The adoption of the Sustainable Supply Chain Management practices by companies in the private sector of Egypt aids to achieve its sustainable development strategy: Egypt Vision 2030, which aligns with the seventeen SDGs launched by the United Nations in 2015. There is a trade-off between sustainable development and economy. The trade-off lies between the benefits that result from adopting environmental, social or resilient practices by companies, versus the costs incurred due to conducting these practices. The research problem is that companies in Egypt regard sustainable practices as a burden to their profitability and continuity. In addition to that, companies do not link application of Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) practices with their performance. The hypothesis tests whether or not there is a significant impact for applying Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) practices on the company's performance measures. The research studies the impact of this application on the economic, environmental and operational performance of these companies. A survey tool is designed to collect the data from managers and employees in the supply chain departments of companies that are listed on the Egyptian corporate responsibility index (S&P/EGX ESG Index) and the sample is expanded by including their market peer companies in the EGX100.
Empirical evidence regarding the emergence of new inventory role in business enterprises is rare and confined to the work of Chikan (2009, 2011). No further research on the changing role of inventory is surprising given the fact that the sample of Chikan (2009) is small and covers only manufacturing companies. As such, this research contributes to the monological validity of Chikan's inventory new paradigm by replicating and extending his analysis using a sample from Egypt as a less developed country. Although similarities and differences were found between the results of this research and those of Chikan (2009, 2011), the general conclusion is that the findings overall support his argument that a new paradigm of inventory has not only emerged, but also become necessary for the analysis. In short, the new paradigm posits that inventory, as a strategic tool, plays an active role in attaining value creation, flexibility and control.
Existing evidence regarding inventory-performance relationship is inconclusive. A perspective that this paper stresses in considering this relationship is that it might depend on organizational life cycle stage. The underlying assumptions of this argument are that organization’s strategies and relationships vary with its life cycle stage, organizations develop their own strategies to fit between inventory system and organizational settings, and design of inventory system is not a linear process, rather it is a dynamic process that emerges and evolves in response to the power and interests of the stakeholders. Econometric analysis provides support for this argument. Specifically, the results show that while inventory to sales ratio affects organization performance negatively in the initial growth stage and the maturity stage, it exerts a positive and significant coefficient on performance in either the rapid growth stage or the revival stage. An implication of these findings is that existing perspectives might need to be treated as complementary viewpoints, each of which comprises a part of the whole picture because depending on just one single perspective is likely to result in misleading conclusions about the whole structure.
Inventory–firm performance relationship is a fast growing research area that attracted considerable research attention in the literature of production and operations management. To date, published literature has not only produced mixed findings, but also focused on presenting empirical evidence from developed countries. Inconclusive evidence in prior work implies that more research is needed to determine the relationship between efficiency of inventory management and firm performance. Accordingly, this research aims to contribute to the literature by presenting empirical evidence regarding this relationship from Egypt as a developing country. The results reveal that efficiency of inventory management and firm performance are positively correlated. This finding is robust to the use of different estimation methods and alternative proxies for firm performance variable, as well as the inclusion of other covariates.
Existing literature is inconclusive about the relationship between social responsibility and institutional investors as it assumes, implicitly, that this relationship is direct. An alternative perspective, that has received less attention in the literature, is that this relationship can be mediated by other contextual variables such as financial performance. Thus, this study is aiming to provide some empirical evidence on this issue that may help in explaining divergence in prior work. Panel data regression was performed on a sample that includes all firms that are listed in the Egyptian social responsibility index during the period from 2007 to 2010. The results demonstrate that better (or worse) financial performance, and rather social responsibility, is the lead for institutional investors when they make their investment decisions.
Although the importance of both inventory management and social responsibility is well acknowledged in the literature related to supply chain management, studies that investigate the relationship between social responsibility and inventory management are rare. Consequently, this study took a step toward filling this knowledge gap by providing empirical evidence regarding the impact of inventory management on corporate social responsibility. The study also adds to literature by conducting research on a sample of listed firms from Egypt as a developing country, where much of the existing evidence reflects experience from developed countries. Econometric analysis demonstrated that the null hypothesis of no impact of inventory management on corporate social responsibility can be rejected. Rather, the findings provided strong evidence that inventory management positively affects corporate social responsibility. This conclusion was robust to the inclusion of a wide range of control variables and the use of more than one estimation model.
Despite managing inventory being considered an essential function in production and operations management discipline, prior research has revealed contested conclusions regarding its determinants. In fact, the impact of collective dynamic change in firm characteristics on inventory performance and how such dynamic change can lead to a non-proportional inventory performance, have not been examined in literature. An alternative approach that this study proposes in examining the inventory performance is that it might depend on the firm's life cycle stage. Econometric analysis, using a sample of 84 Egyptian listed firms between 2005 and 2010, gives substantial support for the proposed argument. Explicitly, the findings strongly suggest that firms in the expansion stage have a better inventory performance than firms in either the inception stage or the maturity stage. The results also demonstrate that firms in the revival stage have a better inventory performance than firms in the maturity stage. It is believed that this novel theoretical and empirical evidence has significant implications for understanding of the inventory literature.
Corporate governance literature presents inconclusive evidence regarding the relationship between board characteristics and financial performance. Remembering that certain types of, but not all, institutional investors exert influence on monitoring and influencing management, this study goes beyond the traditional analyses of institutional investors and focuses on the effect of two different types of institutional investors, namely, pressure-sensitive and pressure-resistant, on the relationship between board leadership structure and financial performance. While pressure-sensitive type includes those institutions that are less likely to challenge management, pressure-resistant type incorporates those institutions that have no business relationships with the firms in which they hold stocks, and therefore are better suited to impose controls on management decisions and behaviour. The findings strongly suggest that institutional ownership moderates the relationship between CEO duality and financial performance, with the relationship being positive (negative) in presence of pressure-resistant (pressure-sensitive) institutional ownership. These findings support prior studies that argue that corporate governance mechanisms, and hence board leadership structure, should be neither modelled nor isolated from other organisational variables. The results of this study can be of interest to researchers in corporate governance, policy makers and managers who aim to maximise the value of their firms and improve board effectiveness.
Theoretical and empirical evidence regarding the impact of board size on financial performance has been proposed for a positive impact, negative impact or no impact at all. In our view, this reinforces the need for careful studies of the available empirical data in order to distinguish between the differing arguments. Contrary to previous works, it is argued in this paper that firm life cycle moderates the relationship between board size and financial performance. Econometric analysis, using a sample of 84 Egyptian listed firms over the period from 2005 to 2010, provided strong evidence for the applicability of this theme and demonstrated that while board size affects financial performance negatively in the inception stage, it has exerted a positive and significant coefficient on financial performance for those firms that are in the expansion stage, the maturity stage or the revival stage.
Despite the crucial role that inventory plays in supply chain management (SCM), research that examines the relationship between inventory and corporate social responsibility (CSR) is rare. This is surprising given the evidence that inventory represents a huge source of cost, a matter that is often reported as a major impediment in practicing social responsibility in SCM. As such, this paper fills this gape in literature by examining directly the effect of inventory management on CSR. Maximum-likelihood ordered logistic regression was performed on a sample of 38 Egyptian listed firms during the period from 2007 to 2010. The results demonstrate that inventory management exerts a positive and significant coefficient on CSR. Further analysis shows that inventory management cannot be safely dropped from model of analysis. Rather, inventory management does add something unique in explaining differences in CSR. For practitioners interested in optimizing their firms’ values, thinking in managing supply chain imperatives, and specially inventory, in terms of social responsibility may guide them to build up a stock of reputational capital that can be used, in turn, to increase the cost of their rivals. This study, to the best of knowledge, is the first one that offers empirical evidence regarding the effect of inventory management on CSR. Moreover, the paper adds to both SCM and CSR literature by providing empirical evidence from Egypt as an emerging market, where much of the existing evidence reflects experience from developed countries
It is hypothesized in this study that the relationship between institutional ownership and inventory management is more likely to be moderated by other internal corporate governance mechanisms (i.e., managerial ownership, board leadership structure and board size). This is more likely to happen as one weak governance mechanism in one area will be offset by a strong one in another area. Furthermore, the effectiveness of one corporate governance mechanism (i.e., institutional ownership) is more likely to be contingent on some contextual variables. Econometric analysis, using a sample of Egyptian listed firms, provides strong evidence for the applicability of this theme and demonstrates that institutional ownership affects inventory management positively (negatively) when managerial ownership is high (low), CEO duality (non-duality) is in place, or board size is large (small). This conclusion is robust to the use of different control variables and econometric models.
Different arguments have been introduced in the literature both for and against large and small board sizes. In this context, empirical evidence regarding the impact of board size on corporate performance is less conclusive, which means that further study is needed. Contrary to previous work, it is hypothesized in this study that the relationship between board size and corporate performance is more likely to be confounded by board leadership structure. Econometric analysis provided strong evidence for the applicability of this hypothesis and demonstrated that board size positively affects corporate performance in the presence of CEO non-duality (board leadership structure that is split between the roles of the CEO and the roles of the chairman). Furthermore, board size is shown to have a negative influence on corporate performance in the presence of CEO duality (board leadership structure that assigns the roles of both CEO and chairman to the same person). This conclusion is robust to the use of different measures of corporate performance, control variables and econometric models. Thus, these findings cast doubt on most of the existing evidence that posits that either large or small board size is always the best alternative to be followed in all organizations.
Much of the existing research in corporate governance has been directed at examining the consequences of board leadership structure on various organizational issues, with little to say about the determinants of this structure. By exploring either agency theory or stewardship theory, researchers provide contested conclusions regarding board leadership structure. The underlying premise of both theories is that ‘one universal structure fits all’. However, the main argument of this paper is that the appropriate board leadership structure varies with some contextual variables and certain actors in a given environment. Econometric analysis demonstrates that board leadership structure varies with firm size, age and ownership structure. The implication of this result is that the assertion of both agency theory (CEO non-duality structure) and stewardship theory (CEO duality structure) may be valid under certain conditions. Thus, existing theories might need to be treated as complementary viewpoints, each of which draws upon a part of the whole picture, because depending on just one single perspective is more likely to result in misleading conclusions about the structure as a whole.
Most prior studies have argued that the relationship between firm complexity and board size is a monotonic one: complex firm tend to have a large board size. Contrary to previous work, it is hypothesized in this study that this relationship is more likely to be moderated by board leadership structure. Using a sample of 92 Egyptian listed firms over the period from 2000 to 2004, we found that firm complexity exerted a positive and significant coefficient on board size when the firm adopts a leadership structure that separates the roles of CEO and chairman. However, the incremental effect of firm complexity on board size was negative and significant for firms that combine the roles of CEO and chairman (i.e., CEO duality). This study provides supportive evidence for the argument that firms are more likely to manipulate their boards’ characteristics to attain organizational adaptation at the minimum total cost. Thus, studying of one main characteristic of the board of directors without taking into account the expected effect of other characteristics may lead to inconclusive evidence. This study offers insights to practising managers and policy makers. If practising managers want to maximize the value of their firms, they need to broaden their insight to understand that board characteristics are multidimensional, contingent and dynamic in their nature and differ not only across firms and industry, but also across countries. Moreover, before developing and launching new and additional corporate governance reforms, policy makers need to realize that differences in corporate governance systems cannot be fully explained outside their institutional environments.
Existing literature has provided inconclusive evidence regarding the impact of financial performance on firm policy relating to environmental issues. In this paper, we propose that the influence of corporate financial performance on corporate environmental policy is unlikely to be monotonic but, rather, will vary with firm life cycle. We test this hypothesis by the application of static and dynamic techniques on panel data from UK companies. The results provide support for our hypotheses that financial performance has the strongest impact on environmental policy in the maturity stage of the firm life cycle and the weakest impact in the rapid growth stage. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Most research investigating the impact of board leadership structure as a corporate governance mechanism, on corporate performance has focused largely on either the Anglo-American context or the Asian experience and has come up with diverse conclusions. This study sheds light on the extent to which corporate leadership structure affects corporate performance by providing empirical evidence from a sample of Egyptian listed firms. The initial econometric results indicate that CEO duality has no impact on corporate performance. However, when an interaction term between industry type and CEO duality is included in the model, the impact of CEO duality on corporate performance is found to vary across industries, a result that is supportive of both agency theory and stewardship theory. In addition, when firms are categorised according to their financial performance, CEO duality attracts a positive and significant coefficient only when corporate performance is low.
An emergent body of literature examined why some firms apply some environmental initiatives while other firms do not take responsibility for their natural environment? Thus, firm environmental orientation (responsiveness and performance) are linked in the literature to several variables. Unfortunately, the relationship between firm environmental orientation and either available resources or firm size showed mixed results and inconclusive evidence. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to show empirically how available resources and firm size can explain differences in firm environmental responsiveness and environmental performance. Econometric results of environmental responsiveness using the logistic regression model demonstrated that firm size does appear to add something unique in explaining differences in environmental responsiveness while available resource can be safely dropped from the model. However, econometric analysis of environmental performance using the maximum-likelihood random effects model showed strong evidence that available resources and firm size are significant predictors of firm environmental performance.
There is a long-standing debate on the impact of environmental performance on firm performance. Although previous studies have reported mixed results, many of these papers suffer from model misspecification and/or limited data. A conspicuous gap in the literature is the inability of authors to control for firm heterogeneity and dynamic effects. In this paper, we conduct static and dynamic panel data analysis of the impact of environmental performance on financial performance. Our evidence implies that environmental performance has a neutral impact on firm performance. This finding is consistent with theoretical work suggesting that firms invest in environmental initiatives until the point where the marginal cost of such investments equals the marginal benefit.
