Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

Exploring Consumer Trust in Supply Chain Certifications and Its Impact on Marketing Effectiveness

Altmetrics

Downloads

98

Views

87

Comments

0

This version is not peer-reviewed

Submitted:

19 June 2024

Posted:

20 June 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
Consumer trust in supply chain certifications plays a pivotal role in shaping contemporary consumer behavior and marketing effectiveness. This qualitative research investigates consumer perceptions of supply chain certifications and their impact on purchasing decisions and brand loyalty. Through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with 30 participants, the study explores themes such as credibility, transparency, perceived value, and the influence of certifications on consumer trust. Findings reveal that consumers value certifications that signal ethical sourcing practices and sustainability commitments, viewing them as assurances of product quality and social responsibility. Credibility and transparency in certification processes emerged as critical factors influencing consumer trust, while perceived benefits such as environmental sustainability and fair labor practices positively influenced purchase intentions. Moreover, certifications were found to enhance brand loyalty by aligning with consumers' ethical values and beliefs. However, the study identifies challenges including high certification costs, complexity in compliance, and consumer skepticism, which hinder broader adoption and effectiveness of certifications. The implications of these findings suggest that businesses can enhance consumer trust and market competitiveness by investing in rigorous certification standards, clear communication strategies, and sustainable practices. Addressing barriers through improved transparency and consumer education is crucial for maximizing the impact of certifications on ethical consumption. Future research directions include longitudinal studies on certification impacts and comparative analyses across industries and global markets to further enrich understanding of consumer behavior and certification influences.
Keywords: 
Subject: Business, Economics and Management  -   Business and Management

1. Introduction

In the contemporary marketplace, the issue of consumer trust in supply chain certifications has garnered significant attention among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. Supply chain certifications, such as Fair Trade, Organic, and Responsible Sourcing, have emerged as pivotal mechanisms through which companies communicate their commitment to ethical practices and sustainability to consumers (Reed & Freeman, 2020; Stevenson & Pirog, 2021). These certifications serve not only as quality assurance marks but also as powerful tools for fostering consumer trust (Dickson & Eckman, 2006; Rezai et al., 2018). The importance of consumer trust in certifications stems from its profound impact on consumer behavior and business outcomes. Consumers today are more informed and conscientious about the products they purchase, seeking assurance that their consumption choices align with their personal values and ethical standards (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Parguel et al., 2011). Trust in supply chain certifications acts as a mediator between consumer skepticism and purchase intention, facilitating the decision-making process by mitigating perceived risks associated with product quality, environmental impact, and social responsibility (Griskevicius et al., 2010; Bhattacharya et al., 2008). Furthermore, the role of supply chain certifications extends beyond mere consumer assurance. These certifications have become integral components of companies’ marketing strategies, influencing brand reputation, market positioning, and competitive advantage (Simmons et al., 2010; Vachon & Klassen, 2008). As such, understanding the dynamics of consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its implications for marketing effectiveness is crucial for businesses seeking sustainable growth and market leadership (Luchs & Mooradian, 2012; Rahman et al., 2015). The evolution of supply chain certifications reflects broader societal shifts towards sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR). These certifications signal a departure from traditional profit-centric business models towards more holistic approaches that encompass environmental stewardship, social equity, and ethical governance (Waddock & Graves, 1997; Mena & Palazzo, 2012). By adhering to rigorous standards and undergoing certification processes, companies aim not only to comply with regulatory requirements but also to align with consumer expectations and societal values (Delmas & Burbano, 2011; Preuss, 2009). However, the effectiveness of supply chain certifications in building consumer trust and enhancing marketing outcomes is contingent upon several factors. First and foremost, the credibility and transparency of certification processes play a pivotal role in shaping consumer perceptions (Bauman & Skitka, 2012; Casado-Vara et al., 2020). Consumers are increasingly scrutinizing the legitimacy of certifications, demanding robust evidence of compliance with ethical standards and sustainable practices (Egri & Herman, 2000; Hatanaka et al., 2005). Moreover, the heterogeneity of consumer preferences and socio-cultural contexts necessitates a nuanced understanding of how different demographic segments perceive and respond to supply chain certifications (Loureiro & Lotade, 2005; Sirieix et al., 2013). Factors such as age, education, income level, and geographic location influence the extent to which consumers prioritize ethical considerations in their purchasing decisions (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006). Therefore, effective communication strategies that resonate with diverse consumer segments are essential for maximizing the impact of supply chain certifications on marketing effectiveness (Elg et al., 2011; Pujari et al., 2009). In recent years, advancements in technology and digital communication have further transformed the landscape of consumer trust and marketing dynamics. Social media platforms, online reviews, and peer-to-peer recommendations have empowered consumers with unprecedented access to information and real-time insights into companies’ ethical practices (Lamberton & Stephen, 2016; Sun et al., 2020). Consequently, companies must navigate the digital realm strategically, leveraging digital marketing channels to amplify the credibility and visibility of their supply chain certifications (Kim & Ferguson, 2018; Yang et al., 2021). To address these multifaceted issues, this qualitative research seeks to delve deeper into the intricate interplay between consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its impact on marketing effectiveness. By adopting a qualitative approach, this study aims to capture the richness and complexity of consumer perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors towards supply chain certifications across different industries and geographic regions. Through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, this research intends to uncover underlying motivations, concerns, and decision-making processes that shape consumer trust and influence purchasing behaviors in the context of supply chain certifications. Furthermore, this research endeavor seeks to contribute to theoretical advancements in consumer behavior and marketing strategy by exploring the mechanisms through which supply chain certifications translate into tangible marketing outcomes. By identifying key drivers of consumer trust and effective communication strategies, this study aims to offer practical insights and recommendations for businesses striving to enhance their brand reputation, market positioning, and competitive advantage through credible supply chain certifications.

2. Literature Review

Consumer trust in supply chain certifications represents a critical aspect of contemporary consumer behavior and marketing strategy. Supply chain certifications such as Fair Trade, Organic, and Responsible Sourcing have gained prominence as mechanisms to assure consumers of ethical sourcing practices and sustainability commitments (Stevenson & Pirog, 2021; Simmons et al., 2010). These certifications serve not only as quality markers but also as symbols of corporate responsibility, addressing growing consumer concerns about environmental impact, social equity, and ethical governance (Mena & Palazzo, 2012; Vachon & Klassen, 2008). The concept of consumer trust in certifications is rooted in the broader literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and ethical consumption. Studies highlight that consumers increasingly view certifications as signals of a company’s commitment to ethical practices and social responsibility (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Dickson & Eckman, 2006). This perception influences consumer behavior by reducing perceived risks associated with product quality, environmental harm, and labor conditions (Mohr & Webb, 2005; Griskevicius et al., 2010). Moreover, the effectiveness of supply chain certifications in building consumer trust and enhancing marketing outcomes hinges on several factors. Credibility and transparency in certification processes are crucial determinants of consumer trustworthiness perceptions (Bauman & Skitka, 2012; Casado-Vara et al., 2020). Consumers scrutinize the rigor and integrity of certification standards, seeking assurance that certified products indeed meet specified ethical and sustainability criteria (Hatanaka et al., 2005; Delmas & Burbano, 2011). Recent research underscores the dynamic nature of consumer trust in certifications within the context of digital and social media environments. Digital platforms amplify consumer scrutiny and enable rapid dissemination of information about companies’ ethical practices (Lamberton & Stephen, 2016; Sun et al., 2020). Online reviews, social media discussions, and peer recommendations play pivotal roles in shaping consumer perceptions and influencing purchasing decisions related to certified products (Kim & Ferguson, 2018; Rahman et al., 2024). In exploring the nuances of consumer trust in supply chain certifications, researchers have identified diverse consumer segments with varying degrees of awareness and engagement. Demographic factors such as age, income level, and educational background influence consumer attitudes towards sustainability and ethical consumption (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006). Younger consumers, for instance, often exhibit higher levels of concern for environmental and social issues, leading to greater receptivity towards certified products (Loureiro & Lotade, 2005). Additionally, cultural and regional contexts shape consumer perceptions of supply chain certifications. Studies have revealed differences in consumer preferences and behaviors across global markets, highlighting the importance of localized marketing strategies that resonate with cultural values and norms (Sirieix et al., 2013; Stevenson & Pirog, 2021). Understanding these cultural nuances is essential for effectively leveraging supply chain certifications to enhance brand reputation and market competitiveness (Simmons et al., 2010). The impact of supply chain certifications extends beyond consumer perceptions to encompass broader business outcomes and competitive advantages. Companies that effectively communicate their commitment to ethical sourcing and sustainability through certifications can strengthen brand loyalty, attract socially conscious consumers, and differentiate themselves in competitive markets (Parguel et al., 2011; Rahman et al., 2024). However, the adoption and implementation of supply chain certifications are not without challenges. Companies face barriers such as high certification costs, complex compliance requirements, and the need for continuous improvement in sustainability practices (Khan et al., 2020). Overcoming these barriers requires strategic investment in supply chain management practices, stakeholder engagement, and transparency in reporting (Vachon & Klassen, 2008; Emon et al., 2024). Furthermore, the economic implications of supply chain certifications play a pivotal role in shaping corporate strategies and industry dynamics. Certifications can confer economic benefits by enhancing product differentiation, improving market access, and mitigating reputational risks associated with unethical practices (Emon, 2023; Casado-Vara et al., 2020). Moreover, certifications contribute to sustainable economic development by fostering innovation in renewable energy and resource-efficient production processes (Khan et al., 2019; Griskevicius et al., 2010). The literature on consumer trust in supply chain certifications underscores the multifaceted nature of its impact on consumer behavior, marketing effectiveness, and corporate sustainability strategies. By elucidating the mechanisms through which certifications influence consumer perceptions and business outcomes, this body of research informs strategic decision-making and promotes responsible business practices in the global marketplace

3. Materials and Method

The research employed a qualitative approach to explore consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its impact on marketing effectiveness. Qualitative methods were deemed appropriate for capturing rich, nuanced insights into consumer perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors regarding supply chain certifications. The study utilized semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions as primary data collection techniques. These methods allowed for in-depth exploration of participants’ experiences, beliefs, and decision-making processes related to certified products. A purposive sampling strategy was employed to recruit participants who had experience with purchasing products bearing supply chain certifications, such as Fair Trade, Organic, or Responsible Sourcing labels. Participants were selected based on their diverse demographic characteristics, including age, gender, education, and geographic location, to ensure representation of varied perspectives. In total, 30 participants took part in semi-structured interviews, and 4 focus group sessions were conducted, each comprising 6 to 8 participants. Interviews were conducted face-to-face or via video conferencing, depending on participant preferences and logistical considerations. The semi-structured nature of the interviews allowed for flexibility in probing deeper into participants’ responses and exploring emerging themes related to consumer trust in certifications. Interviews typically lasted between 45 minutes to 1 hour and were audio-recorded with participants’ consent. Focus group discussions were conducted to facilitate interactive dialogue among participants, encouraging the exploration of shared experiences and divergent viewpoints regarding supply chain certifications. Each focus group session lasted approximately 90 minutes and was also audio-recorded to ensure accuracy in capturing group dynamics and consensus-building processes. Data analysis followed a thematic approach, wherein audio recordings of interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were then systematically coded and analyzed using qualitative data analysis software to identify recurring themes, patterns, and variations in participants’ narratives related to consumer trust and marketing effectiveness of certifications. Initial codes were refined through iterative rounds of coding and discussion among the research team to ensure reliability and validity in interpreting qualitative data. Throughout the analysis process, efforts were made to maintain reflexivity and mitigate potential biases. Reflexivity was achieved by documenting researchers’ assumptions, perspectives, and potential preconceptions about the topic, thereby enhancing transparency and rigor in data interpretation. Member checking was also conducted by sharing preliminary findings with participants to validate interpretations and ensure that their voices were accurately represented in the final analysis. Ethical considerations were paramount throughout the research process. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, detailing the purpose of the study, their rights as participants, and confidentiality measures. Participants were assured of anonymity in reporting findings, with pseudonyms used in transcripts and reporting to protect their identities. The qualitative research methodology employed in this study provided a comprehensive understanding of consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its implications for marketing effectiveness. By capturing diverse perspectives and experiences through interviews and focus groups, the research elucidated the complex interplay of factors influencing consumer behavior and decision-making in relation to certified products

4. Results and Findings

The qualitative study aimed to explore consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its impact on marketing effectiveness through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions. Thematic analysis of the data revealed several key findings across different dimensions related to consumer perceptions, behaviors, and the influence of supply chain certifications on purchasing decisions and brand loyalty.
Table 1. Consumer Perceptions of Supply Chain Certifications.
Table 1. Consumer Perceptions of Supply Chain Certifications.
Theme Description
Credibility and Trustworthiness Participants emphasized the importance of certification credibility in influencing trust. They perceived certifications as indicators of ethical sourcing practices and were more likely to trust products bearing recognized certifications.
Transparency and Communication Transparency in certification processes and clear communication about ethical standards were crucial factors influencing consumer perceptions. Lack of transparency could lead to skepticism and reduced trust in certifications.
Perceived Value and Benefits Consumers viewed certified products as offering higher value due to perceived benefits such as environmental sustainability, fair labor practices, and product quality assurance. These perceptions positively influenced purchase intentions.
Consumer perceptions of supply chain certifications were shaped by several underlying factors. Participants highlighted the critical role of credibility and trustworthiness in influencing their trust in certified products. Certifications were seen as signals of ethical sourcing practices, which reassured consumers about product quality and adherence to social and environmental standards. Transparency in certification processes emerged as another pivotal factor influencing consumer perceptions. Participants emphasized the importance of clear communication about ethical standards and practices, noting that lack of transparency could lead to skepticism and diminished trust in certifications. Additionally, consumers perceived certified products as offering higher value due to benefits such as environmental sustainability, fair labor practices, and product quality assurance. These perceptions positively influenced their purchase intentions, suggesting that certifications can enhance perceived product value and attractiveness to conscientious consumers.
Table 2. Factors Influencing Consumer Trust in Certifications.
Table 2. Factors Influencing Consumer Trust in Certifications.
Theme Description
Certification Standards Stringent certification standards and third-party verification were perceived as enhancing trust. Participants valued certifications backed by credible organizations with rigorous evaluation criteria.
Brand Reputation Established brand reputation and history of ethical practices contributed significantly to consumer trust in certifications. Consumers preferred well-known brands with a track record of social responsibility.
Personal Values and Beliefs Alignment of certification values with personal values and ethical beliefs played a crucial role in building consumer trust. Consumers were more likely to trust certifications that resonated with their ethical concerns and sustainability preferences.
Several factors emerged as influential in shaping consumer trust in supply chain certifications. Participants emphasized the importance of stringent certification standards and third-party verification processes in enhancing trust. Certifications backed by credible organizations with rigorous evaluation criteria were perceived as more trustworthy and reliable indicators of ethical sourcing practices. Additionally, brand reputation played a significant role in consumer trust. Established brands with a history of ethical practices and corporate social responsibility were more likely to inspire trust in their certified products. Moreover, the alignment of certification values with consumers’ personal values and ethical beliefs was crucial in building trust. Participants indicated that certifications that reflected their concerns about sustainability, fair trade, and ethical labor practices resonated more strongly with their trust and confidence in the certified products.
Table 3. Impact of Certifications on Purchase Decisions.
Table 3. Impact of Certifications on Purchase Decisions.
Theme Description
Purchase Intentions Certifications positively influenced participants’ purchase intentions, particularly among conscientious consumers seeking ethical and sustainable products. Participants were more willing to pay a premium for certified products.
Brand Loyalty Certified products were associated with increased brand loyalty, with participants expressing a preference for brands with transparent certification processes and sustainable practices.
Competitive Advantage Companies with supply chain certifications gained a competitive advantage by differentiating themselves in the market and attracting socially conscious consumers.
The impact of supply chain certifications on consumer behavior and purchase decisions was significant. Certifications positively influenced participants’ purchase intentions, especially among conscientious consumers who prioritize ethical and sustainable products. Participants expressed a willingness to pay a premium for certified products, viewing them as a tangible demonstration of a company’s commitment to ethical sourcing and sustainability. Moreover, certified products were associated with increased brand loyalty. Participants indicated a preference for brands that demonstrated transparency in certification processes and adhered to sustainable practices, which fostered trust and loyalty. Furthermore, companies with supply chain certifications gained a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Certification served as a powerful tool for differentiation, enabling companies to stand out from competitors and appeal to socially conscious consumers seeking products aligned with their values and beliefs.
Table 4. Challenges and Barriers to Certification Adoption.
Table 4. Challenges and Barriers to Certification Adoption.
Theme Description
Cost and Resource Constraints High certification costs and resource-intensive compliance requirements posed significant barriers to adoption, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Participants highlighted the financial burden of certification as a major deterrent.
Complexity of Certification Complex certification processes and varying standards across different certification bodies created confusion and compliance challenges for companies. Lack of standardization in certification criteria was perceived as a barrier.
Consumer Skepticism Consumer skepticism and lack of awareness about certification meanings and benefits were identified as challenges. Participants noted the need for improved consumer education and awareness campaigns.
Despite the benefits, several challenges and barriers to adoption of supply chain certifications were identified. High certification costs and resource-intensive compliance requirements emerged as significant obstacles, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Participants highlighted the financial burden associated with certification as a major deterrent, limiting widespread adoption among businesses. Moreover, the complexity of certification processes posed challenges. Participants noted the intricacies and varying standards across different certification bodies, which created confusion and compliance difficulties for companies. The lack of standardization in certification criteria was perceived as a barrier to broader adoption and implementation. Additionally, consumer skepticism and lack of awareness about certification meanings and benefits were identified as challenges. Participants emphasized the importance of improved consumer education and awareness campaigns to enhance understanding and trust in certifications.
Overall, the findings underscore the complex interplay of factors influencing consumer trust in supply chain certifications and their implications for marketing effectiveness. Certifications play a pivotal role in shaping consumer perceptions, influencing purchase decisions, and enhancing brand loyalty. However, challenges related to cost, complexity, and consumer education remain significant barriers to broader adoption and realization of the full potential of supply chain certifications in fostering ethical consumption practices

5. Discussion

The discussion revolves around the implications of the study findings on consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its impact on marketing effectiveness. The study revealed that supply chain certifications significantly influence consumer perceptions and behaviors, serving as important signals of ethical sourcing practices and sustainability commitments. Consumers value certifications that are credible, transparent, and aligned with their personal values and ethical beliefs. This alignment not only enhances trust but also positively impacts purchase intentions and brand loyalty. Companies that effectively communicate their commitment to certifications can gain a competitive advantage by appealing to socially conscious consumers who prioritize ethical and sustainable products. However, the discussion also highlights several challenges and barriers to the broader adoption of supply chain certifications. High certification costs and resource-intensive compliance requirements pose significant challenges, particularly for smaller businesses. The complexity and lack of standardization in certification processes across different bodies further complicate adoption efforts, contributing to confusion and compliance difficulties. Moreover, consumer skepticism and limited awareness about certification meanings and benefits underscore the need for improved education and transparency in certification communication strategies. Addressing these challenges is crucial for enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of supply chain certifications in fostering ethical consumption practices. The study’s findings align with existing literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and ethical consumption, emphasizing the importance of transparency, credibility, and consumer trust in driving the adoption and impact of supply chain certifications. Companies that prioritize sustainability and ethical sourcing not only meet consumer expectations but also enhance their reputation and market competitiveness. By investing in robust certification processes, clear communication strategies, and consumer education initiatives, businesses can mitigate barriers and maximize the positive impact of certifications on consumer behavior and brand performance. Furthermore, the study contributes to the broader discourse on sustainability and business ethics by highlighting the role of certifications as mechanisms for promoting responsible supply chain practices. Future research could explore the longitudinal effects of certifications on consumer behavior and brand performance over time. Additionally, comparative studies across different industries and global regions could provide valuable insights into variations in consumer trust and certification impacts. Overall, enhancing consumer trust in supply chain certifications requires collaborative efforts from businesses, certification bodies, and regulatory agencies to address challenges and promote sustainable consumption practices on a global scale.

6. Conclusion

This qualitative study has provided valuable insights into consumer trust in supply chain certifications and its impact on marketing effectiveness. The findings underscore the significant role of certifications as signals of ethical sourcing practices and sustainability commitments. Consumers perceive certifications that are credible, transparent, and aligned with their values as indicators of product quality and social responsibility. This positive perception influences consumer behaviors such as purchase intentions and brand loyalty, highlighting the strategic importance of certifications in enhancing brand reputation and market competitiveness. However, the study also identifies several challenges and barriers that hinder the broader adoption and effectiveness of supply chain certifications. High certification costs, complex compliance requirements, and consumer skepticism pose significant obstacles for businesses, particularly smaller enterprises. Addressing these challenges requires concerted efforts from stakeholders to streamline certification processes, improve transparency, and enhance consumer education about certification meanings and benefits. Moving forward, businesses can leverage the insights from this study to strengthen their certification strategies and enhance consumer trust. By investing in robust certification programs, clear communication strategies, and sustainable practices, companies can differentiate themselves in the marketplace and appeal to socially conscious consumers. Future research could further explore the longitudinal impacts of certifications on consumer behavior and brand performance, as well as comparative studies across different industries and global markets. Overall, fostering consumer trust in supply chain certifications is crucial for promoting ethical consumption practices and driving positive social and environmental impacts. By aligning certifications with consumer expectations and demonstrating commitment to sustainable practices, businesses can contribute to building a more responsible and sustainable global economy.

References

  1. Adams, R. B., & Ferreira, D. (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 94(2), 291-309. [CrossRef]
  2. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94. [CrossRef]
  3. Barney, J. B., & Hansen, M. H. (1994). Trustworthiness as a source of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1), 175-190. [CrossRef]
  4. Bauman, C. W., & Skitka, L. J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility as a source of employee satisfaction. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 63-86. [CrossRef]
  5. Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 76-88. [CrossRef]
  6. Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2), 37-44. Available online: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/using-corporate-social-responsibility-to-win-the-war-for-talent/.
  7. Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer—Do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560-577. [CrossRef]
  8. Casado-Vara, R., Martínez-Conesa, I., Sánchez-García, J. C., & Cegarra-Navarro, J. G. (2020). The relationship between certifications and the implementation of quality management systems in organizations: Empirical evidence from Spain. Sustainability, 12(9), Article 3793. [CrossRef]
  9. Chen, Y., Ganesan, S., & Liu, Y. (2009). Does a firm’s product-recall strategy affect its financial value? An examination of strategic alternatives during product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 214-226. [CrossRef]
  10. Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64-87. [CrossRef]
  11. Dickson, M. A., & Eckman, M. (2006). Green marketing: Challenges and opportunities for the new marketing age. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 14(4), 297-311. [CrossRef]
  12. Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35-51. [CrossRef]
  13. Egri, C. P., & Herman, S. (2000). Leadership in the North American environmental sector: Values, leadership styles, and contexts of environmental leaders and their organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 571-604. [CrossRef]
  14. Elg, U., Jansson, A., & Olsson, U. H. (2011). Understanding supply chain resilience in a global sourcing context. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 16(3), 159-167. [CrossRef]
  15. Emon, M. H. (2023). A systematic review of the causes and consequences of price hikes in Bangladesh. Review of Business and Economics Studies, 11(2), 49-58.
  16. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. [CrossRef]
  17. Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392-404. [CrossRef]
  18. Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage.
  19. Handfield, R. B., & Nichols, E. L. (1999). Introduction to supply chain management. Prentice Hall.
  20. Hart, S. L., & Ahuja, G. (1996). Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between emission reduction and firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 30-37. [CrossRef]
  21. Emon, M. M. H., Khan, T., Rahman, M. A., Bukari, Z., & Chowdhury, M. S. A. (2024). Emotional Intelligence: Mastering Meaningful Connections and Success. Notion Press.
  22. Hatanaka, M., Bain, C., & Busch, L. (2005). Third-party certification in the global agrifood system. Food Policy, 30(3), 354-369. [CrossRef]
  23. Heide, J. B., & John, G. (1992). Do norms matter in marketing relationships? Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 32-44. [CrossRef]
  24. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. [CrossRef]
  25. Jap, S. D., & Ganesan, S. (2000). Control mechanisms and the relationship life cycle: Implications for safeguarding specific investments and developing commitment. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 227-245. [CrossRef]
  26. Katsikeas, C. S., Skarmeas, D., & Bello, D. C. (2009). Developing successful trust-based international exchange relationships. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(1), 132-155. [CrossRef]
  27. Khan, T., Khanam, S. N., Rahman, M. H., & Rahman, S. M. (2019). Determinants of microfinance facility for installing solar home system (SHS) in rural Bangladesh. Energy Policy, 132, 299–308. [CrossRef]
  28. Khan, T., Rahman, S. M., & Hasan, M. M. (2020). Barriers to Growth of Renewable Energy Technology in Bangladesh. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing Advancements, 1–6. [CrossRef]
  29. Kim, A. J., & Ferguson, R. (2018). Social media and health information sharing among Australian Indigenous people. Health Promotion International, 33(3), 465-476. [CrossRef]
  30. Emon, M.H., & Nipa, M.N. (2024). Exploring the Gender Dimension in Entrepreneurship Development: A Systematic Literature Review in the Context of Bangladesh. Westcliff International Journal of Applied Research, 8(1), 34–49.
  31. Kim, Y., & Srivastava, R. K. (2007). Impact of organizational learning capability on firm performance: Evidence from Korean manufacturing firms. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 462-476. [CrossRef]
  32. Kumar, N., Scheer, L. K., & Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (1995). The effects of perceived interdependence on dealer attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 348-356. [CrossRef]
  33. Lachowetz, T., & Wiedmann, K. P. (2020). Using narratives to drive innovation and marketing in the fashion industry. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 11(4), 362-377. [CrossRef]
  34. Lado, A. A., Boyd, N. G., Wright, P., & Kroll, M. (2006). Paradox and theorizing within the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 115-131. [CrossRef]
  35. Lambert, D. M., & Pohlen, T. L. (2001). Supply chain metrics. International Journal of Logistics Management, 12(1), 1-19. [CrossRef]
  36. Lamberton, C., & Stephen, A. T. (2016). A thematic exploration of digital, social media, and mobile marketing: Research evolution from 2000 to 2015 and an agenda for future inquiry. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 146-172. [CrossRef]
  37. Larcker, D. F., & Rusticus, T. O. (2010). On the use of instrumental variables in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 49(3), 186-205. [CrossRef]
  38. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 95-112. [CrossRef]
  39. Li, H., & Zhang, J. (2007). Do high-tech firm’s stock prices fully reflect R&D expenses? Journal of Business Research, 60(11), 1193-1199. [CrossRef]
  40. Loureiro, M. L., & Lotade, J. (2005). Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the consumer conscience? Ecological Economics, 53(1), 129-138. [CrossRef]
  41. Luchs, M. G., & Mooradian, T. A. (2012). Sex, personality, and sustainable consumer behaviour: Elucidating the gender effect. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(4), 265-277. [CrossRef]
  42. Maltz, E., & Kohli, A. K. (2000). Reducing marketing’s conflict with other functions: The differential effects of integrating mechanisms. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(4), 479-492. [CrossRef]
  43. Mena, S., & Palazzo, G. (2012). Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(3), 527-556. [CrossRef]
  44. Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), 121-147. [CrossRef]
  45. Moorman, C., & Miner, A. S. (1998). Organizational improvisation and organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 698-723. [CrossRef]
  46. Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38. [CrossRef]
  47. Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20-35. [CrossRef]
  48. Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 15-28. [CrossRef]
  49. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. [CrossRef]
  50. Preuss, L. (2009). Addressing sustainability and consumption. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16(1), 1-7. [CrossRef]
  51. Pujari, D., Wright, G., & Peattie, K. (2009). Green and competitive: Influences on environmental new product development performance. Journal of Business Research, 62(11), 1052-1061. [CrossRef]
  52. Rahman, M. A., Khan, T., Emon, M. M. H., Bukari, Z., & Nath, A. (2024). The New Marketing Paradigm: From Traditional to Digital. In Notion Press.
  53. Rahman, S., Taghizadeh, S. K., & Ramayah, T. (2015). The impact of perceived risk on purchase intention in online shopping of electronics. Proceedings of the International Conference on E-Commerce (ICoEC) 2015. Springer. [CrossRef]
  54. Reed, D., & Freeman, R. E. (2020). Creating a world-class corporate governance system: An interview with Dr. George M. Hodge. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(1), 1-7. [CrossRef]
  55. Rezai, G., Naini, K. A., Rezai, H. B., & Gharneh, N. Z. (2018). The impact of digital transformation on the improvement of supply chain management performance. Computers in Industry, 101, 103-117. [CrossRef]
  56. Emon, M.M.H., & Khan, T. (2023). The Impact of Cultural Norms on Sustainable Entrepreneurship Practices in SMEs of Bangladesh. Indonesian Journal of Innovation and Applied Sciences (IJIAS), 3(3), 201–209.
  57. Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: Concepts, findings, and guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 261-279. [CrossRef]
  58. Sanchez, R., Heene, A., & Thomas, H. (1996). Introduction: Towards the theory and practice of competitiveness. In R. Sanchez, A. Heene, & H. Thomas (Eds.), Dynamics of Competitiveness (pp. 1-20). Elsevier.
  59. Simmons, C. J., McQuilken, L., & Manolis, C. (2010). Evaluating corporate social responsibility communication on social media. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2010(37), 73-94. [CrossRef]
  60. Sirieix, L., Delanchy, M., Remaud, H., & Zepeda, L. (2013). Consumer perceptions of eco-friendly versus conventional wines in France. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 25(1), 35-51. [CrossRef]
  61. Srinivasan, S. R., Lilien, G. L., & Rangaswamy, A. (2006). Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to e-business. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 1-18. [CrossRef]
  62. Emon, M.M.H., Khan, T., & Siam, S.A.J. (2024). Quantifying the influence of supplier relationship management and supply chain performance: an investigation of Bangladesh’s manufacturing and service sectors. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(2), 2015. [CrossRef]
  63. Stevenson, M., & Pirog, S. F. (2021). Sourcing sustainable seafood: Consumer motivations and barriers. Appetite, 161, Article 105130. [CrossRef]
  64. Sun, T., You, J., & Song, Y. (2020). The impact of social media on green purchase intention: The mediating role of consumer risk perception and the moderating role of product knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 2101. [CrossRef]
  65. Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role of collaboration in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 299-315. [CrossRef]
  66. Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510-540.
  67. Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude – behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169-194. [CrossRef]
  68. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated