Universiteit van Amsterdam
THESIS
~ Corporate Social Responsibility; sensemaking in the garment supply chain ~
31 JANUARY 2016
T. T. M. Spier
10681841
Supervisor : A. Kourula
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Tjitske Spier who declares to take full
responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is
original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and
its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the
supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
ABSTRACT
This present research contributes to a deeper understanding of how two
stakeholder groups in the garment supply chain make sense of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The stakeholder group which will be further referred as ‘the brands’ consists of companies and their employees who have selling garments to end consumers as their main business. The other stakeholder group consists of factories in which the garments are produced and the persons working in those factories will be further referred as ‘the factories’.
The sensemaking aspect of the two stakeholders will be mainly explored by means of interviews and further developed by the application and refinement of the model Dimensions of the Sensemaking Process design by Basu & Pallazo’s (2008). The purpose of this research is to pinpoint how transparent the garment supply chain is and how the participants made sense of CSR in this supply chain. This study identifies that education on CSR and collaboration among stakeholders is a requisite to improve the quality of life and the well-being of society in the garment industry. The stakeholders are motivated and willing to collaborate with each other to manage the future of CSR improvements in the supply chain.
The importance of urgency to change the sensemaking of CSR has been underlined as well, because the CSR knowledge in the supply chain is currently not sufficient. Therefore the suggestion has been made to add two dimensions to the model; what stakeholders know about CSR and which emotions are present among the stakeholders, to enrich the CSR sensemaking of stakeholders in supply chains. “The most important right we have is the right to be responsible.” ~ Gerald Amos
Key words
Corporate Social Responsibility, sensemaking, Code of Conduct, stakeholders, identity, supply chain and garments.
1. INTRODUCTION
...
5
1.1 Background
...
5
1.2 The research gap
...
7
1.3 The research question
...
8
1.4 Structure of the study
...
9
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
...
11
2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility
...
11
2.2 Sensemaking
...
14
2.3 Code of Conduct
...
16
2.4 Stakeholders
...
18
2.5 Identity
...
22
2.6 Theoretical framework
...
25
3. METHODOLOGY
...
28
3.1 Research design
...
28
3.2 Sampling
...
29
3.4 Data analysis
...
40
3.5 Boundaries & Limitations
...
43
4. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS
...
46
5. DISCUSSION
...
66
6. CONCLUSION
...
76
6.1 Summary of main findings
...
76
6.2 Managerial implications
...
77
6.3 Limitations of the study
...
78
6.4 Suggestions for future research
...
79
REFERENCES
...
84
APPENDICES
...
97
Code of Conduct
...
97
SA8000 Standard 2014
...
97
The coding tree : the factories
...
98
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Corporate Social Responsibility (hereafter CSR) can be found in different parts of supply chains. An example of Corporate Social Responsible behavior in the garment supply chain comes from Simon Zadek, published in the Harvard Business Review (2004) and is still present in the current garment industry. The article concluded that the root of the problem was not so much the quality of the company’s
programs to improve worker conditions and the approach to doing business. But the fact the brands offered performance incentives to its procurement teams based on price, quality and delivery times, which is in many garment companies still the case and tension nowadays. This standard industry practice of profitability optimisation undermines many positive efforts to adopt CSR practices and to comply with the Codes of Conduct; it had the unintended effect of actively encouraging its buyers to circumvent code compliance to hit targets and secure bonuses. Furthermore often the procurement teams would force suppliers to cut corners to push the envelope on delivery times, which would drive up overtime in the factories exactly what the labor code was trying to prevent. Global brands are often under intense pressure from groups working for responsible supply chain management. Much of this pressure is channelled through the supply chain, since the pressure groups sometimes find it difficult to reach the global brands directly (Amaeshi, Osuji & Nnodim, 2008). Not only the brands, the complete supply chain has been the subject of increasing attention from highly visible non-state actors. These actors have politicized key supply chain decision-making processes through their high-profile advocacy for core labour standards in the garment sector. In the garment sector these include brand-based and factory-based ‘anti-sweatshop’ campaigns and corporate codes of conduct (Macdonald, 2014). The groups who target the brands rely on indirect tactics such as targeting the sourcing activities of these brands and their seeming exploitation of cheap labour conditions in
developing countries. These attacks engender negative public sentiments and invariably resentments towards the global brands following ‘irresponsible’ behaviours along their supply chain. These negative perceptions of firms persist, irrespective of the locus of the ‘guilty’ suppliers on the supply chain spectrum of the primary purchasing firm. This image tends to put firms under pressure to bear indefinite responsibilities for their wide and long supplier network. Firms,
therefore, do everything possible to protect their brands - including accounting for the seeming irresponsible behaviours of their suppliers, as shown in the current wave of social reports across industries (Amaeshi, Osuji & Nnodim, 2008). One of the negative consequences of this pressure approach towards CSR adopted by pressure groups is the tendency to (inadvertently) promote the false notion that CSR practice is restricted only to global big firms and brands (Amaeshi, Osuji & Nnodim, 2008). Companies currently face a quite different situation. However, through stakeholder pressure and consumer campaigns, they are directly targeted and urged to show their commitment and the actions taken to prevent human rights violations and environmental pollution. Corporate Codes of Conduct are the most common means to express and implement social responsibility. But how effective are they in addressing the problem? (Basu, 1999; Kolk & van Tulder, 2002a).
A more recent example of CSR behaviour in the garment supply chain comes to light in the documentary ‘The True Cost’, this documentary digs deep into the human and social cost of fast fashion (May, 2015). A distressing overview of the consequences of our addiction to fast fashion, ‘The True Cost’ might suggest another exposé of corporate greed versus environmental well-being (Catsoulis, 2015). This documentary and the still present CSR behavior based on the findings from Zadek twelve years ago, designate the importance to investigate how the stakeholders in the garment supply chain make sense of CSR. The garment industry has an impact on the world, the price of clothing has been decreasing for decades, while the human and environmental costs have grown dramatically. The CSR
behavior of two stakeholders, the brands and the factories, in the garment supply chain will be examined.
1.2 The research gap
CSR in supply chains is a relatively new field. A large body of CSR literature has been devoted to organizational responses to external stakeholder demands (Yuan, Bao & Verbeke, 2011). And recently the CSC9000T, a collective Code of Conduct, has been compared to other CSR standards. To describe the communicated motives for the implementation in the Chinese textile and apparel industry (Chen, Larsson & Mark-Herber, 2014). Lately research has also been conducted on individual level on commitment and awareness of CSR in general (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012) and specifically in the garment supply chain on politics (Macdonald, 2014). Thereby studies at the institutional and organizational levels focus more on the
instrumental motives and theories related to institutional theory, stakeholder theory, and the resource-based view of the firm (e.g., financial outcomes,
reputation, risk, reacting to stakeholder pressure, complying with regulations and standards) (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012), but not on the sensemaking of various
stakeholders in a supply chain. There has not been much work conducted on how stakeholders in specifically the garment supply chain make sense of CSR initiatives in business and how to integrate these separate conceptual streams. According to the literature, there are several factors pushing supplier-buyer companies to adopt CSR, many of which are driven by the concern of lost reputation, brand image, sales, access to markets and financial investments (Cruz, 2008). CSR squares as a risk management strategy in relation to the corporate identity and it may also be considered a source of competitive and even financial advantage (Orlitzky, Schmidt & Rynes, 2003). These insights mainly underline the identity, image and financial impacts of CSR in the supply chain. These elements are important for the brands, in the garment supply chain everything revolves on profit and image building. Other important factors for the brands and the other stakeholders in the garment
supply chain should be the protection of the environment, the improvement of human rights and the reduction of global poverty. These factors and to which extent the stakeholders in the garment supply chain are aware of the urgency to act on them are not extensively discussed in the literature. Frynas (2005) and Wheeler et al. (2002) have viewed CSR outcomes in terms of social benefits
accruing to the organisation’s stakeholders, whereas Pearce II and Doh (2005) have taken the middle ground in analysing outcome in terms of both organisational and societal welfare. Neither analysis have been conducted with two stakeholders in the garment supply chain and how the two stakeholders make sense of CSR and cooperate to achieve a better world. Determining whether the CSR engagement of a firm is authentic or simply a façade masking dubious business practices has been a key question in recent debates on CSR (Laufer, 2003; Sims & Brinkmann, 2003). Creyer & Ross (1997: 421) state; “many firms have initiated a number of actions that encourage employees to include ethics as a formal part of their decision making process.” After all, decisions regarding CSR activities are taken by managers, and stem from their mental models regarding their sense of who they are in their world. As described by Pfeffer (2005: 128), “what we do comes from what and how we think.” Researchers usually tend to evaluate CSR initiatives from the perspective of societal stakeholders, organisational and societal welfare or competitive advantage, with only limited attention devoted to CSR sensemaking initiatives. In the present study, the above research gap will be filled by exploring the forthcoming CSR knowledge of the stakeholders and the additional insights into reasons and developments in CSR sensemaking practices in the garment supply chain.
1.3 The research question
Research on CSR activities has been executed in various supply chains, but not extensive in the garment supply chain on the combination of stakeholder,
stakeholders in the garment supply chain make sense of CSR. This research will complement the already existing literature on competitive advantage, on social benefits and as a combination of both in the garment supply chain. This domain could be filled with additional knowledge how sensemaking can be at play in CSR practices as well. The CSR tensions and related actions in different parts of the garment supply chain will be set out. The main focus of this research is to explore how stakeholders make sense of CSR. The research question is: How do
stakeholders in different parts of a supply chain make sense of Corporate Social Responsibility? For this research the specific focus is on the CSR sensemaking in the garment supply chain.
1.4 Structure of the study
This thesis will provide insights how stakeholders in the garment supply chain make sense of the concept CSR. The insights will make an academic contribution and have a practical value. The practical value of this thesis will be that the garment supply chain can learn from the outcomes of the CSR sensemaking of the examined stakeholder groups. How to improve the current CSR practices among the examined stakeholders and how to integrate the findings in other parts of the garment supply chain. The academic contribution can be found in the expansion of the sense making understanding and the refinement of the model.
To make sure the research is feasible within the time frame of six months, only the CSR understanding of two stakeholder groups in the garment supply chain will be examined. The two stakeholders in the garment supply chain which will be analyzed are the brands and the factories. Various Netherlands-based garment brands positioned in the middle segment will be examined and employees from these brands will be interviewed. As in this middle segment low purchase prices, high margins, in time deliveries and reputation are of importance. The brands will be punished by the end consumer, if the brands are associated with dishonest practices. The garments from brands who are negatively in the publicity will not be
bought anymore (Zadek, 2004; Amaeshi, Osuji & Nnodim, 2008). On the other hand, recent research suggest that there is a positive relationship between a company’s CSR actions and consumers’ attitudes towards that company and it products (Brown & Dacin, 1997; Creyer & Ross, 1997; Ellen, Mohr & Webb, 2000). Furthermore, there is a tendency in the market that consumers ask for transparency. All
together, the brands have to increase their engagement in CSR behavior and carry out their commitment to CSR improvements, which makes the brands an
interesting stakeholder group to examine. Secondly, the factories as stakeholder group will be analyzed. How the process guidance employees of the factory (the merchandise managers and the planners) and a CEO make sense of CSR, as CSR demands from the brands where they work for are presently increasing. Multiple factories, located in the Far East, will be involved. The selected area’s are; Bangkok (Thailand), Ho Chi Min City (Vietnam), and Hong Kong. The choice for factories which are located in the Far East is based on the fact that the largest part of the total garment productions takes place in that part of the world.
This thesis starts by situating the broader context of Corporate Social
Responsibility, sensemaking, Code of Conduct, stakeholders, identity and the theoretical framework in section 2; the literature review. This second section provides the fundament for this study. In section 3 the methodology chapter; research design, sampling, data collection, data analysis and boundaries &
limitations will be set out and discussed. Section 4 reports the empirical findings, whereas section 5 discusses these findings. Finally section 6 presents the
conclusion, the managerial implications of the thesis, discusses the limitations, and briefly presents future research streams.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
In the literature many theories related to the key definitions can be found. The most relevant views and contributing clarifications on Corporate Social
Responsibility, sensemaking, Code of Conduct, stakeholders and identity will be examined. The examined topics will be completed with the evaluation of the theoretical framework which has been added to execute this research.
2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility
Integrating CSR initiatives in business is one of the great challenges facing firms today. Societal stakeholders require much more from the firm than pursuing profitability and growth. But these societal stakeholders often simply assume that increased societal expectations can easily be accommodated within efficiently run business operations, without much attention devoted to process issues (Yuan, Bao & Verbeke, 2011). In this research the definition of CSR as offered by Basu & Palazzo will be adopted to investigate the CSR behavior of the two different stakeholders in the garment supply chain. CSR is defined by Basu & Palazzo (2008: 9) as; “the process by which managers within an organization think about and discuss relationships to stakeholders as well as their roles in relation to the common good, along with their behavioral disposition with respect to the fulfilment and achievement of these”. Another, older however still interesting, insight comes from Davis & Blomstrom. Davis & Blomstrom (1975) assert that CSR is the obligation of the decision maker to take actions that protect and improve the welfare of society along with their own interests and that at its core, CSR argues that economics and social goals need not be in conflict. Unfortunately economics and social goals are often in conflict in the garment supply chain. The asymmetry of these power relations between retailers (the brands) and suppliers (the
factories) thus leads the market-oriented priorities of retailers to be reproduced throughout supply chain decision-making structures, as retailers reward their
suppliers on the basis of price, timing and quality, with little incentive to prioritise non-economic objectives such as compliance with specified ‘labour standards’ at the factory level (Zadek et al. 1997; Zadek, 2001). This then leads directly and foreseeable to the undercutting of wages and conditions for workers. The desire of retailers to achieve low prices (driven in turn by consumer preferences, in the context of competitive retail markets) is passed through the supply chain in the form of cost pressures. These cost pressures in turn have direct implications not only for wages but also for other cost-related factors such as implementing health and safety measures and the intensity of pressure placed on the workers to raise productivity (Ross, 2004).
The decision to adopt these specific definitions, besides the three fundamental lines (stakeholder driven / performance driven / motivation driven) given by Basu & Palazzo (2008), is based on the overall coverage and match with this research interest. In this research the combination of what stakeholders think (their motivation), their roles (performance) in relation to the common good and
sensemaking processes are of importance. The garment industry is according to the Danish Fashion Institute (2013), the world's 2nd most polluting industry, second only to oil and where farmers and workers commonly make less than a living wage and benefit from very little social protection (EYD, 2015). Therefor there is an urge to examine the CSR sensemaking among the stakeholders in the garment supply chain.
In today’s marketplace CSR is not only an ethical / ideological imperative, but also an economic one. In other words, companies today are increasingly aware of both the normative and business case for engaging in CSR (Murray & Vogel, 1997); not only is ‘doing good’ ‘the right thing to do’, but it is also leads to ‘doing better’ through its positive effects on key stakeholder groups. This research will reveal whether ‘doing better’ is common practice among the stakeholders in the garment supply chain nowadays. The positive link of CSR to consumer patronage is spurring
companies to devote greater energies and resources to CSR initiatives, shifting the debate about from ‘whether’ to ‘how’ (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). The ‘how’ could be answered by providing transparency on the supply chain in the garment industry to the end consumers and how the stakeholder makes sense of the CSR initiatives. The start on sensemaking has been made by calling in life the Fashion Revolution day with the first edition on the 24th of April 2014. The visibility of CSR actions and the benefits of CSR affect the entire supply chain a firm participates in (Ciliberti, de Haan, de Groot & Pontrandolfo, 2010). For the garment supply chain this thought that the entire chain can benefit from CSR affects must permeate. Transparency in the supply chain can help to accomplish the CSR benefits.
Furthermore is transparency a crucial condition to implement a CSR policy based on the reputation mechanism (Dubbink, Graafland & van Liedekerke, 2008).
Another view on CSR has been defined by Ciliberti, de Haan, de Groot & Pontrandolfo (2009) “the voluntary integration, by companies, of social and environmental concerns in their commercial operations and in their relationships with interested parties” (Commission of the European Communities, 2001: 7). CSR has traditionally been conceptualized rather broadly as “the managerial obligation to take action to protect and improve both the welfare of society as a whole and the interest of organizations” (Davis & Blomstrom, 1975: 6). This broad definition is clear, but should be enlarged. CSR is regarded as a means for “improving the
quality of life or well-being of society” (Arendt & Brettel, 2010: 1471). Specifically in this research the well being of the workers in the factories of the garment supply chain. The study Arendt & Brettel (2010) conducted adds to the understanding of how and when CSR affects corporate image attractiveness,
company-stakeholder identification and organizational success by showing that CSR effects on the relationship between CIM, external image and identity. This
relationship is of importance for the brands. For the brands there is a lot adjacent to their corporate image attractiveness. The pressure from the brands on the factories to produce cheaper garments has a negative effect on the working
conditions of the factories employees and the environment. To improve the working conditions and to not pollute the environment, an alternative and potentially richer description of CSR might emerge from studying internal institutional determinants such the mental frames and sensemaking processes within which CSR is embedded (i.e., by studying how an organization makes sense of its world) (Basu & Palazzo, 2008).
2.2 Sensemaking
Sensemaking has been described by Ring & Rands as “a process by which individuals develop cognitive maps of their environment.” (1989: 342). Another description comes from Basu & Palazzo, they described sensemaking as “it views activities such as CSR as resulting not directly from external demands but instead from
organizationally embedded cognitive and linguistic processes.” (2008: 6).
Additionally, Brickson (2007) stated that these processes of sensemaking within an organization lead the organization to view its relationships with stakeholders in particular ways, which in turn influence its engagement with them. The mental models or frames that underlie organizational sensemaking, then, influence the way the world is perceived within the organization as well as critical decisions with respect to perceived external and internal demands. Studying CSR through the lens of sensemaking – which might include motivation for CSR as one of its surface representations – as a feature of a firm’s general organizational character, might provide a more robust conceptual basis, rather than simply analyzing the content of its CSR actions within a certain context or over a certain period of time (Basu & Palazzo, 2008). As described by Ghoshal and Moran (1996), a particular pattern of behavior is more likely to occur as a result of its strong links with cognitive, linguistic and behavioral features that define character. Ciulla (2005) has likewise emphasised the notion of walking the talk, and the congruence between thinking and saying as bases for the emergence of robust relationships (e.g., trust and reciprocity resulting from moral consistency) reflecting an actor’s intrinsic
character. Such a process view of CSR locates the phenomenon as an intrinsic part of an organization’s character (i.e., the way it goes about sensemaking of its world), with the potential to discriminate it from other organizations that might adopt different types of sensemaking processes. Thus, rather than analyzing CSR by focusing largely on the content of CSR activities, it argues for a deeper
examination of organizational character along the tripartite process dimensions (Basu & Palazzo, 2008).
Sensemaking is not about truth and getting it right. Instead, it is about continued redrafting of an emerging story so that it becomes more comprehensive,
incorporates more of the observed data, and is more resilient in the face of criticism (Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005). It is clear that the stakes in
sensemaking are high when issues of identity are involved. When people face an unsettling difference, that difference often translates into questions such as who are we, what are we doing, what matters, and why does it matter? (Brown, 2000). Besides identity, cognitive legitimacy can be involved as well and cognitive
legitimacy is concerned with the definition and meaning of organizational activities. In other words, cognitive legitimacy is what makes organizational activities simply ‘make sense’ (Suchman, 1995; Zucker, 1983).
An important but under examined facet of sensemaking is the role of emotion (Gioia & Mehra, 1996; Magala, 1997). There are several reasons why emotion, which we define as a transient feeling state with an identified cause or target that can be expressed verbally or non-verbally (Grandey, 2008; Russell & Barrett, 1999), and may be an important element in sensemaking processes. Emotion may help us understand why certain events trigger sensemaking. Emotion thus appears to be an important factor in shaping the kind of sensemaking process that occurs following a triggering event (Maitlis, Vogus & Lawrence, 2013). Sensemaking involves turning circumstances into a situation that is comprehended explicitly in words and that serves as a springboard into action. The seemingly transient nature of sensemaking
belies its central role in the determination of human behavior, whether people are acting in formal organizations or elsewhere (Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005). It is worthwhile to investigate whether persons are passive or active in their
sensemaking role. The sensemaking role stakeholders have in the issue of child labour. Child labour provides one of the clearest litmus tests for self-regulation. A strict approach, such as firing child workers or terminating relationships with companies that employ them, does not necessarily change underlying causes. Previous research has underlined that severe sanctions can even worsen the children’s situation by driving them to more hazardous work in the informal sector (Basu, 1999; Kolk & van Tulder, 2002). The reduction of child labour was one of the reason to comply the Code of Conduct.
2.3 Code of Conduct
Promoting social responsibility management in standards and industrial Codes of Conduct (CoC) is expected to lead to improved competitive advantages in business and benefits to society at large (CNTAC, 2010; Sun, 2010; European Commission, 2011). Besides benefits for the society, the society requests transparency; the consumers would like to know under which conditions their garments are produced (Dubbeld & Tilstra, 2015). Transparency and ethics are two concepts frequently used in tandem in public discourse. Consequently, these concepts are frequently muddled together (Piotrowski, 2014). Unfortunately, very little research has been devoted towards discovering whether codes really are effective in promoting ethical decision-making behavior. Organizations need to know whether their CoC, which most believe to be one of the best ways to promote ethical behavior, really affect behavior at all. Research shows that corporate codes are considered to be important, though not the only instruments for addressing for example child labour. Possible negative side effects and limitations of codes are not seen as crucial factors that harm their effectiveness. To be effective, codes must be specific, strictly implemented and monitored, and combined with alternative arrangements
for under-age child workers. The importance of a supply-chain approach and attention for the host-country context is recognised and that the corporate codes of conduct are the most common means to express and implement social
responsibility (Kolk & van Tulder, 2002b). In the garment supply chains the Code of Conducts occur frequently and are mostly based on SA 8000. SA8000 was ‘one of the world's first audit-able social certification standards for decent workplaces’ and the certification relies on un-announced audits and certification by a third-party (Social Accountability International, 2013) and is widely used in developing countries and in the textile industry (Stigzelius & Mark-Herbert, 2009). Most major brands have, besides the general compliances, their own CoC which has to be signed by the factory’s CEO and must be explained and lived up to by all the
factories employees. Only, the follow up whether the compliances and codes affect the behavior are not executed very often. Cleek & Leonard (1998) stated that it seems apparent that Codes of Ethics are not powerful enough tools to affect ethical decision-making behavior and to cast doubt on the standing that Codes of Ethics have been given in the business world.Other results from the study indicate that the factors of gender, age, work status, grade level, familiarity with the term ‘Code of Ethics’, and opinion on the importance of ethics for success in an
organization did not influence decision patterns significantly. For this purpose, codes of conduct are defined as “guide-lines, recommendations and rules issued by entities within society (adopting body or actor) with the intent to affect the
behavior of (international) business entities (target) within society in order to enhance corporate responsibility” (Kolk, van Tulder & Welters, 1999: 151). In this definition, codes therefore always aim at influencing company conduct, focusing on their external, societal, usually international, behavior (Kolk & van Tulder, 2002a). So far, companies are more likely to report in terms of procedures and steps they have undertaken for dealing with suppliers, rather than reporting on the actual outcomes in terms of reductions of environmental and social impacts. This can be explained by the difficulty to secure absolute outcomes of supply chain
improvements at all the times anywhere in the world. This question is especially interesting, as supply chain management of environmental and social issues has an inherent Achilles point: the element of control is highly complex and it can be extremely challenging to ensure that all hundreds of suppliers, potential sub-contractors and suppliers in the 2nd and 3rd tier of the supply chain follow the focal organisation's Code of Conduct or sustainability policy. On the other hand, some companies are under pressure from stakeholders to improve the performance in their chains and if knowledge of environmental and social violations becomes public, companies that have been working with their suppliers appear in a better light, than those who have not worked with these issues at all. But whether this could be counted as success remains to be seen (Kogg & Mont, 2012). Therefor there must be a focus on how the codes of conducts are implemented and monitored by audit institutions and by the stakeholders.
2.4 Stakeholders
Building on Milton Friedman’s longstanding dictum that “there is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits” (1982: 133). Freeman’s classical definition of a stakeholder is “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” (1984: 46). Freeman also stated; “the goal of any company is or should be the flourishing of the company and all its principal stakeholders” (1999: 471). Additionally, Jensen (2002) insists that
stakeholder theory conflicts with 200 years of economic theory and research, which espouses the doctrine that social well-being is maximized when shareholder wealth is maximized. It is worthwhile to examine whether the stakeholders; the brands and the factories, in the garment supply chain aim for wealth maximization, or that there main aim is of another character. Or whether there is a cohesion between social well-being and wealth maximization. Stakeholder theory has attracted attention from researchers sympathizing with a myriad of different
theories, both complementary and competitive. Stakeholder theory is also controversial because it questions the conventional assumptions that pursuit of profits is the preeminent management concern, which Jensen (2002: 237) calls the “single-valued objective” of a corporation. Yet it is also important because it seeks to address the often overlooked sociological question of how organizations affect society (Hinings & Greenwood, 2003; Stern & Barley, 1995). This research will explore how the garment supply chain is affected by the stakeholders; the brands and the factories.
Another interesting and underdeveloped possibility for stakeholder theory research is to elaborate on the dimension of stakeholder emotion. Emotion is an very
important reinforcement in the research area, and must be included in the research. Previous research suggests that positive emotions build individuals’ personal resources (Fredrickson, 1998) and expand their cognitive thought processes (Fredrickson, 2003). Thereby, Weick (1995) emphasises the role of emotions in the sensemaking process. Emotions are involved in both the
commencement and outcome of sensemaking; “the reality of flows becomes most apparent when that flow is interrupted. An interruption to a flow typically induces an emotional response, which then paves the way for emotion to influence
sensemaking. It is precisely because ongoing flows are subject to interruption that sensemaking is infused with feeling’’ (Weick, 1995: 45). When individuals feel that they can trust each other, they are more willing to take risks in relationships (Edmondson, 1999). Trust can be gained when both stakeholders are transparent in their actions and communication. For instance, it appears reasonable to argue that employees may be more energized working for firms that have a purpose that goes beyond maximizing shareholder wealth (Laplume, Sonpar & Litz, 2008).
Besides the brands and the factories as stakeholder in the garment supply chain, there are two other important stakeholders. Two other stakeholders in the garment supply chain which are of great importance are the consumers and
nongovernmental organizations (NGO’s). NGO’s could also take a larger and more collaborative role by working with factory owners to improve labor conditions, rather than policing the supply chain through frequent auditing. Nike Inc. picked up on this idea, saying it is ‘evolving its mindset and its field operations away from a compliance auditing model towards a coaching model for factory partners
focusing on continuing improvement in sustainability.’ (Tripleundit).
The consumers are of importance and attention must be given to their behavior, as they make the decision to buy the garments the brands sell, which the factories have produced. Consumer behavior involves individuals’ selecting, purchasing, using and disposing of products to satisfy their needs (Solomon & Rabolt, 2009). Due to the adverse environmental impacts of the present clothing consumption behavior, there is a rising concern on sustainability issues on the consumption side of the fashion supply chain (Fineman, 2001; Jackson, 2004; Birtwistle & Moore, 2007; Carter & Rogers, 2008; Niinimäki, 2010). Although fashion consumers have a positive attitude toward environmental protection, they rarely apply such attitude into eco-fashion consumption (Solomon & Rabolt, 2004; Niinimäki, 2010). Recent studies revealed that fashion consumers’ sustainable consumption decision is highly complicated (Niinimäki, 2010). Furthermore, fashion consumers are less likely to purchase eco-fashion despite their positive attitude toward environmental protection (Joergens, 2006; Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011). There is an attitude-behavior gap of fashion consumers’ environmental protection interest and ethical consumption (Niinimäki, 2010). This attitude-behavior gap can be narrowed with the help from NGO’s. NGO’s can be defined as social, cultural, legal, and
environmental advocacy and/or operational groups that have goals that are primarily non-commercial. The rise of NGO’s as relevant players, in addition to private and public sector actors, has been seen as one of the most significant processes related to the global environmental and social challenges of today (Kourula & Laasonen, 2010). In terms of terminology, it can be stated that nongovernmental organisation is clearly the most commonly used term, although
many other terms are also utilized. In articles where the relationship between an NGO and business is seen as adversarial, the terminology used is more varied: anti- market environmentalists, pressure groups, and activists (Kourula & Laasonen, 2010). Besides the NGO’s as relevant stakeholder to challenge the environmental and social challenges of today, the other stakeholders in the garment supply chain, for example the raw material suppliers, the fabric mills and the transport
companies must make their contribution as well and they have to collaborate with the other stakeholders in the chain. Collaboration in supply chains refers to the information sharing (Dabas & Sternquist, 2012), joint decision making and benefit sharing between two or more supply chain members in order to improve
profitability and satisfy the customer needs (Simatupang & Sridharan, 2002).
Furthermore, it is also worthwhile to shed light on the presence of the stakeholder group government in the garment supply chain. Since many European and American buyers place orders directly to China and the S. Eastern Asian countries for low-cost production, the government could set up an independent regional compliance organization to monitor, execute, consult and certify enterprises. The government could additionally liaise with trade departments overseas to get recognition for the compliance certificate (Tam, Chan, Chu, Lai & Wang, 2005). Strengthen the
manpower development. It is suggested that the employers should consider development of their human resources programmes in addition to continuous education (Berger & Lester, 1997). This would assist the industry in the matter of maintaining an educated workforce and sustain the growth of enterprises to improve the industry. The government should offer a continuous education fund to both employees and employers in order to encourage continuous education for the industries. In addition, it should educate the employers about the benefits to be derived from the continuous education programmes and reinforce the point that they should perceive such programmes as a long-term investment (Tam, Chan, Chu, Lai & Wang, 2005). Closely working with the government is the International Labour Organization (ILO). The ILO is a specialised agency of the United Nations, with 185
member States and an unique tripartite structure providing a platform to advance decent work for women and men through the promotion of rights at work, decent employment opportunities, enhanced social protection and strengthened dialogue on work-related issues. The Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning
Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration) was adopted by governments, workers’ and employers’ representatives and comprises
recommendations addressed to enterprises, governments, and employers’ and workers’ organisations. Its principles are based on international labour standards and cover the areas of general policies, employment, training, conditions of work and life, and industrial relations. The rationale behind the tripartite structure is the creation of free and open debate among governments and social partners. Underlying the ILO’s work is the importance of cooperation between governments and employers’ and workers’ organizations in fostering social and economic progress (ILO).
2.5 Identity
People have multiple identities—based on attributes such as organizational
membership, profession, gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality, and family role(s)— and that these multiple identities shape people’s actions in organizations
(Ramarajan, 2014). Identities also carry deep affective components, such as self-esteem (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992; Vignoles, Regalia, Manzi, Golledge & Scabini, 2006). Other components in identity are pride and shame (Britt & Heise, 2000; Goffman, 1963; Tangney, Miller, Flicker & Barlow, 1996). The assumption is that pride and shame are attributes, which are rooted in the culture of the employees of the Far East factories. Shame is defined as a “self-conscious emotion evoked by self-reflection and self-evaluation” in the context of perceived or real negative judgment from others (Tangney, Stuewig & Mashek, 2007: 347). It is described as “a particularly intense, and often incapacitating, negative emotion involving feelings of inferiority, powerlessness and self-consciousness, along with the desire to
conceal deficiencies” (Andrews, Qian & Valentine, 2002: 29). Shame is an important emotion in Confucian-based societies, like China, where shame is not merely an emotion, but valued as “a human capacity that directs the person inward for self-examination and motivates the person toward socially and morally desirable change” (Li, Wang & Fischer, 2004: 769). These two attributes, pride and shame, must not be underestimated, they play a significant role during the
decision-making process. Decision-making is a balancing act, the lines one draws between right and wrong (Anteby, 2010; Ashmore, Deaux & McLaughlin-Volpe, 2004; Mead, 1934; Phinney, 1990). The factories and the brands identify behavior in different ways based on the culture and back ground. A different definition of what is right and what is wrong in relation to practices in the factory.
In the CSR domain, an organization might respond to its critics by adopting a pragmatic approach, unleashing a massive advertising campaign to build links with valued icons or showcase achievements that demonstrate conformity with social norms and expectations (Parker, 2002). Many garment brands started campaigns in order to emphasise that they strive for the reduction of the environmental impacts of the garment production processes and for the improvement of the worker’s conditions in the factories (e.g. G-star / Hema / Patagonia / PVH). In this research there will be attention for the actual steps that are made to accomplish this openness on their part of the supply chain. Do the brands in the supply chain live up to the promises made or that the behavior of the stakeholder is not in line with the statements made.
Identities provide lenses through which we make sense of the world and enable us to connect meaning and action (Alvesson, Ashcraft & Thomas, 2008; Ashforth, Harrison & Corley, 2008; Dutton & Dukerich, 1991; McAdams, 2001; Pratt, 2000; Weick, 1993, 1995). To make the connection between meaning and action a person has to adjust his or her behavior and the perceived meanings in the situation to verify all the identities simultaneously. The verification of all salient identities is
not considered to be problematic when the meanings in identity standards are independent or aligned, but when there are conflicting standards, the person has to adjudicate between them, either by changing the identity standards or
reprioritizing them (Burke & Stets, 2009). Very different, even conflicting,
identities can be at play for the two stakeholder groups. Even within a stakeholder group conflicting identity attributes can be present. Like social identity theory, identity theory also acknowledges that people have multiple identities and for the most part contends that a single identity influences behavior at a given time (Stryker & Burke, 2000). The perceived need to gain acceptance in society, especially among it stakeholders (i.e., legitimacy for its actions) leads
organizations to strive for compliance with ‘some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions’ (Suchman, 1995). The norms, values and definitions can be found in the CoC. Jones et al. (2007) argued that CSR
commitments are driven by particular, morally based stakeholder cultures, because the organizational practices (and, by extension, organizational routines) that characterize a stakeholder culture reflect ‘collectively learned behavioural
responses to problems that the organization has encountered as its members have worked together to manage complex stakeholder relationships’. Besides identity, legitimacy is another cognitive dimension. Suchman (1995: 574) published a
definitive article where he put forward one of the most widely accepted definitions of legitimacy as “the generalised perception or assumption that an entity’s actions are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions.”
The combination of the identity attributes of the two stakeholders in the garment supply chain, the transparency request from the fashion industry and the interest in the stakeholders character related to CSR sensemaking has resulted in the decision to include a theoretical framework.
2.6 Theoretical framework
In contrast to prevalent models of CSR that are content based, Basu & Palazzo (2008) propose a process model of organizational sensemaking that explain how managers think, discuss and act with respect to their key stakeholders and the world at large. The authors emphasize the potential of applying a configurational approach, whereby two elements must be studied. First, the fit between external contexts (e.g. a community’s past experience), which tap into managers’ inherent CSR sensitivities, and the firm’s ‘CSR character’, the latter also being path
dependent. Second, the impact of such a fit on business performance; recognizing the continued importance of external fit, they agree that internal fit between CSR and prevailing business practices may produce variable financial returns to
investments in CSR. Finally, the article provides a menu of options for senior executives seeking to match prevailing business routines with their CSR activities. It offers a framework for them to identify different patterns of adding CSR
initiatives to extant business activities (Yuan, Bao & Verbeke, 2011). An additional insight from Basu & Palazzo (2008); there are three fundamental lines of CSR enquiry prevalent in the academic literature, while not mutually exclusive, they might be characterised as stakeholder driven, performance driven and motivation driven. In the first line, stakeholder driven, CSR is viewed as a response to the specific demands of largely external stakeholders, with regard to a firm’s
operations, or with regard to generalised social concerns such as poverty reduction (Jenkins, 2005). The task poverty reduction accompanied by no exploitation of child labour is very much at hand in the garment industry and mentioned in all Code of Conducts. Other often mentioned principles in Code of Conducts are health and safety in the workplace, freedom of association, no discrimination,
environmental protection and legal requirements. The second line is performance driven; emphasises the link between external expectations and a firm’s concrete CSR actions, focusing on measuring the effectiveness of such actions (Wood, 1991) as well as determining which activities might be best suited to deliver the requisite
performance. The performances are monitored by audit institutions. Factories must be audited and homologated by the brands before productions can take place. The audit frequently follows the Social Accountability 8000 (or SA 8000) standards (Appendix). SA 8000 has been developed based in the convention of the
International Labour Organization (ILO), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the Unites Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child. Last and third fundamental line of CSR enquiry prevalent is motivation driven. Motivation driven; examines either the extrinsic reasons for a firm’s CSR engagement such as
enhancing corporate reputation (Fombrun, 2005). Reputation is one of the most valued property in the garment industry. Another valued property is generating customer loyalty (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2001 and 2004).
The combination of both organisational and societal welfare with the three fundamental drives of CSR enquiry prevalent and the seven proposed process dimensions have so far not been extensively highlighted for the practices of the stakeholders in the garment supply chain. This research could be of value for the whole garment supply chain. The outcome of this research will present the understanding of the CSR topic of the two stakeholder groups, what the
motivations are to adopt CSR practices and what the status is of the current CSR performances.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research design
This qualitative explorative embedded single case study aims to find out how stakeholders in different parts of the garment supply chain make sense of
Corporate Social Responsibility. An embedded case study is a case study containing more than one sub-unit of analysis (Yin, 2003). A case study research methodology relies on multiple sources of evidence to add breadth and depth to data collection, to assist in bringing a richness of data together in an apex of understanding through triangulation, and to contribute to the validity of the research (Yin, 2003). The unique strength of this triangulate approach is the ability to combine a variety of information sources including documentation from brands and factories, meeting notes and interviews.
Research on this topic is important because CSR behaviour in the garment supply chain has a great impact on the world’s environment and labor’s welfare. Thereby the end consumers are asking for more transparency in the chain; they would like to know where their garments are made and under which conditions (Dubbeld & Tilstra, 2015). In 2004 Boyd, Spekman & Werhane already stated that transparency and open / honest communication flows are essential to the process. Nowadays more brands have links to video’s from different parts in the supply chain on their website (G-star / PVH) to increase the transparency in the garment supply chain.
To explore how stakeholders in a supply chain make sense of Corporate Social Responsibility, what their drivers are and which of these drivers are most
important, will therefore lead to the research question: How do stakeholders in different parts of a supply chain make sense of Corporate Social
Responsibility? For this research the specific focus is on the CSR sensemaking of the brands and the factories in the garment supply chain.The answer will come forth out of the adaption and the further development of the framework from Basu
& Palazzo (2008) CSR: Dimensions of the Sensemaking Process (Figure 1).
3.2 Sampling
In the garment supply chain there is a variety of stakeholders. The first stakeholder in the chain is the fibre or raw material supplier, followed by the fabric mill, the garment factory is a succeeding part of the chain. In the garment supply chain the closest stakeholder working to the factory is the stakeholder group the brands. Other stakeholders in the supply chain are among others; nongovernmental organizations (NGO’s), the media, the government and at the end of the supply chain the consumers. For this research the focus is two-fold. The decision to select two stakeholder groups out of the garment supply chain is based on the limited time and access possibilities. The two stakeholders who are relatively easy to access for the researcher are the garment factories and the garment brands. Another reason to focus on these two parts of the supply chain is the fact that these two stakeholders must work together to reduce the footprints and to improve CSR impact in the supply chain and on the world at large. These two stakeholders can influence and improve the CSR adaption in the other parts of the supply chain as well, as they are the centre of the supply chain and they are indirect in contact with many other stakeholders in the garment supply chain.
3.2.1 The brands
For the stakeholder group the brands, five garment brands positioned in the mid level segment have been investigated and five employees from these brands have been interviewed. The reason to select these five brands is based on the access possibilities and the fact that the brands are in different sustainability levels and have different CSR communication strategies. One of the five brands is known due to the fact that they also participate in the Strawberry Earth Fair and that this brand is rewarded for their CSR policy. Three other brands invest a lot in CSR and also communicate their efforts on their website and with special hangtags on their garments, only they still have to make improvements on the application of
sustainable materials, the reduction of their footprints and the implementation of cleaner production processes to become a sustainable brand. The last brand is in the most polluting part of the garment supply chain and this brand is also not communicating their CSR commitments. The combination of these five brands provide a representative image of the CSR sensemaking in the mid level segment. The procure teams of the garment brands often balance between price and quality, completed with delivery deadline challenges. The best prices to make profitable margins and not make any concessions on the quality or delivery to the customers. Quality can be translated in two ways. The first direction is on the actual quality of the garment, the technical workmanship and the materials used. The used
materials must not be harmful to the environment or to the workers. The second way is the quality under which circumstances the workers in the factory worked, the CSR quality. Considerations the employees of the brands make, will be made based on image, how will decisions be reviewed by consumers. And in addition the ethical considerations the procurement team makes; for their own benefit or for the best interest of the worker in the factories. Boyd, Spekman & Werhane (2004) stated that beyond having responsibility for buying goods in the ‘right quantity, at the right price, and delivered at the right time,’ procurement now is the partially responsible for stewardship of the brand. Price is important, but firms cannot afford to potentially denigrate their reputations through benign neglect of their supply bases. To achieve a richer understanding of the CSR sensemaking in this stakeholder group, besides the procure team members of the garment brands, also the CSR employees have been interviewed. The CSR employees have as main focus the empowerment of the people they work with, and to preserve the environment. To accomplish this, they perform audits and monitor the progress and
3.2.2 The factories
The second stakeholder group consists of the employees working in the factories in the Far East. The first reason to select these factories is based on the access possibilities. The decision to examine the factory in Hong Kong is based on the fact that they work mainly with European and American brands, these brands are more demanding than the local brands, which do not request any audits. The factories in Hong Kong are familiar with CSR practices. The factory in Thailand is also familiar with CSR practices, as the factory has been certified. Another reason to include this factory is based on the fact that this is a big factory producing for various countries, including Europe and America. More than half the world’s clothing retail is concentrated in North America and Europe. North America represents 25 per cent, Western Europe 27 per cent, Eastern Europe and Turkey 10 per cent, Japan and the Republic of Korea 13 per cent. The rest of the world represents 25 per cent of the total (ILO). These reasons make it interesting to examine whether the
employees of this factory also make sense of CSR and of the CSR audits which have been conducted. The last factory which has been included, is located in Vietnam. The factories in Vietnam are not as developed as the factories in Thailand or Hong Kong, therefore interesting to add to the research, to check to which extent CSR sensemaking is already present under the employees and how sensemaking can be introduced and spread. The employees of the factories in the Far East have their own set of norms and values with regard to CSR behavior, among others based on culture. In addition, the process guidance employees of the factories have motives to reduce their cost and maximize their profits. Therewithal many factories have been audited by the brands, and they must practice following the Code of Conduct they signed. Increasingly, executives need to be aware of the ways in which their corporate practices are monitored externally, as well as undertaking internal reviews that can improve performance. Companies are increasingly being
evaluated on social, as well as financial performance criteria, whether they want to be or not. So much information is available on company practices, in fact, that
its very availability in some cases may direct managers to ‘do the right thing’ (Waddock, 2000).
The locations relate differently to each other on various CSR practices and CoC responsibilities. Wages and working time are part of the CoC rules and have a direct impact on the lives of workers and the competitiveness of companies. An essential aspect of the ILO’s work is the development of international labour standards that assist governments in establishing national legislation to regulate wages and working hours, and provide employers’ and workers’ representatives with a solid legal framework for collective bargaining and other forms of negotiation (ILO). Although real average wages increased slightly in 2011 at the global level, wages in the textiles and clothing industries reportedly continue to be low. For many factory employees the salary in under living wage standard.
According to UNIDO’s Industrial Development Report 2013, global average wages in the clothing industry are 35 per cent lower and in the textiles industry are 24 per cent lower than the manufacturing industry average wage. Besides wages and working hours there are other comparisons which can be made. Comparisons between the three locations can be found in table 1 : Comparative analysis of the locations of the factories.
Table 1 : Comparative analysis of the locations of the factories
Location Bangkok (Thailand) Ho Chi Min City (Vietnam) Hong Kong
Companies (Textile
& Apparel) > 4000 6000 825
Persons working in
the sector 1.2 million 2.5 million 6266
Working hours 6 days a week 6 days a week Weekdays and Saturday
mornings
Monthly wages USD 240 USD 130 USD 800
Economy newly industrialised and
heavily export dependent, classified as a middle income country
planned en market economy, with low wages and not as
industrialised as the other two locations
service-oriented with low taxation, high degree of economic freedom
The three factories in the different locations are currently facing various challenges. The challenge can even be at the expense of a factory in another location included in this research. Therefore it is very important that the factories make sense of CSR to make sure they have a competitive advantage and can engage with the brands. During the interviews below mentioned threats the
factories in specific locations face have been mentioned, but not extensively as the this research was not focussed on this topic. Nonetheless, the threats can become more important in the future, to have an extensive picture on the threats the number of interviewees must be enlarged and relevant questions to explore this topic must be added to the interview.
Thailand’s textile and garment industry faced a fall in export to the US and EU, they set its sights on becoming a fashion hub for the ASEAN region. The industry faces challenges and in order to maintain its position in the garment industry, Thailand must cooperate with ASEAN countries for sustainability. In Thailand the minimum wages are not the key problem, the long lead times and shortage of workers is. Thailand’s younger generation is reluctant to enter labour intensive industries (just-style). While walking through the factories in the period from 7 to 16 September 2015 the researcher was aware that the average age of the workers in the Thailand factory was higher than the average age of the workers in the Lao factory. The Lao factory is a recently set up factory next to factory in Thailand to be more competitive (Laos does not have import duties and the salaries are lower than in Thailand). The workers in the Lao factory looked, and after a check with the factory director to be confirmed, are younger than the workers in the Thai factory. The doubt regarding the actual age of the Lao worker was visible on the face of the researcher. As the factory director firmly added; “no workers younger than 15 years in my factory”. Countries with no import duties like Laos are becoming more appealing for the brands. Some 20 of Thailand’s biggest garment manufactures have moved part of their operations to Myanmar (Burma) and
remaining in Thailand must upgrade their quality and product design and
innovation in order to survive (just-style). A high level of CSR sensemaking can help to accomplish this, as the brands are focussed on factories with excellent CSR results. Nevertheless, costs stay important. Due to extremely competitive wage policies, one of the lowest in the region, textile and clothing has become the largest contributor to Vietnam’s exports (qualityinspection).
Vietnam’s textile and apparel industry is growing faster than that of many of its regional competitors, and foreign companies are starting to pour money into Vietnam to take advantage of potential economic opportunities from future free trade agreements. US companies will have the chance to increase their exports of technical textiles to more consumers and businesses in Vietnam. Under this free trade agreement, Vietnam could see tariffs on textiles and garments drastically reduced. In order to take advantage of this potential tariff reduction, foreign companies must physically locate themselves in Vietnam and begin producing textiles and garments for export (qualityinspection). In recent years, traditional markets, such as the US, the EU and Japan, have rendered clothing exporters from developing countries, including ASEAN and Bangladesh, more preferential market access, which has in turn impaired the competitiveness of Hong Kong and mainland manufacturers. Along with rising labour costs, RMB appreciation and stricter
environmental regulations on the Chinese mainland, an increasing number of Hong Kong and mainland clothing manufacturers have relocated their production of lower-end and mass products to Southeast Asian countries like Bangladesh,
Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia. Their manufacturing operations on the mainland are now focused on more sophisticated and higher value-added items or urgent orders (HKTDC).
Hong Kong clothing companies are reputable for ODM (Original Design
Manufacturing) and OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) production. They are able to deliver quality clothing articles in short lead times, as foreign importers
and retailers request clothing suppliers to tighten up supply chain management to ensure the ordered merchandise reaching the store floor at the right time (HKTDC). Compared with Thailand and Vietnam, where long production lead times and higher order volumes are applicable, Hong Kong has an advantage with shorter lead times and lower minimum order quantities. The down side is that the garments made in Hong Kong are more expensive. Hong Kong's geographic boundary has never
constrained the development of the forward-looking clothing industry. The majority of clothing manufacturers have set up offshore production facilities in an attempt to reduce operation costs. Relocation of production facilities offshore has,
however, resulted in a largely steady decline in the number of clothing manufacturers in Hong Kong (HKTDC), and also in Thailand as mentioned hereinbefore.
3.2.3 Inclusion and exclusion
The criteria to include a participant out one of the two stakeholder groups into the research, has been well-considered, to have a purposeful outcome. For the
stakeholder group the factories, the participant had to be employed at the (senior) merchandise level or be a member of the management team. This is important for the understanding of the subject, the understanding level of the English language and the motives / obligations to make certain CSR choices / decisions. From the brands, a participant has been included if he or she is a (senior) product manager, (senior) buyer or a CSR manager.
3.2.4 Sample size
For qualitative research the best sample size is not well defined. It lacks concrete guidelines for estimating sample sizes (Marshall et al., 2013). However Marshall et al. (2013) do give information of what is an average number of interviews for one author. For one author the average is located in the threshold of n = 11-20. Due to the limited time and the faced shortcoming of CSR understanding of the
factories n = 5 (seven more persons have been approached, they were not willing to participate as the topic was too difficult for them) and for the brands n = 5 has been applied as well (in this stakeholder group the majority of the persons who have been approached, also imparted that their CSR acquaintance was not
sufficient to cooperate). It is expected that with this number of interviews, enough data has been gathered to reach saturation of the data. Saturation occurs when data collection ceases to reveal any new properties that are relevant to a category, where categories have become well developed and understood and relationships between categories have been verified (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). With the ten participants saturation has been experienced. The saturation in this research revealed itself by the discussed topics and illustrations during the interviews. During the interviews the same categories have been discussed, and the
participants came with the same or very comparable examples to illustrate their answers. All participants are reported anonymously in table 3.
3.3 Data collection
The data has been collected by multiple technique executions; internet sources, observations, diary notes and interviews.
Table 2 : Data Collection
Date type Period Location #
Internet sources September 2015 until January 2016 NA 32 websites Observations The factories 7 to 16 September 2015
Bangkok (Thailand), Ho Chi Min City (Vietnam), and Hong Kong
1/2 a page per interviewee (all interviewees have been observed several times during the time period) Diary notes
The factories
7 to 16 September 2015
Bangkok (Thailand), Ho Chi Min City (Vietnam), and Hong Kong
2 pages per interviewee (the diary notes have been made per interviewee on several occasions during the time period) Interviews
The factories
7 to 16 September 2015
Bangkok (Thailand), Ho Chi Min City (Vietnam), and Hong Kong
5 interviews
Interviews The brands
November and December 2015
The combination of the data collection resulted in five key topics; Corporate Social Responsible behavior, labor welfare, protection of the environment, ethical codes and audits. The data collection is qualitative in nature and has been gathered in September, October, November, and December of the year 2015. Additional website to complete the research have been visited in January 2016. The decision to
combine multiple sources of data has been made to reach triangulation.
Triangulation refers to the use of different data collection techniques within one study in order to ensure that the data are telling you what you think they are telling you (Saunders et al., 2012). This to strengthen the outcome and improve the reliability and construct validity. The base to gather the most useful data per stakeholder group will follow the dimensions and make the attempt to refine the CSR Sensemaking Process framework from Basu & Palazzo (2008) (Figure 1).
For the factories where the researcher is working with, data has been collected through direct observations, diary notes and semi structured interviews. The direct observations took place while the participants and the researcher made daily production inspection rounds in the factories in the period from 7 to 16 September 2015. During these inspection rounds in the factories the participants have been observed in their natural work setting, this to broaden the researcher’s imaging and the observations contributed to the research value. All the factories have been visited multiple times over the last two years, and the participants have been asked to participate after the observations took place, this to avoid any adapted behaviour during the interviews and to improve the reliability. There are suspicions that factories hide violations during visits. These suspicions can never be rejected completely, but to minimise any violations of CoC principles, factories are visited by employees of the brands and independent audit teams on regular base
(announced as well as unannounced), so far there have been no reports of violations. In the factories where the researcher conducted the research there is even a quality manager from the company where the researcher is working for present. The quality manager alters per location on a two weekly base.
