JJOPMperformingcompaniestend toscan environmental information morebroadlythantheircounterparts inlowperformingcompanies"(Xuetal,2003,p.382)34,52.2.1ESinSCM.DespitetheincreasingimperativetoundertakeES,fewSCMpapers consider this as a core topic (Paiva et al.,2008).Those that do, indicate a rangeofbenefits.Bymonitoring competitors'productlines,quality and costs,scanningenablesfirmstostayahead ofthecompetition (Badrietal.,2000)andprovides insights668into salestrendsand customerpreferences,supplynetwork innovations andnewdistribution channels (March and Hevner, 2007; Kristal et al., 2010).It can trigger thereconfiguration offirmsSCstorespondquicklytomarketplacechanges and managedisruption risks (Harland etal,2003)and tosafeguard uninterrupted customer service(BraunscheidelandSuresh,2009).Scanningcanmitigatetheimpactofenvironmentaluncertainty on SC performance (Srinivasan et al.,2011),and support thecreationof powerful value propositions for other chain members (Walters, 2008). Scanning ofsuppliers and their extended networks can improve supplier selection for long-termrelationships and provideaccess to othercompanies withtechnologicaland innovativeresources (ChoiandKim,2008;Koufteros etal,2012)In practice,organizationstendtoadopta fragmented and somewhatisolatedfocusontheindividualfirm(HakanssonandSnehota,2006b),despiteencouragementto"widen their sweep,"especially in inter-organizational networks (Eisingerich and Bell,2008; Neto et al,2008; Peters et al,2011).Moreover, due to increased environmentalcomplexity and uncertainty,and a greatervolume and range of external informationsources (Bengisu and Nekhili, 2006),new scanning methods are called for, especiallysince“a review of the state-of-the-art in environmental scanning does not revealany major changes in its basic methods since the1970's"(Tonn,2008,p.596).Althoughfirms are beginning to use the internet and social media to undertake SCM scanning(Abrahams et al,2012),the changes being advocated are much broader in scope.Thus,“a framework of multiple perspectives for environmental scanning"(Neugarten,2006,p.903)is needed, such that the peripheral environment is taken into accountfor thedetectionofweaksignals(Brown,2004;Rossel,2011)2.2.2ESand sustainability.Since sustainabilitymandates firms tolook tothefutureand showa concern for the long-term well-being of humanity(Tilley and Fuller,2000Voros,200la;Kelly et al,2004),it isstriking thattheES literature is relatively sparseon thetopic ofsustainability.Afew articles assertthatES is,or could be,important insustainabledevelopmentcontexts(Voros,2001b;Schlange,2009;AdemaandRoehl)2010,Asifet al,20i1),and othersmakebriefmention of its importance in organizationalpractices such as corporateplanning(Clemens,2009)orthe development of corporatesustainabilityperformance measurement systems (Searcy,201l).Finally therearea fewpaperswhichrefertothepracticeofESforsustainabilityinspecificorganizations suchasShell in Thailand (Ngamkroeckjoti and Johri, 2000),companies in developing countries(JamailandMirshak.2007).thepublicsector(Clemens,2009)andsmallfirms(Will.2008)Innoinstanceswasitpossibletofindanydetailedstudiesofenvironmentalscopeandtargetsin sustainabledevelopment contexts.Summarizing the literature review, three distinct dyadic relationships emerge.Thefirst relates to sustainability and SCM,where the importance of SSCM is confirmedthrough the many studies which have examined aspects of this. Nevertheless researchgapsremainconcerningtheneedtoadoptabroaderenvironmentaland social perspectiveof the whole SC and highlighting the need for work which takesa trulybalanced“triple-bottom-line"perspective.The second relationship involves the role and practiceofES in SC contexts.Here, the review identifies a need for new approaches and particularly
performing companies tend to scan environmental information more broadly than their counterparts in low performing companies” (Xu et al., 2003, p. 382). 2.2.1 ES in SCM. Despite the increasing imperative to undertake ES, few SCM papers consider this as a core topic (Paiva et al., 2008). Those that do, indicate a range of benefits. By monitoring competitors’ product lines, quality and costs, scanning enables firms to stay ahead of the competition (Badri et al., 2000) and provides insights into sales trends and customer preferences, supply network innovations and new distribution channels (March and Hevner, 2007; Kristal et al., 2010). It can trigger the reconfiguration of firms’ SCs to respond quickly to marketplace changes and manage disruption risks (Harland et al., 2003) and to safeguard uninterrupted customer service (Braunscheidel and Suresh, 2009). Scanning can mitigate the impact of environmental uncertainty on SC performance (Srinivasan et al., 2011), and support the creation of powerful value propositions for other chain members (Walters, 2008). Scanning of suppliers and their extended networks can improve supplier selection for long-term relationships and provide access to other companies with technological and innovative resources (Choi and Kim, 2008; Koufteros et al., 2012). In practice, organizations tend to adopt a fragmented and somewhat isolated focus on the individual firm (Hakansson and Snehota, 2006b), despite encouragement to ˚ “widen their sweep,” especially in inter-organizational networks (Eisingerich and Bell, 2008; Neto et al., 2008; Peters et al., 2011). Moreover, due to increased environmental complexity and uncertainty, and a greater volume and range of external information sources (Bengisu and Nekhili, 2006), new scanning methods are called for, especially since “a review of the state-of-the-art in environmental scanning does not reveal any major changes in its basic methods since the 1970’s” (Tonn, 2008, p. 596). Although firms are beginning to use the internet and social media to undertake SCM scanning (Abrahams et al., 2012), the changes being advocated are much broader in scope. Thus, “a framework of multiple perspectives for environmental scanning” (Neugarten, 2006, p. 903) is needed, such that the peripheral environment is taken into account for the detection of weak signals (Brown, 2004; Rossel, 2011). 2.2.2 ES and sustainability . Since sustainability mandates firms to look to the future and show a concern for the long-term well-being of humanity (Tilley and Fuller, 2000; Voros, 2001a; Kelly et al., 2004), it is striking that the ES literature is relatively sparse on the topic of sustainability. A few articles assert that ES is, or could be, important in sustainable development contexts (Voros, 2001b; Schlange, 2009; Adema and Roehl, 2010; Asif et al., 2011), and others make brief mention of its importance in organizational practices such as corporate planning (Clemens, 2009) or the development of corporate sustainability performance measurement systems (Searcy, 2011). Finally there are a few papers which refer to the practice of ES for sustainability in specific organizations such as Shell in Thailand (Ngamkroeckjoti and Johri, 2000), companies in developing countries ( Jamail and Mirshak, 2007), the public sector (Clemens, 2009) and small firms (Will, 2008). In no instances was it possible to find any detailed studies of environmental scope and targets in sustainable development contexts. Summarizing the literature review, three distinct dyadic relationships emerge. The first relates to sustainability and SCM, where the importance of SSCM is confirmed through the many studies which have examined aspects of this. Nevertheless research gaps remain concerning the need to adopt a broader environmental and social perspective of the whole SC and highlighting the need for work which takes a truly balanced “triple-bottom-line” perspective. The second relationship involves the role and practice of ES in SC contexts. Here, the review identifies a need for new approaches and particularly 668 IJOPM 34,5 Downloaded by WUHAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 03:58 25 June 2015 (PT)
those which move beyond a focus on individual firms to the wider SC.The thirdSustainablerelationship is associated with ES in sustainable development contexts. In this domainsupply chainstheliteratureissparseandcomparativelysuperficialinitsapproachInmostcasesthetreatment of ES for sustainability makes tangential referenceto its importanceor,atbest, produces brief descriptive accounts of broader foresight or scenario planningprocesseswhichincludesustainablescanning.The conclusion of this literature review is that the intersection of these three dyads669represents a significant and important research gap, ie. SCM-focussed ES approacheswhich take account of sustainable development. Earlier work, which begins toaddressthisgap,proposesaconceptual frameworkforSSC designthat incorporatesamulti-level approachtoES (Figure1)(Fabbe-Costes et al.,2011)2.3ConceptualframeworkandresearchquestionsThe framework incorporates scanning at different levels from individuals andgroups of people up to the entire societal environment. The six levels representsignificant depth and breadth of scope and are argued to be inherently inter-related(Fabbe-Costes et al,2011).Theframework is complementedby a set of targetsforeachlevel,where-inthiscontext-“targetsrefertothosetopics,subjectsorentitiesthat firms search for, and monitor, when scanning.Implicit in the theoreticaldevelopmentof theframework is a debate about themostappropriate boundaries andunits of analysisfor sustainableSCMresearchinterms of activity,timehorizonand geography orterritory.Acanning.scopeforthe-focalAbility to copefirmwithSocietal levelsustainablerequirementsSustainablescanningNetwork level=thenewfocal levelaaooChainlevelScopebreadthFirmlevelEnvironmFunctionlevel2Figure 1.A sustainablescanningframeworkSource:Fabbe-Costesetal.(2011)
those which move beyond a focus on individual firms to the wider SC. The third relationship is associated with ES in sustainable development contexts. In this domain, the literature is sparse and comparatively superficial in its approach. In most cases the treatment of ES for sustainability makes tangential reference to its importance or, at best, produces brief descriptive accounts of broader foresight or scenario planning processes which include sustainable scanning. The conclusion of this literature review is that the intersection of these three dyads represents a significant and important research gap, i.e. SCM-focussed ES approaches which take account of sustainable development. Earlier work, which begins to address this gap, proposes a conceptual framework for SSC design that incorporates a multi-level approach to ES (Figure 1) (Fabbe-Costes et al., 2011). 2.3 Conceptual framework and research questions The framework incorporates scanning at different levels from individuals and groups of people up to the entire societal environment. The six levels represent significant depth and breadth of scope and are argued to be inherently inter-related (Fabbe-Costes et al., 2011). The framework is complemented by a set of targets for each level, where – in this context – “targets” refer to those topics, subjects or entities that firms search for, and monitor, when scanning. Implicit in the theoretical development of the framework is a debate about the most appropriate boundaries and units of analysis for sustainable SCM research in terms of activity, time horizon and geography or territory. Sustainable scanning Societal level Ability to cope with sustainable requirements Scanning scope for the focal firm Network level = the new focal level Chain level Firm level Function level People level Source: Fabbe-Costes et al. (2011) Scope depth Environmental scanning Scope breadth Figure 1. A sustainable scanning framework 669 Sustainable supply chains Downloaded by WUHAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 03:58 25 June 2015 (PT)
IJOPMThe purpose of this paper is to test the conceptual framework through comparisonwith the sustainable scanning practices of firms engaged in the design or re-design of34,5theirSCsandnetworksorthatareseekingtodoso.Inparticularweproposetogatherempirical data about therealities of scanning for sustainability in SC contexts so thatthe validity and utility of the proposed framework can be assessed.To do so weproposethefollowing set of research questions (RQs).670First,concerningthesearchfor information:RQ1.How do the sustainable scanning practices used by organizations relate to thestructure of the conceptual framework (Figure1)?Second,regarding sustainablescanning targets:RQ2.Howdo thetargets thataremonitored inpractice compare tothosederivedfrom theliterature (as listed in Fabbe-Costes et al.,2011)?Third, concerning the scope of the search for information:RQ3.What is the scope ofESfor sustainability inpractice?In thenext section we outlinetheresearch design and methodologyadopted forthe investigation.3.ResearchdesignandmethodologyThe nature of the research questions argued foran exploratory approach to thefieldwork and within this, a two-stage design was adopted.First, semi-structuredinterviewswereheldwithkey informantsfroma rangeof organizationstogatherrich, in-depth qualitative data. Thereafter, a quasi-confirmatory method, involving afocus group ofexperts,considered the outcomes ofouranalysis ofthe interviewdata.This two-step approach thatfacilitates triangulation of the issues and which is similarto others used to gather rich data (e.g. Manuj and Mentzer, 2008), is described in moredetail in thefollowing paragraphs.The research was undertaken as part of a government-sponsored national researchinitiative inFrance (Predit 4, 2012)and was funded by theFrench EnvironmentandEnergyManagementAgency[]Given this context,thefocusof thefieldwork wason a single country (France).3.1Stageone:semi-structured interviewsFor this stage, we wanted diversity relating to industry sector, organizational size andactivity of participants.Furthermore, in order to gather the breadth of data required,we specifically neededto target interviewees from organizations operating atdifferentSCpoints (from upstream to downstream).Accordingly,respondents were soughtfromfirms ofvarying size,sectorand SCfunction,and fromotherstakeholderstothesustainability agenda, including institutions and associations. Sampling involveddirect targeting of professional contacts known to the researchers and, through theseusingaformofsnowballingidentifyingsecondarycontacts.Informantswithexperienceof SCM, sustainable development or scanning were sought, and - in all cases - theorganizationstowhichtheyareaffiliated areknownfortheirSCM competencies andsustainable commitment/initiatives.The unit of analysis for the study being the
The purpose of this paper is to test the conceptual framework through comparison with the sustainable scanning practices of firms engaged in the design or re-design of their SCs and networks or that are seeking to do so. In particular we propose to gather empirical data about the realities of scanning for sustainability in SC contexts so that the validity and utility of the proposed framework can be assessed. To do so we propose the following set of research questions (RQs). First, concerning the search for information: RQ1. How do the sustainable scanning practices used by organizations relate to the structure of the conceptual framework (Figure 1)? Second, regarding sustainable scanning targets: RQ2. How do the targets that are monitored in practice compare to those derived from the literature (as listed in Fabbe-Costes et al., 2011)? Third, concerning the scope of the search for information: RQ3. What is the scope of ES for sustainability in practice? In the next section we outline the research design and methodology adopted for the investigation. 3. Research design and methodology The nature of the research questions argued for an exploratory approach to the fieldwork and within this, a two-stage design was adopted. First, semi-structured interviews were held with key informants from a range of organizations to gather rich, in-depth qualitative data. Thereafter, a quasi-confirmatory method, involving a focus group of experts, considered the outcomes of our analysis of the interview data. This two-step approach that facilitates triangulation of the issues and which is similar to others used to gather rich data (e.g. Manuj and Mentzer, 2008), is described in more detail in the following paragraphs. The research was undertaken as part of a government-sponsored national research initiative in France (Predit 4, 2012) and was funded by the French Environment and Energy Management Agency[1]. Given this context, the focus of the fieldwork was on a single country (France). 3.1 Stage one: semi-structured interviews For this stage, we wanted diversity relating to industry sector, organizational size and activity of participants. Furthermore, in order to gather the breadth of data required, we specifically needed to target interviewees from organizations operating at different SC points (from upstream to downstream). Accordingly, respondents were sought from firms of varying size, sector and SC function, and from other stakeholders to the sustainability agenda, including institutions and associations. Sampling involved direct targeting of professional contacts known to the researchers and, through these using a form of snowballing, identifying secondary contacts. Informants with experience of SCM, sustainable development or scanning were sought, and – in all cases – the organizations to which they are affiliated are known for their SCM competencies and sustainable commitment/initiatives. The unit of analysis for the study being the 670 IJOPM 34,5 Downloaded by WUHAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 03:58 25 June 2015 (PT)
Sustainablerespondent's organization rather than theSC to which it belonged,informants derivedfrom multiple SCs.The role, sector, activity and organizational size of thefinal set of 45supply chainsintervieweesareshowninAppendix.The over-arching national research initiative aimed to investigate the importance oflogistics/SCM and sustainabledevelopment issuesfororganizations,andtounderstandthe various SSCM initiatives and scanning practices that are used relating to future671SSCs.The research, which is essentially exploratory, used a semi-structured interviewguidetogatherdata ona rangeof issuesassociated with theseaims.Tominimizebias inthe results, questions were open and non-leading.Specifically, it was important thatrespondents provided unprompted answersand,for this reason,we did not mentionany scanning targets or boundaries as we conducted theinterviews.The interviewslasted between one and two hours, and were conducted and audio-recorded betweenDecember 2010 and February 2011.Once“theoretical saturation"was reached (after 45interviews)the recordings were transcribed and atwo-stepcodingapproach was usedfordata analysis.In the first “open coding" step (Ellram, 1996), each significant verbatim quoterelevantto theresearch questionswas noted.Inparticular,we captured every scanningtarget for future SSCs that wasmentioned (RQ2).Thereafter,we related each target toitsappropriatelevel(s)intheSSCMframework,thuscompletinga codingtableforeachinterview (RQI).During this process, we noted those topics thatfeatured atmorethanoneframeworklevel (RQI),and wecapturedresponses thatreferred totheboundariesused to delineate/prioritize respondents'SSC scanning practices (RQ3).In ordertoensure rigor in this coding process three of the richest interview transcripts wereinitially coded independently bytworesearchers who afterwards compared resultsAsa consequence,slightadjustments weremadeto theprocess such that theanalysisof the remaining transcripts would be standardized and without bias. Once alltranscripts had been analyzed,the results were shared,and final coding was made anddouble-checked To complete the first step, the primary results and observations foreach interview were summarized, by“writing analytic notes to explicateand fill outcategories,"a crucial intermediate step close to memo-writing from grounded theory(Charmaz, 1995, p. 28).Inthesecond step,the individual codingtablesweremerged intomastertables,eachincluding a compilation of all the scanningtargets foroneof theframework's six levelsWe then lookedfor similarities,and iteratively developed a view ofemerging categoriesthat could serve as a generic guideline for scanning focus definition.Finally in thisstep, the results of coding and categorization were compared to scanning targetsidentified from the literature (Fabbe-Costes et al,2011) (RQ2)and used toexaminethescopeofrespondentsscanningpractices(RQ3).3.2 Stage two: focus groupIn this stage,during which we sought in-depth discussion and validation of the interviewresults, a focus group method was considered appropriate (Sanchez-Rodriguez et al.,20i0).ThegroupcomprisedexpertsdrawnfrommembersofaFrench"environmentand logistics"ciub which aims to develop and implement operational solutions forSSCM, and is well-known in Francefor its SSCM commitment[2]. The three-hour focusgroup, which was audio-recorded, was held in Paris on May 4, 2012 with nineparticipants representing various SCroles,includingretail,manufacture and thirdpartylogistics (seeAppendix).Followingabriefpresentationabouttheprojectand theproposed framework, we circulated the master tables from the analysis of interviews
respondent’s organization rather than the SC to which it belonged, informants derived from multiple SCs. The role, sector, activity and organizational size of the final set of 45 interviewees are shown in Appendix. The over-arching national research initiative aimed to investigate the importance of logistics/SCM and sustainable development issues for organizations, and to understand the various SSCM initiatives and scanning practices that are used relating to future SSCs. The research, which is essentially exploratory, used a semi-structured interview guide to gather data on a range of issues associated with these aims. To minimize bias in the results, questions were open and non-leading. Specifically, it was important that respondents provided unprompted answers and, for this reason, we did not mention any scanning targets or boundaries as we conducted the interviews. The interviews lasted between one and two hours, and were conducted and audio-recorded between December 2010 and February 2011. Once “theoretical saturation” was reached (after 45 interviews) the recordings were transcribed and a two-step coding approach was used for data analysis. In the first “open coding” step (Ellram, 1996), each significant verbatim quote relevant to the research questions was noted. In particular, we captured every scanning target for future SSCs that was mentioned (RQ2). Thereafter, we related each target to its appropriate level(s) in the SSCM framework, thus completing a coding table for each interview (RQ1). During this process, we noted those topics that featured at more than one framework level (RQ1), and we captured responses that referred to the boundaries used to delineate/prioritize respondents’ SSC scanning practices (RQ3). In order to ensure rigor in this coding process three of the richest interview transcripts were initially coded independently by two researchers who afterwards compared results. As a consequence, slight adjustments were made to the process such that the analysis of the remaining transcripts would be standardized and without bias. Once all transcripts had been analyzed, the results were shared, and final coding was made and double-checked. To complete the first step, the primary results and observations for each interview were summarized, by “writing analytic notes to explicate and fill out categories,” a crucial intermediate step close to memo-writing from grounded theory (Charmaz, 1995, p. 28). In the second step, the individual coding tables were merged into master tables, each including a compilation of all the scanning targets for one of the framework’s six levels. We then looked for similarities, and iteratively developed a view of emerging categories that could serve as a generic guideline for scanning focus definition. Finally in this step, the results of coding and categorization were compared to scanning targets identified from the literature (Fabbe-Costes et al., 2011) (RQ2) and used to examine the scope of respondents’ scanning practices (RQ3). 3.2 Stage two: focus group In this stage, during which we sought in-depth discussion and validation of the interview results, a focus group method was considered appropriate (Sanchez-Rodriguez et al., 2010). The group comprised experts drawn from members of a French “environment and logistics” club which aims to develop and implement operational solutions for SSCM, and is well-known in France for its SSCM commitment[2]. The three-hour focus group, which was audio-recorded, was held in Paris on May 4, 2012 with nine participants representing various SC roles, including retail, manufacture and third party logistics (see Appendix). Following a brief presentation about the project and the proposed framework, we circulated the master tables from the analysis of interviews. 671 Sustainable supply chains Downloaded by WUHAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 03:58 25 June 2015 (PT)
IJOPMReflecting the content of the second column in Table Il, these contained thecategorized lists of targets from the interviews.For each level, we asked the experts34,5independentlytoselectthethreecategoriesthattheyconsideredtobemostimportant(not necessarily those that they or their organizations actually scan), and to add anytargets that they felt were missing. The results were collated and summarized toindicate, for each scanning level, the target(s) with a majority of choices.This provided672the basis forgeneral discussion byfocus groupmembers, including consideration ofhowtheresultsmightinformtheirfuturedevelopmentof a collectivesustainablescanning approach and critical review of the relevance and utility of this particularscanningframework.Theresearch methodology adopted for this study was designed to ensure,as far aspossible, the reliability and validity of the data deriving from it.In particular, stepswere taken to ensurethat it conformed to the parallel quality criteria forqualitativeresearch in logistics deriving from interpretivist research approaches (Halldorsson andAastrup,2003).Thus, in pursuit of“truth-value"we directly targeted professionalswho had conviction that sustainability and scanning are important issues for logisticsand SCM;weused open and non-leading questions forthe semi-structuredinterviews; we continued data collection until theoretical saturation was reached andwe double-checked the final coding.Every respondent received thefinal report withresults of the research and could comment on its "credibility."To maximize"transferability,”wedeliberately sought diversity in terms of responder organizations'size,sectorand activityandweattempted toidentifybestpracticesthroughthefocusgroup.When building themaster tables with target categories, we formulated generictargets that couldfit withasmany industriesaspossible.Finally,for“trackability andexplicity,"theprocess, data sources and theories underlying the work are documented,and the interview guide and transcribed interviews are available upon request.The fieldwork results are presented according to the sequence of the researchquestions in thefollowing section, and are subsequently discussed by reference to theconceptual frameworkand theresearchquestions.4.Results4.1 RQ1RQ1 sought to understand how the sustainable scanning practices used byorganizationsrelate tothe structure of theconceptual framework.Interview dataaddressing this question is shown in Table Iand, with respondents reporting targetmonitoring at all levels,provides strong evidence of the relevance of its multi-levelarchitecture.Alargemajorityofrespondentspracticescoverseverallevels,withoverNumber of levelsCumulative%ofNumberof interviews% of interviewsconcernedinterviews(total = 45)65432101842240B9320069896.595.5TableI.4.51000100Number of levels000100mentioned in the45Total100%100%interviews
Reflecting the content of the second column in Table III, these contained the categorized lists of targets from the interviews. For each level, we asked the experts independently to select the three categories that they considered to be most important (not necessarily those that they or their organizations actually scan), and to add any targets that they felt were missing. The results were collated and summarized to indicate, for each scanning level, the target(s) with a majority of choices. This provided the basis for general discussion by focus group members, including consideration of how the results might inform their future development of a collective sustainable scanning approach and critical review of the relevance and utility of this particular scanning framework. The research methodology adopted for this study was designed to ensure, as far as possible, the reliability and validity of the data deriving from it. In particular, steps were taken to ensure that it conformed to the parallel quality criteria for qualitative research in logistics deriving from interpretivist research approaches (Halldorsson and Aastrup, 2003). Thus, in pursuit of “truth-value” we directly targeted professionals who had conviction that sustainability and scanning are important issues for logistics and SCM; we used open and non-leading questions for the semi-structured interviews; we continued data collection until theoretical saturation was reached and we double-checked the final coding. Every respondent received the final report with results of the research and could comment on its “credibility.” To maximize “transferability,” we deliberately sought diversity in terms of responder organizations’ size, sector and activity and we attempted to identify best practices through the focus group. When building the master tables with target categories, we formulated generic targets that could fit with as many industries as possible. Finally, for “trackability and explicity,” the process, data sources and theories underlying the work are documented, and the interview guide and transcribed interviews are available upon request. The fieldwork results are presented according to the sequence of the research questions in the following section, and are subsequently discussed by reference to the conceptual framework and the research questions. 4. Results 4.1 RQ1 RQ1 sought to understand how the sustainable scanning practices used by organizations relate to the structure of the conceptual framework. Interview data addressing this question is shown in Table I and, with respondents reporting target monitoring at all levels, provides strong evidence of the relevance of its multi-level architecture. A large majority of respondents’ practices cover several levels, with over Number of levels concerned Number of interviews (total ¼ 45) % of interviews Cumulative % of interviews 6 18 40 40 5 13 29 69 4 9 20 89 3 3 6.5 95.5 2 2 4.5 100 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 100 Total 45 100% 100% Table I. Number of levels mentioned in the interviews 672 IJOPM 34,5 Downloaded by WUHAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY At 03:58 25 June 2015 (PT)