturer, Visteon’s Cor-
porate Citizenship Report concentrates on the organiza-
tion’s involvement in the external environment (Visteon
Corp. 2005). Entire sections of the report are dedicated to
expanding global business, making its global supply
chain more efficient and capitalizing on emerging mar-
kets’ growth. The report emphasizes Visteon’s ‘‘Strategy
for Worldwide Growth’’ and concentrates its organiza-
tional resources on several important goals of global
expansion. First, a globally balanced supply base that
takes advantage of low-cost manufacturing, while pro-
viding jobs and economic growth opportunities to local
communities. Second, Visteon enhances its global engi-
neering capabilities through partnering with global sup-
pliers to acquire emerging innovation and technology.
Third, certification of global operations and suppliers
fully ISO 14001 (environmental standard) and ISO
16949 (quality and waste reduction standard) helps
January 2010
guard against poor environmental performance in the
supply chain. Finally, developing and maintaining a
global vision for all employees recognizes and encour-
ages diversity in the work force.
Risk Management
The theme of Risk Management addresses potential
‘‘risks’’ related to ‘‘policy’’ and ‘‘process’’ as well as its
impact in both the physical environment (‘‘emission,’’
‘‘asbestos’’ and other ‘‘waste’’) and the operating envi-
ronment (‘‘information,’’ ‘‘client’’). Stakeholders use CSR
reports to understand the risks to which firms are ex-
posed through social and environmental performance
and how firms manage these risks (Solomon and Lewis
2002). Companies use CSR reports to reassure investors,
customers, NGOs and lawmakers that their social and
environmental performance expectations of the organi-
zation are being met (Sen and Bhattacharya 2001),
which includes risk management. As would be expected,
the influence value of risk management is statistically
higher for the Finance sector (at p < 0.05) than any of the
other industries. Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and
Credit Suisse have the highest scores in the Risk Man-
agement theme. Within this sector, Goldman Sachs’
sustainability report focuses on how to manage different
forms of risk. From a supply chain perspective, it includes
domestic and international financial risk of investments
in suppliers of alternative energy, impact of environ-
mental risk on investment decisions, research into do-
mestic and international lending risk as well as risk
management in the organization (Goldman Sachs
2006). Internally, Goldman Sachs’ Global Investment
Research (GIR) department has a dedicated team to in-
tegrate environmental, social and governance risk criteria
into a fundamental analysis of companies and sectors.
The interests of the GIR group focus on finding links
between long-term financial performance and alternative
energy, carbon finance, water use issues and corporate
governance.
While the Financial sector scored highest on this theme,
an example from the Industrial Goods sector helps to
illustrate how Risk Management manifests itself in other
industries. The Denso CSR report discusses the compa-
nies’ risk management group in detail, whose function is
to detect and prevent risk in its early stages. The risk
management group oversees the internal operations of
the firm’s subsidiaries and supply chain members. It
works to avoid and mitigate social and environmental
risks, including accidents, product recalls and the unau-
thorized discharge of hazardous substances into the en-
vironment (Denso 2006).
Measures
The Measures theme focuses on issues such as ‘‘reports,’’
‘‘goals,’’ ‘‘initiatives,’’ ‘‘controls’’ and ‘‘results.’’ Stakehold-
ers put pressure on companies to develop social and
31
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
environmental strategies, while also insisting that these
strategies are based on measurable financial goals (Wood
and Jones 1995). Companies use CSR reports to show
quantitatively how firms are able to manage social re-
sponsibility, environmental responsibility and sound fi-
nancial performance (Solomon and Lewis 2002). Among
most industry sectors, the influence of the Measures
theme is similar, with Services having the highest average
score. Within the Services sector, BNSF Railway Com-
pany’s Report presents detailed metrics and goals of the
organization’s social responsibility programs (BNSF
2004). The organization uses the metrics to measure its
achievable goals, find opportunities for future improve-
ment throughout its operations and provide meaningful
and relevant data for analyzing trends. From a supply
chain perspective, BNSF provides measures of how sup-
ply chain sustainability is managed. For example, the
BNSF report gives specific measures of efforts to reduce its
environmental impact by working with its suppliers to
implement recycling programs and to reduce both air
emissions and solid wastes. It provides measures and
goals related to environmental reporting, energy effi-
ciency and safety training, thus also covering social and
economic sustainability.
Energy Issues
The Energy Issues theme focuses on ‘‘energy,’’ ‘‘utility,’’
‘‘efficiency,’’ ‘‘cost,’’ ‘‘fuel,’’ and ‘‘projects.’’ Not surprisingly,
Utilities have the highest influence value here at p < 0.05.
Energy issues are at the forefront of the debate on envi-
ronmental responsibility. Energy companies seek to le-
gitimize themselves as a socially and environmentally
responsible organization as well as an economically vi-
able organization (Wood 1991). Organizations do this by
proactively integrating social and environmental re-
sponsibilities into an economic responsibility in CSR
reports (Wilmshurst and Frost 2000). The organizations
within the Utilities industry that experience the highest
influence include Xcel, Alliant and Southern Company. A
major focus of these firms is on the environmental im-
pact of the supply chains. For example, much of the
Alliant Energy CSR report is dedicated to the organiza-
tion’s commitment to cleaner fossil fuel production and
increased production of renewable energy sources (Alli-
ant Energy 2007). The resulting in-depth discussion of
clean energy products and technologies that it develops
with its suppliers shows Alliant’s commitment to proac-
tively pursuing environmental sustainability. Alliant
works closely with its primary energy suppliers to im-
prove efficiency in energy production and increase eco-
nomic sustainability, while minimizing its impact on the
environment and the communities in which it operates.
This is carried out through two primary means. First,
significant resources are dedicated to implementing
cleaner technology in the production of fossil fuels, such
as combustion burners to reduce power plant emissions.
32
Second, the production of alternative fuels such as wind
and solar are expanded to make production and delivery
more efficient and less costly to the end customer.
The Energy theme also manifests itself in nonutility
companies. For example, energy efficiency is of great
importance throughout Johnson Controls’ sustainability
report (Johnson Controls 2006). Johnson Controls
partners with suppliers in the upstream supply chain to
create energy-efficient products for consumers in the
downstream supply chain. From an operational and
process standpoint, Johnson Controls partners with the
EPA, automotive OEMs and suppliers to improve envi-
ronmental performance throughout the automotive parts
supply chain with more efficient processes that reduce
energy consumption.
Health-Related Issues
The Health-Related Issues theme encompasses ‘‘medi-
cine,’’ ‘‘healthcare,’’ ‘‘safety,’’ ‘‘drug,’’ ‘‘care,’’ and ‘‘patients.’’
This theme has the highest influence in the Healthcare
sector, among firms like Pfizer, Eli and Abbott. It is sta-
tistically significantly higher in the Healthcare sector than
with all the remaining industries. Like the themes of
Energy and Green Buildings, it has a fairly low influence
otherwise. Pharmaceutical companies are in a challeng-
ing position with regard to supply chains. Socially and
economically, these companies are pressured to make
drugs affordable, yet safe to users. Drug testing increases
product R&D costs significantly, which is typically passed
on to the consumer. CSR reports issued by pharmaceu-
tical companies often use language defending pricing,
while also describing social programs that help cut costs
of drugs to lower-income individuals and governments
of developing countries. By reporting positive social re-
sponsibility goals and actions, pharmaceutical compa-
nies hope to enhance brand image among stakeholders
(Hatch and Schultz 1997; Cerin 2002). Pfizer, a phar-
maceutical organization, is understandably concerned
with health-related issues and has a high rating for this
theme. The majority of Pfizer’s Citizenship Report dis-
cusses the organization’s concern with health-related is-
sues as an attempt to convey concern for the health of
people, both their own employees and the general public
(Pfizer 2005). This focus on people de-emphasizes
profits, while strongly emphasizing the social aspects of
the supply chain. Pfizer works carefully with upstream
supply chain members to find ways of simultaneously
reducing ingredient costs while ensuring the highest
quality and safety standards. Suppliers are held to a strict
code of conduct that allows for random audits and site
inspections. Pfizer works with its downstream supply
chain members to distribute HIV/AID fighting drugs
donated to governments around the world. The program
has distributed more than 7 million free doses of the
Pfizer drug Diflucan.
Volume 46, Number 1
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
The Health theme is also important in other industries.
For example, Texas Instruments (TI) has an EHS program
implemented to manage the performance of supplier and
service providers. It is used as one of the criteria for
supplier selection and procurement strategies (Texas In-
struments 2006). TI emphasizes the program’s bottom
line: TI suppliers around the world are expected to meet
corporate goals toward employee health – zero injuries,
zero illnesses and healthy work environments. Suppliers
and service providers are measured on written health
programs and TI business decisions are based on the
measured results.
Green Building
The Green Building theme includes ‘‘conservation,’’
‘‘building,’’ ‘‘facility,’’ ‘‘construction’’ and resource ‘‘re-
duction.’’ This theme has very little influence overall and
is statistically the same across industries, with Industrial
Goods experiencing the highest average influence of all
sectors. Value-seeking social and environmental strategies
look to design resource minimization and pollution
elimination into products and manufacturing processes
(Porter and van der Linde 1995), which includes facili-
ties. The value-seeking strategy helps firms not only re-
duce costs through waste elimination, but also gain
recognition for environmental responsibility at the early
stages of production, rather than after the fact pollution
control. For example, Obayashi’s dedicates a portion of
its Environmental report to how manufacturing sites
were made more resource efficient with less pollution,
including zero-emission construction sites (Obayashi
2006). From a supply chain perspective, the emphasis is
definitely on environmental sustainability. A large part of
the discussion in the report focuses on how buildings
were made more ‘‘green’’ through the supply manage-
ment function of the organization. Building contractors
were brought in to help to design buildings with low
carbon-dioxide emissions and construction companies
that specialize in low-impact construction techniques
were hired. The supply management department also
worked with suppliers to procure environmentally
friendly construction materials.
Summary and Implications of Themes
It is clear from the presentation of each of the above
themes that supply chain management activities are an
important factor and have the potential to play an in-
creasingly important role in all of the major themes of
corporate sustainability, as summarized in Table VI. In-
deed, SCM activities are present in all of these themes,
and many companies specifically mentioned the impor-
tance of SCM in each of the themes. In some cases, the
firms did not use the SCM terminology used by SCM
academics and professionals, but it was clear from the
discussion that SCM was heavily relied on to achieve
January 2010
sustainability goals. Thus, we offer the following propo-
sition:
Proposition 1: Among companies that create progressive
corporate social and environmental strategies, the role of
SCM cuts across all aspects of sustainable practices.
Stepping back from the details, it is apparent that a
strong institutional and stakeholder focus predominates
all of the industries’ CSR reports. As indicated in Table III,
Institutional Pressure has the highest influence value of
any of the themes across all of the industries studied. This
is an interesting finding, given that certain sectors, such
as Utilities and Healthcare have the appearance of being
much more influenced by external pressure than indus-
tries like Services and Finance. In addition, we might
expect industries to have specific influences that are more
pervasive than Institutional Pressure. For example, the
Healthcare sector might be more influenced by the
Health theme than Institutional Pressure. However, this
was not the case on average. Thus, we propose:
Proposition 2: The primary theme among CSR reports,
regardless of industry, is managing institutional pressure
to meet stakeholder demands.
Given this emphasis, it is not surprising that our find-
ings are consistent with prior literature, indicating that
companies appear to be utilizing CSR reports as a means
to enhance reputation (Fombrun and Shanley 1990) and
to communicate positive social and environmental con-
tributions. The positioning of these reports clearly em-
phasizes the firms’ desires to meet external stakeholder
demands (Hatch and Schultz 1997; Gioia et al. 2000;
Aguilera et al. 2007). These stakeholders include general
society, shareholders, governments, customers, industry
and specific countries and communities in which the
organizations operate.
Looking beyond the dominant influence of institu-
tional and stakeholder pressure, there are clear differ-
ences in emphasis in various industries based on key
stakeholders and specific industry concerns. For example,
very industry-specific-dominated themes include
sustainability themes related to health in the Healthcare
sector, energy in the Energy sector and risk in the Fi-
nancial sector. Even from a CSR perspective, these in-
dustries emphasize the areas that comprise the business
focus core.
Additional Analyses
To understand better the relationship between the
themes and the companies in our sample, further anal-
ysis was performed on the Crawdad data. An EFA was
conducted on the data by segmenting the organizations
based on geographical location and revenue. These types
of groupings are common in other supply chain research
(Gioia et al. 2000; Aguilera et al. 2007). Geographic
33
 Journal of Supply Chain Management

TABLE VI
Summary of Themes and Relationship to SCM

Theme SCM

Supply Chain SCM addresses sustainability issues across the supply chain in:
 Supplier management
 Packaging reduction and development of environmentally friendly packaging
 Product design and conservation of inputs such as energy and water
 Sourcing policies; supplier evaluation rules; supplier requirements
 Supplier factory EHS audits
Institutional Stakeholder pressure influences SCM to:
Pressure  Hold its suppliers accountable for a high level of environmental compliance
 Choose suppliers, locations and processes that provide value at a competitive cost
 Enforce company’s values and standards with its suppliers
Community Focus SCM reflected primarily in terms of social issues such as:
 Being sensitive to social needs of suppliers, logistics providers and manufacturers
 Developing an awareness of the communities in which the companies and suppliers
operate
Consumer Customer service is at the core of a supply chain that provides value to the firm:
Orientation  SCM creates a positive quality image of products as safe, responsibly produced, high
quality and healthy
 SCM supports customer service through supplier selection and development
 SCM works with material suppliers to improve the quality and safety of products
External SCM works to balance global expansion and corporate responsibility by:
Environment  Ensuring a globally balanced supply base that takes advantage of low-cost
manufacturing, while providing jobs and economic growth opportunities to local
communities
 Partnering with global suppliers to acquire emerging innovation and technology
 Certifying global operations and suppliers
Risk Management SCM works to avoid, manage, and mitigate:
 Social and environmental risks
 Accidents, product recalls and risks related to the discharge of hazardous substances
 Domestic and international financial and environmental risk of investments in
suppliers
 Long-term financial performance, alternative energy, carbon finance, water use issues
Measures SCM provides measures of how supply chain’s sustainability is managed including:
 Measures of efforts to reduce its environmental impact
 Recycling programs
 Air emissions and solid wastes
 Environmental reporting, energy efficiency and safety training
Energy SCM focuses on:
 Cleaner fossil fuel production
 Increased production of renewable energy sources
 Clean energy products and technologies developed in collaboration with suppliers
 Improved efficiency in energy production
 Partnering with suppliers to create energy efficient products for consumers
 Improving process efficiency to reduce energy consumption
Healthcare EHS policy implemented to help SCM:
 Manage the performance of supplier and service providers
 Develop criteria for supplier selection and procurement strategies
 Enforce supplier compliance regarding employee health
 Measure suppliers and service providers on written health programs

34 Volume 46, Number 1

 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

TABLE VI Continued

Theme SCM

Green Building SCM emphasis on environmental sustainability:

 Buildings made more ‘‘green’’ through the supply management function of the
company
 Suppliers hired to help design buildings with low carbon-dioxide emissions
 Construction companies hired that specialize in low impact construction techniques
 Work with suppliers to procure environmentally friendly construction materials

location and organization size, as measured by revenue,
have been associated with the type of information dis-
closed in CSR reports (Deegan and Gordon 1996). Two
EFAs were run in SPSS using principle component anal-
ysis with varimax rotation. The first EFA compared or-
ganizational orientation by geographic location and the
second compared the companies by revenue.
Geographic Comparison. The 100 companies studied
here were divided into two major geographic sections
based on the companies’ headquarter location. The first
group included all companies with headquarters in the
United States and consisted of 73 of the 100 sample
companies. The second group included all companies
headquartered in Western Europe and Japan; it contained
the remaining 27 companies.
Western Europe and Japan were paired together for
several reasons. First, companies in Western Europe and
Japan have more input in the regulatory formulation
process than companies in the United States, and
therefore view regulation as a cooperative relationship
between business and government (Hatch and Schultz
1997). The amount of participation firms have in the
regulatory process affects how social and environmental
responsibility is viewed and managed in the firm (Porter
and van der Linde 1995) and how it will be reflected in
the reporting. Also, companies in Japan and Western
Europe operate in economies that are shaped more by
institutional structures than market forces, while US
companies operate in an economy shaped more by
market forces (Witt and Redding 2009). Institutional
factors significantly influence most companies to create
social and environmental policies and strategies,
evidenced by the high scores of all companies on the
theme Institutional Pressure. Research suggests that
executives in companies operating in these institutionally
pressured economies will make social and environmental
decisions that are similar to other companies operating in
this type of economy but different from companies that
operate in a more market-driven economy (Hall and
Soskice 2001; Witt and Redding 2009). Finally, Western
Europe and Japanese executives prefer a more relational
model of business management, which is more in line
with their countries’ cultural norms (Witt and Redding
2009). Companies that operate under the relational
model will view areas of business management (such as
risk management, organizational growth and relationships
with supply chain members and stakeholders) differently
than companies that operate under a more competitive
business model.
Similarities in the societal norms of Western
Europe and Japan have also been observed (Witt
and Redding 2009). The importance and role of
education, the expectations of the individual and
of society and the rejection of the equality of outcomes
in favor of performance principles have been found to be
similar in European countries and Japan (Dore 2000; Witt
and Redding 2009). The pairing of Western Europe/Japan
is logical because of the similarity of regulatory and
business environments and cultural and social norms.
This pairing also provides a strong contrast to the
companies headquartered in the United States. A
graphic representation of the factor analysis comparison
between the two groups is shown in Figure 2.
The comparison shows eight of the 10 themes load on
the same five factors for the two groups. The two themes
that differ in loading are Institutional Pressure and
Measures. In the United States, the role of Institutional
Pressure is associated with Risk Management and Green
Buildings; in Western Europe and Japan, it is associated
with Community. This association is logical given Western
European and Japanese cultures. This integration
promotes a cooperative attitude among institutions,
community and companies that is supported by the
literature (Witt and Redding 2009). In part because of
culture, population density and greater awareness of
resource scarcity, there is a perception that Western
European and Japanese companies are more advanced
in social and environmental practices. In the United
States, social responsibility is still linked to managing
risks, facility operations considerations, institutional
regulation and stakeholder pressure. Some US
companies react to institutional pressure by managing it
as a risk (Delmas and Toffel 2004). US-based companies
understand ‘‘green’’ facilities and operations are a primary
target of regulation and stakeholder pressure. Companies
operating under certain cultural and regulatory
environments are encouraged to integrate external
pressures more proactively and cooperatively.
In the United States, the Measures theme loads
with External Environment and in Western Europe and

January 2010 35
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
Differences in the Configuration of Sustainability Strategies: Geography, United States vs. Western Europe/Japan
United States
1 2 3 4
Institutional Pressure
Community Focus
Healthcare
Energy
External Environment
Risk Management
Supply Chain
Consumer Orientation
Green Buildings
Measures
Japan, it loads with Consumers and Supply Chain. The
Measures theme focuses on setting goals and measuring
results. The outcomes of the factor analysis suggest that
US companies are concerned about measuring issues
within the External Environment theme, such as the
rate of globalization, diversity, sales and responsibility
in the organization’s operations. The goal is improving
the corporate image while building market share. In
contrast, in Western Europe and Japan, the upstream
‘‘Supply Chain’’ and downstream ‘‘Consumer’’ are linked
with measures in order to meet efficiency and
effectiveness goals that achieve lean, lowest cost
operations. At the same time, these companies are
meeting customer service goals and customer
expectations for environmental and social responsibility.
The results of the geographic location analysis of the
companies in this study point to differences in how
companies located in non-US industrialized countries
view social and environmental responsibility in the
supply chain. These findings reveal interesting
differences in how firms in industrialized countries
view social and environmental responsibility. Thus, we
offer the following propositions:
Proposition 3: Among firms located in industrialized
countries, US firms view responding to the institutional
pressure of stakeholder’s sustainability demands as a part
of risk management, while European and Japanese firms
view it as a part of community integration.
Proposition 4: Among firms located in industrialized
countries, US firms focus the measurement of sustain-
ability on broad external operational issues such as glob-
alization, whereas European and Japanese firms link
measurement with more focused issues in the upstream
and downstream supply chains.
Organization Size. The next analysis separated the 100
organizations by organizational size. Size of the
organization refers to the annual revenue of the
organizations in our sample. Annual revenue of each
organization was obtained from public records for the
same fiscal year as the CSR report used in the Crawdad
36 Volume 46, Number 1
FIGURE 2
W. Europe/Japan
5 1 2 3 4 5
Role of Institutional
Role of Measures
analysis; the organizations were sorted from highest to
lowest and then split into two groups: higher revenue
and lower revenue. This was determined by taking the
median of all of the organizations’ revenue and dividing
this into the higher/lower group at the median point. The
median annual revenue was $22 billion. A graphic
representation of the factor analysis comparison
between the two groups is shown in Figure 3.
A second EFA was run on the same data as a
comparison. The organizations were again sorted from
the highest to lowest using the annual revenue. Then, the
organizations were split into two groups by revenue: top
one-third and bottom one-third. Intuitively, this type of
classification would seem to yield a better analysis, due to
the spread of the variation in annual revenue among the
companies. However, the EFA that uses the top one-third/
bottom one-third split leaves 33 companies out of the
analysis, and results in a misrepresentation of the
industries in the smaller sample. The Health and Utility
industries are underrepresented, because a higher
percentage of their companies are in the middle one-
third than in the sample as a whole. The Finance and
Services industries are overrepresented, because none of
their companies are in the middle one-third. Therefore,
the EFA that uses the median as a cut-off between large
and small companies, and includes all 100 companies
from the sample, is used as the basis for the additional
analysis of companies by size.
The comparison shows eight of the 10 themes loading
on the same four factors. The two themes that load
differently are Risk Management and Measures. The
difference in the loading of Risk Management with
Institutional Pressure is that smaller companies have
more at stake in this area than larger companies.
Smaller companies do not have the same resources,
and therefore treat institutional pressure as more of a
risk that needs to be managed than larger companies. In
addition, smaller companies may view regulatory
demands as the majority of institutional pressure to act
in a more socially and environmentally responsible
manner. This equates to managing compliance with
regulation and the risks associated with being non-
compliant. Larger companies see the risk associated
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
FIGURE 3
Differences in the Configuration of Sustainability Strategies: Size of Organization, High-Revenue Organizations vs.
Low-Revenue Organizations
High Revenue
1 2 3 4
Institutional Pressure
Community Focus
Healthcare
Energy
External Environment
Risk Management
Supply Chain
Consumer Orientation
Green Buildings
Measures
with social and environmental responsibility in the
community and in global business operations, as more
is generally expected of companies with higher revenue.
Measures loads with Green Buildings and Institutional
Pressure in larger companies, and with Supply Chain and
Consumer Orientation in smaller companies. Because
Green Building is only an influential theme for one
organization in the high-revenue category, this is akin
to saying that Measures loads with Institutional Pressure
in larger companies. This may be because larger firms,
perceiving less risk from institutions than smaller firms,
are able to work more collaboratively with institutions,
using metrics to track joint goals and performance
indicators. Larger companies can ‘‘prove’’ that they are
good citizens through CSR data. Measures moves from
Institutional Pressure and loads with Supply Chain and
Consumer Orientation for the smaller companies. This
may indicate that these smaller firms identify the supply
chain as a source of revenue generation and potential
cost reduction. Perhaps the focus remains more
externally on measures because of the lack of available
internal resources to engage in as many sustainability
efforts. This would be consistent with the loading of Risk
Management with Institutional Pressure among smaller
firms.
Based on the theme discussion and differences based
on the size of the organizations, the following
propositions are presented:
Proposition 5: Smaller firms view institutional pressure
to adopt social and environmental strategies in supply
chains more as a risk to be managed than larger firms
perceive it.
Proposition 6: Larger firms view measurement and
reporting as an important way to deal with institutional
pressure.
IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
RESEARCH
This study makes a number of contributions to research
and practice. The original intent of this research was to
January 2010
Low Revenue
1 2 3 4
Role of Risk Management
Role of Measures
determine what environmental and social issues compa-
nies are emphasizing in CSR reports and how those
themes relate to SCM. A further purpose was to assess if
there are differences in practice related to organizational
location, industry sector or size. The previous sections
discuss how these research questions were addressed. The
following sections discuss the impact of this research and
then provide guidance for managers and researchers to
continue to benchmark and build on these initial findings.
Research Implications
The findings from this research cut across academic
disciplines while emphasizing the role of SCM. This re-
search also builds on the body of theory building
(Wacker 2008) in sustainable SCM, including the work of
Carter and Rogers (2008). By applying inductive logic
based on reviewing 100 corporate CSR reports, this re-
search provides fecundity and new insights into the far-
reaching roles of SCM in sustainability at large corpora-
tions. The results are also generalizable across large
companies. SCM accounts for the majority of most firms’
external spending, and has a large influence on the social,
economic and environmental aspects of many areas of
business. This was indicated in Proposition 1. In addi-
tion, many other functions have a role through the
themes that developed. Community and stakeholder re-
lationships are embodied in the Institutional and Com-
munity themes. Purchasing, operations and supply chain
management are part of the Supply Chain theme. The
Community, External and Customer themes are all rele-
vant to marketing. The differences in an industry’s em-
phasis on these themes should be of interest to all
disciplines. More striking is the similarity in the emphasis
of CSR reports across industries. As indicated in Propo-
sition 2, these reports are clearly aiming to appeal to
institutional pressures across all industries, with some
minor variation in influence among the themes, as dis-
cussed above. But, the way institutional pressures are
viewed in the CSR reports does vary by geography and
firm size. As Proposition 3 indicates, US firms view in-
stitutional pressure as a part of risk management, while
37
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
European and Japanese firms link institutional pressure
with community integration. Proposition 5 also indicates
that smaller firms are also likely to link institutional
pressure with risk management.
Other differences related to firm size and geographical
location. Proposition 4 indicates that measurement is
viewed differently between US- and Japanese- and Eu-
ropean-based firms. US firms tend to link measurement
with broad external issues such as globalization, whereas
Japanese and European firms tend to be more focused on
upstream and downstream (consumers) concerns in
conjunction with supply chain measures. Finally, Prop-
osition 6 indicates that larger firms link measurement
with institutional pressure, which could be an indicator
that CSR reports are perceived as an important way to get
the message out to stakeholders. This finding is in line
with the literature that emphasizes the importance of
firm image and reputation.
Thus, from a research perspective, this paper contrib-
utes to a greater understanding of the positioning of CSR
reports. While this is an area that has received some ex-
amination in the past, CSR reporting remains an unreg-
ulated area that continues to grow. While the GRI
continues to expand and provides some guidelines, it is
voluntary. It does not appear that there is a great deal of
similarity in the format of the reports we examined. On
the surface, it appeared that the content was also very
dissimilar. However, as CRA showed, there is actually a
good deal of similarity in the emphasis of these reports.
This research provides a snapshot at a point in time; it
identifies areas of emphasis in CSR reporting through the
development of themes. As such, this research adds to the
body of corporate report analysis. It enables researchers
to understand better the themes that companies are
emphasizing in regard to what companies are doing, or
planning to do, relative to corporate social and envi-
ronmental responsibility initiatives. This could be used as
a barometer of future trends, as well as a starting point
for a longitudinal study of CSR reporting practices.
Finally, this research contributes by applying Crawdad
software, using CRA to analyze large amounts of publicly
available narrative. Recently, there has been a call among
journals to use different analysis tools and different data
sources (Boyer and Swink 2008; Carter, Ellram, and
Kaufmann 2008). The supply chain and operations lit-
erature has been highly reliant on survey work since the
inception of these fields (Carter and Ellram 2003; Davis-
Sramek and Fugate 2007; Gattiker and Parente 2007;
Calantone and Vickery 2009). Yet, the populations that
academic researchers rely on to provide data are over-
surveyed, resulting in ‘‘survey fatigue’’ (Boyer and Swink
2008). For example, the Institute for Supply Management
(ISM) received 50 requests and provided its membership
list for 32 research projects from April 2006 to October
2008 (Maciejewski 2008). Survey response rates are
down; this allows a greater chance of biased and unrep-
38 Volume 46, Number 1
resentative results, which ultimately affects validity
(Davis-Sramek and Fugate 2007). At the same time,
through the Internet and other sources, the wide avail-
ability of published data issued by companies, govern-
ment agencies and other sources is at an all-time high.
However, without access to good analysis tools the sheer
amount of data can be overwhelming. Through the use
of Crawdad and CRA, this research represents a relatively
early effort to provide meaningful analysis based on
publicly available data related to corporate social and
environmental responsibility.
Managerial Implications
This research provides a number of insights for man-
agers. Corporate social environmental reporting has be-
come a critical and high-profile strategic initiative. While
not required by any legislation, there seems to be external
pressure for companies to issue public reports on social
and environmental responsibility activities. This research
can help organizations benchmark practices and report-
ing. For example, the development and discussion of
‘‘themes’’ within the report can be reviewed to help
managers understand whether the organization is
aligned with general and industry trends in reporting.
This knowledge may also help organizations to improve
the image being presented to various stakeholders. If the
assessment of the document shows that a theme is being
reinforced that does not support the organizations’ stra-
tegic mission, then the report could be adapted. In-depth
information regarding an organization’s CSR report
would also be extremely helpful for an organization that
is ‘‘late’’ in emphasizing CSR and sustainability issues, or
an organization that is early in creating, or is in the
process of refining, its CSR report. Organizations that are
late in the process of developing sustainability strategies
can follow and learn from the information revealed in
this research about the sustainability practices of leading
global organizations. In this way, late organizations have
the opportunity to expend fewer resources and make
fewer mistakes when developing or refining CSR reports.
This study is particularly useful to SCM professionals
because it analyzes the many roles of SCM across a broad
range of corporate themes and industries. If an organi-
zation wants to implement innovative sustainability
practices, or emphasize specific areas within corporate
social and environmental responsibility such as Risk
Management, a review of these themes can provide an
understanding of where other organizations are reported
to be in terms of risk reduction effort. Along these same
lines, organizations can use the information here to
benchmark reporting practices with others in the same
and different industry sectors. If there is a theme that is
highlighted in this research that is not influential in an
organization’s CSR report, the organization may want to
reconsider its current social and environmental respon-
sibility practices, its reporting emphasis, or both.
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
Organizations have struggled to understand the con-
tribution of social and environmental responsibility
practices to the firm’s bottom line. Historically, managers
have considered social and environmental issues
peripheral to, or even in conflict with, the core interests
of the organizations’ business model and strategies
(Hoffman 2000). This research highlights the importance
of not only having corporate social and environmental
responsibility strategies and practices, but also of re-
porting these to stakeholders. This may help managers to
see the economic and relationship-building benefits that
have been realized by other organizations enacting strong
social and environmental practices.
Limitations
Some of the general limitations of secondary research
are expanded in Appendix A. Issues associated with the
lack of standardization of the reports and possible biases
in reporting are presented there. In addition, there are
other limitations to this research. First, as indicated in the
methodology section, there is a selection bias in the CSR
reports included in this study; we selected organizations
that are leaders in sustainability practices according to
one or more measures. In addition, because we had to
covert PDF reports to text files, several desirable organi-
zations were excluded from this analysis because em-
bedded security controls prevented us from converting
the PDFs. Green washing, or reporting unrelated activi-
ties in the light of sustainability, and emphasizing ex-
tremely favorable cases are possible. Another limitation is
the possibility of an inflated alpha value associated with
the multiple ANOVA tests that were conducted on the 10
themes developed from the latent factor analysis. Al-
though a Tukey post-hoc test was used to decrease the
possibility of alpha inflation due to multiple ANOVAs,
the possibility of an inflated alpha still remains. The in-
flated alpha value could have influenced the outcomes of
the ANOVA results, as presented in Table V.
A third limitation is the small sample size for the non-
US-based firms in the EFA conducted on the geographic
location of the organizations. The generalizability of the
results can be called into question, as factor loadings with
small samples may be misclassified (Costello and Osborne
2005). One final limitation is latent factor analysis. The
initial EFA provided a clear preliminary view of the themes.
However, there were words that ‘‘fit’’ better on alternative
themes, did not fit any of the themes, or had low loadings.
Based on the recommendation of the Crawdad software
developers, these words were eliminated from consider-
ation, which may bias the selection of themes.
Future Research
There are a number of opportunities for future research.
Content analysis can be suitable for longitudinal research
so that we can understand the trends in corporate social
and environmental responsibility better. This research
January 2010
provides a cross-organization comparison of CSR
reporting at a particular point in time. Therefore, an
analysis of whether the social and environmental policies
of the organizations change over time would be useful.
There is an opportunity to perform an in-depth longi-
tudinal assessment of CSR reports. A number of proactive
organizations have been publicly reporting on CSR since
the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Another opportunity is using CRA to compare these en-
vironmental reports with other publicly posted informa-
tion such as the annual reports. Most organizations are
now required to report on certain aspects of corporate so-
cial and environmental sustainability. What similarities and
differences exist between these two reporting documents?
This analysis could also be used to explore practices in
specific functional areas more directly. For example,
many firms have a specific website section aimed at so-
cially responsible supply chain practices for suppliers. Is
there a strong relationship between supplier guidelines
and the influence of supply chain management practices
in the reports?
More in-depth analysis using qualitative techniques
such as interviews or case studies would help to under-
stand the true intentions of these reports better. Are the
organizations ‘‘green washing’’ the stakeholders? Re-
searchers could also conduct interviews or a survey to
follow up on the results of this content analysis, which
would help to validate the results of this research. There
is also a need for theory building, and a need to use es-
tablished theoretical lenses to assess corporate sustain-
ability and environmental responsiveness.
This is an exciting area of research with future oppor-
tunities for researchers who are interested in a developing
phenomenon. This report provides not only a link in the
emerging research of corporate communication, but also
looks at it using an emerging scholarly methodology.
Furthermore, with much of the research in corporate re-
sponsibility concentrating on US-based firms, this study
incorporates international organizations and compari-
sons. This research shows that global perspectives are
important and relevant in supply chain and operations
social and environmental responsibility research.
REFERENCES
Aguilera, R.V., D.E. Rupp, C.A. Williams and J.
Ganapathi. ‘‘Putting the S Back in Corporate Social
Responsibility: A Multilevel Theory of Social Change
in Organizations,’’ Academy of Management Review
(AMR), (32:3), 2007, pp. 836-863.
Alliant Energy, Alliant Energy Environmental Progress
Report 2007, available at: http://www.alliant
energy.com/Newsroom/RecentPressReleases/016162
(Accessed April 30, 2008).
Anheuser-Busch, Anheuser-Busch Companies Envi-
ronmental Health and Safety (EHS) Report
2006, available at: http://www.abehsreport.com/
39
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
documents/ABI-EHS_site_2006.pdf (accessed March
20, 2008).
Aragon-Correa, J.A. and S. Sharma. ‘‘A Contingent
Resource-Based View of Proactive Corporate
Environmental Strategy,’’ Academy of Management
Review, (28:1), 2003, pp. 71-88.
Arlow, P. and M.J. Gannon. ‘‘Social Responsiveness, Cor-
porate Structure, and Economic Performance,’’ Acad-
emy of Management Review, (7:2), 1982, pp. 235-241.
Azzone, G. and U. Bertelè. ‘‘Exploiting Green Strategies
for Competitive Advantage,’’ Long Range Planning,
(27:6), 1994, pp. 69-81.
Beamon, B.M. ‘‘Designing the Green Supply Chain,’’
Logistics Information Management, (12:4), 1999, pp.
332-342.
BNSF, BNSF Railway Company Environmental Report
2004, Available at: http://www.corporateregister.
com/a10723/bnsf04-env-usa.pdf (accessed April 1,
2008).
Boyer, K.K. and M.L. Swink. ‘‘Empirical Elephants—Why
Multiple Methods are Essential to Quality Research
in Operations and Supply Chain Management,’’
Journal of Operations Management, (26:3), 2008, pp.
337-348.
Brown, T.J., P.A. Dacin, M.G. Pratt and D.A. Whetten.
‘‘Identity, Intended Image, Construed Image, and
Reputation: An Interdisciplinary Framework and
Suggested Terminology,’’ Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, (34:2), 2006, pp. 99-106.
Buysse, K. and A. Verbeke. ‘‘Proactive Environmental
Strategies: A Stakeholder Management Perspective,’’
Strategic Management Journal, (24:5), 2003, pp. 453-
470.
Calantone, R. and S.K. Vickery. ‘‘Using Archival and
Secondary Data Sources in Supply Chain Man-
agement Research,’’ Journal of Supply Chain Manage-
ment, (45:2), 2009, pp. 53-54.
Canary, H. and M. Jennings. ‘‘Principles and Influence in
Codes of Ethics: A Centering Resonance Analysis
Comparing Pre- and Post-Sarbanes-Oxley Codes of
Ethics,’’ Journal of Business Ethics, (80:2), 2008, pp.
263-278.
Carroll, A.B. ‘‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of
Corporate Performance,’’ Academy of Management
Review, (4:4), 1979, pp. 497-505.
Carter, C.R. and L.M. Ellram. ‘‘Thirty-Five Years of The
Journal of Supply Chain Management: Where Have
We Been and Where are We Going?,’’ Journal of Supply
Chain Management, (39:2), 2003, pp. 27-39.
Carter, C.R., L.M. Ellram and Kaufmann. ‘‘From the
Editors: New Directions for JSCM,’’ Journal of Supply
Chain Management, (44:1), 2008, pp. 5-9.
Carter, C.R. and D.S. Rogers. ‘‘A Framework of
Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Moving
Toward New Theory,’’ International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, (38:5),
2008, pp. 360-387.
Cerin, P. ‘‘Communication in Corporate Environmental
Reports,’’ Corporate Social Responsibility and Envi-
ronmental Management, (9:1), 2002, pp. 46-65.
40 Volume 46, Number 1
Christopher, M. Logistics and Supply Chain Management:
Strategies for Reducing Cost and Improving Service,
Financial Times: Pitman Publishing, London, 1998.
Commoner, B. Making Peace with the Planet, Pantheon,
New York, 1990.
ConAgra, ConAgra Foods 2005, Corporate Responsibility
Report, Available at: http://www.conagrafoods
company.com/documents/2006CRR.pdf (accessed
March 21, 2008).
Corman, S.R. and K. Dooley. Crawdad Text Analysis System
2.0, Crawdad Technologies, LLC, Chandler, AZ,
2006.
Corman, S.R., T. Kuhn, R.D. McPhee and K.J. Dooley.
‘‘Studying Complex Discursive Systems: Centering
Resonance Analysis of Communication,’’ Human
Communication Research, (28:2), 2002, pp. 157-206.
CorporateRegister.com. Available at: http://www.
corporateregister.com, n.d. (accessed June 1, 2008).
Costello, A.B. and J.W. Osborne. ‘‘Best Practices in
Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommen-
dations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis,’’
Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, (10:7),
2005, pp. 1-9.
Davis-Sramek, B. and B.S. Fugate. ‘‘State of Logistics: A
Visionary Perspective,’’ Journal of Business Logistics,
(28:2), 2007, pp. 1-34.
Deegan, C. and B. Gordon. ‘‘A Study of the
Environmental Disclosure Practices of Australian
Corporations,’’ Accounting and Business Research,
(26:3), 1996, pp. 187-199.
Delmas, M. and M.W. Toffel. ‘‘Stakeholders and
Environmental Management Practices: An
Institutional Framework,’’ Business Strategy and the
Environment, (13:4), 2004, pp. 209-222.
DENSO Corporation, DENSO CSR Report 2006,
Available at: http://www.globaldenso.com/en/csr/
report/2006/index.html (accessed April 15, 2008).
Dooley, K. Crawdad Technology, LLC, Personal
communication, January, 2007.
Dooley, K.J., S.R. Corman, R.D. McPhee and T. Khun.
‘‘Modeling High-Resolution Broadband Discourse in
Complex Adaptive Systems,’’ Nonlinear Dynamics,
Psychology, and Life Sciences, (7:1), 2003, pp. 61-85.
Dore, R.P. Stock Market Capitalism: Welfare Capitalism:
Japan and Germany Versus the Anglo-Saxons, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2000.
Drezner, D.W. ‘‘Bottom Feeders,’’ Foreign Policy, (121),
2000, pp. 64-70.
Dyllick, T. and K. Hockerts. ‘‘Beyond the Business Case
for Corporate Sustainability,’’ Business Strategy and the
Environment, (11:2), 2002, pp. 130-141.
Elkington, J. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of
21st Century Business, New Society Publishers, Stoney
Creek, CT, 1998.
Esrock, S.L. and G.B. Leichty. ‘‘Social Responsibility and
Corporate Web Pages: Self-Presentation or Agenda-
Setting?,’’ Public Relations Review, (24:3), 1998, pp.
305-319.
Fombrun, C. and M. Shanley. ‘‘What’s in a Name?
Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy,’’
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports
Academy of Management Journal, (33:2), 1990, pp.
233-258.
Fowler, S.J. and C. Hope. ‘‘Incorporating Sustainable
Business Practices into Company Strategy,’’ Business
Strategy and the Environment, (16:1), 2007, pp. 26-38.
FPL Group, FPL Group 2006, Sustainability Report.
Available at: http://www.fplgroup.com/pdf/sustain-
report.pdf (accessed March 20, 2008).
Friedman, M. Capitalism and Freedom, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962.
Gattiker, T.F. and D.H. Parente. ‘‘Introduction to the
Special Issue on Innovative Data Sources for
Empirically Building and Validating Theories in
Operations Management,’’ Journal of Operations
Management, (25:5), 2007, pp. 957-961.
Gioia, D.A., M. Schultz and K.G. Corley. ‘‘Organizational
Identity, Image, and Adaptive Instability,’’ Academy of
Management Review, (25:1), 2000, pp. 63-81.
Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI),
Available at: http://www.gemi.org/gemihome.aspx,
n.d. (accessed June 1, 2008).
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Available at: http://
www.globalreporting.org/Home, n.d. (accessed June
1, 2008).
Goldman Sachs, Goldman Sachs Environmental Policy:
2006, Year-End Report. Available at: http://
www2.goldmansachs.com/citizenship/environment/
2006-initiative-report.pdf (accessed March 20, 2008).
Grayson, D. and A. Hodges. Corporate Social Opportunity!,
Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK, 2004.
Hall, P.A. and D. Soskice. ‘‘An Introduction to Varieties of
Capitalism.’’ In P.A. Hall and D. Solkice (Eds.),
Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of
Comparative Advantage, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, 2001.
Handfield, R., R. Sroufe and S. Walton. ‘‘Integrating
Environmental Management and Supply Chain
Strategies,’’ Business Strategy and the Environment,
(14:1), 2005, pp. 1-19.
Hart, S.L. ‘‘A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm,’’
Academy of Management Review, (20:4), 1995, pp.
986-1014.
Hatch, M.J. and M. Schultz. ‘‘Relations Between
Organizational Culture, Identity and Image,’’
European Journal of Marketing, (31:5/6), 1997, pp.
356-365.
Hoffman, A.J. Competitive Environmental Strategy: A Guide
to the Changing Business Landscape, Island Press,
Washington, DC, 2000.
Hoffman, A.J. and M.J. Ventresca. ‘‘The Institutional
Framing of Policy Debates: Economics Versus the
Environment,’’ American Behavioral Scientist, (42:8),
1999, pp. 1368-1391.
Holsti, O.R. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and
Humanities, Addison-Wesley Reading, Reading, MA,
1969.
Johnson Controls, Johnson Controls 2006, Busi-
ness Review and Sustainability Report. Available
at: http://www.johnsoncontrols.com/publish/us/en/
sustainability/sustainability_reporting/2006_busi
January 2010
ness_review.-CenterPar-00014-DownloadFile.tmp/
JC_06_Final_Review_12-15.pdf (accessed March 22,
2008).
Jose, A. and S.M. Lee. ‘‘Environmental Reporting of
Global Corporations: A Content Analysis Based on
Website Disclosures,’’ Journal of Business Ethics,
(72:4), 2007, pp. 307-321.
Klassen, R.D. and C.P. McLaughlin. ‘‘Impact
of Environmental Management on Firm Per-
formance,’’ Management Science, (42:8), 1996, pp.
1199-1214.
Kolbe, R.H. and M.S. Burnett. ‘‘Content-Analysis
Research: An Examination of Applications with
Directives for Improving Research Reliability and
Objectivity,’’ The Journal of Consumer Research,
(18:2), 1991, pp. 243-250.
Kolk, A. ‘‘Trends in Sustainability Reporting by the
Fortune Global 250,’’ Business Strategy and the
Environment, (12:5), 2003, pp. 279-291.
Lash, J. and F. Wellington. ‘‘Competitive Advantage on a
Warming Planet,’’ Harvard Business Review, (85:3),
2007, pp. 94-102.
Lee, P.M. and E.H. James. ‘‘She‘E’Os: Gender Effects and
Investor Reactions to the Announcements of Top Ex-
ecutive Appointments,’’ Strategic Management Journal,
(28:3), 2007, pp. 227-241.
Lichtenstein, B., K. Dooley and T. Lumpkin. ‘‘An Emer-
gence Event in New Venture Creation: Measuring
the Dynamics of Nascent Entrepreneurship,’’
Journal of Business Venturing, (21:2), 2006, pp. 153-
175.
Maciejewski, D. CAPS Research, Personal communi-
cation, November, 2008.
Manne, H.G. and H.C. Wallich. The Modern Corporation
and Social Responsibility, American Enterprise Institute
for Public Policy Research, Washington, DC, 1972.
Maxwell, J., S. Rothenberg, F. Briscoe and A. Marcus.
‘‘Green Schemes: Corporate Environmental
Strategies and their Implementation,’’ California
Management Review, (39:3), 1997, pp. 118-134.
McPhee, R.D., S.R. Corman and K. Dooley. ‘‘Organi-
zational Knowledge Expression and Management,’’
Management Communication Quarterly, (16:2), 2002,
pp. 274-281.
McWilliams, A. and D. Siegel. ‘‘Corporate Social Re-
sponsibility and Financial Performance: Correlation
or Misspecification?,’’ Strategic Management Journal,
(21:5), 2000, pp. 603-609.
MergentOnline.com, Available at: http://www.
mergentonline.com/, n.d. (accessed June 1, 2008).
Montabon, F., R. Sroufe and R. Narashimhan. ‘‘An
Examination of Corporate Reporting, Environ-
mental Management Practices and Firm Perfor-
mance,’’ Journal of Operations Management, (25:5),
2007, pp. 998-1014.
Morhardt, J.E., S. Baird and K. Freeman. ‘‘Scoring Cor-
porate Environmental and Sustainability Reports
Using GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and Other Criteria,’’
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, (9:4), 2002, pp. 215-233.
41
 Journal of Supply Chain Management
Neuman, W.L. Social Research Methods, Allyn and Bacon,
London, 2000.
Obayashi, Obayashi Environmental Report 2006,
Available at: http://www.obayashi.co.jp/english/
environment/pdf/eco_report2006.pdf (accessed
March 20, 2008).
Pagell, M. and Z. Wu.‘‘Building a More Complete Theory
of Sustainable Supply Chain Management Using
Case Studies of 10 Exemplars,’’ Journal of Supply
Chain Management, (45:2), 2009, pp. 37-56.
Pfizer, 2005, Corporate Citizenship Report Available at:
http://www.corporateregister.com/a10723/pfiz05-
csr-usa.pdf (accessed March 15, 2008).
Porter, M.E. and M.R. Kramer. ‘‘Strategy and Society: The
Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate
Social Responsibility,’’ Harvard Business Review,
(84:12), 2006, pp. 78-92.
Porter, M.E. and C. van der Linde. ‘‘Green and
Competitive: Ending the Stalemate,’’ Harvard
Business Review, (73:5), 1995, pp. 120-134.
Ramus, C.A. ‘‘Encouraging Innovative Environmental
Actions: What Companies and Managers Must Do,’’
Journal of World Business, (37:2), 2002, pp. 151-164.
Roberts Environmental Center, Available at: http://
www.roberts.cmc.edu/, n.d. (accessed June 1, 2008).
Rosen, C.M. ‘‘Environmental Strategy and Competitive
Advantage: An Introduction,’’ California Management
Review, (43:3), 2001, pp. 9-20.
Roth, A.V., A.A. Tsay, M.E. Pullman and J.V. Gray.
‘‘Unraveling the Food Supply Chain: Strategic
Insights from China and the 2007 Recalls,’’ (44:1),
2008, pp. 22-39.
Russo, M.V. and P.A. Fouts.‘‘A Resource-Based Perspective
on Corporate Environmental Performance and
Profitability,’’ Academy of Management Journal,
(40:3), 1997, pp. 534-559.
Saha, M. and G. Darnton. ‘‘Green Companies or Green
Con-panies: Are Companies Really Green, or Are
They Pretending to Be?,’’ Business and Society Review,
(110:2), 2005, pp. 117-157.
Sarkis, J. ‘‘Evaluating Environmentally Conscious
Business Practices,’’ European Journal of Operational
Research, (107:1), 1998, pp. 159-174.
Sen, S. and C.B. Bhattacharya.‘‘Does Doing Good Always
Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to
Corporate Social Responsibility,’’ Journal of
Marketing Research, (38:2), 2001, pp. 225-243.
Seuring, S. and M. Müller. ‘‘From a Literature Review to a
Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Supply
Chain Management,’’ Journal of Cleaner Production,
(16:15), 2008, pp. 1699-1710.
Sharma, S. ‘‘Managerial Interpretations and Organi-
zational Context as Predictors of Corporate Choice
of Environmental Strategy,’’ Academy of Management
Journal, (43:4), 2000, pp. 681-697.
Sharma, S. and H. Vredenburg. ‘‘Proactive Corporate
Environmental Strategy and the Development of
Competitively Valuable Organizational Capa-
bilities,’’ Strategic Management Journal, (19:8), 1998,
pp. 729-753.
42 Volume 46, Number 1
Sharp, Environmental and Social Report 2006, Available
at: http://sharp-world.com/corporate/eco/report
2006 (accessed March 20, 2008).
Shrivastava, P. ‘‘Environmental Technologies and
Competitive Advantage,’’ Strategic Management
Journal, (28:6), 1995, pp. 183-200.
Snow, C.C. and J.B. Thomas. ‘‘Field Research Methods in
Strategic Management: Contributions to Theory
Building and Testing,’’ Journal of Management
Studies, (31:4), 1994, pp. 458-480.
Solomon, A. and L. Lewis. ‘‘Incentives and Disincentives
for Corporate Environmental Disclosure,’’ Business
Strategy and the Environment, (11:3), 2002, pp. 154-
169.
Spekman, R.E. and E.W. Davis. ‘‘Risky Business:
Expanding the Discussion on Risk and the
Extended Enterprise,’’ International Journal of Physical
Distribution and Logistics Management, (34), 2004, pp.
414-433.
Srivastava, S.K. ‘‘Green Supply-Chain Management: A
State-of-the-Art Literature Review,’’ International Jour-
nal of Management Reviews, (9:1), 2007, pp. 53-80.
Steiner, G.A. Business and Society, Random House, New
York, 1975.
Stemler, S. ‘‘An Overview of Content Analysis,’’ Practical
Assessment, Research & Evaluation, (7:17), 2001, pp.
137-146.
Texas Instruments Incorporated, Corporate Sustainability
2006, Available at: http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/csr/
downloads/corp_citz_reports/csr_corpcitz_rpt_2006.
pdf (accessed May 2, 2008).
Tsoulfas, G.T. and C.P. Pappis. ‘‘Environmental Principles
Applicable to Supply Chains Design and Operation,’’
Journal of Cleaner Production, (14:18), 2006, pp.
1593-1602.
Venkatraman, N. and R. Vasudevan. ‘‘Measurement of
Business Performance in Strategy Research: A
Comparison of Approaches,’’ The Academy of
Management Review, (11:4), 1986, pp. 801-814.
Visteon Corp., 2005, Corporate Citizenship Report,
Available at: http://www.corporateregister.com/
a10723/vis05-corp-usa.pdf (accessed March 1,
2008).
Wacker, J.G. ‘‘A Conceptual Understanding of
Requirements for Theory Building Research:
Guidelines for Scientific Theory Building,’’ Journal of
Supply Chain Management., (44:3), 2008, pp. 5-15.
Waddock, S.A. and S.B. Graves. ‘‘The Corporate Social
Performance-Financial Performance Link,’’ Strategic
Management Journal, (18:4), 1997, pp. 303-319.
Wal-Mart Inc., Wal-Mart 2006, Sustainability Report,
Available at: http://walmartstores.com/GlobalWM
StoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=217 (accessed March
24, 2008).
Weber, R.P. Basic Content Analysis, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 1990.
Wells Fargo, Wells Fargo 2006, Corporate Citizenship
Report, Available at: https://www.wellsfargo.com/
downloads/pdf/about/csr/reports/wf2006corporate_
citizenship.pdf (accessed April 1, 2008).
 Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

Wilmshurst, T.D. and G.R. Frost. ‘‘Corporate
Environmental Reporting: A Test of Legitimacy
Theory,’’ Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, (13:1), 2000, pp. 10-26.
Witt, M.A. and G. Redding. ‘‘Culture, Meaning, and
Institutions: Executive Rationale in Germany and
Japan,’’ Journal of International Business Studies,
(40:5), 2009, pp. 860-885.
Wood, D.J. ‘‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited,’’
Academy of Management Review, (16:4), 1991, pp.
691-718.
Wood, D.J. and R.E. Jones. ‘‘Stakeholder Mismatching:
A Theoretical Problem in Empirical Research
on Corporate Social Performance,’’ International
Journal of Organizational Analysis, (3:3), 1995, pp.
229-267.
Zadek, S. ‘‘The Path to Corporate Responsibility,’’ Harvard
Business Review, (82:12), 2004, pp. 125-132.
Wendy L. Tate (Ph.D., Arizona State University) is an
assistant professor in the Department of Marketing and
Logistics at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville,
Tennessee. Her primary research interests include services
supply management, off-shoring, and environmental
supply chain management. Dr. Tate has published in
many managerial and academic outlets, including the
Journal of Service Research, the Journal of Operations Man-
agement, the California Management Review, the Journal of
Supply Chain Management and the Journal of Business Lo-
gistics.
Lisa M. Ellram (Ph.D., The Ohio State University) is the
Rees Distinguished Professor of Distribution at Miami
University in Oxford, Ohio. Her primary areas of research
include services supply management, supply chain cost
management and sustainable supply management. Dr.
Ellram has published articles in the Journal of Supply Chain
Management (for which she serves as Co-Editor-in-Chief),
the Journal of Operations Management, the Journal of Ser-
vices Research, the California Management Review, Industrial
Marketing Management, the Journal of Business Logistics and
other managerial and academic publications.
Jon F. Kirchoff (MBA, The Ohio State University) is a
doctoral candidate in the Department of Marketing and
Logistics at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville,
Tennessee. His research interests focus on global supply
chain strategy, ‘‘green’’ supply chain strategy and man-
agement, the antecedents and consequences of out-
sourcing and off-shoring and global supply chain risk
management. Before returning to graduate school, Mr.
Kirchoff worked as a Senior Commodity Manager for
Echostar Corporation; prior work experience also in-
cludes a position as Senior Buyer with Mercedes-Benz
U.S. International and with OEA Incorporated.

APPENDIX
Limitations and Issues Associated with Secondary Data

Increasingly, it has been difficult to garner significant response rates using a survey method. Many
populations have been over-sampled, and suffer from survey fatigue. This creates an unwillingness to respond
to surveys. This is likely the reason there has been a call for more secondary data use, and expanding the
methods used to analyze such data (Gattiker and Parente 2007; Boyer and Swink 2008; Carter et al. 2008;
Calantone and Vickery 2009). This research is one such effort on both of these counts. To address potential
weaknesses, pitfalls and limitations associated with the use of secondary data in this study, also applicable to
other studies, this appendix was created

General Limitations of Secondary Data

When seeking secondary data to use in analysis, there can be significant time spent searching for the data and
interpreting the data, trying to understand issues such as: where are the data published, are there common
reporting measures used and are there common time frames? In addition, all secondary data and empirical
data in general, whether voluntarily provided or mandated and standardized, is a snapshot at a point in time
(Snow and Thomas 1994). Archival data focus on what has already occurred (Snow and Thomas 1994). In
addition, the way that the data were gathered and the information that is included is all subject to
interpretation unless a very precise directive for reporting is provided. Even then, data can be distorted by
company differences in accounting policies or other internal practices (Venkatraman and Vasudevan 1986).
Who was responsible for collecting and reporting the data, and what biases may be present in the data as a
result are also considerations, even with data that appear to be very quantitative in nature, such as financial
reports

January 2010 43
 Journal of Supply Chain Management

APPENDIX Continued
Further, data are not always available for all time periods for all phenomena and organizations of interest
(Venkatraman and Vasudevan 1986). Such bias is present even in data that we assume to be very standardized
and subject to external auditing, such as financial reports of publicly held corporations (Snow and Thomas
1994). Thus, green-washing might even be a threat if the CSR reports were audited

Specific Limitations of Voluntarily Reported Data

Specific to voluntarily report data such as CSR data and data from company websites, there is no auditing of
the data. While it is unlikely that companies would wildly distort such data due to the potential impact that
this could have on reputation, data will be presented in a favorable light (Jose and Lee, 2007). In addition,
because there is no requirement that companies to disclose everything, reports will likely emphasize on what
is perceived as important, rather than disclose all relevant activities. Along similar lines, there is a lack of
common language for communicating sustainability initiatives. Terminology may differ somewhat by industry
and by country. Thus, there may be differential interpretation of what companies are actually doing.
In addition to these limitations, data cleansing can be an arduous task. Depending on the format of the data,
there may be a tremendous amount of time required to transform the data into a useable form, then cleanse
the data for errors and extraneous characters and standardize the format of the data just to prepare it for
analysis

Conclusions
While there is a wealth of potentially valuable and interesting secondary data that can be mined by
researchers, the acquisition, cleansing, interpretation and publication of that data is not without extreme
challenges. Reviewers may not be familiar with such data. This creates an extra responsibility for the authors
to take care in the handling of the data, its interpretation and its presentation to the public. As in all data
analysis, care must be taken to strive for validity and generalizability while clearly acknowledging both the
limitations and contributions of secondary data analysis

44 Volume 46, Number 1