4.6 Article

Green Supply Chain Management and Competitive Advantage of Jordanian Pharmaceutical Industry

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 23, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su132313315

关键词

green supply chain management; green purchasing; green operations; green selling; competitive advantage; pharmaceutical industry; Jordan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Through questionnaire surveys and data analysis, it was found that Jordanian pharmaceutical manufacturing organizations implement green purchasing and selling, but have weak implementation in green operations. Additionally, the organizations are more concerned with quality, speed, and reliability, rather than cost reduction and innovation when it comes to competitive advantage dimensions.
This research aims to investigate the effect of green supply chain management (GSCM) on the competitive advantage (CA) of Jordanian pharmaceutical manufacturing (JPM) organizations. Data were collected by questionnaires from managers who were working in JPM organizations, then checked and coded against SPSS. After confirming the tool validity, reliability, and relationship between variables, the hypotheses were tested by multiple regressions. The results show that JPM organizations implement green purchasing and green selling, while weakly implementing green operations. At the same time, for CA dimensions, the results show that JPM organizations are more concerned with quality, speed (time), and reliability than cost reduction and innovation. Moreover, the results show that the relationship between GSCM and CA is very strong. The results also show that green supply chain components affect the CA of JPM organizations, where green operations have the highest effect on total CA, followed by green purchasing and finally, green selling. Additionally, the green supply chain affects CA dimensions of JPM organizations, where GSCM has the highest effect on quality, followed by innovation, then time, while GSCM does not have any significant effect on reliability and cost.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据