• Vol 9, No 8 (2018)
  • Industrial Engineering

Technological Integration and Sustainable Performance in Manufacturing Firms

Mohamad Ghozali Hassan, Muslim Diekola Akanmu, Rushami Zien Yusoff


Published at : 30 Dec 2018
IJtech : IJtech Vol 9, No 8 (2018)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v9i8.2747

Cite this article as:
Hassan, M.G., Akanmu, M.D., Yusoff, R.Z. 2018. Technological Integration and Sustainable Performance in Manufacturing Firms. International Journal of Technology. Volume 9(8), pp. 1639-1650
68
Downloads
Mohamad Ghozali Hassan School of Technology Management and Logistics, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia
Muslim Diekola Akanmu School of Technology Management and Logistics, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia
Rushami Zien Yusoff School of Technology Management and Logistics, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia
Email to Corresponding Author

Abstract
image

An excellent way of maintaining business performance is through sustainability; one of the essential elements of the sustainability transition process is the development of an innovative and constructive corporate culture through integration. This study therefore aims to determine the relationship between the integration of technology and sustainable performance. It focuses on Malaysian Standard (MS) ISO (International Organization for Standardization) 14001 certified manufacturing firms in Malaysia. Self-administered surveys were used to gather data and information for the study from 722 organizations operating in Malaysia. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was used to analyze the data. The results identify significant associations between technology integration and sustainable performance from the perspective of economic, environmental and social performance. Technological integration has always been a significant predictor of sustainable performance, as it is a necessary and key driver in most industries in the environmental achievements of manufacturing firms. The findings from the study provide specific details on the relationship between the variables employed. Technological integration has been found to have a positive relationship with three dimensions of sustainable performance (the economic, environmental and social). A basis for future research and practical application is provided by a framework of identified associations to improve sustainability performance.

Economic performance; Environmental performance; Social performance; Sustainability performance; Technology integration

Introduction

Sustainable business performance can be achieved when a firm or organization develops continuous value for its stakeholders and shareholders, while keeping abreast with environmental requirements (Brent & Labuschagne, 2004). An outstanding way of maintaining business performance is through sustainability, and one of the essential features of the sustainability transition process is the development of an innovative and constructive corporate culture through integration (Chen et al., 2010). Such a healthy culture would be able to create a better organizational performance and make optimum use of existing assets in order to create beneficial economic, environmental and societal outcomes (Dunphy, 2011). The results from economic, environmental and social sustainability would ensure satisfaction among shareholders, suppliers, customers, employees and society. According to the International Energy Annual Report (2007), manufacturing industries are globally responsible for the huge and significant amount of waste generation and resources. Across the world, the manufacturing section is responsible for the generation of 36 percent of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere (OECD, 2009). 

According to Kusrini et al. (2015), the development and application of green engineering principles in the academic, industrial and government sectors should be explored in order to promote sustainability and to add value to products. Therefore, the different paradigm focusing on the effects of manufacturing firms’ stakeholders, such as customers, employees, shareholders and regulators, requires manufacturing organizations to be more responsive to the environment with respect to their processes and products (Amrina & Yusof, 2011). Innovations in technological integration and the development of new material products, such as waste-to-energy (alternative energy), composting, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis and gasification, material recycling, and design modeling that lead to sustainable practices, are essential in achieving a safe and clean environment (Kusrini et al., 2015).

Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) has been a point of significant interest for practitioners and researchers of supply chain management and operation, due to the awareness of environmental protection on a global level (Abdullah et al., 2014). GSCM concerns the delivery of products and services from suppliers and manufacturers to end customers through material flow, information flow and cash flow, in the context of the environment. To improve sustainable performance among manufacturing firms, GSCM is now considered as an important management tool. GSCM also refers to all the stages of Supply Chain Management (SCM) that must comply with the requirements of environmental protection (Zhu & Sarkis, 2007). Requirements with regard to the involvement of green supply chain partners have led to the introduction of Green Supply Chain Integration (GSCI), an approach to GSCM. GSCI can be considered as a novel concept when firms develop an approach to strategically integrate with suppliers, customers, logistic, and technology to reduce environmental impacts (Wong et al., 2015). Manufacturers are required to employ GSCI to integrate environmental management practices within their companies, and with suppliers and customers (Shi & Lin, 2003). This action will enhance inter-firm cooperation and encourage mutual GSCM, as well as influencing firms’ sustainable performance (Wu, 2013). Thus, the creation of new technologies that foster research and stimulate innovation is required to accelerate sustainable development in all fields of study related to manufacturing (Berawi, 2017a). 

Conclusion

Technological integration has been found to have a positive relationship with the three dimensions of sustainable performance. As a result, all the hypotheses proposing a linkage between technology integration and sustainable performance (economic, environmental and social) can be supported. These results significantly prove the positive relationship between technological integration and sustainable performance. The study fills the gap in the literature on technological integration as a crucial variable of GSCI, despite being an excellent tool for integrating green supply chain partners more efficiently, leading to the enhancement of environmental performance. Based on the multiple regression analysis, the results reinforce the fact that technological integration is a necessity and a key driver in most industries towards environmental achievements. Although there are certain challenges to technological integration, such as the difficulty in obtaining the latest green manufacturing technologies, the high cost, the considerable requirement of managerial techniques, and the expertise needed, manufacturing firms in Malaysia should consider technological integration as a strong predictor of sustainable performance. However, such integration still requires involvement from suppliers, customers and internally to improve the exchange of technological knowledge. The findings of the hypothesis testing have established that the use of an integrated technological process along with the green supply chain would improve sustainable performance. Technological integration has been found to have a significant influence on sustainable performance. 

Acknowledgement

We would like to express our gratitude to the Research and Innovation Management Centre (RIMC), Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) for giving us the opportunity to conduct this beneficial research through a CoE Research Grant (S/O code 13734).

References

Abdullah, R., Hassan, M.G., Johari, N.A., 2014. Exploring the Linkage of Supply Chain Integration between Green Supply Chain Practices and Sustainable Performance: A Conceptual Link. In: 4th International Conference on Future Environment and Energy IPCBEE, Volume 61(22), pp. 116–120

Amrina E., Yusof, S.M., 2011.  Key Performance Indicators for Sustainable Manufacturing Evaluation in Automotive Companies. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, pp. 1093­–1097

Andiç, E., Yurt, Ö., Baltac?o?lu, T., 2012. Green Supply Chains: Efforts and Potential Applications for the Turkish Market. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 58, pp. 50–68

Berawi, M.A., 2017a. Fostering Partnerships and Strategic Alliances in Sustainable Infrastructure Development. International Journal of Technology, Volume 8(4), pp. 568–571

Berawi, M.A., 2017b. The Role of Technology in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals. International Journal of Technology, Volume 8(3), pp. 362–365

Bessire, D., Onnée, S., 2010. Assessing Corporate Social Performance: Strategies of Legitimation and Conflicting Ideologies. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Volume 21(6), pp. 445–467

Brent, A.C., Labuschagne, C., 2004. Sustainable Life Cycle Management: Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of Engineering Projects and Technologies. In: 2004 IEEE International Engineering Management Conference

Bushar, A., Zanwar, A. Jain N., Rao, P.H., 2014. Technological Integration for Efficient and Sustainable Supply Chain in Indian Multi-brand Retail, A Real Life Application of Business Analytics. Available Online at http://analyticsindiamag.com/, Accessed on December 30th, 2014

Chen, Y., Okudan, G.E., Riley, D.R., 2010. Sustainable Performance Criteria for Construction Method Selection in Concrete Buildings.  Automation in Construction, Volume 19(2), pp. 235–244

Chien, M.K., Shih, L.H., 2007. An Empirical Study of the Implementation of Green Supply Chain Management Practices in the Electrical and Electronic Industry and Their Relation to Organizational Performances. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Volume 4(3), pp. 383–394

Dangelico, R.M., Pujari, D., 2010. Mainstreaming Green Product Innovation: Why and How Companies Integrate Environmental Sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 95(3), pp. 471–486

Darnall, N., Jolley, G.J., Handfield, R., 2008. Environmental Management Systems and Green Supply Chain Management: Complements for Sustainability? Business Strategy and the Environment, Volume 17(1), pp. 30–45

Dunphy, D., 2011. Chapter 1 Conceptualizing Sustainability: The Business Opportunity. In: Business and Sustainability: Concepts, Strategies and Changes, Book Series of Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability, Eweje, G., Perry, M., (eds.), Volume 3, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Eltayeb, T.K., Zailani, S., Ramayah, T., 2011. Green Supply Chain Initiatives among Certified Companies in Malaysia and Environmental Sustainability: Investigating the Outcomes. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 55(5), pp. 495–506.

George, D., Mallery, M., 2010. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update. 10a edition. Pearson, Boston

Green Jr, K.W., Zelbst, P.J., Meacham, J., Bhadauria, V.S., 2012. Green Supply Chain Management Practices: Impact on Performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume 17(3), pp. 290–305

Gunasekaran, A., Lai, K., Cheng, T.C.E., 2008. Responsive Supply Chain: A Competitive Strategy in A Networked Economy. Omega, Volume 36(4), pp. 549–564

Hair, J.F.J., Money, A.H., Samouel P., Page, M., 2008. Research Method for Business. John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed, Prentice Hall, Inc., New Jersey

Huber, N., Michael, K., McCathie, L., 2007. Barriers to RFID Adoption in the Supply Chain. In: 2007 1st Annual RFID Eurasia, 5-6 September 2007, Istanbul, Turkey

International Energy Annual Report (IEA), 2007. International Bioenergy Annual Report

Junquera, B., del Brío, J.Á., Fernández, E., 2012. Clients' Involvement in Environmental Issues and Organizational Performance in Businesses: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 37, pp. 288–298

Kim, J.O., Mueller, C.W., 1994. Introduction to Factor Analysis: What It Is and How to Do It. In: Factor Analysis and Related Techniques, Lewis-Beck, M.S., (ed.), Sage Pubns, Singapore

Koufteros, X., Vonderembse, M., Jayaram, J., 2005. Internal and External Integration for Product Development: The Contingency Effects of Uncertainty, Equivocality, and Platform Strategy. Decision Sciences, Volume 36(1), pp. 97–133

Kusrini, E., Harjanto, S., Yuwono, A.H., 2015. Applications of A Green Chemistry Design, A Clean Environment, and Bioenergy to Promote the Sustainability and Added Value of Products. International Journal of Technology, Volume 6(7), pp. 1065–1068

Liu, S., Kasturiratne, D., Moizer, J., 2012. A Hub-and-spoke Model for Multi-dimensional Integration of Green Marketing and Sustainable Supply Chain Management. Industrial Marketing Management, Volume 41(4), pp. 581–588

Martin, P., Bateson, P., 2007. Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Mazzi, A., Mason, C., Mason, M., Scipioni, A., 2012. Is It Possible to Compare Environmental Performance Indicators Reported by Public Administrations? Results from An Italian survey. Ecological Indicators, Volume 23, pp. 653–659

Montabon, F., Sroufe, R., Narasimhan, R., 2007. An Examination of Corporate Reporting, Environmental Management Practices and Firm Performance. Journal of Operations Management, Volume 25(5), pp. 998–1014

Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C.K., Rangaswami, M.R., 2009. Why Sustainability is Now the Key Driver of Innovation. Harvard Business Review, Volume 87(9), pp. 56–64

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2009. Input-Output Tables (IOTs), Paris

Sekaran, U., 2003. Research methods for business: A skill building approaches. 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, USA

Setiawan, E.A., Asvial, M., 2016. Renewable Energy's Role in a Changing World. International Journal of Technology, Volume 7(8), pp. 1280–1282

Shi, L.X., Lin, K.X., 2003. The Integrated Strategies of the Enterprises within Green Supply Chain. Journal of Industrial Sustainable Development, Volume 12, pp. 11–18

Tabachnick B.G., Fidell, L.S., 2007. Experimental Designs using ANOVA. Duxburry Press, Belmont

Teraji, S., 2009. A Model of Corporate Social Performance: Social Satisfaction and Moral Conduct. The Journal of Socio-Economics, Volume 38(6), pp. 926–934

Vachon, S., 2003. Green Supply Chain Practices: An Examination of Their Antecedents and Performance Outcomes. PhD Dissertation, University of Western Ontario, Ontario

Wong, C.Y., Wong, C.W., Boon-Itt, S., 2015. Integrating Environmental Management into Supply Chains: A Systematic Literature Review and Theoretical Framework. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Volume 45(1/2), pp. 43–68

Wu, G., 2013. The Influence of Green Supply Chain Integration and Environmental Uncertainty on Green Innovation in Taiwan's IT industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume 18(5), pp. 539–552

Yamane, T., 1967. Statistics: An Introductory Analysis. 2nd ed, Harper & Row, New York

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., 2007. The Moderating Effects of Institutional Pressures on Emergent Green Supply Chain Practices and Performance. International Journal of Production Research, Volume 45(18/19), pp. 4333–4355

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Cordeiro, J.J., Lai, K., 2008. Firm-level Correlates of Emergent Green Supply Chain Management Practices in the Chinese Context. Omega, Volume 36(4), pp. 577–591