reactive or proactive sme workwear? smes managing
TRANSCRIPT
Reactive or proactive SME workwear?
SMEs managing legitimacy in the garment industry
Master Thesis Business Administration Organizational Design and Development
Silke Eijgenraam s4744128
Supervisor: Dr S. Schembera
Second examiner: Dr N. Lohmeyer
June 14th, 2021
2
Preface
Dear reader,
I hereby present to you my master thesis on the subject of SMEs managing legitimacy in the
garment industry. This is the final part of the master specialization Organizational Design &
Development at the Radboud University. The past year has gone incredibly fast, but I took great
pleasure in following the different courses and writing the master thesis.
I would like to thank Dr. S. Schembera for the pleasant cooperation the past months. Through
his support and provided feedback I was able to finish the master thesis with hopefully the right
quality. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. N. Lohmeyer for the provision of constructive
feedback on the research proposal and for examining my master thesis. Her feedback really
helped me to improve the final version of this research study.
Furthermore, I would like to thank all the participants for their trust, input and openness during
the interviews in order to help me conducting this research.
Hopefully you enjoy reading my master thesis.
Silke Eijgenraam
June 14th, 2021
3
Abstract
This research study explored the drivers of SMEs legitimacy management as well as how
legitimacy strategies for SMEs look like. A qualitative comparative case study has been
conducted at two SMEs in the garment industry. The cases have been selected based on their
reactive and proactive legitimacy management in order to make a comparison. Data has been
collected through conducting semi-structured interviews with internal stakeholders of both
SMEs. Due to the lack of literature on the topic of legitimacy management for SMEs in specific,
it was not possible to make ex-ante operationalizations. Therefore, the grounded theory
approach has been applied to analyse the transcribed interviews while using an inductive coding
process. The findings show that both reactive and proactive legitimacy strategies consist of the
following elements that can be either on the reactive or on the proactive side: the role the SME
takes upon in the supply chain; SMEs required level of certainty; SMEs communication towards
stakeholders; SMEs relationships in the supply chain; SMEs responsibility in the supply chain;
SMEs level of assertiveness in acting with stakeholders and SMEs level of taking initiative with
regard to social and environmental issues in the supply chain. In addition, five forces have been
identified that push SMEs towards a more reactive legitimacy management or towards a more
proactive legitimacy management. These identified forces are the SMEs organizational focus,
SMEs awareness of social and environmental issues, SMEs motivation, SMEs understanding
of the supply chain and external pressures. All forces have characteristics that explain whether
an SME is pushed towards either reactive or proactive legitimacy management.
Keywords: Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), legitimacy, Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR), garment industry
4
Table of content
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5
2. Theoretical background .............................................................................................................................. 9 2.1 The concept of legitimacy ....................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Managing legitimacy in the garment industry ........................................................................................ 12 2.3 Management legitimacy for SMEs ......................................................................................................... 15
2.3.1 Reactive strategy ........................................................................................................................... 15 2.3.2 Proactive strategy .......................................................................................................................... 17 2.3.2 Important factors in shaping the behaviour of SMEs ...................................................................... 18
2.4 Overview of the theoretical background ................................................................................................ 19
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................................................. 21 3.1 Research design.................................................................................................................................... 21 3.2 Data collection ..................................................................................................................................... 22 3.3 Data analysis........................................................................................................................................ 25 3.4 Quality of the research ......................................................................................................................... 26 3.5 Research ethics ..................................................................................................................................... 27
4. Findings ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Elements of SME legitimacy management ............................................................................................. 29
4.1.1 Reactive SME legitimacy management .......................................................................................... 29 4.1.2 Proactive SME legitimacy management ......................................................................................... 33
4.2 Forces driving SME legitimacy management ......................................................................................... 35 4.2.1 SMEs organizational focus ............................................................................................................ 36 4.2.2 SMEs awareness in the supply chain .............................................................................................. 37 4.2.3 SMEs motivation in the supply chain ............................................................................................. 38 4.2.4 SMEs understanding of the supply chain........................................................................................ 39 4.2.5 External pressures ......................................................................................................................... 41
4.3 SMEs organizational culture ................................................................................................................. 42 4.4 Conceptual model ................................................................................................................................. 43
5. Conclusion & Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 44 5.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 44 5.2 Theoretical implications ....................................................................................................................... 46 5.3 Practical implications ........................................................................................................................... 47 5.4 Limitations and recommendations for further research .......................................................................... 48 5.5 Reflexivity on the role of the researcher ................................................................................................ 49
References ..................................................................................................................................................... 51
Appendices .................................................................................................................................................... 55 Appendix I: Interview guide ........................................................................................................................ 55 Appendix II: Code book .............................................................................................................................. 57
5
1. Introduction In today’s context of globalization legitimacy is a necessary condition to preserve the inflow of
resources and it improves the chances for an organizations’ sustainable existence (Meyer &
Rowan, 1977). Legitimacy plays a key role in understanding the survival and growth of
organizations. It can be seen as a resource that enables the organization to preserve other
resources to survive and grow (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002). Examples of these resources
required for organizational survival and growth are, inter alia, quality employees, financial
resources and government support. Additionally, legitimacy influences the social and economic
exchange of an organization because most stakeholders only engage with an organization if
they consider it legitimate (Deephouse, Bundy, Tost & Suchman, 2017). Therefore, it is
important that organizations manage their legitimacy in order to remain socially accepted by
their stakeholders.
Managing legitimacy has grown in importance with the process of globalization both in
theory and in practice and has become a vibrant topic in the field of business management
(Díez-De-Castro & Peris-Ortiz, 2018). Globalization has provided big opportunities and
expanded the interconnectedness between all kinds of actors over the world. Like Johnson
(2002, p. 427) states: ‘Globalization is far more than the international movement of goods and
investments.’ Johnson (2002) points out the rather positive side effects that globalization can
bring about on for example the well-being of people. However, globalization also contributes
to transnationally emerging social and environmental problems, such as child labor, abuses of
human and labor rights and global warming. Due to the globalization, which resulted in the
possibility of ongoing global communication, and the increasingly upcoming institutions
focusing on the practices of organizations, such as NGO’s, a context is emerging in which
stakeholders hold organizations responsible for both their social and environmental impact
(Waddock, 2008). This leads to an arising pressure of stakeholders on organizations, in
particular large multinational corporations (MNCs), to focus on desirable and appropriate
practices in order to remain legitimate. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) can therefore be
seen as an exemplary strategy of managing organizational legitimacy. However, there are also
more potential reactive strategies that organizations can use for the management of their
legitimacy such as denying their responsibility for contributing to social and environmental
issues or only acting when something has gone wrong and let into the event of a scandal.
The context of an industry highly influences what kind of practices are seen as legitimate
because each industry has different specific rules, norms, values, practices, trends and
6
expectations (Dabic, Colovic, Lamotte, Painter-Morland & Brozovic, 2016). The garment
industry can be seen as the prime example of globalization. Developing countries are often an
important source for production and the clothes are being sold on a global scale. This results in
the garment industry being in a structure of global supply chains, which makes it rather difficult
to implement legitimate practices in all parts of this supply chain (Hassler, 2003). In addition,
there is an increasing attention of governments, human rights organizations and trade unions on
the practices of organizations in the garment industry. The industry has become under scrutiny
because of big public scandals such as the accident in the garment factory Rhana Plaza in 2013.
Hence organizations in this industry face an intensified attention of an increasing number of
stakeholders.
The business models, strategies and practices of small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) are usually in contrast to MNCs not well-known to the public (Schembera & Scherer,
2019). SMEs are often not required to write an annual report and if they do decide to report,
this is often read by only a few people or stakeholders. There is also much less information
publicly disclosed about SMEs on the internet and the news. Their impact on stakeholders,
society and the environment seems to draw lower levels of attention and are not questioned that
much. Therefore, the status and legitimacy of small and medium-sized enterprises is often taken
for granted (Schembera & Scherer, 2019). Despite the fact that SMEs often experience less
publicity, lower levels of attention and a taken for granted status, they are increasingly operating
in complex and ambiguous environments due to the globalization. The challenges with regard
to social and environmental issues are also increased because of the global context they are
operating in (Schuessler, Frenkel, & Wright, 2019). Within this institutional environment SMEs
sometimes have to deal with different expectations from their stakeholders (Scherer & Palazzo,
2007). However, SMEs can still decide to manage their legitimacy more reactively or
proactively.
This research study wants to gain more insight in the drivers of SMEs legitimacy
management and how legitimacy strategies for SMEs look like. While literature acknowledges
the importance of managing organizational legitimacy, the specific case of SME legitimacy
strategies has yet to be further researched. The research question that will be addressed in this
study is as follows: ‘How and why do some SMEs in the garment industry manage legitimacy
more proactively than other SMEs in the same industry?’
The scientific relevance of answering this research question is threefold. First it
contributes to the literature on the organizational management of legitimacy. While the existing
literature has extensively studied the management of legitimacy for MNCs, this research study
7
focusses on legitimacy strategies for SMEs in specific. SMEs differ substantially from MNCs
in terms of several organizational characteristics, behavioral guiding principles and visibility
(Wickert, 2016). SMEs are more informally organized and culturally determined when
compared to MNCs, they are much less visible, they face fewer external pressures and do not
possess the same resources (Wickert, 2016). Considering these differences between MNCs and
SMEs, it is assumable that these also have implications for the management of legitimacy.
SMEs differ structurally from MNCs and therefore it is relevant to study how and why SMEs
in specific manage legitimacy. This research study contributes to the already existing literature
on legitimacy by providing an integrated framework on the different legitimacy strategies for
SMEs in specific and the drivers behind these strategies.
Second this research study contributes to the CSR literature. There is already elaborate
literature on CSR for SMEs, but this literature is somewhat different than the literature on
legitimacy. Both CSR and legitimacy involve a relation with the stakeholders of an
organization, but they differ in the aspect that legitimacy is about being accepted and
appropriate in the eyes of the stakeholders in relation to all kinds of expectations and CSR is
about the responsibility of organizations to contribute to social and environmental issues.
Managing legitimacy comes into place when stakeholders increase pressures on SMEs to
behave in a corporate responsible way in order to be accepted (Scherer, Palazzo & Seidl, 2013).
Therefore, the literature on CSR and organizational legitimacy are strongly entangled. The CSR
related issues that grow with the process of globalization challenge the legitimacy of
organizations (Scherer et al., 2013). This research study contributes to this literature by looking
at CSR related issues from the perspective of organizational legitimacy.
Third this research study contributes to the institutional theory. With the process of
globalization, the institutional environment in which organizations operate is becoming
increasingly complex (Scherer & Palazzo, 2007). This institutional complexity implies that
organizations are faced with multiple and heterogenous expectations. Managing organizational
legitimacy is a way of responding to these different expectations. Conformity of the
organization with socially shared values, normative expectations as well as with laws and
general rules in the institutional environment ensures legitimacy for an organization (Scott,
2008). This research study contributes to the institutional theory by looking at legitimacy
strategies for SMEs as a way to respond to their institutional environment.
Understanding how and why SMEs manage legitimacy is not only relevant for academic
researchers but also for practitioners. The number of SMEs is increasingly growing over the
past years and it has become one of the most common business types (Jenkins, 2006). SMEs
8
create the majority of new jobs and provide a big part of employment (Ruffo, Mnisri, Morin-
Esteves & Gendron, 2018). They can be considered as the critical backbones of economy and
therefore it is relevant to study the management of legitimacy for SMEs in specific. With SMEs
increasingly operating in a globalized context and complex supply chains, they are exposed to
different expectations of stakeholders (Dana, Etemad & Wright, 1999). T his incre as ing
comple xity in the ins titutional e nvironme nt can challenge the le gitimacy of
SMEs (Olive r , 1991). It is impor tant for organizations , both MNCs and SMEs , to
be engage d in the manage me nt of the ir legitimacy in orde r to e ns ure viability
on the long run (De ephous e e t al., 2017). Therefore, SMEs cannot ignore the
management of their legitimacy which makes insight in the SMEs management of legitimacy
needed. T his knowle dge is us e ful for SMEs to re cognize the force s that pus h
the m towards a ce r tain s trate gy and to be aware of how the s e s trate gie s can
look like for the m. In addition, for CSR manage rs it is us e ful to gain ins ight in
how CSR initiative s can be us e d to manage the le gitimacy of SMEs .
To answer this research question a qualitative comparative case study will be conducted
at two SMEs in the garment industry. By selecting two SMEs that are similar on most of their
organizational characteristics except for their legitimacy strategy, it is possible to make a
comparison between a rather reactive and proactive case. Both SMEs are operating in the
workwear sector of the garment industry. Data will be collected through conducting semi-
structured interviews with internal stakeholders of both SMEs. Through inductively coding the
transcribed interviews, findings and conclusions can be derived that answer the research
question.
This research study is divided into multiple chapters to provide structure. In the
following chapter the literature will be reviewed and thereby provide a theoretical background
used to guide the data collection and analysis of this research study. The third chapter goes
deeper into the research design, the applied methods and choices for data collection and data
analysis, the quality of this research and the research ethics. In the fourth chapter the findings
of the analysis will be elaborately discussed, resulting in an inductively derived conceptual
model presenting the main findings and their relationships. The final chapter contains the
conclusion, the theoretical and practical implications, the limitations, the recommendations for
further research and a reflexivity on the role of the researcher.
9
2. Theoretical background The theory section first introduces the concept of legitimacy in chapter 2.1. The concept is
elaborately explained on the basis of three distinct types of legitimacy. Chapter 2.2 deepens the
understanding of managing legitimacy in the garment industry. In chapter 2.3 managing
legitimacy for SMEs, in specific more proactive and reactive legitimacy strategies are further
elaborated. Since there is no specific literature on SME legitimacy strategies this section is
mainly used to provide guidance in the progress of this research study. The literature on
Corporate Social Responsibility is used as a background and is helpful in giving exemplary
strategies for legitimacy management. Chapter 2.4 provides a summary of the key concepts and
presents the sensitizing concepts that are used to guide the data collection and analysis.
2.1 The concept of legitimacy Legitimacy is a generalized social judgement that is issued by the stakeholders of an
organization (Díez-De-Castro & Peris-Ortiz, 2018). It is a judgement of acceptance,
appropriateness and desirability (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002). This means that legitimacy is not
an objective but a subjective concept. Additionally, it is not directly observable because it is
something that is granted or denied by the stakeholders of an organization. By granting
legitimacy to an organization, stakeholders encourage and promote the organizations practices
which they see as beneficial for themselves, their social group or society as a whole (Bitektine,
2011). As Zimmerman & Zeitz (2002, p. 416) state: ‘legitimacy ultimately exists in the eye of
the beholder’. Legitimacy can be understood as: ‘the assumption that the actions of an
organization are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of
norms, values, beliefs, and definitions’ (Suchman, 1995, p. 574). It is about the consistency of
these norms, values, beliefs and definitions of society on the one hand and the activities of an
organization on the other hand (Ashforth & Gibbs, 1990; Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975). The norms,
values, beliefs and definitions are part of a social system which has expectations for the
organization. This social system represents the institutional environment in which the
organization operates and with which it needs to be consistent (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002).
The industry in which an organization operates is an important representor of the
institutional environment. Each industry has its own environmental forces and factors that are
important for the organization’s survival (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002). Certain rules, norms,
values, definitions and expectations are developed and reinforced throughout the social system
after which they are seen as legitimate by the stakeholders (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002). In
10
addition to the industry, the organizational characteristics also influence the environment of an
organization.
Suchman (1995) synthesizes the already existing literature on legitimacy and identifies
three types of legitimacy. All three types are granted based on a different behavioral dynamic.
The first is pragmatic legitimacy and is based on the personal appropriateness or self-interest
of the organization’s most important stakeholders (Suchman, 1995). This type of legitimacy is
granted by the stakeholders closest to the organization and it shows a materialistic relationship
of power and dependence (Díez-De-Castro & Peris-Ortiz, 2018). Pragmatic legitimacy often
involves direct exchanges between the organization and the stakeholder in terms of a product,
service or investment. With pragmatic legitimacy it is about questions like: ‘what is in it for
me?’; ‘does the organization provide value to me?’; ‘does it provide a good product which I
can use?’. Although it can also be the case that it involves a broader political, economic or
social interdependency in which the practices of an organization affect the stakeholders’ well-
being (Suchman, 1995). An organization receives pragmatic legitimacy because stakeholders
believe that the organization provides favorable exchanges (Suchman, 1995). The confidence
for granting legitimacy can come from compliance with certain rules, standards and
expectations that are set by the environment (Díez-De-Castro & Peris-Ortiz, 2018). For SMEs
this type of legitimacy would mainly be granted by stakeholders close to the organization who
gain benefits from their existence or behaviour, like consumers and employees (Scherer et al.,
2013). Therefore, managing pragmatic legitimacy is about demonstrating adequate
performance (Deephouse et al., 2017).
The second type is moral legitimacy and this type is based on social appropriateness. It
is different from the stakeholders’ self-interest with pragmatic legitimacy because here it is
about what is considered ‘the right thing to do’ based on socially constructed normative beliefs
(Suchman, 1995). With moral legitimacy it is also about a judgement but about a value
judgement in specific. It reflects a normative approval of the organization and its practices
(Bitektine, 2011). To grant or deny moral legitimacy the organization’s outputs,
accomplishments, processes, techniques and structures are often evaluated (Suchman, 1995).
With moral legitimacy it is about questions like: ‘do I think this organization is doing the right
thing morally in terms of labor standards, pollution, caring for employees etc.?’. To manage
this type of legitimacy an organization therefore needs to show fit with social norms and values
(Deephouse et al., 2017). Since SMEs often only disclose information to close stakeholders, it
is important for their legitimacy that their outputs, accomplishments, processes, techniques and
structures are in line with the social norms and values of these stakeholders.
11
Finally, cognitive legitimacy is based on comprehensibility and taken-for-grantedness.
When comparing this to the previous two types, there is no explicit evaluation made or interest
in it for the stakeholder when granting this type of legitimacy (Suchman, 1995). Here an
organization is accepted based on a taken for granted cultural account. When stakeholders grant
or deny this type of legitimacy, they classify the organization to a certain known organizational
form, class or industry. This judgement is made based on a set of recognizable organizational
characteristics (Suchman, 1995). By permitting the stakeholder to classify the organization to
a certain industry or organization type, the effort needed for evaluation is reduced (Bitektine,
2011). The judgement is then based on an organization type or industry whose legitimacy has
already been evaluated and therefore the organization in dispute is not being questioned or
challenged anymore. The organization enjoys a taken for granted status and thus no further
scrutiny occurs (Bitektine, 2011). SMEs could for example be classified to the industry in which
they are operating or the organizational form of small and medium-sized enterprises.
Stakeholders then do not evaluate each organization separately but judge the specific SME
based on an organization type or industry whose legitimacy has already been evaluated.
In contrast to pragmatic and moral legitimacy, cognitive legitimacy does not rely on an
evaluation through dialogues. When granting both pragmatic and moral legitimacy the
organization is judged through explicit discourse and the organization can increase the chances
of securing these types of legitimacy by taking part in this discourse (Suchman, 1995). With
cognitive legitimacy there is no specific content or dialogue needed to underly a justification
(Tost, 2011). Suchman (1995, p. 583) specifies this type as ‘the most subtle and the most
powerful source of legitimacy identified’ because the organization is exempted from evaluation
and scrutiny, is taken for granted and is often not being challenged. While studying SMEs
within this research there will be a main focus on this type of legitimacy, which will now be
further explained.
Recent scandals such as the collapse of the garment factory Rhana Plaza in 2013 has
placed the garment industry under public scrutiny. After these scandals the local and
international attention drastically increased and additionally resulted in a lot of new policies,
expectations and changes in the practices of organizations in the garment industry (Bossavie,
Cho & Heath, 2019). Governments, global unions, NGOs and trade unions together led
coordinated campaigns against the practices in the garment industry (Beierlein, 2020). These
scandals raised legitimacy concerns for the organizations operating in that particular industry.
Differences in legitimacy concerns and organizational responses can be explained by
differences in stakeholder pressures (Schuessler et al., 2019). Typically large MNCs are more
12
intensively receiving stakeholder attention and therefore raise more concerns with regard to
their legitimacy (Schuessler et al., 2019). Although SMEs in the garment industry are similarly
to MNCs in a structure of global supply chains, which means that they are also facing social
and environmental challenges and risks that the process of globalization brings about, their
business models, strategies and practices are often not well-known to the public (Scherer &
Palazzo, 2011). SMEs are in contrast to MNCs exempted from public scrutiny and experience
less pressure and attention from stakeholders (Scherer et al., 2013). Unless SMEs fail in their
day-to-day businesses and routines or there is a crisis, their legitimacy is built upon the
acceptance of the organization and its processes and structures as a representative of a taken for
granted status quo (Scherer et al., 2013). Therefore, while studying how and why SMEs in the
garment industry manage their legitimacy more or less proactively there is a main focus on the
third type of legitimacy: cognitive legitimacy.
2.2 Managing legitimacy in the garment industry
Organizations in the garment industry are increasingly involved in supply chains on a global
scale. The developments of information and communication technologies, the liberalization of
trade and the possibility of shipping against very low costs have made it possible for
organizations to outsource their production to cheap suppliers located all over the world (Kim
& Davis, 2016). Clothing of MNCs but also of SMEs are most of the time not produced by the
organization itself but by suppliers in developing countries, simply because buying has become
much cheaper than producing (Kim & Davis, 2016). The global fragmentation of supply chains
has created both opportunities and threats for organizations in the garment industry (Locke,
Rissing & Pal, 2013). End retailers now have the chance to produce and ship their clothing
against very low cost, but the increasingly environmental and social issues that are involved
with producing in these global supply chains can threaten their legitimacy (Locke et al., 2013).
The arising environmental and social issues in global supply chains involve among others
pollution, waste, loss of biodiversity, damage of eco-systems, deforestation, working
conditions, health & safety of workers, labor rights and human right standards.
Organizations and especially large MNCs in the garment industry are increasingly held
accountable for the practices in the entire global supply chain in order to remain legitimate.
Expectations of stakeholders in this context are based on the idea that the organization is
responsible for all the activities that are going into their product (Kim & Davis, 2016). This
means that organizations are not only being held accountable for everything that happens within
13
their organization, but for everything that happens in the entire process from production to
selling. This entails being responsible for the practices of suppliers, logistic providers and
intermediaries over which an organization has no ownership (Jenkins, 2001). Meanwhile, the
global scale and the dispersion of the supply chains make it difficult for organizations to oversee
the whole process starting from production to eventually selling it to the end-consumer (Kim
& Davis, 2016). Organizations in global supply chains know their first-tier supplier but often
aren’t aware of the fact that there even is a fourth- or fifth-tier supplier that eventually
manufactures their products (Kim & Davis, 2016). This makes it rather difficult to implement
legitimate practices in the entire global supply chain. Meanwhile the legitimacy of an
organization still depends on all the practices in the entire global supply chain needed for their
products. Managing legitimacy in global supply chains thus requires engagement with partners
upstream and downstream the supply chain (Kim & Davis, 2016).
The increasing number of organizations operating in global supply chains leads to
organizations not only being responsible for aspects such as the quality and the value of the
product, but also for contributing to solving environmental and social issues (Andersen &
Skjoett-Larsen, 2009). Therefore, CSR can be a way of responding to these environmental and
social concerns of stakeholders. CSR initiatives in global supply chains are receiving growing
attention in the media, academic literature and the corporate world and are therefore very
relevant for the management of legitimacy (Andersen & Skjoett-Larsen, 2009). MNCs in the
garment industry are increasingly under scrutiny for engaging in unethical practices (Busse,
Kach & Bode, 2016). To manage legitimacy in global supply chains, organizations can among
others implement CSR initiatives that contribute to social and environmental issues (Mueller,
Dos Santos & Seuring, 2009). The initiatives decrease the chances of public scrutiny which
could lead to a loss of legitimacy and a competitive disadvantage (Mueller et al., 2009). There
are various possible CSR initiatives that organizations in the garment industry can implement
to manage their legitimacy. CSR can be seen as an important dimension of an organization’s
legitimacy and thus the relationship between the organizations and the stakeholders (Nijhof,
Forterre & Jeurissen, 2008).
A first example of a CSR initiative is the implementation of a code of conduct. Codes
of conduct are documents about social and environmental standards and principles that an
organization expects to comply with (Jenkins, 2001). These are based on principles and values
with which the organization wants to be associated (Andersen & Skjoett-Larsen, 2009). They
can be implemented to improve the poor working conditions and pollution in the global supply
chain factories for example (Locke, Amengual & Mangla, 2009). A second example of a CSR
14
initiative is the introduction of monitoring programs in different parts of the supply chian. This
entails monitoring transnationally over different product lines. Monitoring enhances the
visibility and the engagement of the global supply chain (Kim & Davis, 2016). Within these
programs monitoring the codes of conduct is often included. Due to the lack of authority of
governments in developing countries they are often not able to monitor whether the suppliers
are acting conform with these codes of conducts. Therefore monitoring programs by the end
retailer are required to enforce compliance (Locke et al., 2009).
Another possibility for the management of legitimacy in global supply chains is the
implementation of certification standards. Certification standards are labels that communicate
information about products to consumers and they underpin a response to the expectations of
stakeholders and interest groups (National Research Council, 2010). In the garment industry
these are often labels like ‘fair-trade’ or ‘eco-friendly’, but they can involve information about
all kinds of social and environmental issues.
Organizations in the garment industry can also take part in multi-stakeholder
governance programs such as agreements, covenants and initiatives to manage their legitimacy
(Anner, 2012). Taking part in these initiatives often goes beyond the immediate concern of
improving a certain issue because it is also aimed at signaling a good impression to stakeholders
in order to gain legitimacy (Schuessler et al., 2019). Focusing on these kinds of initiatives
increases the chance of granted legitimacy and reduces the risk of negative public attention and
scrutiny (Anner, 2012). In addition, corporate reporting can be a way of managing legitimacy
in the garment industry. Organizations can report on their actions as a reaction to pressures
from stakeholders or as a way to legitimize their organizational activities (Guthrie & Parker,
1989). It is often an attempt to reduce a perceived legitimacy gap between the organization and
its stakeholders (Campbell, Craven, & Shrives, 2003). However, organizations in the garment
industry can also use rather reactive strategies to manage their legitimacy such as merely acting
in response to the event of a scandal or a crisis, or denying their responsibility for issues going
on in the garment industry.
Organizations in the garment industry vary in their visibility to the public and the main
distinction with regard to this visibility can be made between MNCs and SMEs. Typically large
MNCs experience intensified stakeholder pressure due to their direct involvement in governing
global supply chains (Schuessler et al., 2019). Their firm size and well-known brand name
increase the chances of becoming a social target (Bartley & Child, 2014). Due to their publicity,
size, power and position in society it is easier for stakeholders to oversee their supply chain and
to focus their attention on large MNCs (Bartley & Child, 2014). A major scandal can even
15
intensify the stakeholder attention and put them into the spotlight (Bartley & Child, 2014).
Therefore they are often the victim of naming and shaming campaigns which decrease their
legitimacy. SMEs on the other hand receive less attention from the public and are exempted
from scrutiny of practices in their global supply chain (Wickert, 2016). This makes them less
susceptible to consequences from stakeholders on the basis of the practices in the entire supply
chain (Kim & Davis, 2016). For most SMEs it is often too expensive to oversee their global
supply chain and to ensure that legitimate practices are implemented. The CSR initiatives
earlier discussed that are used to manage legitimacy in global supply chains are primarily
designed for large MNCs that have the resources and power to implement these standards and
procedures within all parts of the global supply chain (Baumann-Pauly, Wickert, Spence,
Scherer, 2013). SMEs do not acquire the same resources and therefore have to rely on different
approaches (Wickert, 2016). This leads to differences in the management of legitimacy for
SMEs and MNCs. Legitimacy strategies specifically used by SMEs have yet to be further
researched.
2.3 Management legitimacy for SMEs
SMEs often enjoy a taken for granted status due to the lack of public attention about their
ethicality (Schembera & Scherer, 2019). Although SMEs in the garment industry are in a
structure of global supply chains and therefore face social and environmental challenges, their
practices are often not being questioned. However, SMEs can still decide to implement a
reactive or a proactive strategy to manage their legitimacy. These strategies will now be
introduced based on already existing literature. In addition, some important factors in shaping
the behaviour of SMEs will also be introduced by reviewing different streams of literature.
Since there is no specific literature on the management of legitimacy for SMEs, the existing
literature is used as a background to form sensitizing concepts to guide this research study in
order to explore how and why SMEs manage their legitimacy in a certain way.
2.3.1 Reactive strategy
SMEs have fewer reasons to proactively manage their legitimacy because they are exempted
from public scrutiny and receive less attention from stakeholders. Therefore, SMEs have less
incentives to change something about this lower visibility and merely disclose information to
those stakeholders with whom they have direct exchanges with, such as their suppliers,
employees and customers (Wickert, 2016). A reactive strategy means that the SME only reacts
to pressures that are outside of the organization and that it adjusts its behaviour due to these
16
pressures (Schembera & Scherer, 2019). SMEs then seek to maintain their state of taken for
grantedness by avoiding public attention about environmental and social issues (Schembera &
Scherer, 2019). They leave their activities aimed at managing legitimacy rather concealed and
only manage their legitimacy as a reaction to changing pressures from outside. These changing
pressures from outside can involve a change in law regulation which means that the SME has
to change certain policies within the global supply chain. It could also be that a scandalous
event in the industry has taken place which leads to intensified attention and thereby an
increased stakeholder pressure to include certain issues in the mission statement or disclose
information about the activities or the global supply chain. Additionally, stakeholders like
NGOs or trade unions can increase their pressures which forces a reaction of the SME to change
something in their behaviour. All these exemplary scenarios have in common that first an event
happens which then forces the SME to act in order to remain legitimate.
SMEs can manage their legitimacy by avoiding exposure of their practices in reports for
example or by shielding off their behavior towards public stakeholders (Schembera & Scherer,
2019). In that case SMEs often do not actively engage with public stakeholders to contribute in
solving environmental and social issues. SMEs can also have the tendency to maintain the
established routines and strategies that have worked out for them in the past (Schembera &
Scherer, 2019). This makes it rather difficult for SMEs to change their practices and
management aimed at sustaining legitimacy. Additionally, SMEs often use status-quo
rationalizations aimed at maintaining their cognitive legitimacy (Schembera & Scherer, 2019).
They use these rationalizations as an argument for not contributing to social and environmental
issues and thus managing their legitimacy rather reactively. These status-quo rationalizations
for SMEs in the garment industry could be inter alia about their smaller size, the trust within
the organization or the costs of compliance. SMEs can also deny their responsibility and only
act as a reaction to stakeholder pressures or a certain scandal such as the collapse of the garment
factory Rhana Plaza. Organizations can experience pressures from NGOs, trade unions or even
consumers who force them to act upon a certain situation.
To conclude, a reactive strategy implies that an SME acts in response to a certain
change. SMEs are in that case not raising legitimacy concerns, unless their routinized activities
and practices fail, a scandalous event happens or there is a change in pressures from the
environment (Schuessler et al., 2019). If one of these scenarios happens, the interests and
expectations from stakeholders are not met anymore and this possibly reduces the social
acceptability. Therefore, an SME is forced to react and change something in order to sustain
their legitimacy. SMEs then only act in response to a change in pressures from outside in order
17
to meet the interests and expectations of their stakeholders again (Scherer et al., 2013). As long
as these SMEs do not fail or there are no changing pressures or crises, they build upon this
cognitive legitimacy and there is no need for them to change something themselves (Scherer et
al., 2013).
2.3.2 Proactive strategy
A proactive strategy means that the SME has certain structures and procedures to manage
legitimacy without facing pressures from outside (Schembera & Scherer, 2019). SMEs then
initiate action themselves for the management of legitimacy without being forced by external
pressures or changes. SMEs can manage their legitimacy by putting an emphasis on fair and
long-term relationships with suppliers, logistic providers and intermediaries within the global
supply chain (Wickert, 2016). SMEs can have close relationships with their stakeholders, and
this can increase the owners or managers feeling of responsibility for social and environmental
issues (Ruffo et al., 2018). Maintaining a strong personal relationship can be important for them
and these relationships form a critical factor in the legitimacy of an organization. SMEs can
focus on strengthening their relationships with important stakeholders in order to manage their
legitimacy. A possible method for this stakeholder engagement is taking part in a discourse
with stakeholders who might question their legitimacy (Scherer et al., 2013). This can be in the
form of an open discourse in order to discuss the acceptability of the organization. SMEs can
also actively engage in external collaboration with other stakeholders to jointly address
environmental and social issues (Baumann-Pauly et al., 2013). The collective actions can be
used as a way to proactively manage legitimacy and could focus on for example improving
working conditions or environmental standards in the global supply chain. These multi-
stakeholder initiatives can be in the form of an agreement which can be signed by several
involved stakeholders and organizations. Organization can also proactively communicate
information to their stakeholders about their activities and the supply chain. This information
contains content with which the organization wants to be associated. The information can be
disclosed, inter alia, through the publication of reports, updates on their website or social media
accounts. They can also disclose information about suppliers in order to increase the global
supply chain transparency (Schuessler et al., 2019).
To conclude, SMEs can take several actions in order to proactively manage their
legitimacy, but these actions are taken without being caused by changing pressures from the
environment. The main difference when compared to a reactive strategy is that SMEs initiate
18
action themselves for the management of legitimacy and are not merely responding to the
environment.
2.3.2 Important factors in shaping the behaviour of SMEs
First, ownership plays a critical role in shaping the behaviour and strategies of SMEs
(Wickert, 2016). SMEs are characterized by a high level of personalization of the owner or
manager (Ruffo et al., 2018). The behaviour of SMEs is often guided by the values, moral
beliefs and personal integrity of the owners or managers of that organization (Jenkins, 2006).
Among SMEs it is relatively common that the owners or managers have an ethical motivation
for social and environmental engagement (Wickert, 2016). The ethical motives of the owners
or managers then play a large role in managing the SME and can be a driver for contributing to
solving social and environmental issues and thereby proactively manage their legitimacy
(Wickert, 2016). Committing to social and environmental responsibilities and thereby
proactively managing legitimacy is thus strongly reflected in the attitude, values and beliefs of
the owners or managers of SMEs (Baumann-Pauly et al., 2013). Emotions of the owners,
managers or employees can also play a key role in the decision for a legitimacy strategy. These
positive emotions such as a passion to behave in an ethical way, curiosity, willingness to learn
or eagerness for a good feeling can trigger using a proactive strategy (Schembera & Scherer,
2019).
Additionally, the owners or managers of SMEs also often mold the culture of the
organization with their personal values and moral beliefs (Jenkins, 2006). The daily practices
and processes of SMEs are merely informally organized, and the culture is often implicitly built
upon informal values and beliefs (Baumann-Pauly et al., 2013). The culture is an important
guide for SMEs and their employees and steers the practices towards implicit values and beliefs
represented in this culture (Wickert, 2016). A feeling of responsibility for environmental and
social issues can be strongly integrated in the culture of SMEs and these are expressed in the
habits and routines (Baumann-Pauly et al., 2013). Within SMEs the employee awareness of
social and environmental issues in the global supply chain can therefore be high (Baumann-
Pauly et al., 2013). It is common that the organizational complexity is quite low and due to the
flat hierarchy and close cooperation it is easier to discuss these kinds of issues with employees.
19
2.4 Overview of the theoretical background
The theoretical background will now be briefly summarized to provide a compelling overview
in order to start the data collection and analysis with generic ex-ante formulated concepts. The
literature has been thoroughly reviewed to provide adequate sensitizing concepts that act as a
guiding line in this research study. They form the theoretical lens with which the data will be
approached (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). However, these sensitizing concepts only serve as
a starting point. The actual data will be leading in the analysis and in eventually answering the
research question. Therefore, the focus of this research study remains on exploring new
concepts and insights. The sensitizing concepts are presented in figure 1 at the end of this
section.
SMEs often enjoy a taken-for-granted cognitive legitimacy. However, SMEs can choose
to implement a reactive or a proactive strategy for the management of their legitimacy. While
reviewing the literature, a few elements could be classified as a reactive strategy. SMEs can
tend to maintain their taken for granted status and thereby avoid public attention. Therefore,
they keep their activities rather concealed and disclose information only to those stakeholders
with whom they have direct exchanges with. They can shield off their behaviour and try to
avoid public exposure. In some cases, SMEs can even deny their responsibility in contributing
to social and environmental issues. They often use rationalizations as an argument for not
contributing and therefore take no responsibility.
In addition, some elements could be classified as a proactive strategy from the literature
review. SMEs can put an emphasis on stakeholder engagement by having close relationships
with their stakeholders. This can be done for example by taking part in a discourse with
stakeholders or by joining multi-stakeholder initiatives. SMEs can choose to openly and
regularly communicate information about their activities to their stakeholders. They can also
implement several CSR initiatives to manage their legitimacy proactively.
Through the literature review, several forces could be classified as playing a role in the
SMEs behaviour. First, pressures and changes from outside the organization can force an SME
towards a more proactive strategy (Schembera & Scherer, 2019). Second, the values, moral
beliefs and personal integrity of the owners or managers together with their emotions are an
important factor in shaping the behaviour of SMEs (Schembera & Scherer, 2019; Wickert,
2016). Therefore, these can be an important driver for choosing a particular strategy. Finally,
the culture and its implicit values and beliefs represented in the culture can also steer the
behaviour of an SME towards a particular direction (Wickert, 2016).
20
Reactive strategy Proactive strategy Forces Avoiding public attention & exposure
Stakeholder engagement Pressures and changes from the environment
Keeping activities concealed Open and regular communicate with stakeholders
Ownership (including values, moral beliefs, personal integrity and emotions)
Denying responsibility or using rationalizations
CSR initiatives Organizational culture
Figure 1: sensitizing concepts used as a starting point for data collection and analysis
21
3. Methodology This chapter focusses on the different aspects and methods of doing research. The method
section first introduces the research design of this study in chapter 3.1. Chapter 3.2 explains
what data sources will be used and how the data will be collected. In chapter 3.3 the techniques
used to analyze the data will be explained. Chapter 3.4 takes into account the quality criteria of
doing research and shows how the quality of this research study is ensured. Finally, in chapter
3.5 the research ethics of conducting this study will be discussed.
3.1 Research design
This research study follows a qualitative research approach. A qualitative research approach is
aimed at collecting and interpreting linguistic material in order to make statements about a
social phenomenon in reality (Bleijenbergh, 2016). It will offer the possibility to systemically
collect, organize and interpret the data within this research study. Qualitative research is used
to develop concepts that help us in understanding a social phenomenon in its natural context
(Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). To understand the social phenomenon, there will be an
emphasis on meanings, experiences, arguments, motives and viewpoints of the people involved.
As a result, a much smaller number of research units will be involved as with a quantitative
research approach but the observations per unit are more intensive. Therefore, the data collected
can be characterized by a high level of richness. The richness of the material ensures that
statements can be made about a social phenomenon based on a relatively small number of
research units (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). A qualitative research approach thus allows to
study the phenomenon of legitimacy more in depth in order to find out how and why SMEs in
the garment industry manage their legitimacy more or less proactively.
Within the qualitative research approach this study follows an inductive approach in
specific. An inductive approach means that theoretical statements are derived from the
empirical data (Bleijenbergh, 2016). The empirical data will be openly analyzed without clearly
formulated expectations about the social phenomenon. The existing literature is not offering the
possibility to ex-ante formulate explicit SME legitimacy strategies that can be operationalized.
Therefore, it is not possible to study whether existing theories also hold for the cases of SMEs
in the garment industry. This clearly differs from a deductive approach in which the researcher
is guided by clear theoretical expectations that precede the data collection and analysis
(Bleijenbergh, 2016). Due to the lack of specific literature, it is not possible to set clear
22
expectations and therefore a deductive approach is in contrast to an inductive approach not
appropriate.
The literature review in the previous chapter shows that there are comprehensive
theories about the concept of legitimacy, managing legitimacy in supply chains, Corporate
Social Responsibility and legitimacy strategies for MNCs. However, there is no literature that
provides SME legitimacy strategies that can be operationalized and studied to show differences
between SMEs and their implemented strategies. Therefore the different literature streams were
combined to come up with ex-ante formulated concepts that are only used to guide the process.
These concepts will be treated as sensitizing concepts for this research study. The theoretical
background thus merely contributes to the formulation of the problem definition and provides
sensitizing concepts used in the following steps of the research. The sensitizing concepts as
presented in the previous chapter are used as a starting point for data collection and data
analysis. Sensitizing concepts will provide the researcher with a reference and guidance in
approaching the data (Bowen, 2006). Due to the inductive nature of this research study it is
necessary to conduct empirical research to get a better understanding of the concept of
legitimacy for SMEs.
3.2 Data collection
To answer the research question a comparative case study will be conducted. A case study is
aimed at investigating a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context
(Yin, 2009). The phenomenon that is going to be studied within this research is the management
of legitimacy by SMEs in the garment industry. The aim of this research study is to develop a
deep understanding of SME legitimacy strategies in combination with the drivers behind them
and therefore conducting a case study is most suitable. A comparative case study analyzes
patterns, similarities and differences across different cases (Dion, 2003). Two cases will be
selected and studied within this research study. Studying only two cases offers the possibility
to get into real depth with both of the cases. The aim is to select one reactive case and one
proactive case in order to make a clear comparison so that conclusions can be derived.
For the selection of the proactive case the Dutch Agreement on Sustainable Garment
and Textile is used as a sample. The agreement is made by the Social and Economic Council
of the Netherlands, hereafter SER. The agreement is aimed at ‘achieving substantial progress
towards improving the situation for groups experiencing adverse impacts in respect of specific
risks in the garment and textile production and supply chain’ (SER, 2016, p.9). Therefore,
23
guidelines are provided to prevent organizations from having an adverse impact in the supply
chain and joint activities and initiatives are developed to address problems that organizations
in the industry can’t prevent when acting alone (SER, 2016). The Dutch Agreement on
Sustainable Garment and Textile is signed by a broad variety of partners like industry
associations, NGOs, the Dutch government and trade unions (About this agreement, n.d.).
These parties together commit themselves to improve working conditions, labor standards and
wages as well as animal welfare and environmental protection (About this agreement, n.d.).
SMEs that are part of this multi-stakeholder initiative can be expected to have rather advanced
CSR practices which can be an indicator of a more proactive legitimacy strategy when
compared to other SMEs. As also stated in the Dutch Agreement on Sustainable Garment and
Textile, organizations that sign the agreement will benefit from it because they anticipate on
developments in expectations of stakeholders with regard to CRS in the garment industry and
they can openly report on it (SER, 2016). Additionally, the organizations are part of a broad
coalition of partner organizations who support each other in addressing social and
environmental issues (SER, 2016). Therefore, it is assumed that SMEs who are part of this
multi-stakeholder initiative have a more proactive legitimacy strategy than SMEs who are not
part of this or any likewise initiative. To select the reactive case several SMEs were taken into
account who are not part of any multi-stakeholder initiative and do not publish on their
websites, social media channels and reports about Corporate Social Responsibility. In this way,
information is sought about the way in which they position themselves and deal with their
stakeholders.
In order to guarantee their anonymity, the organization names of the two selected cases
will not be mentioned within this study. The proactive case that has been selected is as stated
before part of the Dutch Agreement on Sustainable Garment and Textile. The organization was
founded in 1989 and is a supplier of workwear, safety workwear & shoes and protective
equipment (Gerards, 2020). The organization publishes very regularly on its website and social
media channels about their responsibility in the supply chain. They annually publish an
extensive CSR report in which they disclose information about their activities, their supply
chain and their contribution to social and environmental issues. The organization discloses
extensive information and communicates regularly with its stakeholders via reports, social
media channels and the website. In addition, they appear to work closely with other
organizations in the supply chain and take part in several multi-stakeholder initiatives.
Therefore, this organization has been selected as the proactive case in this research study.
24
The reactive case that has been selected is, as well as the proactive case, a supplier of
workwear, safety workwear & shoes and protective equipment. It was a deliberate choice to
select both the proactive and the reactive case in the workwear sector of the garment industry
in order to make a good comparison between the two cases. The reactive case has a website
where outdated information about the organization can be found. They do not openly share
updates about the organization or their supply chain and do not report on any form of CSR. In
addition, they have several social media channels but sporadically post information on these
channels. The organization doesn’t report on being part of any multi-stakeholder initiative. The
website merely seems to be aimed at customers because it mainly shows information about the
different products, discounts or other promotions. This organization does, in contrast to the
proactive case, not disclose extensive information to its stakeholders and not much information
can be found about their supply chain and activities. Therefore, this organization has been
selected as the reactive case in this research study.
Data will be collected through conducting four interviews at both the proactive case and
the reactive case. To get a rich and comprehensive view of both SMEs legitimacy strategies
these interviews will be semi-structured. A semi-structured interview offers some structure
when comparing the interviews but still provides a comprehensive view of how the participant
experiences a social phenomenon (Bleijenbergh, 2016). In a semi-structured interview, a list of
topics or questions is formulated in advance in the form of an interview guide (Boeije &
Bleijenbergh, 2019). This interview guide provides direction in the research but leaves room
for adjustment per specific participant. The interview guide used for conducting the interviews
is included in appendix I. The advantage of conducting semi-structured interviews is that the
researcher can control which information will be discussed during the interview without
pinning the participant down to a specific answer (Bleijenbergh, 2016). In an open interview,
no questions are formulated in advance and the follow-up questions are determined by the
answers given by the participant (Bleijenbergh, 2016). The personal story of the participant
then determines which information is presented. Since there is a focus on the SMEs
management of legitimacy and the aim is to make a comparison between the two cases, using
semi-structured interviews is the most appropriate form of data collection because it will
provide the exact amount of guidance to make this comparison.
As stated before, multiple interviews will be conducted at both cases. The interviews
will be held with internal stakeholders of both SMEs, in specific the owner, the manager, and
employees of both cases. By only looking at internal stakeholders it is possible to find out how
these specific SME cases manage their legitimacy but also why they do this in a certain way.
25
Only focusing on internal stakeholders will increase the quality of the findings for this particular
group of stakeholders (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). Within this research study it is
appropriate to apply source triangulation and thereby involve people from different positions
within the organization about the same phenomenon. The different internal stakeholders can
supplement the knowledge about the SME legitimacy strategies from different points of view.
This will provide more rich and varied information about the phenomenon (Bleijenbergh,
2016).
3.3 Data analysis
The multiple interviews will be recorded and transcribed afterwards. The transcribed interviews
form the basis for analysis. The transcripts will be coded in order to analyze the rich and varied
data. By systematically labeling the transcripts with concepts that begin concretely but become
more and more abstract, patterns and relationships will emerge from the textual material (Boeije
& Bleijenbergh, 2019). This form of analysis is based on the grounded theory approach. The
procedure of grounded theory is aimed at ‘developing an integrated set of concepts that provide
a thorough theoretical explanation of the social phenomenon under study’ (Corbin & Strauss,
1990, p.5). The grounded theory approach can be used to explain and describe the phenomenon
of SMEs legitimacy strategies. This procedure enables the researcher to capture and understand
all potential aspects of the phenomenon under study which eventually leads to producing a
theory (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). Since there is no specific theory on the management of
legitimacy for SMEs this procedure seems appropriate. The grounded theory uses an inductive
analysis but can include sensitizing concepts to guide the procedure. The analytical process of
coding based on grounded theory research involves open coding, axial coding and selective
coding. The process of coding is iterative and therefore it might be necessary to move back and
forth from one form of coding to another. The process is also iterative in nature because relevant
topics discovered in the first interviews can be used as a guide and thereby be included in the
following interviews together with the sensitizing concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The
process of data collection and data analysis are therefore intertwined.
Open coding is the process of researching, comparing, conceptualizing and categorizing
the data (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). Open coding ensures that the researcher gets to know the
material thoroughly and it thereby provides a clear overview (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019).
The transcripts will be broken down analytically and specific fragments will be given concrete
labels. In doing so, the researcher stays close to the empirical material. Open codes are concrete
26
and help to unravel the text into different fragments (Bleijenbergh, 2016). They provide the
concepts with which the participants describe the social phenomenon. With open coding a
constant comparison will be made on similarities and differences between fragments (Corbin
& Strauss, 1990).
The process of axial coding takes place after open coding and brings the data together
in a new way, by making connections between categories (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). In the
process of axial coding the connection between the open codes will be discovered and
distinguished categories will be identified (Bleijenbergh, 2016). These categories will be
labeled with axial codes and form the more abstract overarching categories of the open codes.
With axial coding the different categories will be related to their sub-categories (Corbin &
Strauss, 1990). As a result, the number of codes will be reduced and thus data reduction can be
achieved.
In the process of selective coding ‘all categories are unified around a core category’
(Corbin & Strauss, 1990, p. 14). This one or few core categories will represent the central
phenomenon of this research study. The emphasis will be on integrating the findings by making
connections between categories described in the process of axial coding (Boeije &
Bleijenbergh, 2019). By comparing the fragments with the same axial codes, patterns can be
recognized with regard to the social phenomenon (Bleijenbergh, 2016). These selective codes
help to make the connection between data and theory and represent relationships. On the basis
of these relationships a conceptual model can be developed. The resulting conceptual model
should show the relationships between the categories that describe the phenomenon studied
(Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton, 2013). The conceptual model helps to formulate the findings and
conclusion in order to answer the research question.
3.4 Quality of the research
The criteria used to assess the quality of quantitative research are different from qualitative
research because it involves a structurally different kind of research. It is therefore important to
consider the quality assessment criteria for qualitative research within this research study. The
interviewer is the main measuring instrument and it is wise to separate empirical data from
interpretations (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019). Within this study the assessment criteria of Guba
& Lincoln (1989) as described in the book of Symon & Casell (2012) about qualitative
organizational research will be used. The first assessment criterium is credibility. Credibility is
about demonstrating a good fit between the constructed realities of participants and the
27
reconstruction that the researcher attributes to them (Guba & Lincoln, as cited in Symon &
Casell, 2012). To enhance the credibility member checks will be conducted to check the
interpretations with the participants throughout the research. Additionally, peer debriefings will
be held with other students to discuss what has come across during the research with someone
from outside. The second assessment criterium is transferability. Transferability is about
providing enough information so that the reader can judge whether their situation might be
informed by the findings (Guba & Lincoln, as cited in Symon & Casell, 2012). To enhance the
transferability a thick description of both cases will be provided to inform the readers. On the
basis of this thick description the reader is able to judge whether their situation is comparable
to the specific cases in this research. The third assessment criterium is dependability.
Dependability is about showing methodological changes and shifts in constructions to inform
the reader how meaning is constructed (Guba & Lincoln, as cited in Symon & Casell, 2012).
Therefore, the methodological choices of this research study are elaborately discussed so that
the reader knows what decisions have been made and why. The final assessment criterium is
confirmability. Confirmability is about showing where your data comes from (Guba & Lincoln,
as cited in Symon & Casell, 2012). By providing a code book it is possible to show how the
different analytical steps eventually lead to the findings and final conclusions.
3.5 Research ethics
Within social sciences the emphasis on ethics is getting increasingly important (Boeije &
Bleijenbergh, 2019). Therefore research ethics will be taken into account in this research study.
First of all, the informed consent will be ensured within this study. This means that participants
must give their consent to participate after they have been fully informed about the content of
the research and have had the opportunity to ask questions (Boeije & Bleijenbergh, 2019).
Before the interview starts, participants will be informed about the research goal and the
duration of the interview. Participants are allowed to ask further questions during the entire
process and have the freedom to withdraw from the research at any time, which will be
communicated clearly to them. Second, the participants permission to record the interview will
be asked. The transcribed interviews will be sent back to the participants via email for a
member-check. The transcripts and findings of this research study can be discussed with the
participants to prevent that they are misinterpreted, exaggerated or taken out of their context.
Third, agreements will be made with the participants on the possibilities of debriefing. The final
report of this research study can be shared online or through a presentation if the organization
28
is interested in this. Final, throughout the entire research study there will be a focus on treating
information confidentially to safeguard privacy. The names of the participants as well as the
organizations will not be mentioned to guarantee their anonymity.
29
4. Findings In this chapter the findings of this research study will be discussed. Due to the comparative
nature of this case study it was possible to explore the differences between the proactive case
and the reactive case. With semi-structured interviews at both cases the phenomenon of SME
legitimacy strategies has been studied in depth. Therefore, it was possible to inductively
develop a model that helps us to distinguish SMEs along their legitimacy strategies and identify
the forces that drive SMEs legitimacy strategies. The findings of the data analysis will be
discussed in detail, from which it will also become clear how these findings were arrived at. In
chapter 4.1 the identified elements of reactive and proactive legitimacy strategies for SMEs will
be discussed. These elements will provide insight in how some SMEs manage their legitimacy
more proactively than other SMEs in the same industry. In chapter 4.2 the forces driving SMEs
towards a more reactive or proactive legitimacy management will be elaborately explained. It
will become clear how these forces influence the specific elements and therefore drive the
SMEs towards a particular strategy. These specified forces and their relationships with the
elements will provide insight in why some SMEs manage their legitimacy more proactively
than other SMEs. Chapter 4.3 shortly elaborates on the findings about the SMEs organizational
culture. Chapter 4.4 introduces the conceptual model that presents the relationships between
the identified forces and elements of SMEs legitimacy strategies. These categories together
describe the phenomenon of legitimacy management for SMEs.
4.1 Elements of SME legitimacy management
For both legitimacy strategies seven elements were identified that help us to distinguish SMEs
along their legitimacy management. The seven elements can be both on the reactive side as well
as on the proactive side of managing legitimacy. The identified elements will first be presented
for the reactive legitimacy strategy and afterwards for the proactive legitimacy strategy. As
explained before, this chapter will provide insight in how SMEs can manage their legitimacy.
4.1.1 Reactive SME legitimacy management
The first element is the role the SME takes upon in the supply chain (axial code). SMEs using
a reactive strategy tend to take on a dependent role in the supply chain (open code). If partners
in their supply chain do not invest in certain issues, reactive SMEs take no further action to
choose suppliers who do invest in these issues. They take on a dependent role and continue to
work with these partners, thereby agreeing to sell their items no matter if these partners’
30
activities are in line with their values. The following quote by the warehouse manager of the
reactive case (2021) expresses the dependent role: ‘I don't think we can do anything more about
it [sustainability] because it is simply not possible for us because we are dependent of suppliers
and their activities (…) so I don’t think we can do much about these issues.’ . This shows that
the reactive SME does not set requirements regarding the collaboration with partners in the
supply chain and thereby agrees with the activities as determined by their partners. They
therefore take upon a rather dependent role in their supply chain.
The dependent role that reactive SMEs take upon in the supply chain often comes
together with merely responding to the actions of stakeholders (open code). This element is
about the SMEs level of assertiveness in dealing with stakeholders (axial code). SMEs using a
reactive strategy are not participating in collective actions but act as a response to actions from
stakeholders. This means that the SME only takes action itself due to changes in the institutional
environment of the organization. As the store manager of the reactive case (2021) explains: ‘We
sometimes notice that the larger concerns want to distinguish themselves because they sense in
the market that this is an important topic. They then want to present themselves as ‘yes, we are
paying attention to this topic and even our clothing is responsible’. So then we will have to
respond to that and that's when we're looking for suppliers who can deliver this.’. This quote
illustrates that the SME only responds to the action of larger concerns paying attention to the
topic of sustainable clothing. They don’t initiate action themselves to offer sustainable clothing
on beforehand. Thus, the SME is responding to actions from stakeholders. In addition, the
following quote by the owner of the reactive case (2021) shows that they do not take part in
any multi-stakeholder initiatives: ‘I: In the garment industry, there is the covenant for
sustainable clothing and textiles. Do you participate in this or any other similar initiative?
R: No, to be honest, we don't. We are just really not involved in with these things.’. They do not
take part in collective actions with other stakeholder’s and merely respond to the actions of
stakeholders.
In addition, SMEs can decide on the responsibility they take for social and
environmental issues in the supply chain (axial code). Whilst using a reactive strategy SMEs
tend to shift the responsibility to other parties in the supply chain (open code). They assume
that other partier will take responsibility and therefore do not take responsibility themselves for
social and environmental issues that occur in the supply chain or industry. The following quote
illustrates that they shift the responsibility to parties upstream the supply chain: ‘We can of
course choose with which suppliers we want to work together. For example, if suppliers do not
really stand for sustainability, we can choose whether or not to work with them. This can be of
31
course part of our responsibility but to be honest, we don’t consciously take that responsibility.
We assume that suppliers are doing this and we trust them.’ (Owner reactive case, 2021). As
the owner explains, they assume that the supplier takes responsibility for environmental issues
and thereby rely on their responsibility. They do not take their own responsibility for things that
happen within the supply chain and therefore shift the responsibility to other partiers.
While shifting the responsibility to other parties in the supply chain, reactive SMEs tend
to take no initiative for contributing to social and environmental issues occurring in the supply
chain or the industry (open code). This element is about the level of initiative taken by the SME
with regard to social and environmental issues (axial code). These issues often don’t play a role
within their organization, as the following quote by the owner of the reactive case (2021)
illustrates: ‘I: And how would you define corporate social responsibility? ... What does this
mean for your organization? R: We have recycled toilet paper, that is sustainable ha-ha. There
is just not that much attention for it here because we are a smaller organization and it doesn’t
concern us that much. Yeah, what can I say, what are we actually doing here? … I think it is a
good question, but it doesn’t really concern us very much.’. The owner explains that they do
not pay attention to Corporate Social Responsibility because these social and environmental
issues don’t play a role for them either. Therefore, they do not take any initiative to contribute
to these issues occurring in their supply chain or industry.
In addition to the earlier mentioned elements about taking responsibility and initiative
to contribute to social and environmental issues, a third element is related to this. This element
is about the level of certainty the SME requires in the supply chain (axial code). SMEs using a
reactive strategy rely on what partners in the supply chain state about their activities (open
code). They assume that the activities of other organizations in the supply chain are carried out
under the right circumstances and thereby believe what other organizations report on it. As the
owner of the reactive case (2021) explains: ‘We assume that not so much the clothing itself, but
the process surrounding the production is sustainable at almost every supplier. They specify
this, so we assume that this is the case’. This shows that the SME assumes that products are
produced in a sustainable way for the majority of suppliers. They do not take their own initiative
to check whether this is true, even if they are not aware of the circumstances and location of
the production. This is shown by the following quote: ‘We can find out where the production is
located but we usually don’t because there are a lot of them [supplier]. This kind of information
regarding sustainability is available on their website so we rely on this information’ (Store
manager reactive case, p. 20). The quote illustrates that the SME does not question these
32
statements and trusts what the supplier is reporting. They rely on what partners state about their
activities and thereby require a low level of certainty.
Another element of SMEs legitimacy strategy is the communication towards
stakeholders (axial code), which for reactive SMEs implies they communicate information
rather carefully and occasionally towards stakeholders (open code). They are not actively
involved in communicating information that they want stakeholders to be aware of. In addition,
whilst being careful in their communication they do not want to set false expectations. The
following quote illustrates the careful and occasional nature of the SMEs communication: ‘It
says on the website that we provide a good service, but this is mainly evident in the service
itself. So, we do communicate it, but we are not very actively communicating it. We are also a
little cautious because people who are too strong about it and say that they do everything so
good and perfectly, that's where most of the problems occur. Of course, we say that to new
customers, and we are absolutely committed to it, but we also know that sometimes things go
wrong here so we don't communicate this to the outside world to prevent disappointing them.’
(Owner reactive case, 2021). The owner demonstrates that the SME has certain values but that
they prefer to communicate these values through their services. They do not want to disappoint
their stakeholders and therefore are cautious about the way and the information they
communicate. Therefore, the SME using a reactive legitimacy strategy communicates
information carefully towards stakeholders and is not actively involved in it, leading to
communication happening rather occasionally.
The communication towards stakeholders is often related to the SMEs relationships with
other organizations in the supply chain (axial code). Reactive SMEs tend to have their contact
with partners in the supply chain via intermediaries (open code). They often have no direct
relationship with partners upstream or downstream the supply chain. This is evident in the data
by the following quote: ‘We have contact with the representatives of suppliers, often not with
the suppliers themselves. (…) The communication with the factory is in English but we actually
hardly ever communicate with them.’ (Owner reactive case, 2021). The owner of the reactive
case explains that they have contact with their suppliers via representatives and that they barely
communicate with manufacturers more upstream the supply chain. Hence, they have indirect
relationships via intermediaries or even no relationship with partners in the supply chain.
33
4.1.2 Proactive SME legitimacy management
As seen at the reactive SME legitimacy management, the first element of SMEs legitimacy
strategies is about the role the SME takes upon in the supply chain (axial code). SMEs using a
proactive strategy are often forming their supply chain based on their own set requirements
(open code). They collaborate with partners in the supply chain that have values and standards
that are in line with the requirements set by the SME. As the purchase manager of the proactive
case (2021) explains: ‘We select suppliers by checking whether they comply with our values.
So, we mainly check whether they meet the requirements of the ILO (International Labor
Organization), whether they do not use child labor, or whether certain environmental
requirements are met. There are a number of criteria that we pay attention to.'. This quote
illustrates that the proactive SME sets requirements and on the basis of these requirements they
decide whether they collaborate with a certain party. This eventually decides how their supply
chain will look like and therefore they are taking up a rather independent role.
This independent role they take upon in the supply chain is often relatable to the SMEs
level of assertiveness in dealing with stakeholders (2n order code). SMEs that use a proactive
strategy are not merely responding to the actions of stakeholders but take initiative for collective
actions with stakeholders (open code). They work collectively with several stakeholders to
collaborate on certain issues. This can entail among others being part of a project, a partnership
or a multi-stakeholder initiative. The following two quotes show that the proactive SME takes
part in collective actions with several stakeholders: ‘We also have a project where we work
together with one of our customers. We collect old clothing from them and process that into
new materials from which we make sustainable items’ (Production manager proactive case,
2021).
‘I: Do you also sometimes have contact with other companies that are members of this initiative
and participate in it? R: Yes, definitely. We also have meetings and discussions with other
organizations sometimes so we can learn from each other.’ (Owner proactive case, 2021). In
the quotes the interviewees mention that they collaborate with customers in a project and have
meetings with other organizations in the garment industry to learn from each other with regard
to sustainability. They additionally take part in several multi-stakeholder initiatives like Fair
Wear, NL Greenlabel and Clearmark. Therefore, it can be concluded that they initiate collective
actions with stakeholders and are not merely responding to the actions of stakeholders.
Furthermore, SMEs can determine on the responsibility they take for social and
environmental issues in the supply chain (axial code). SMEs using a proactive strategy tend to
acknowledge their responsibility for social and environmental issues (open code). They even
34
take responsibility for activities that are executed by other parties upstream the supply chain.
The acknowledged responsibility is evident by the following quote: ‘I think that we have and
that we are taking a big responsibility for issues that are happening in the garment industry
because we are also part of it. We try to contribute by focusing on these issues and therefore
actually avoiding and solving them throughout the entire supply chain.’ (Purchase manager
proactive case, 2021). As explained by the quote, they acknowledge that they have a big
responsibility for social and environmental issues in the garment industry because they are
being part of this industry. They do not shift the responsibility to other parties but take their
own responsibility.
By acknowledging responsibility with regard to social and environmental issues,
proactive SMEs often take initiative themselves to contribute to social and environmental issues
(open code). During the interviews with the proactive case many examples of such initiatives
were given of which two will be shown to illustrate: ‘That means that in our company we
employ people with a disability, who are therefore difficult to employ in a normal recruiting
process.’ (Owner proactive case, 2021). This quote illustrates that the SME works with people
for whom it is not easy to enter the labor market. By doing so, they want to make a social
contribution. Another example given by the sustainability manager of the proactive case (2021)
would be: ‘We actually want to minimize our footprint that we leave as an organization. We
actually want to make sure that anything where we make use of energy or where we have an
impact on the environment or CO2 emission, that we minimize that. And we do everything we
can to reduce this.’. This quote demonstrates that the SME is concerned with environmental
issues and the footprint they leave as an organization. Therefore, they take initiatives
themselves to minimize their impact as an organization and thereby contribute to social and
environmental issues.
In addition to taking initiative to contribute to social and environmental issues, another
element is related to the acknowledged responsibility of proactive SMEs. This element is about
the level of certainty the SME requires in the supply chain (axial code). SMEs using a proactive
strategy for the management of their legitimacy are monitoring the activities in the supply chain
themselves (open code). They not only monitor their own activities but also those of partners
in the supply chain to make sure that certain conditions are met. The following quote explains
how the reactive case monitors the production activities of their partner in the supply chain: ‘If
you look at the factory in Bulgaria, we agreed with the Fair Wear foundation that we will audit
them once every three years. This means that we actually monitor the factory on the 9 different
ICSR (International Corporate Social Responsibility) themes.' (Sustainability manager
35
proactive case, 2021). This quote demonstrates that the SME using a proactive strategy does
not rely on the information that partners in the supply chain provide about their activities. They
want to be certain that the products are made under the right conditions and thus monitor the
activities in the supply chain.
Furthermore, SMEs are distinct in their communication towards stakeholders (axial
code). SMEs that use a proactive strategy communicate information actively towards
stakeholders (open code). They think it is important that stakeholders are well informed about
their activities. This becomes evident by the following quote: ‘We like to be transparent. We
want everyone to know what we are doing and what we are focusing on within the
organization.’ (Owner proactive case, 2021). It is important for the SME that stakeholders are
actively updated with relevant information. Reaching these different stakeholders is done by
putting in place several communication methods: ‘We do the communicating in different ways.
We do it on the website, with reports, surveys, conversations with customers and suppliers and
things like that. We are actively involved with this communication to keep those parties
informed in a fun and informative way.’ (Purchase manager proactive case, 2021). By making
use of these different methods they assure that stakeholders are regularly informed and therefore
know what the SME is occupied with. Hence, they actively communicate towards their
stakeholders.
Related to the active communication towards stakeholders are the often direct
relationships that proactive SMEs have with partners in the supply chain (open code). Proactive
SMEs put an emphasis on having direct relationships with partners upstream and downstream
the supply chain. This is illustrated by the following quote: ‘We also have close and direct
contact with both our suppliers and the manufacturers of the cloths. Before corona, we would
also visit often to discuss these kinds of issues.’ (Owner proactive case, 2021). As the owner
explains they have direct contact with both their suppliers and manufacturers and sometimes
even visit them at their production locations. Therefore, it can be stated that they have direct
relationships with partners in the supply chain.
4.2 Forces driving SME legitimacy management
While analyzing the data, five forces driving the management of legitimacy for SMEs were
discovered. These forces push the SME towards a particular management of their legitimacy.
It will become clear how these forces were discovered and how they influence the specific
elements and therefore drive the SMEs towards a particular strategy. This chapter will provide
36
insight in why some SMEs manage their legitimacy more proactively than other SMEs. The
forces and their identified relationships will now be elaborately explained.
4.2.1 SMEs organizational focus
The first force that drives SMEs towards a certain strategy is the organizational focus of the
SME (axial code). SMEs can either have a primary focus on the competitive market or a primary
focus on the organizational improvement. SMEs who tend to focus primarly on the competitive
market (open code) are being pushed towards a more reactive strategy because this competitive
focus is closely related to the SMEs tendency to merely respond to the actions of stakeholders.
While having a focus on the competitive market, they try to find out how they can differentiate
themselves from other organizations in the same industry. They often try to provide a more
attractive offer than their competitors do and thereby act in response to changes in their
competitive environment. As the owner of the reactive case (2021) explains: ‘Well, you see,
there are a lot of companies in the Netherlands that need company clothing, so there are also
a lot of company clothing suppliers. Therefore, it is quite difficult, especially since most of them
are also dealers. We try to constantly distinguish ourselves from competitors by means of a
lower price, good quality and better service.'. This quote illustrates that they are continuously
looking at what competitors are doing and adjust their pricing, products and services as a
reaction to that. As the owner of the reactive case (2021) explains: ‘You can start fighting
yourself and try to find all kinds of new things in the market in which you can do something
new, but it is still easiest to look around at what competitors are doing and try to distinguish
yourself from them.’. This quote demonstrates that the SME is waiting to see what competitors
are doing and then react to that by differentiating themselves. Thus, an organizational focus on
the competitive market pushes SMEs towards a reactive management of legitimacy by
influencing the level of assertiveness through merely reacting to the actions of stakeholders.
SMEs who are on the other hand merely focusing on the organizational improvement
(open code) are being pushed towards a more proactive strategy. They try to focus on their own
organization instead of looking at other organizations in the same industry while acting as a
reaction to them. By focusing on the organizational improvement SMEs are being pushed
towards a more proactive strategy because they take initiatives for collective actions with other
stakeholders in order to improve their organization or the supply chain. Like the owner of the
proactive case (2021) explained in his interview: ‘We actually focus as much as possible on our
own company. We can endlessly worry about what other companies are doing, but we only
want to worry about things that we can do something about ourselves or in collaboration with
37
other parties. The rest is not of interest to me.’. As illustrated in the quote the SME takes
initiative for improving the organization without being forced by changes in the competitive
environment. Due to the focus on organizational improvement, SMEs initiate collective actions
with stakeholders in order to improve on certain issues and therefore the SME is pushed towards
a more proactive strategy.
4.2.2 SMEs awareness in the supply chain
In addition to the organizational focus, the SMEs awareness of social and environmental issues
in the supply chain or industry (axial code) also push SMEs towards a certain strategy. SMEs
who are rather ignorant of issues going on their supply chain and industry (open code) are being
pushed towards a reactive management of their legitimacy by not taking responsibility for these
issues, not taking initiatives to contribute to these issues and relying on what partners in the
supply chain state about their activities. If SMEs are not aware of the social and environmental
issues going on in the supply chain, they don’t perceive these issues as a challenge to their
organization. Therefore, they are less incentivized to take responsibility for these issues and
initiate actions to actually solve these social and environmental issues. In addition, the
ignorance also pushes the SME towards a reactive strategy because they merely rely on what
partners in the supply chain state about their activities with regard to these issues. SMEs do not
feel responsible and therefore push the responsibility to partners in the supply chain. They rely
on the information their partners provide about these issues and don’t take actions themselves
for contribution. The following quote shows how the ignorance of social and environmental
issues leads to not initiating action: ‘No with our small business we don't really have to deal
with social and environmental issues in the supply chain. (...) We don’t do much here about
corporate social responsibility. It's not really an issue to us.’ (Owner reactive case, 2021). As
illustrated by the quote, they are not aware of the issues going on in the garment industry,
leading to them not feeling responsible for these issues and thereby not initiating action. Thus,
SMEs ignorance of social and environmental issues pushes them towards a more reactive
strategy.
SMEs who are on the other hand extensively aware of the social and environmental
issues occurring in the supply chain (open code) are being pushed towards a more proactive
management of legitimacy. If SMEs are aware of the consequences that their activities upstream
and downstream the supply chain can have for society as well as the environment, their sense
of responsibility is triggered. SMEs therefore acknowledge their responsibility in the supply
chain and thereby take initiative to contribute to social and environmental issues. In addition,
38
they are not merely relying on what partners state about their activities. Instead they are
monitoring activities in the supply chain in order to ensure that certain conditions are met. The
following quote demonstrates how the awareness of the SME influences their acknowledged
responsibility: ‘At one point the story came up that Syrian refugees and other oppressed people
were being put to work in garment factories in Turkey. We found out about this and it made us
realize that this was a serious issue. Well, you know, if you can’t have control over it and can’t
control the situation, then it's a very dangerous problem. You then get these kinds of abuses,
and I just call them abuses because they are. We should actually be ahead of them and this is
a real focus point for us. (Sustainability manager proactive case, 2021). The SME is aware of
the working conditions and the seriousness of these kinds of issues. While having an extensive
awareness of social and environmental, SMEs acknowledge their responsibility and initiate
actions with regard to these issues, meaning the SME is pushed towards a more proactive
management of legitimacy.
4.2.3 SMEs motivation in the supply chain
Furthermore, the SMEs motivation in the supply chain (axial code) also drives the SME towards
a more reactive or proactive legitimacy management. SMEs whose motivation is mainly
focused on money (open code) are being pushed towards a reactive management of their
legitimacy by triggering certain elements of a reactive legitimacy strategy. Their motivation
focused towards money can be related to the organizational focus on the competitive
environment. In both cases, SMEs put an emphasis on the pricing of products and processes.
This motivation directed at the value of money causes the SME to pay less attention to other
issues that arise in the supply chain. Therefore, they are less triggered to acknowledge their
responsibility and shift the responsibility to other parties in the supply chain. SMEs then often
take no initiative to invest in social and environmental issues. As the owner of the proactive
case (2021) explains: ‘I'm willing to think about these issues but investing money in it is just
too much for me’ (Owner, reactive case). As the quote illustrates, the SME wants to prevent
losing money by contributing to issues that occur in the supply chain. It is therefore rather
irrelevant to them how and where their products are being made: ‘Our suppliers are mostly
European suppliers but of course they have the clothing produced somewhere in the east. But
where and how they produce these products exactly? I really have no idea. This isn’t really an
issue to us. As long as the price and quality are good here, I am actually satisfied. As long as
it is an addition for us here.’ (Owner, reactive case)
39
As a result, the SME doesn’t initiate actions themselves to invest in issues happening in their
supply chain because they want to prevent losing money. Thus, SMEs having their motivation
primarly focused on money and generating revenues are pushed towards a more reactive
legitimacy management. Their motivation has an impact on the SMEs sense of responsibility
and their urge to take initiative with regard to other issues. SMEs are even increasingly pushed
towards a reactive strategy when their motivation on money is combined with an organizational
focus on the competitive environment. In that case, there is an intensified focus on money and
the pricing of products, and this makes other issues rather irrelevant for the SME.
SMEs can instead also have their intrinsic motivation mainly focused towards engaging
in social and environmental issues (open code). In that case, SMEs consider it foremost
important that their activities in the supply chain have as little impact as possible on the society
and the environment. Therefore, they acknowledge their responsibility and actively engage in
CSR initiatives. They are willing to make sacrifices in order to ensure their negative impact is
reduced: ‘The advantage of those countries [in Asia] is that it can all be produced at a much
cheaper cost, but not against all prices with regard to society and the environment. That's
actually kind of how it works with us.’ (Sustainability manager proactive case, 2021). The quote
illustrates that the SME considers their impact on society and the environment more important
than the price they pay. Their intrinsic motivation to engage in social and environmental issues
also influence the SMEs required level of certainty. They often monitor the activities in the
supply chain themselves to ensure that certain social and environmental standards are met. This
intrinsic motivation, often in combination with the SMEs awareness of social and
environmental issues, pushes the SME towards initiating actions without being forced: ‘We
always say: if we want to leave a livable world then we have to start with ourselves. We are
just a small player, but we can certainly contribute something.’ (Owner proactive case, 2021).
Hence, the intrinsic motivation focused towards engaging in social and environmental issues
pushes SMEs towards a more proactive legitimacy management because it closely related to
their acknowledged responsibility, their engagement in CSR initiatives and their required level
of certainty in the supply chain.
4.2.4 SMEs understanding of the supply chain
In addition, the SMEs understanding of the supply chain (axial code) is also an important driver
for the management of legitimacy for SMEs. While having no clear understanding of the supply
chain, SMEs are being pushed towards a rather reactive legitimacy management. The lack of
understanding implies that SMEs are not aware of their relevant stakeholders and therefore they
40
are communicating rather inactively towards their stakeholders. This lack of knowledge also
influences the relation they have with partners in the supply chain. SMEs who have no insight
in the entire supply chain often don’t seek relationships with partners more upstream or
downstream the supply chain. They mostly have contact with partners via intermediaries and
not with the suppliers or manufacturers themselves. Aside from knowing who their direct
partners are in the supply chain, going more upstream or downstream the supply chain it
remains unclear to them. The following narrative illustrates the ignorance of the SME: ‘R: The
clothing is basically just all produced in Thailand and Bangladesh and countries like that. I: Is
it then clear to you where exactly it comes from? R: No, not at all. Of course, I can look it up
and ask the intermediary, but I wouldn’t know where all my suppliers have their clothes
produced. They are mostly European suppliers but of course they have their clothes made
somewhere far away but where exactly they produce, I really have no idea.’ (Owner reactive
case, 2021). As the interviewee points out, apart from knowing who their suppliers are, they
have no insight in where the clothing is actually produced. They have no clear understanding
of the entire supply chain and as the narrative demonstrates they have little interest in this
information. This pushes the SME towards a reactive strategy by having an impact on the SMEs
relationships with partners in the supply chain and the SMEs communication towards relevant
stakeholders.
When SMEs have a more detailed understanding of the supply chain (open code), they
do not only know their direct partners but also have insight in the supply chain whilst going
more upstream or downstream. This pushes the SME towards a rather proactive legitimacy
management by having an impact on the nature of the relationships with partners in the supply
chain and the SMEs communication with these stakeholders. The following quote illustrates
the direct relationship with partners in the supply chain and the additionally active
communication with these partners: ‘We know exactly where our products and materials come
from and map this for ourselves as well. We want transparency within the supply chain. We've
also been there [factories] ourselves and have direct relationships with them. In addition, we
often communicate with them about all kinds of issues.’ (owner proactive case, 2021). The quote
demonstrates that the SME visited a partner and therefore knows where the products they sell
are being produced. Due to the understanding of the supply chain, SMEs are being pushed
towards a more proactive strategy by having direct relationships and actively communicating
with stakeholders.
41
4.2.5 External pressures
Besides from the above-mentioned forces that are internal of the organization, there are also
external pressures (axial code) that can push SMEs towards a certain legitimacy management.
The external pressures together consist of the customer demands and the expectations of
stakeholders. If there are hardly no stakeholder expectations or customer demand (open code)
for sustainable products, SMEs are pushed towards a rather reactive legitimacy management
by having less incentives to acknowledge their responsibility in the supply chain and to take
initiative with regard to social and environmental issues. As the warehouse manager of the
reactive case (2021) explains: ‘If there is no demand for sustainable clothing, we can purchase
it as much as we want but then we won't make it.’. This quote shows that the customer demand
can be an important driver for SMEs in deciding to invest in sustainable clothing. Therefore, a
low level of stakeholder expectations and customer demand for sustainable products pushes the
SME towards a reactive strategy by less incentivizing the SME to acknowledge their
responsibility and invest in CSR initiatives together with other stakeholders.
When there are high stakeholder expectations in combination with customer demands
for sustainable products, SMEs are pushed towards a proactive strategy by acknowledging their
responsibility, taking initiatives to invest in social and environmental issues and thereby
communicating this proactively to meet these external pressures. The following quote illustrates
that a customer demand for sustainable products pushes them to engage in social and
environmental issues: ‘We work a lot with municipalities and governments and they sometimes
ask about sustainability, so there is also a part of commercial interest in it for in engaging in
these issues ourselves.’ (Purchase manager proactive case). The following quote illustrates the
expectations from the institutional environment pushing them to engage in social and
environmental issues: ‘I think it is something from the past few years. It [issue of sustainability]
used to be there but it was less present. It’s becoming much more present in the past few years,
also because of the media attention. It has also come much more to the attention with other
companies in the industry. Because of this, of course we are moving along.’ (Production
manager proactive case, 2021). SMEs can experience an increased expectation from
stakeholders such as the government, competitors or the press. As a result, this commercial
interest in investing in these kinds of issues and initiating action themselves pushes the SME
towards a more proactive legitimacy strategy.
42
4.3 SMEs organizational culture
The axial code ‘SMEs organizational culture’ stood out while analyzing the data. However,
based on this concept it is not possible to distinguish SMEs with regard to their legitimacy
management. For both the reactive SMEs as well as the proactive SMEs the organizational
culture is similar. All the interviewees of both cases mention a friendly atmosphere within the
organization (open code) and explain that the people in the organization are open to each other
(open code). The following two quotes illustrate the similarities between the organizational
cultures of the different SMEs: ‘Things are very relaxed here. We can joke around, we goof around,
we like to have a beer together at the end of the day, but it can also definitely be serious if we have to.
So very friendly and familial even I would say.’ (Owner reactive case, 2021). ‘Yes, it is actually very cozy here. Of course, there are issues and arguments because we are
also just normal people but basically, it's just fun and very friendly. We drink a cup of coffee together.
We often have drinks on Friday afternoons, especially when that was still possible before the pandemic.’
(Production manager proactive case, 2021). Both interviewees elaborate on the atmosphere in
which there is room for informal interaction. They express the atmosphere as being friendly
and familial, illustrating the similarities between both organizational cultures. Therefore, it is
not selected as one of the drivers of SMEs management of legitimacy because no distinction
can be made based on the organizational culture.
43
4.4 Conceptual model
The findings presented in chapter 4.1 and chapter 4.2 can be conceptualized into a model. On
the left side of the model the forces are presented that drive the legitimacy management of
SMEs. These forces and their particular characteristics push the SME either towards a more
reactive legitimacy management or towards a more proactive legitimacy management. As
explained in the findings, both strategies consist of seven elements. These elements are
presented on the right side of the model for each strategy. The conceptual model helps to
formulate the conclusion in order to answer the research question.
Figure 2: conceptualization of the findings
44
5. Conclusion & Discussion In this chapter the conclusion and discussion of this research study will be discussed. Chapter
5.1 presents the conclusion that answers the research question of this study. Chapter 5.2 and 5.3
go deeper into the theoretical and practical implications of this research study. Chapter 5.4
presents the limitations of this research together with the recommendations for further research.
Finally, in chapter 5.5 a reflexivity is made based on the role of the researcher during this study.
5.1 Conclusion
This research study is aimed at gaining insight in the drivers of SMEs legitimacy management
and how specific legitimacy strategies for SMEs look like, by studying both a reactive and a
proactive SME in the garment industry. Therefore, the following research question has been
formulated: ‘How and why do some SMEs in the garment industry manage legitimacy more
proactively than other SMEs in the same industry?’ To answer this research question a
distinction will be made between answering how SMEs manage their legitimacy and why some
SMEs manage their legitimacy more proactively than others.
How?
Several elements have been identified for both a reactive and proactive legitimacy
strategy, explaining how SMEs manage their legitimacy. While using a reactive strategy, SMEs
tend to take upon a rather dependent role in the supply chain and thereby do not set requirements
regarding the collaboration with partners. They agree with the activities as determined by their
partners in the supply chain. This dependent role often comes together with the SME merely
acting as a response to certain actions from stakeholders. In addition, reactive SMEs tend to
shift the responsibility for social and environmental issues to other parties in the supply chain.
They thereby often take no initiative for contribution and rely on what partners state about their
activities with regard to social and environmental issues. They require a low level of certainty
and therefore assume that activities are carried out under the right circumstances. In addition,
SMEs reactively managing their legitimacy tend to communicate information rather carefully
and occasionally towards stakeholders and often agree with having indirect relationships or
even no relationships with partners in the supply chain.
SMEs using a proactive strategy on the other hand often take upon a rather independent
role in the supply chain. They form their supply chain based on their own set requirements to
make sure to make sure they only collaborate with partners that match their criteria. While
taking on this independent role, SMEs often have a high level of assertiveness and therefore
45
take initiative themselves for collective actions with stakeholders. They acknowledge their
responsibility for social and environmental issues in the supply chain and thereby actively
engage in contributing to these issues. These SMEs require a high level of certainty in the
supply chain and accordingly monitor the supply chain to ensure that certain conditions are met.
In addition, while using a proactive strategy SMEs often actively communicate information to
their stakeholders and ensure to have direct relationships with partners upstream and
downstream the supply chain.
Why?
SMEs are pushed towards a reactive legitimacy strategy when they focus primary on the
competitive market and thereby merely respond to the actions of competitors. This focus on the
competitive environment in combination with the SMEs motivation focused towards money
causes the SME to pay less attention to other issues. Therefore, they do not take responsibility
and initiative to contribute to social and environmental issues. In addition, if SMEs have no
clear understanding of the supply chain, they are often not aware of their partners and relevant
stakeholders and therefore communicate rather inactively with them. Furthermore, ignorance
of social and environmental issues pushes SMEs towards a reactive legitimacy management by
not taking responsibility and taking no initiative for CSR initiatives. There are also external
pressures that push SMEs towards a certain strategy, consisting of stakeholder expectations and
customer demands for sustainable products and processes. While experiencing low external
pressures, SMEs are less incentivized to meet these expectations and are therefore pushed
towards a reactive legitimacy management.
SMEs are pushed towards a proactive legitimacy management when they have a primary
focus on organizational improvement. They thereby take initiative for collective actions with
other stakeholders in order to improve the organization or the supply chain. Furthermore, by
being extensively aware of social and environmental issues SMEs are incentivized to
acknowledge their responsibility and take actions themselves, pushing them towards proactive
legitimacy management. While having an intrinsic motivation to engage in social and
environmental issues SMEs tend to be even more actively engaged in these issues. A clear
understanding of the supply chain pushes the SME towards a proactive legitimacy management
by having direct relationships with partners and communicating actively towards stakeholders.
Finally, a high level of external pressures pushes SMEs towards a proactive strategy because
they are incentivized to take responsibility, actively engage in issues and communicate this
information to meet these expectations.
46
5.2 Theoretical implications
This research study contributes to the literature on organizational legitimacy and the
institutional theory by providing a model that helps to distinguish SMEs along their legitimacy
strategy. Where Schembera & Scherer (2019) focused more on the organizational change path
of reactive and proactive SMEs, this research study additionally identifies elements that provide
insight in how both strategies can be used by SMEs for the management of their legitimacy.
Moreover, this research study identifies that SMEs who have an intrinsic motivation to
contribute to social and environmental issues are also pushed towards a proactive strategy. This
is relatable to the positive emotions that are identified by Schembera & Scherer (2019). These
positive emotions are about acting according to ethical principles, a willingness to learn about
issues or the desire to feel ‘good’ which are in line with the intrinsic motivation of SMEs. In
addition, the external pressures identified in this research study, consisting of customer
demands and the expectations of other stakeholders are in line with the exposure of practices
caused by forces in the institutional environment of SMEs (Schembera & Scherer, 2019).
However, the organizational focus that can be oriented towards the competitive market or
towards organizational improvement has not been identified in the SME pathway model of
Schembera & Scherer (2019). Therefore, both models can complement each other.
In addition, the external pressures identified as one of the forces driving SMEs
organizational legitimacy towards a proactive strategy are in line with the isomorphic
adaptation strategy (Deephouse, 1996; Scherer et al., 2013). This strategy entails the
organizational adaptation to societal expectations (Deephouse, 1996). Whilst using a proactive
strategy SMEs also initiate actions to meet the expectations of stakeholders and the customer
demands. Furthermore, the organizational culture has not been selected as one of the drivers of
SMEs legitimacy strategies because the culture was similar at both the reactive and proactive
case. Therefore, it was not possible to make a distinction between SMEs based on their
organizational culture with regard to their legitimacy management. This is inconsistent with the
organizational culture as identified by Wickert (2016), steering the behaviour of SMEs towards
a particular direction.
Additionally, the findings of this research study also contribute to the literature on
Corporate Social Responsibility by showing how CSR can be incorporated by SMEs to
proactively manage their legitimacy. Contributing to social and environmental issues has been
identified as an element of a proactive legitimacy strategy and this can be compared to the
proactive CSR strategy as identified by Groza, Pronschinske & Walker (2011). In both
proactive strategies SMEs actively engage in social and environmental issues without being
47
forced by external pressures. However, not engaging in social and environmental issues as part
of a reactive legitimacy strategy is caused by more identified forces than the report of
irresponsible actions as identified by Groza et al. (2011). Furthermore, the identified external
pressures consisting of stakeholder expectations and customer demands for sustainable
products push SMEs towards a more proactive legitimacy strategy by incentivizing the SME to
take responsibility, actively engage in issues and communicate this information to meet these
external pressures. This is comparable to the CSR communication strategies that can be used to
manage organizational legitimacy as identified by Colleoni (2013).
5.3 Practical implications
This study explored how and why SMEs in the garment industry manage their legitimacy. Five
forces that push SMEs towards a certain strategy have been identified. In addition, for both
strategies seven elements were identified that are part of the SMEs management of legitimacy.
The practical implications of these findings for the management of legitimacy among SMEs is
twofold.
First, by being aware of the four forces that drive the management of legitimacy, SMEs
can identify whether they are pushed towards a more reactive or proactive strategy. By being
aware of their motivation, organizational focus, awareness of social and environmental issues,
understanding of the supply chain and external pressures, SMEs can deduce which forces are
driving them towards a certain legitimacy strategy. The first four forces that have been
identified are internal of the organization, meaning SMEs can do something to change these
forces. Therefore, the knowledge regarding these forces can help SMEs to put in place a more
reactive or proactive strategy. The latter represents the expectations of stakeholders in
combination with the customer demands. It is useful for SMEs to realize what stakeholders and
customers are expecting so that they can anticipate on these external pressures to this in order
to ensure organizational legitimacy.
Second, the elements present in both the reactive and the proactive strategies can help
SMEs to identify how they can put in place a certain strategy. Legitimacy is an abstract term
that is often operating on a subconscious level for organizations (Zimmerman & Zeitz, 2002).
Therefore, SMEs are often not aware of the possible strategies they can put in place. SMEs
have a choice in the management of their legitimacy and by being aware of the elements of both
strategies it is easier to identify which elements they are currently using and how this would
look for a different strategy. Due to the globalization, SMEs are increasingly involved in
48
complex supply chains which has implications for their legitimacy (Dana et al., 1999). Since
legitimacy is an important condition for social and economic exchange (Deephouse et al.,
2017), SMEs are recommended to be aware of the forces that drive the management of their
legitimacy and to gain insights in how they can put in place a certain legitimacy strategy. The
findings of this research study can be help SMEs to recognize their own legitimacy strategy, to
identify which forces drive their legitimacy management and to gain insight in how they can
put in place a certain legitimacy strategy.
5.4 Limitations and recommendations for further research
This research study was aimed at exploring how and why some SMEs manage their legitimacy
more proactively than others. The study has been carried out as adequately as possible but there
are still some limitations that need to be indicated. These limitations thereby provide the basis
of the recommendations for further research. Both aspects will now be elaborately clarified in
this paragraph. First, the proactive and reactive SME that have been selected as the cases within
this study were aimed to be as similar as possible to make the best comparison between the two.
However, the cases were somewhat different in their size. The proactive case had at the time of
collecting data around 15 employees more. For future research it is recommended to study two
identical cases with similarities between all aspects, except their legitimacy strategy. By doing
so, a more precise comparison can be made without the possibility of the differences being
influenced by other factors. In addition, the cases were selected as the proactive and reactive
case based on prior knowledge. A lot of effort has been invested in selecting the cases, but it
still remains an assumption that needs to be made beforehand. However, this remains quite
unavoidable in future research.
Second, while studying SMEs legitimacy management only the perspective of the
organization and the internal stakeholders have been included. Since ‘legitimacy ultimately
exists in the eye of the beholder’ (Zimmerman & Zeits, 2002, p. 416), it would be suitable to
additionally include the perspective of external stakeholders such as NGOs and customers. Due
to the limited size of this research study it was not possible to take the perspectives of several
groups of stakeholders into account and therefore this remains a limitation. For future research
it is recommended and interesting to include both internal and external stakeholders to study
the legitimacy management of SMEs. When including both internal and external stakeholders
it is also possible to provide insight in how legitimacy is granted, possibly complementing the
49
work of Ruffo et al. (2018) in which they study the individual judgments of internal
stakeholders as well as the legitimacy evaluations of external stakeholders.
Third, the interviews at the proactive case were conducted online because these
employees were working from home and preferred not to meet physically due to the COVID-
19 measurements. In contrast, the interviews at the reactive case were conducted physically
leading to possible differences in the collection of data at both cases. Conducting interviews
online makes it more difficult to read a person’s facial expressions and to engage with them in
a rather informal conversation before the interview to make the participant feel comfortable. It
would be best to conduct all interviews online or physical to ensure that no differences arise in
the collection of the data.
Fourth, this research study has been only looking at SMEs in the garment industry. Due
to the limited size of this study it was not possible to include different industries. For future
research it is recommended to conduct this research in different industries. By doing so, the
differences within and between industries can be explored leading to additional potential
insights with regard to legitimacy strategies for SMEs in specific.
Finally, within this research study a comparison has been made between a selected
reactive and proactive case. Both are two extremes which makes it interesting for future
research to explore SMEs that are in between these strategies. Some SMEs might use elements
of both strategies and it is interesting to see how these combined elements would look like in a
legitimacy strategy. It is recommended to conduct more research among SMEs to see what
other strategies are possible for the management of legitimacy. This could complement the
work of Ivanova & Castellano (2012) in which they study how SMEs make sure to gain both
functional as well as relational legitimacy.
5.5 Reflexivity on the role of the researcher
In this paragraph I will reflect on my role as a researcher during this research study. First, as a
researcher I had certain motivations while selecting a subject for this research study. I am
interested in the growing social and environmental issues that are occurring in the garment
industry. I used to work at a large MNC in the garment industry that was actively engaging in
sustainability issues. My strong interest in social and environmental issues made me feel more
attracted to the proactive case that was engaging in these kinds of issues. This might have
influenced the process of data collection and analysis which can affect the eventual findings of
this research study.
50
Second, although the inductive nature of this research study, I started this study with
prior knowledge about the topic of organizational legitimacy. During several courses of the
bachelor business administration and the master specialization of organizational design and
development multiple lectures were given of organizational legitimacy. This prior knowledge
might have steered me into a particular direction. Due to this knowledge and a passion for CSR
it was not possible to start the coding process completely ‘open’. By constantly taking a step
back from the data and discussing my thoughts and findings with another student of my thesis
group, I tried to limit the subjectivity of this study. Nevertheless, as a researcher I am aware
that this had an impact on the analysis of the data and thus on the findings of this research study.
Third, the use of sensitizing concepts helped me to find a starting point and these
concepts provided guidance especially in the beginning of the data collection. However,
defining these concepts on beforehand might have directed attention away from other aspects
that are interesting (Bowen, 2006). I tried to use the identified sensitizing concepts merely at
the beginning of the data collection and tried to let go of them after the first interviews.
However, these concepts were already in my mind and therefore caused unavoidable
subjectivity for the rest of the research study. This subjectivity possibly steered the data
collection and analysis into a particular direction.
51
References
About this agreement (n.d.). IMVO Convenanten. Retrieved from:
https://www.imvoconvenanten.nl/en/garments-textile/agreement
Andersen, M., & Skjoett‐Larsen, T. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in global supply
chains. Supply chain management: an international journal.
Anner, M. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and freedom of association rights: The
precarious quest for legitimacy and control in global supply chains. Politics &
Society, 40(4), 609-644.
Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L. J., & Scherer, A. G. (2013). Organizing
corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of
business ethics, 115(4), 693-705.
Bartley, T., & Child, C. (2014). Shaming the corporation: The social production of targets and
the anti-sweatshop movement. American sociological review, 79(4), 653-679.
Beierlein, L. (2020). Development aid and the governance of global value chains the case of
the Bangladesh accord on fire and building safety. Society and Business Review.
Bitektine, A. (2011). Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of
legitimacy, reputation, and status. Academy of management review, 36(1), 151-179.
Blijenbergh, I. (2016). Kwalitatief onderzoek in organisaties (2nd Ed.). Amsterdam, Nederland:
Boom uitgevers Amsterdam
Boeije, H., Blijenbergh, I. (2019). Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek (3d Ed.). Amsterdam,
Nederland: Boom uitgevers Amsterdam
Bossavie, L., Cho, Y., & Heath, R. (2019). The effects of international scrutiny on
manufacturing workers: Evidence from the rana plaza collapse in bangladesh. World
Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (9065).
Bowen, G. A. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International journal of
qualitative methods, 5(3), 12-23.
Busse, C., Kach, A. P., & Bode, C. (2016). Sustainability and the false sense of legitimacy:
How institutional distance augments risk in global supply chains. Journal of Business
Logistics, 37(4), 312-328.
Campbell, D., Craven, B., & Shrives, P. (2003). Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE
sectors: a comment on perception and legitimacy. Accounting, Auditing &
Accountability Journal.
52
Colleoni, E. (2013). CSR communication strategies for organizational legitimacy in social
media. Corporate Communications: an international journal, 18(2), 228-248.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and
evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
Dabic, M., Colovic, A., Lamotte, O., Painter-Morland, M., & Brozovic, S. (2016). Industry-
specific CSR: analysis of 20 years of research. European Business Review.
Dana, L. P., Etemad, H., & Wright, R. W. (1999). The impact of globalization on
SMEs. Global Focus, 11(4), 93-106.
Deephouse, D. L., Bundy, J., Tost, L. P., & Suchman, M. C. (2017). Organizational legitimacy:
Six key questions. The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism, 4(2), 27-54.
Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate?. Academy of management
journal, 39(4), 1024-1039.
Díez-De-Castro, E., & Peris-Ortiz, M. (Eds.). (2018). Organizational legitimacy:
Challenges and opportunities for businesses and institutions. Springer.
Dion, D. (2003). Evidence and inference in the comparative case study. Necessary conditions:
Theory, methodology, and applications, 95-112.
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational
behavior. The Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122–136.
Gerards, T. (2020). MVO jaarverslag 2019-2020 Heigo. Retrieved from:
https://www.heigo-mvo.nl
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive
research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational research methods, 16(1),
15-31
Groza, M. D., Pronschinske, M. R., & Walker, M. (2011). Perceived organizational motives
and consumer responses to proactive and reactive CSR. Journal of Business
Ethics, 102(4), 639-652.
Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1989). Corporate social reporting: a rebuttal of legitimacy theory.
Accounting and business research, 19(76), 343-352.
Hassler, M. (2003). The global clothing production system: commodity chains and business
networks. Global networks, 3(4), 513-531.
Ivanova, O., & Castellano, S. (2012). Signalling legitimacy for SMEs transition environments-
the case of the Bulgarian IT Sector. Journal for East European Management Studies,
398-422.
53
Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate social responsibility. Journal of
business ethics, 67(3), 241-256.
Jenkins, R. (2001). Corporate Codes of Conduct. Self-Regulation in a Global Economy.
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva.
Johnson, D. G. (2002). Globalization: what it is and who benefits. Journal of Asian
Economics, 13(4), 427-439.
Kim, Y. H., & Davis, G. F. (2016). Challenges for global supply chain sustainability:
Evidence from conflict minerals reports. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6),
1896-1916.
Locke, R., Amengual, M., & Mangla, A. (2009). Virtue out of necessity? Compliance,
commitment, and the improvement of labor conditions in global supply chains. Politics
& Society, 37(3), 319-351.
Locke, R. M., Rissing, B. A., & Pal, T. (2013). Complements or substitutes? Private codes,
state regulation and the enforcement of labour standards in global supply
chains. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 51(3), 519-552.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth
and ceremony. American journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
Mueller, M., Dos Santos, V. G., & Seuring, S. (2009). The contribution of environmental and
social standards towards ensuring legitimacy in supply chain governance. Journal of
Business ethics, 89(4), 509-523.
National Research Council. (2010). Certifiably Sustainable?: The Role of Third-party
Certification Systems: Report of a Workshop. National Academies Press.
Nijhof, A., Forterre, D., & Jeurissen, R. (2008). Managing legitimacy issues in global supply
chains: The case of the athletic footwear industry. Corporate Governance: The
international journal of business in society.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of management
review, 16(1), 145-179.
Ruffo, O. I., Mnisri, K., Morin-Esteves, C., & Gendron, C. (2018). Judgements of SMEs’
legitimacy and its sources. Journal of business ethics, 1-16.
Schembera, S., & Scherer, A. G. (2019). Institutional and Emotional Dynamics on the Dark
Side of Legitimacy: The Case of Anti-corruption at SMEs. Available at SSRN 3484967.
Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Seidl, D. (2013). Managing legitimacy in complex and
heterogeneous environments: Sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal
of management studies, 50(2), 259-284.
54
Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A
review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and
democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 899-931.
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility:
Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of management
review, 32(4), 1096-1120.
Schuessler, E., Frenkel, S. J., & Wright, C. F. (2019). Governance of labor standards in
Australian and German garment supply chains: The impact of Rana Plaza. Ilr
Review, 72(3), 552-579.
Scott, W. R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and
society, 37(5), 427.
Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands. (2016). Agreement on Sustainable Garment
and Textile. Retrieved from: https://www.ser.nl/-/media/ser/downloads/overige-
publicaties/2016/convenant-duurzame-kleding-textiel.pdf
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional
approaches. Academy of management review, 20(3), 571-610.
Symon, G., & Cassell, C. (Eds.). (2012). Qualitative organizational research: core methods
and current challenges. Sage.
Tost, L. P. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of management
review, 36(4), 686-710.
Waddock, S. (2008). Building a new institutional infrastructure for corporate
responsibility. Academy of Management perspectives, 22(3), 87-108.
Wickert, C. (2016). “Political” corporate social responsibility in small-and medium-sized
enterprises: A conceptual framework. Business & Society, 55(6), 792-824.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth
by building legitimacy. Academy of management review, 27(3), 414-431.
55
Appendices
Appendix I: Interview guide
Introduction
• How would you describe (company name) activities?
• What are your responsibilities at (company name)?
• How many employees does (company name) currently employ?
Strategy & Processes
• How would you describe the business strategy of (company name)?
• How would you describe the core business goal of (company name)?
• How do you make your decisions internally within (company name)?
• Who are the relevant actors involved in your business strategy and decision making?
Corporate Social Responsibility
• What does (company name)’s supply chain look like?
o Do you have knowledge about the entire global supply chain?
• Are you aware of any social and environmental issues that are going on in the garment
industry?
o What challenges or problems does (company name) face by being part of this
supply chain?
• How does (company name) define CSR?
• Does (company name) has an explicit strategy for CSR?
o Why did you decide to do so? Did something changed that triggered you?
o How do you make sure that this strategy is internalized and lived throughout the
organization? And throughout the entire global supply chain?
• How would you describe the responsibility of (company name) in the supply chain?
• Why did (company name) choose to sign the Dutch Agreement on Sustainable Garments
and Textile and communicate proactively about CSR? (only for proactive case)
• Does (company name) engage in other collective actions with industry peers or third
parties to maximize CSR benefits/ overcome challenges?
o If yes, why?
• How do you measure the environmental and social impact of your organizational
activities?
56
• Does (company name) has an explicit strategy to report on CSR?
Environment
• Which partners do you consider as (company name)’s stakeholders?
• How would you describe (company name)’s relationship with its stakeholders?
o How are you engaging with stakeholders? And why are you engaging with them
in a certain way?
• How do you make sure that the stakeholders accept (company name) as an appropriate
social actor?
o What is your strategy and why?
• What kind of pressures and/or expectations are you experiencing from the environment
or stakeholders?
o How do you deal with these pressures and expectations?
• What is important for you in selecting your suppliers and partners in the supply chain?
• How do you interact with partners and work force in new countries?
• Does (company name) have an explicit strategy to communicate information to your
stakeholders?
Ownership & Culture
• How would you describe the organizational culture of (company name)?
o How is this culture visible within the organization?
• How would you describe the values that (company name) stands for?
o Why are it in specific these values?
o How do you make sure that these values are known and lived throughout the
whole organization?
o Are you communicating these values to stakeholders? How and why?
Outlook
• How do you think the social and environmental issues in the garment industry will
develop in the future?
• What are (company name)’s plans for the future? Are you planning on doing something
differently in the future?
Appendix II: Code book
Selective code Axial code Open code Quote & Sources Forces driving SMEs legitimacy strategy
SMEs organizational focus
Focus on competitive market, trying to distinguish from competitors
‘Weet je als ze hier bij mij een jasje komen kopen of ze komen het bij de concurrent kopen dan moeten we die allebei bestellen en dan duurt het allebei even lang. Je bestelt meestal toch bij dezelfde leverancier.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Dus betreft hoe snel het proces gaat met de in- en uitgaande goederen proberen we hier zo snel mogelijk te doen zodat mensen zo min mogelijk hoeven te wachten en niet naar de concurrent gaan. Daar proberen we ons echt in te onderscheiden.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Nou ja weet je kijk, er zijn ontzettend veel bedrijven in Nederland die bedrijfskleding nodig hebben dus er zijn ook heel veel bedrijfskleding aanbieders. Dus het is redelijk lastig, zeker gezien de meeste ook dealers zijn. Wij proberen ons daarin continu van concurrenten te onderscheiden door middel van een lagere prijs en kwaliteit en betere service.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Je kan er wel een eigen kledingmerk op gaan zetten maar alles is er eigenlijk al. Het is dus vrij lastig om je daar in te onderscheiden qua producten kwalitatief gezien. Dit proberen wij dan wel zo veel mogelijk te doen door middel van de prijs.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Want ja, elk bedrijf dat kleding nodig heeft, heeft al kleding. We verkopen niet iets extra’s, niet iets bijzonders, niet iets nieuws. Dus dan moet je ze eigenlijk weg gaan kapen bij iemand anders.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We hebben gewoon onze volle focus en aandacht gezet op onze service en kwaliteit hier zodat de mensen die bij ons zitten in ieder geval niet weg gaan naar de concurrent, en de nieuwe klantjes dat komt later nog wel.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Je kan zelf wel gaan lopen knokken en proberen allerlei gaten te vinden waarin je iets kan doen en waarin je jezelf kan onderscheiden, alleen is het toch het makkelijkst om juist om je heen te kijken naar wat concurrenten zo allemaal doen en zo te proberen je te onderscheiden van hen’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Kijk iedereen kan zijn winkel vol hebben hangen met leuke kleding maar vooral in bedrijfskleding moet het ook functioneel zijn. Ja die kennis, dat is heel belangrijk om in huis te hebben om je zo te kunnen onderscheiden.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Dus kijk in die bouw, weet je dat werk dat blijft maar er zijn ook genoeg aanbieders. Bijvoorbeeld de ZZP’er die gaat zelf shoppen en dan is het voor ons van belang van hoe springen wij er nou uit ten aanzien van die ander. Daar kijken we met name naar.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Wij focussen ons op de kwaliteit van producten in combinatie met de prijs natuurlijk. Dat is voor klanten ook heel belangrijk en hierin proberen we ons ook te onderscheiden van concurrenten in de buurt.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Het is natuurlijk niet het meest romantische artikel dat we verkopen en er zijn natuurlijk een heleboel bedrijven die zich daar voor lenen dus op aanbod kan je je niet heel erg onderscheiden.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Focus on organizational improvement
‘Het is wel zo dat we samen kijken wat we door de jaren heen doen en kunnen doen. We kijken naar ons eigen kartonverbruik. We recyclen onze eigen dozen indien het nodig is, we gebruiken plastic zakken die afbreekbaar zijn en dat soort zaken.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij zijn FairWear leader als bedrijf. Wij doen FairWear ook inmiddels meer dan 10 jaar. Hierdoor wordt er elk jaar gekeken van waar kun je intern verbeteren.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij focussen ons echt puur op ons eigen bedrijf en hier zo efficiënt en duurzaam mogelijk te werken.’ (Owner, proactive case)
59
‘Wij richten ons eigenlijk zoveel mogelijk op ons eigen bedrijf. Wij kunnen ons eindeloos druk maken om andere bedrijven of andere dingen maar wij willen ons druk maken over dingen waar wij zelf iets aan kunnen doen. De rest geloof ik wel.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Even los van het feit dat we naast deze initiatieven als [company name] zijnde zelf ook gewoon goed kijken naar wat er allemaal te halen valt op het gebied van duurzaamheid.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wij focussen ons om die reden dus ook liever op het verbeteren van die relatie en het verbeteren van onze processen en activiteiten dan dat wij continu kijken waar het ergens anders beter of goedkoper kan.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs awareness of social and environmental issues
Ignorant of social and environmental issues in the supply chain
‘Nee met ons kleine bedrijf krijgen wij niet echt te maken met sociale en milieu gerelateerde issues in de supply chain. Ik denk dat dat vooral speelt bij de leveranciers die de kleren echt produceren.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Heel veel gebeurt hier niet voor maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen. Het is voor ons niet echt een issue dat speelt.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Om heel eerlijk te zijn merken we hier [social and environmental issues] bijna niks van. Het stukje duurzaamheid is dat wat grotere klanten dit wel graag willen of hier aandacht aan willen besteden.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Een aantal merken doen dit wel al. Die produceren hun kleren op een duurzame manier. Maar bijvoorbeeld echt de focus op die issues hebben wij totaal niet.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘I: Krijgen jullie ook te maken met bepaalde uitdagingen door het deel uitmaken van een supply chain? R: … ja, dan vooral duurzaamheid eigenlijk. Dat het proces duurzaam verloopt.’ (Store manager, reactive case). ‘Ik denk dat wij als kleine onderneming daar minder mee te maken krijgen. Ik kan eigenlijk vooral duurzaamheid bedenken, dat speelt natuurlijk wel.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Extensive awareness of social and environmental issues in the supply chain
‘FairWear en FairWear is een keer naar ons gekomen om te vertellen wat ze aan het doen zijn. Wij worden geaudit door hun dus ook om te communiceren van goh waar zijn die vreemde vogels hier voor en wat komen ze hier doen. Nou dan komen zij wat vertellen en dat helpt mee aan bewustwording.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Ik ben in India en Bangladesh geweest en dan kom je daar en dan ziet het er fantastisch uit maar ik weet zeker dat de kleding niet gemaakt is in de fabrieken die ik bezocht heb. We hebben dit namelijk wel eens geprobeerd maar dit werkte niet. Dat is dan ook weer een probleem, je hebt geen overzicht en geen goede band mee dan werkt het niet. En dat is eigenlijk heel triest.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘In zijn algemeenheid hebben wij in onze kleding veel katoen zitten en hebben we veel polyester zitten. Katoen wordt natuurlijk ergens geplukt. Er is nu een hele actuele discussie over bij de Oeigoeren in China maar dit kopen wij niet zelf in.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Daar is natuurlijk heel veel om te doen omdat katoen eigenlijk een enorme impact heeft op het milieu in verband met het vele water dat verbruikt wordt en of pesticide die hiervoor gebruikt worden.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Je kunt zeggen Bulgarije is een Europees land maar ook daar zijn misstanden. Er zijn ook allerlei landen studies gemaakt waaruit blijkt dat in Oost-Europa toch dingen scheef gaan en dat is voor ons wel een drijfveer geweest. Nou en daarvan hebben wij gezegd van dit moet ook voor ons het moment zijn om ons aan te sluiten bij die labels, bij die organisaties om daarmee onszelf ook te triggeren om dingen geregeld te krijgen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Op een gegeven moment kwam het verhaal aan de orde dat Syrische vluchtelingen en dergelijke ook te werk gesteld werden in fabrieken in de textielindustrie in Turkije. Hier zijn wij achter gekomen en dat heeft ons wel aan het denken gezet van goh
60
weet je als je hier niet de volledige grip op hebt en de controle op kunt uitoefenen dan is het een heel gevaarlijk probleem. Je krijgt dan dit soort wantoestanden en ik noem het ook gewoon wantoestanden en die zou je eigenlijk voor moeten zijn.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Je weet dat er enorme hoeveelheden aan volumes kleding jaarlijks verbrand worden en als we daar maar een paar procent de komende jaren kunnen weghalen, ja dan zijn we in die zin al heel wat gevorderd weer.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case)
SMEs motivation
Motivation focused on money (and thereby generating revenue)
‘Ik wil best meedenken maar dat [investing money] doe ik dan net weer niet. Heel veel gebeurt hier niet voor maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen. Het is voor ons niet echt een issue dat speelt.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij weten inderdaad dat deze goedkope kleding eigenlijk een slechte kwaliteit heeft maar ja als de klant het wil dan verkopen we dat gewoon.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Tuurlijk altijd het stuk prijs-kwaliteit. Dit hoeft natuurlijk niet altijd goed te zijn want voor iedere markt is een doel. De ene klant wil hele goedkope kleding en de ander wil meer uitgeven. Dit verkopen wij beide dan gewoon.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We scheiden verder het afval, ik doe de lampen uit ’s avonds en de chauffeurs mogen niet al te hard rijden maar dan heb je het eigenlijk wel gehad. Wij zijn vooral bezig met klanten en het bieden van kwaliteit voor hun.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Eigenlijk alles wat de kosten in gaat, gaat wel via mij. Als we een grotere offerte moeten binnen halen dan gaat het wel ook via mij. Dan kijk ik of ik daar tevreden mee ben. (…) De kleine dingen mogen ze dus in principe allemaal zelf doen maar als het wat grotere zaken zijn dan word ik hier wel in betrokken, wanneer er ook geld bij betrokken is.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Het zijn veelal Europese leveranciers maar die laten natuurlijk hun kleding in het verre oosten maken maar waar en hoe ze dat precies doen ik heb echt geen idee. Dit maakt voor mij verder niet uit. Zolang de prijs en kwaliteit hier goed is ben ik eigenlijk tevreden, zolang het voor ons hier maar wat toevoegt.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We hebben bijvoorbeeld wel eens met Emma, dat is een leverancier, daar hebben we wel eens een inzamelingsactie mee gedaan. Toen hebben we een bak hier neer gezet waar klanten hun oude schoenen en kleren in konden gooien maar toen moesten wij hier voor betalen. Dan denk ik ‘ja hallo, ik wil best meedoen maar niet per se met mijn portemonnee’.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Dan is dat vooral de kwaliteit, prijs en kennis wat wij belangrijk vinden.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Het is als kleine onderneming lastig om aan MVO te doen want je moet ook op je kosten letten.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘De verhouding tussen prijs en kwaliteit, die moet goed zijn. Daar wordt vooral naar gekeken bij het kiezen van leveranciers. We kunnen wel iets aanbieden voor heel weinig geld maar het moet niet zo zijn dat het dan de volgende maand kapot is en dat wij hier klachten over krijgen. Die verhouden tussen prijs en kwaliteit moet gewoon goed zijn.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Als er geen vraag is voor duurzame kleding dan kunnen we dit wel inkopen maar dan redden wij het niet.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Intrinsic motivation to engage in social and
‘We willen natuurlijk ook een leefbaar loon betalen. Onze instelling is dat wij echt willen dat de mensen die voor ons werken, ook gewoon van het salaris kunnen leven.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Het moet zo zijn dat de mensen die voor ons werken of die in opdracht voor ons werken dat zij een salaris verdienen waar zij gewoon normaal mee kunnen leven. Dat vinden wij heel belangrijk.’ (Production manager, proactive case)
61
environmental issues
‘Wat wij ook belangrijk vinden is dat er geen kinderarbeid in zit en dat soort zaken. Dus daar letten wij ook heel erg op.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij zeggen altijd willen we een leefbare wereld hier achter laten dan zullen we bij onszelf moeten beginnen. Wij zijn maar een klein steentje maar we kunnen er wel zeker wat aan bijdragen.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben denk ik een jaar of 14 geleden nog eens gekeken in China, in India, Colombia of de productie hier interessant zou zijn. Wij hebben toen besloten aan de hand van wat we daar gezien en gehoord hebben om toch in Europa te blijven omdat we vinden dat we hier ethisch gezien een meer voldoening van krijgen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ja, wij hebben zelf gekozen om FairWear in te schakelen omdat dit toch ook een duwtje in de rug is en wij dit soort issues heel belangrijk vinden. Dit is een organisatie die ons hierbij kan helpen dus dan sluiten wij ons hierbij graag aan.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Hiermee denken wij dat wij iets goeds kunnen doen voor de wereld. Ik heb de redenatie dat we beter andere mensen en de wereld kunnen helpen als dat je geholpen moet worden.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Je kan beter helpen als dat je geholpen moet worden. Als ik straks in een rolstoel zit en met een stokje loop, dan heb ik liever dat ik nu iemand of de wereld kan helpen. Ik draag graag mijn steentje bij en help anderen, vooral nu dit nog kan.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘I: waarom hebben jullie besloten om hier deel van uit te maken? R: Dat hoort een beetje bij onze genen, je moet tegenwoordig zorgen dat je op een faire manier je bedrijfsprocessen inricht en het convenant is wel een mooie tool om dit eigen te maken en hiermee te werken.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ik heb ook begrip voor iedereen die iets mankeert hier. Als je je niet goed voelt dan ga maar naar huis want je kunt zo niet werken. Dat vind ik allemaal prima, geen probleem. Dus ik wil graag goed doen voor de mensen om me heen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Voor de korte tijd dat je hier op de wereld bent waarom zou je het moeilijk en gecompliceerd maken. Waarom zou je niet iets goeds doen. Als je de ander toch ook iets gunt dan is dat alleen maar mooi.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij zijn als [company name] aangesloten bij een aantal verschillende organisaties en vanuit onze duurzaamheidsambities… dat heeft te maken met hetgeen dat wij vinden dat er daadwerkelijk echt wat moet gebeuren in die textielindustrie, ook door ons…’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Het voordeel van die landen is wel dat het allemaal goedkoper kan maar niet tegen alle prijs, dat is eigenlijk een beetje hoe het zit bij ons.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Kijk als het gaat om de kledingindustrie is dit de een na meest vervuilende industrie van de hele wereld. Omdat wij in deze industrie actief zijn weten we dat we hier als bedrijf ook een bijdrage aan leveren en we vinden het ook gewoon heel belangrijk in relatie tot het milieu en de mensen dat we dingen ook gewoon goed doen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Dat is ook de cultuur van [company name], dat we wel een heel sociaal familiebedrijf zijn om echt op te komen voor de medemens, het milieu en het dierenwelzijn. (…) We vinden dit soort zaken gewoon echt heel belangrijk.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wel een zeer sociaal geëngageerd bedrijf dus men heeft een enorme compassie voor het sociale leven.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case)
62
‘Ja wij vinden het belangrijk dat wij in de ogen van onze klanten dat doen wat belangrijk is. Dat vinden we niet alleen belangrijk voor onze klanten maar ook voor onszelf en voor de wereld.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Ik denk dat het begint met een intrinsieke motivatie. Wij vinden dat bij [company name] hier gewoon ontzettend belangrijk en dan met name ook de eigenaar die hier echt voor wil gaan.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
Commercial interest in engaging in social and environmental issues
‘Wij communiceren onze MVO strategie duidelijk naar andere partijen. Als bedrijf wil je natuurlijk ook altijd op een gezonde manier groeien. Door middel van onze MVO strategie proberen we goed te doen maar hiermee hopen we uiteindelijk ook te kunnen groeien als bedrijf.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘En we willen ons natuurlijk ook gewoon profileren op de markt want ja business is natuurlijk wel business. Als wij het ten op zichten van een ander beter doen dan is dat voor ons natuurlijk een voordeel. Maar dit komt vooral echt vanuit het feit dat we goed willen doen voor anderen en de wereld.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Daarnaast dienen we natuurlijk ook de klanten ermee [investing in sustainability] dus daar komt ook weer het stukje commercieel belang.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Wij willen ook graag koploper zijn op dat gebied. We willen graag koploper zijn en vooraan lopen om zeg maar uiteindelijk ook bij de gemeentes en overheden bijvoorbeeld een streepje voor te hebben om invulling daaraan te kunnen geven.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs understanding of the supply chain
No clear understanding of the supply chain
‘Dat [our stakeholders] zijn eigenlijk gewoon onze leveranciers en klanten, meer niet. Zonder leveranciers heb ik geen spullen om te verkopen en zonder klanten heb ik geen mensen om het aan te verkopen. Zo simpel als dat is het.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ja, dat zijn wel heel veel leveranciers. Ik durf niet eens te zeggen hoeveel…’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘R: De kleding wordt in principe gewoon allemaal geproduceerd in Thailand en Bangladesh en dat soort landen. I: Is het voor jullie dan duidelijk waar het vandaan komt? R: Nee, helemaal niet. Dit kan ik natuurlijk wel opzoeken en navragen bij de vertegenwoordiger maar ik durf niet te zeggen waar al mijn leveranciers de kleding laten produceren. Het zijn veelal Europese leveranciers maar die laten natuurlijk hun kleding in het verre oosten maken maar waar ze dat precies doen ik heb echt geen idee.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Het zijn ook te veel leveranciers om dit [supply chain] allemaal in kaart te brengen.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Het zijn veelal Europese leveranciers maar die laten natuurlijk hun kleding in het verre oosten maken maar waar ze dat precies doen ik heb echt geen idee.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Dat [onze stakeholders] zijn met name klanten en leveranciers.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Er zit maar heel weinig qua fabricage in Nederland. (…) Maar je ziet heel veel verschuiving ook logistiek gezien naar landen als Polen bijvoorbeeld. Je hebt grote magazijnen daar en vanaf daar wordt dan heel Europe aangeleverd. En de fabrieken zelf die liggen veelal in Azië.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Ja dat [suppliers] zijn er echt heel wat, ik zou niet eens durven zeggen hoeveel dat er zijn.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Een deel weten we wel maar een groot deel eigenlijk ook niet. We kunnen dit in principe wel achterhalen. Tegenwoordig is het nog steeds heel veel in Azië en dan zie je soms wel dat halffabricaten naar Nederland komen en dat het hier afgemaakt wordt maar Azië is denk ik wel de grootste speler.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Dat is vrij ingewikkeld omdat wij heel veel verschillende leveranciers hebben die de kleding vaak ook niet zelf produceren. ‘Daarvoor is die hele supply chain voor ons denk ik niet helemaal duidelijk. Dat durf ik niet met zekerheid te zeggen maar
63
dat kunnen we als het goed is wel achterhalen. Over het algemeen is wel duidelijk waar onze leveranciers zitten en of zij zelf produceren of niet. (…) Maar waar die fabriek precies gevestigd is, is voor ons niet helemaal duidelijk.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Detailed understanding of the supply chain
‘Wij weten precies waar alle materialen en producten vandaan komen. Althans, wij kopen het bij 3m bijvoorbeeld maar waar 3m alle grondstoffen vandaan haalt dat hebben we niet helemaal in kaart.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij kopen kleding en basisartikelen in Europa, die transporteren wij zo veel mogelijk als grote hoeveelheden naar de productie in Bulgarije. (…) En van daaruit gaat het wekelijks op transport naar Nederland. Op vrijdag wordt het verzonden en dan arriveert het bij ons op dinsdagavond of woensdagmorgen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ja, wij weten precies waar onze producten en materialen vandaan komen. Hier zijn wij heel transparant in. We zijn er ook geweest zelf en hebben rechtstreekse relaties met hen. Daarnaast communiceren wij ook veel met hun over allerlei issues’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Maar dit komt dus elk jaar weer terug en eind deze maand moet ik inderdaad zorgen dat ik de due dilligence van [company name] in kaart breng om daarmee aan te geven van goh wat hebben wij eraan gedaan om dat allemaal ook te zekeren. Dus hoe gaan wij om met ik noem maar even wat… kinderarbeid. Hoe gaan wij om met overdreven overuren, met living wage dus een goed loon voor medewerkers in de textielindustrie en hier moet je dus inderdaad aangeven wat in jouw supply chain als het ware voor een zaken geregeld zijn en hoe heb jij dit zelf ook geregeld. Heb jij hier invloed op kunnen uitoefenen en hoe heb je dit kunnen aansturen? Dit moeten wij dus iedereen jaar weer in kaart brengen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Die katoen wordt door het bedrijf katoen nazi gekocht en vervolgens levert katoen nazi het aan onze doekenleveranciers. (…) Vervolgens zie je dan dat het katoen aankomt bij die doekenleverancier en die gaan dat spinnen, weven en die maken er daadwerkelijk echte doeken van. Die doeken kopen wij eigenlijk op de rol bij hun en die laten we rechtstreeks verplaatsen naar de fabriek in Bulgarije. Van daaruit worden patronen gemaakt op basis van de ontwerpen die er zijn en daar worden dan de kledingstukken van gemaakt.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Ja, de supply chain is bij ons heel duidelijk en transparant. Maar wel tot de grens waar die katoen nazi’s hun katoen inkopen. Wij hebben niet inzichtelijk of dit daadwerkelijk in China gebeurt of ergens anders. Wij zouden voor bepaalde batches dat wel kunnen laten herleiden maar dan is dat altijd het proces achteraf.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben precies in zicht waar onze materialen vandaan komen en wie die levert. Dan wordt het naar de fabriek gebracht waar we ook inzicht in hebben en dan komt het naar Nederland.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
External pressures
Low stakeholer expectations and customer demands for sustainable products
‘Wij weten inderdaad dat deze goedkope kleding eigenlijk een slechte kwaliteit heeft maar ja als de klant het wil dan verkopen we dat gewoon.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ja, wij merken eigenlijk niet veel van die aandacht voor dat soort issues en vanuit de klant is er ook minder vraag naar.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Om heel eerlijk te zijn merken we hier bijna niks van. Het stukje duurzaamheid is dat wat grotere klanten dit wel graag willen of hier aandacht aan willen besteden.’ (Owner, reactive case) We hebben gerecycled toiletpapier, dat is duurzaam haha. Er is hier gewoon niet zo heel veel aandacht voor omdat wij ook wat kleiner zijn en het vanuit klanten niet gevraagd wordt. Ja wat moet ik er van zeggen, wat doen wij hier eigenlijk… Ik vind het een goeie vraag maar het houdt ons eigenlijk niet heel veel bezig. (Owner, reactive case)
64
‘Weet je, veel bouwbedrijven willen vaak een goedkoop shirt want die gasten blijven toch ergens aan haken en dan gooien ze het shirt weer weg. Dus dan is goedkoop-duurkoop toch net even anders dus vanuit de klant is er ook minder vraag. Een klein deel vraagt er [sustainable clothing] wel naar, dan heb je het inderdaad over wat grote bedrijven maar het gros kijkt er niet naar.’ (Owner, reactive case) Maar op het gebied van inkoop kunnen wij wel kijken van waar kunnen we het vandaan halen en hebben wij klanten die hier heel erg gevoelig voor zijn en dan in ieder geval regelen dat wij aan die vraag kunnen voldoen. Dat is in ieder geval iets dat wij kunnen doen betreft MVO en ik denk eigenlijk ook wel het enige wat we doen. (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Niet wat mij nu te binnen schiet. Ik denk dat zoals ik zei een aantal klanten bezig zijn met duurzaamheid. Dat speelt dus wel in de markt maar ik denk dat dit op het moment wel het enige is dat speelt in de supply chain.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Als er geen vraag is voor duurzame kleding dan kunnen we dit wel inkopen maar dan redden wij het niet.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
High stakeholer expectations and customer demands for sustainable products
‘Wij zijn als [company name] aangesloten bij een aantal verschillende organisaties en vanuit onze duurzaamheidsambities… dat heeft deels te maken met hetgeen dat wij vinden dat er daadwerkelijk echt wat moet gebeuren in die textielindustrie maar daarnaast dat wij ook vanuit aanbestedingen en dergelijken de vraag krijgen van goh hoe hebben jullie je duurzaamheidsprogramma gesecureerd als het ware.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘De eigenaar en eigenlijk wij allemaal vinden dit heel belangrijk maar er zit natuurlijk ook een commercieel belang bij. We werken natuurlijk veel samen met gemeentes en overheden en die vragen dat soms dus er zit ook groot deel commercieel belang bij voor ons.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Daarnaast dienen we natuurlijk ook de klanten ermee [investing in sustainability] dus daar komt ook weer het stukje commercieel belang.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Ik denk dat het iets is van de laatste jaren, vroeger speelde het wel al maar toen was het minder aanwezig. Het is door de laatste jaren, ook door de media, veel meer aanwezig. Het is veel meer onder de aandacht gekomen, ook bij andere bedrijven in de industrie. Hierdoor gaan wij natuurlijk mee.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Er komt meer druk op te staan van partijen en klanten van buitenaf maar we kiezen hier ook zelf heel bewust voor. Zoals ik al zei is het niet direct zichtbaar in de winst dus het is voor ons zelf wel ook een hele bewuste keuze geweest die we heel belangrijk vinden.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Maar degene waar wij mee te maken hebben op aanbesteding gebied, sommige concurrenten, die moeten natuurlijk wel. Dus dat is natuurlijk wel een beetje een wedloop, zij focussen hier ook erg op. Dat zijn over het algemeen vaak grotere bedrijven dus die hebben daar ook wat meer slagkracht in. Dat is wel een strijd. Het groepje is helemaal niet groot maar degene die er mee bezig zijn ja die zijn er wel intensief mee bezig en daar zijn we ook van op de hoogte.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
Elements of SME legitimacy strategies
The role the SME takes upon in the supply chain
Dependent of other parties in the supply chain
‘Het kan wel eens zijn dat er van een merk opeens heel erg weinig kleding is. (…) Als de voorraden bij de leveranciers ontzettend slecht zijn en er zit 2 tot 3 maanden levertijd op (…) Dan merk je toch dat we afhankelijk zijn van hun voorraden.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wat ik alleen altijd wel belangrijk vind, kijk weet je soms heb ik de leverancier nodig om een order binnen te halen.’ (Owner, reactive case)
65
‘Dus je moet hier goed voor zorgen dat je je leveranciers op tijd kunt betalen. Je hebt vaak ook nog wel eens een betalingskorting als je binnen een week betaalt dus daar gaan we dan wel vaak voor. (…) Als je je leveranciers laat liggen en eigenlijk alleen maar aan de klantkant probeert te trekken dan komt het ook niet goed. (Owner, reactive case) ‘Bijvoorbeeld stel je hebt merken erbij zitten die geven er geen ene reet om, die willen het liefst gewoon op elke hoek van de straat liggen maar je hebt ook merken die zeggen van joh Coen je hebt dit merk al dus dan gaan wij niet meer naar een andere bedrijfskleding ondernemer in de buurt. Datzelfde geldt ook andersom, als ze bij mijn concurrent in de buurt iets verkopen dan mag ik dit vaak niet meer verkopen.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Maar we kunnen er denk ik niet veel meer aan doen omdat dat voor ons gewoonweg niet mogelijk is en dat is puur omdat je afhankelijk bent van leveranciers en hun activiteiten (...) wij kunnen daar denk ik dus ook niet zo veel mee’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Supply chain based on set requirements by SME (independent role)
‘Omdat wij uitsluitend gebruik willen maken van Europese stoffen, kopen wij die in België, in Engeland, in Denemarken enzovoort en die verzamelen we hier in Elst.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wat wij ook belangrijk vinden is dat er geen kinderarbeid in zit en dat soort zaken. Dus daar letten wij ook heel erg op.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Ik denk dat het van belang is dat we Europese materialen hebben. Dat het voor de manager inkoop van belang is dat hij weet dat de regelgeving nageleefd wordt, dat er geen rare dingen gebeuren en dat de kwaliteit goed is. Dat we eigenlijk een constante kwaliteit krijgen. Ik denk dat dat het allerbelangrijkste is dat we constante kwaliteit hebben en dat het gemaakt is onder de juiste omstandigheden.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Dus waarom kopen wij in Europa, omdat het constante kwaliteit is en omdat we zeker weten dat het onder goede condities geproduceerd is.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Het is wel duurder maar bijkomende kosten die eromheen komen in het begeleiden van leveranciers en producenten en vaak op en neer vliegen is ook duur. Als er miscommunicatie is over bijvoorbeeld kwaliteit, dan krijg je daar niet altijd wat je denkt te krijgen. Hierom hebben wij besloten om toch in Europa te blijven. Ook om de contacten kort te houden zodat we hier meer invloed op hebben.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Dat verzamelen we allemaal en als we enigszins het idee hebben van deze partij past niet bij ons vanwege de schending van bepaalde mensenrechten en dan stoppen we hier vrij snel mee of daar beginnen we niet eens aan.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Dus Fair is dat wij zeg maar geen kinderarbeid, dwangarbeid en dat soort zaken in onze supply chain willen.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Wij selecteren leveranciers door te kijken of ze compliance zijn met onze waardes. Dus dan kijken we vooral of ze voldoen aan de eisen van ILO (International Labour Organization), of ze geen kinderarbeid hebben, of er aan bepaalde milieu eisen worden voldaan. Er zijn een aantal maatstaven waar wij op letten.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs required level of certainty in the supply chain
Relying on what partners in the supply chain state about their activities
‘Een aantal merken doen dit wel al. Die produceren hun kleren op een duurzame manier. Maar bijvoorbeeld echt de focus op die issues hebben wij totaal niet.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Als mensen vragen aan mij van het merk dat je aanbiedt, waar komt dat vandaan. Dat heb ik wel eens moeten doen voor een klant en dan kan ik iets downloaden van de website of zo om aan te tonen hoe dit gemaakt wordt.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij gaan ervanuit dat niet zozeer de kleding zelf maar wel het proces eromheen daarom ook wel bij bijna iedere leverancier duurzaam is. Zij geven dit aan dus dan gaan wij hier ook vanuit.’ (Owner, reactive case)
66
‘We hebben heel leveranciers dus dat is voor ons niet helemaal duidelijk. Je kan er bij de grotere merken wel achter komen, die zijn daar best wel transparant in.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Welke fabriek dat dan is dat is niet duidelijk voor ons maar dit is veelal in Azië. Landen als Pakistan en Bangladesh bijvoorbeeld, voormalige Oostblok landen daar zit ook nog wel eens wat productie. En sommige merken hebben echt hun eigen fabriek ergens zitten dus dan weet je in principe wel waar het vandaan komt. Daarin vertrouwen we onze leveranciers wel gewoon op hun woord.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Er kon toen wel kleding ingeleverd worden om het te hergebruiken alleen niemand wist waar ze ermee naartoe moesten en nu merk je dat de merken het meer aan het oppakken zijn. Merken komen bijvoorbeeld met Rewear met producten die van grondstoffen gemaakt zijn.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Wij kunnen dit achterhalen maar dit doen wij meestal niet omdat het er echt heel veel zijn. Dit soort informatie betreft duurzaamheid is wel gewoon te vinden op hun website dus hier vertrouwen we op.’ (Store manager, reactive case) Ja wij houden wel heel scherp in de gaten welke leveranciers zoiets aanbieden. Dus voor ons is duidelijk wie daarmee bezig zijn en die informatie krijgen we dan vooral van de vertegenwoordigers zelf. We vertrouwen erop dat die informatie klopt en kijken dan welke leverancier ons hier het beste bij kan helpen.’ (Store manager, reactive case)
Monitoring actual activities in the supply chain
‘En dat we betekent dat we dit wel zelf nog controleren. Wij bestellen een bepaalde stof en kijken wat deze stof doet en afwijkt op met name kleuren en dichtheid. Dat is voor ons echt het belangrijkste, omdat wij ook veiligheid garanderen.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘FairWear komt één keer in het jaar en dan controleren zij ons bedrijf. Controleren wil zeggen net zoals hier de Belastingdienst komt controleren en de vakbond. Dus 10% van de medewerkers wordt elk jaar geïnterviewd in een neutrale ruimte waar alleen maar een medewerker is met iemand van FairWear. De boeken worden gecontroleerd: laat eens even de lonen zien, hoeveel mensen er werken, staan alle mensen op de loonlijst, wordt er zwart betaald, worden er overuren betaald, ben je een nette werkgever betreffende veiligheid en arbeidsethiek, hebben de werknemers correcte pauzes, is er voldoende frisse lucht, al dit soort zaken wordt naar gekeken.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij controleren gewoon alles. Daar hebben wij dus Clearmark voor en die zorgt ervoor dat wanneer je bij ons op de site kijkt, dat je ziet waar het gecertificeerd is en dan is dat 100% zeker.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Daarnaast zijn we nog ISO en 14001 en 9001 gecertificeerd om onze processen goed te monitoren en zo efficiënt en transparant mogelijk te werken want dat vinden we wel belangrijk. ’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Daar worden we op geauditeerd, dus dat wordt regelmatig gecheckt. Dat is een jaarlijks programma en de FairWear foundation vertaalt dat in een soort van brand performance check en hier moet je minimaal zoveel punten halen om hieraan te voldoen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Als je kijkt naar de fabriek in Bulgarije, daar hebben wij met de FairWear foundation afgesproken dat wij die een keer in de drie jaar auditen. Dat betekent dat die op de 9 verschillende IMVO thema’s daadwerkelijk ook echt gemonitord worden.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Een paar jaar geleden hebben wij met elkaar afgesproken dat we die kledingindustrie en dan ook onze eigen supply chain gewoon echt heel goed moeten monitoren met wat er gebeurt. ’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case)
67
‘Dan monitoren we eigenlijk van tevoren alvorens we zeggen van goh je krijgt van ons een bestelling, dat we daadwerkelijk een soort inventarisatie formulier gebruiken om te kijken hoe zij omgaan met de IMVO thema’s.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben hier uiteraard veel mee te maken maar aangezien wij aangesloten zijn bij FairWair en het Convenant wordt dat gemonitord.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Bij die leveranciers weten we ook zeker dat zij aan bijvoorbeeld milieu eisen en wetten voldoen. Dit controleren wij dan ook. Zij komen veelal uit België en dat is dan toch ook makkelijker dan landen in Azië. Dus wij kopen minder aan in die landen bijvoorbeeld.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs communication towards stakeholders
Communicating carefully and occasionally towards stakeholders
‘Het staat op de website natuurlijk dat wij goeie service leveren maar dit blijk vooral uit de dienst zelf. We communiceren het dus wel maar we zijn hier niet heel actief mee bezig. We zijn er ook een klein beetje voorzichtig mee want mensen die te hoog van de toren blazen en zeggen dat zij alles zo goed doen en perfect doen, daar gaat vaak het meeste mis. We zeggen dat natuurlijk tegen nieuwe klanten en we staan er ook absoluut voor maar we weten ook gewoon dat er hier wel eens iets mis gaat dus we communiceren dit niet schreeuwend naar buiten toe om ze niet teleur te stellen.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Maar ook wel af en toe met acties, in combinatie met leveranciers. Dan is het niet heel erg dat wij naar de klanten toe gaan maar dan is het meer online proberen om zo wat klanten onze kant op te krijgen. Dit doen we dan via de website en social media, maar ook wel gewoon wat advertenties in kranten of dat kan zijn bij Vitesse of dat kan van alles zijn.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ik zit eigenlijk net tussen de generatie geen social media en wel social media in. Maar ik neig wel veel meer naar die social media want daar kun je gewoon handig gebruik van maken. Dat kan wel echt een tool zijn om die informatie bij je klant te krijgen want dat gebeurt nu nog niet echt.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Ja, en we willen in de toekomst meer bezig gaan zijn met Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn waar automatisch natuurlijk ook je klanten uit voort komen.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Het grootste gedeelte reclame is door bestaande klanten. Zo worden wij wel sneller geaccepteerd. Bij bouwbedrijven en ZZP’ers onderling komt dit toch vaak op de een of andere manier ter sprake en dan verwijs je ze door en andersom. Ik denk dat dat het meeste voorkomt.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Communicating actively towards stakeholders
‘Daarnaast krijgen wij dan een beoordeling en dus een label en dit kun je ook mooi aan klanten en leveranciers laten zien. Daar zijn wij wel trots op.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Binnen [company name] zelf lukt dat [het communiceren van de strategie] redelijk maar om het uit te dragen naar andere partijen is wel een kunst apart. Wij zijn nu zover dat wij een MVO-magazine klaar hebben. De inhoud is klaar maar dit moet nog gedrukt worden. En dat is eigenlijk om de reden waar je naar vraagt: hoe bereik je in je eigen organisatie maar vooral hoe bereik je de markt en andere belangrijke partijen? Dat willen we nu gaan doen door middel van dit magazine.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij willen graag transparant zijn. We willen graag dat iedereen weet waar we mee bezig zijn en waar wij ons op richten.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ja dus we communiceren dit naar andere partijen door middel van onze website en dit soort magazines. Zo proberen wij andere te bereiken. De website is vorig jaar klaar gekomen, dat vonden wij nog niet genoeg. (…) Om deze reden hebben wij
68
een magazine gemaakt van ik geloof 30 pagina’s en dit is wat luchtiger, wat vrolijker. Hier staan wat meer foto’s bij want anders bereik je je doel niet in de markt.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Dit magazine is ook weer een manier om het duidelijk te communiceren naar de markt. Dan laat je zien van als je bij ons kleding koopt dan zitten er geen chemisch verkeerde stoffen in, dan blijf je hier 100% gezond in. De kleren zijn ook niet door kinderhandjes geproduceerd want dat speelt ook heel vaak.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij communiceren nu bijvoorbeeld middels de website. Dit vinden we nog onvoldoende dus vandaar dat we nu met een magazine komen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Het gaat er om dat wij de markt en onze klanten maar ook NGO’s laten zien van goh dit is wat wij doen en dit hebben wij bereikt de afgelopen periode met betrekking tot duurzaamheid. Het is niet zomaar iets waarvan wij zeggen dat doen we even tussen de soep en aardappelen door, nee we besteden hier echt wel heel serieus aandacht aan.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben ook een intrinsieke waarde die we ook gewoon graag willen delen met onszelf maar ook met anderen. Om daarmee in ieder geval te laten blijken dat we er alles aan doen om zaken gewoon goed geregeld te krijgen. Dat heeft niet met prijs te maken. Het is ook een beetje een missie die we voor de toekomst hebben, dat we daadwerkelijk ook echt daar iets aan willen doen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘We hebben ook met de FairWear foundation afgesproken dat wij ook onze adressen van de verschillende productielocaties vrijgeven, dat is redelijk uniek. Wij zijn hiermee heel transparant waardoor ook andere bedrijven binnen de FairWear foundation, als zij geïnteresseerd zijn, kunnen laten zien wat wij gedaan hebben en laten weten dat andere bedrijven ook contact met ons kunnen opnemen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Daar zijn we heel open in en daar laten we ook echt wel blijken wat onze waardes inderdaad zijn. Dat doen we met een MVO jaarverslag, dat doen we met de brand performance check, we hebben een social report wat we communiceren dus dit soort dingen doen we allemaal. Daar maken we geen geheim van. ‘(Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Op onze website is heel veel te vinden, wij werken ook aan verslagen en dat soort dingen zodat onze stakeholders eigenlijk ook altijd toegang hebben tot die informatie. Hier zijn we dus wel echt mee bezig.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case) ‘Dat communiceren doen wij op verschillende manieren. Wij doen dit op de website, met verslagen, onderzoeken, gesprekken met klanten en leveranciers en dat soort dingen. Wij zijn daar wel actief mee bezig om die partijen ook op een leuke en informatieve manier op de hoogte te houden.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs relationships in the supply chain
No relationships or indirect relationships through intermediaries of partners in the supply chain
‘Dan heb ik het vooral over de vertegenwoordigers van de leveranciers. Hiermee hebben wij contact en die zien we ook regelmatig, met de leveranciers zelf vaak niet.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij hebben contact met de vertegenwoordigers. Dat is op zich ook wel fijn voor het stukje klantenservice. Dan weten wij sneller waar iets blijft bijvoorbeeld. (…) De communicatie met de fabriek zelf gebeurt in het Engels maar dat doen we eigenlijk nauwelijks.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij hebben ook wel buitenlandse leveranciers maar dan zit er vaak een vertegenwoordiger in Nederland. En als dat niet zo is dan heb je hier gewoon wat minder frequent contact mee. Een aantal van die concerns hebben wel weer in Nederland een vertegenwoordiger maar die komt dan gewoon minder vaak op bezoek. Terwijl onze hoofdmerken best wel vaak langs komen.’ (Store manager, reactive case)
69
‘Als je dan kijkt van wat is nu populair onder klanten ja dan kom je inderdaad soms bij een agent terecht die meerdere merken vertegenwoordigd en dan is het gewoon een kwestie van kijken of je over een aantal jaar dichterbij dat merk kan komen om het niet met een tussenpersoon te krijgen. Dat maakt het voor ons ook veel goedkoper en dan hebben wij direct contact. (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Nee we hebben vooral contact met de vertegenwoordigers in Nederland, niet met de leveranciers zelf.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Direct relationships with partners in the supply chain
‘Wij hebben die fabriek daar gevestigd dus dat maakt het wel een stuk makkelijker om ook daar contact mee te onderhouden. Er zit ook een Nederlander die hier de financiën doet, dus dat maakt het een stukje eigen en qua communicatie wel een stuk makkelijker.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben een goede relatie met leveranciers en kopen rechtstreeks bij onze leveranciers zoals Ten Kate of bij Concordia en wij hebben ook rechtstreeks contact met Emma.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Ja, de lijnen tussen ons, de leveranciers van de stoffen en de fabriek is wel heel kort.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben ook nauw contact met leveranciers en producenten. Voor corona gingen wij ook vaak langs om dit soort zaken te bespreken.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Meestal is het dat als we de kleding ergens laten produceren, dat we dan de fabriek daadwerkelijk gaan bezoeken zodat ze ons echt kunnen overtuigen van hoe ze dat geregeld en georganiseerd hebben.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Wij gaan ook die contacten met de leveranciers aan om dat ook daadwerkelijk mogelijk te maken. (…) Dus dat wordt in die zin ook zo gedaan dus de nauwe contacten met de stakeholders zijn wel heel belangrijk maar nogmaals je moet er wel heel transparant in zijn.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case)
Good relationship with partners in the supply chain
‘Wat wij graag uitstralen is dat we graag meedenken met klanten.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We hebben gewoon onze volle focus en aandacht gezet op onze service en kwaliteit hier zodat de mensen die bij ons zitten in ieder geval niet weg gaan naar de concurrent, en de nieuwe klantjes dat komt later nog wel.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Aan de leveranciers kant, hoe onze relatie is… ik hoop goed. Ten minste ik hoop dat zij blij met mij zijn. Je hebt altijd leveranciers die willen wat meer met je doen maar dat gaat niet altijd.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ik probeer daarnaast ook goed te betalen. Wij proberen altijd zo snel mogelijk de leverancier te betalen.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ja ik denk dat we gewoon echt met zijn allen willen groeien en dan proberen we natuurlijk ook gewoon die grotere concerns binnen te halen. Maar dan wel op onze manier, zoals wij met elkaar hier binnen die 4 muren omgaan zo willen wij ook met onze klanten omgaan. De klant moet gewoon kunnen bellen en het gevoel hebben dat hij een bekende aan de lijn heeft. Dat vinden wij vooral heel belangrijk. Dus ook de relatie met klanten gewoon goed onderhouden.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Het is met name, de merken die we nu nog vertegenwoordigen dat zijn merken die we destijds ook al hadden dus daar heb je gewoon een hele goede band mee, met die vertegenwoordigers dan’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘We houden die relatie eigenlijk vrij persoonlijk binnen het gehele bedrijf. Als je ons belt zul je ongetwijfeld iedereen wel eens een keer aan de telefoon gehad hebben. Dat betekent dat we ook allemaal op de hoogte zijn met de contactpersoon van de klanten. Ik denk dat de relatie voornamelijk informeel is.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Wij hebben een goede relatie met leveranciers en kopen rechtstreeks bij onze leveranciers zoals Ten Kate of bij Concordia en wij hebben ook rechtstreeks contact met Emma.’ (Production manager, proactive case)
70
Ik denk dat de relatie met al onze leveranciers en producenten heel goed is, dat die langdurig is en dat die stabiel is.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ja wij hebben regelmatig fijn contact en houden elkaar op de hoogte. Wij hebben hier een goede en lange relatie mee. Met sommige zelfs al 20 of 25 jaar. (Owner, proactive case) ‘Ja wij hebben hele korte en directe relaties met veel partijen om ons heen. Wij doen met onze leveranciers al jaren zaken dus daar ontstaat ook een bepaalde vertrouwensrelatie waardoor je met elkaar goede dingen kunt afspreken.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Je wordt ook een beetje ‘vrienden’ met dat soort partijen he als je al zo lang samenwerkt. Dat is dan vaak een heel fijn en prettig contact wat niet meer heel formeel hoeft.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs responsibility in the supply chain
Shifting responsibility to other parties in the supply chain
‘Nee met ons kleine bedrijf krijgen wij niet echt te maken met sociale en milieu gerelateerde issues in de supply chain. Ik denk dat dat vooral speelt bij de leveranciers die de kleren echt produceren.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij maken natuurlijk zelf de keus met welke leveranciers we werken en als leveranciers bijvoorbeeld niet echt voor duurzaam staan kunnen wij natuurlijk ook de keus maken om daar wel of niet mee samen te werken. Daarin ligt natuurlijk een stukje verantwoordelijkheid bij ons, maar eerlijk gezegd nemen we die verantwoordelijkheid niet bewust. We gaan ervanuit dat leveranciers dit doen en we vertrouwen hen hierop.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Zij [suppliers] nemen hun verantwoordelijkheid betreft deze problemen wel. Die beseffen ook van als wij niet meegaan dan verliezen we straks de slag dus je moet hier nu echt instappen. Het ene merk is hier veel voortvarender in dan het andere merk maar ook zij zijn er gewoon veel meer mee bezig.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘We hebben jarenlang de trend gehad dat overal polyester in gaat en je merkt nu vanuit de klant dat er meer gevraagd wordt naar wat natuurlijke materialen. Natuurlijk katoen en dat soort dingen. Daarin zit nog wel echt een verwachting. En ik denk dat wij dan deze vraag ook weer bij onze leveranciers kunnen leggen van goh waarom hebben jullie dat niet en kan dat wel?’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘De drive voor duurzaamheid ligt dan vooral bij de klanten en wij zoeken hier dan een passende leverancier bij zodat wij dit dan ook weer kunnen aanbieden. Het is ook een kwestie van vraag en aanbod natuurlijk en hier spelen wij op in. Daar hebben wij verder niet echt een verantwoordelijkheid in omdat de leveranciers de kleren ten slotte produceren.’ (Store manager, reactive case). ‘Onze leveranciers zijn hiermee bezig en laten dit ook weten wanneer er bijvoorbeeld een nieuw duurzaam product is.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Het enige wat wij wel kunnen doen is via reclames of dergelijke aangeven dat wij een medespeler zijn op dat vlak. Dat wij mensen kunnen voorzien van duurzame kleding als zij dat willen maar ik denk dat onze verantwoordelijkheid niet heel groot is omdat ik denk dat wij hier als kleine onderneming niet veel meer aan kunnen doen dan meegaan in die trend en onze naam er wel aan te koppelen.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Acknowledging own responsibility in the supply chain
‘We willen natuurlijk ook een leefbaar loon betalen. Onze instelling is dat wij echt willen dat de mensen die voor ons werken, ook gewoon van het salaris kunnen leven. We nemen onze verantwoordelijkheid niet alleen voor onze eigen mensen hier in Nederland maar ook in de fabrieken en bij de leveranciers bijvoorbeeld.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij zijn maar een klein steentje maar we kunnen en moeten er wel zeker wat aan bijdragen.’ (Production manager, proactive case)
71
‘Wij hebben minder uitdagingen op het milieu en sociaal gebied omdat wij in Europa werken en omdat we in de hoogte categorie zitten van FairWear. Op deze manier voorkomen wij dus dat we in aanraking komen met dat soort issues en proberen wij hieraan bij te dragen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij zijn als [company name] aangesloten bij een aantal verschillende organisaties en vanuit onze duurzaamheidsambities… dat heeft te maken met hetgeen dat wij vinden dat er daadwerkelijk echt wat moet gebeuren in die textielindustrie, ook door ons…’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Ik denk dat wij een grote verantwoordelijkheid hebben en nemen voor issues die zich voordoen in de textielindustrie. Wij proberen daar aan bij te dragen door te focussen op deze problemen en deze dus eigenlijk te vermijden in onze supply chain.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs level of assertiveness in acting with stakeholders
Responding to stakeholders’ actions
‘Bijvoorbeeld NewWave is een Zweeds bedrijf en zij hebben een Nederlandse tak hier. Daar vallen dan heel veel merken onder, vooral in de bedrijfskleding branche zie je dat veel. Dan heb ik het vooral over goedkope kut kleding, dat zijn vaak soms echt 30 merken wat onder een distributeur valt. (…) Wij weten inderdaad dat deze goedkope kleding eigenlijk een slechte kwaliteit heeft maar ja als de klant het wil dan verkopen we dat gewoon.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Tuurlijk altijd het stuk prijs-kwaliteit. Dit hoeft natuurlijk niet altijd goed te zijn want voor iedere markt is een doel. De ene klant wil hele goedkope kleding en de ander wil meer uitgeven. Ik kijk naar mijn omgeving en reageer daar op.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We proberen er gewoon rekening mee te houden van nou we hebben nu bijvoorbeeld heel erg veel van een merk verkocht, we moeten nu dus ook meer van het andere merk verkopen om die leverancier ook tevreden te houden. Dan gaan we dus weer meer van dat merk verkopen. Op die manier proberen we de leveranciers ook een beetje tevreden te houden.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Weet je, veel bouwbedrijven willen vaak een goedkoop shirt want die gasten blijven toch ergens aan haken en dan gooien ze het shirt weer weg. Dus dan is goedkoop-duurkoop toch net even anders dus vanuit de klant is er ook minder vraag.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘I: In de textielindustrie is er het convenant voor duurzame kleding en textiel. Nemen jullie deel aan dit soort initiatieven of andere gelijksoortige initiatieven? R: Nee, om heel eerlijk te zijn niet. Wij zijn hier gewoon echt niet mee bezig.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Wij zijn echt gericht op waar is behoefte van de klant en hoe kunnen we dit invullen’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Ik sta natuurlijk wat meer ook in de winkel dus ik voel ook bij de klant van waar is er vraag naar. Dat speel ik ook weer door naar boven en dan wordt er inderdaad gekeken van zijn er aanknopingspunten en dan proberen we hierop wel in te spelen. Dus er wordt veel vanuit de vraag van de klant gekeken en hier wordt dan op ingespeeld met inkoop bijvoorbeeld.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘En daarnaast kijken we wel of we met populaire merken onder klanten, of we daar contact mee kunnen krijgen met de leverancier. Dat hoor ik dan vooral in de winkel van klanten van hey jullie verkopen dit merk niet en dan gaan we hiermee aan de slag. Als de vraag groot is dan wil je het ook hebben natuurlijk.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Wij kijken vooral wat er vanuit de klant gevraagd wordt en spelen daar op in.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘We merken dat de grotere concerns zich willen onderscheiden en die proeven dus in de markt dat dat heel erg speelt dus die willen zich ook profileren van ja wij hebben daar aandacht voor en zelfs onze kleding is verantwoord. Hier zullen wij dan
72
dus op in moeten springen en hier zul je dus inderdaad leveranciers binnen je pakket moeten hebben die dat kunnen leveren.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Ik denk dat we in ieder geval de keus moeten kunnen bieden tussen het ‘normale’ zeg ik maar even tussen haakjes of een gerecycled product. Dus vooral omdat er vanuit grote klanten aandacht voor is, is het voor ons ook belangrijk dat we dat kunnen bieden.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Collective actions with stakeholders
‘De strategie wordt gemaakt vanuit onze directie, en dan samen met de manager sustainability. Die maken het beleid en daar varen wij op mee. Dit doen zij samen met FairWear, dat ze samen optrekken om te kijken om te kijken wat speelt er, welke regelgeving heeft het land, wat moeten wij doen en wat moet de fabriek zelf doen.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘En dan samen met FairWear foundation wordt het beleid gemaakt wat wel en wat niet, hoe moeten wij acteren, doen wij het goed zo, hoe zijn onze verpakkingen, hoe moeten we het aanleveren.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘We hebben ook een project waarbij we samenwerken met de klant en bij hen oude kleding inzamelen en dat verwerken tot nieuwe materialen, en hier maken we duurzame artikelen van.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Ik denk dat we langzaam maar zeker toch meer die kant op gaan van MVO, dat we steeds meer recyclen en daar steeds meer producten van gaan maken in samenwerking met andere partijen.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Hier zie je met wie wij allemaal samenwerken en wat wij allemaal doen. Dit is NL Greenlabel dat gaat over de CO2 footprint, die proberen wij zo laag mogelijk te houden. Van Clearmark zijn we lid, die controleren of dus alle Europese normeringen want hier wordt ook heel veel mee gerommeld. Dan doen we nog het MVO-register. Dat is een keuringsinstituut dat jaarlijks de vorderingen controleert en hier verslag van brengt op sociaal gebied, op milieu gebied, op organisatorisch gebied. Dan zijn we lid van de vereniging voor veilig en gezond werken. Dan zijn we nog lid van de Modint, de grootste textielbond van Nederland.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘I: Hebben jullie soms ook contact met andere bedrijven die daar ook bijvoorbeeld lid van zijn en hieraan meedoen? R: Ja, zeker. Hier hebben we soms ook meetings en gesprekken mee om ook van elkaar te leren.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘We proberen met onze huidige leveranciers zo lang mogelijk door te gaan door dik en dun en niet bij elk misverstand naar de volgende leverancier te gaan. Daar bouw je niks mee op, daar bouw je geen relatie mee op. Je moet elkaar steunen door dik en dun en degene moet ook een foutje kunnen maken want als je dat niet mag kan niemand iets goed doen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Dat doen we dus op deze manier en dat resulteert gewoon in echte ontwikkelen en betere ontwikkelingen op het gebied van MVO. Niet alleen voor onszelf maar zeker ook bij die productiebedrijven waarbij er echt gelet wordt door het management op arbeidsomstandigheden en noem maar op.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Tevens dit soort initiatieven van FairWear maken ook die samenwerkingsverbanden tussen verschillende partijen mogelijk. Zij kunnen ons aan elkaar linken als het ware om zaken ook voor elkaar te krijgen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Het is een doorlopend proces en dat maakt het ook wel weer heel aangenaam hoor dat je daarmee ook weer een soort energie voor jezelf en voor je organisatie creëert om er elke keer weer wat nieuws en wat beters van te maken samen met anderen.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Het geldt eigenlijk voor onze hele supply chain, alle partijen moeten aan die voorwaarden van FairWear voldoen en we moeten dit samen doen’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
73
‘Wij wisselen niet gewoon te pas en te onpas wanneer er bijvoorbeeld een keer iets fout gaat of wanneer er iets verandert aan de kwaliteit. Wij werken dan samen naar een gerichte oplossing om ook die samenwerking in stand te houden. Dat willen beide partijen natuurlijk het liefst.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs level of taking initiative with regard to social and environmental issues in the supply chain
No initiative for contributing to social and environmental issues, these issues play no role
‘Alleen ja, wij zitten nou eenmaal in een branche met spullen die nou eenmaal moeilijk te recyclen zijn, of ja wel te recyclen zijn maar niet… bijvoorbeeld recyclebaar polyester dat is een techniek die gewoon nog niet per se als prettig wordt ervaren en dat is ook een stuk duurder. Daarmee zeg je het ook al een klein beetje.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘We hebben gerecycled toiletpapier, dat is duurzaam haha. Er is hier gewoon niet zo heel veel aandacht voor omdat wij ook wat kleiner zijn en en daar gewoon niet zo mee bezig zijn. Ja wat moet ik er van zeggen, wat doen wij hier eigenlijk… Ik vind het een goeie vraag maar het houdt ons eigenlijk niet heel veel bezig.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Ik wil best meedenken maar dat [investing money] doe ik dan net weer niet. Heel veel gebeurt hier niet voor maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen. Het is voor ons niet echt een issue dat speelt.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘We scheiden verder het afval, ik doe de lampen uit ’s avonds en de chauffeurs mogen niet al te hard rijden maar dan heb je het eigenlijk wel gehad. Wij zijn vooral bezig met klanten en het bieden van kwaliteit voor hun.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Maar op het gebied van inkoop kunnen wij wel kijken van waar kunnen we het vandaan halen en hebben wij klanten die hier heel erg gevoelig voor zijn en dan in ieder geval regelen dat wij aan die vraag kunnen voldoen. Dat is in ieder geval iets dat wij kunnen doen betreft MVO en ik denk eigenlijk ook wel het enige wat we doen.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘Het enige wat wij wel kunnen doen is via reclames of dergelijke aangeven dat wij een medespeler zijn op dat vlak. Dat wij mensen kunnen voorzien van duurzame kleding als zij dat willen maar ik denk dat onze verantwoordelijkheid niet heel groot is omdat ik denk dat wij hier als kleine onderneming niet veel meer aan kunnen doen dan meegaan in die trend en onze naam er wel aan te koppelen.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case)
Contributing to social and environmental issues
‘We willen natuurlijk ook een leefbaar loon betalen. Onze instelling is dat wij echt willen dat de mensen die voor ons werken, ook gewoon van het salaris kunnen leven.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij kopen kleding en basisartikelen in Europa, die transporteren wij zo veel mogelijk als grote hoeveelheden naar de productie in Bulgarije… dus we vliegen veel minder als je dit vergelijkt wanneer je naar China zou moeten bijvoorbeeld. Dit is dan ook veel duurzamer.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Hier doen wij het recyclen van de kleding van onszelf, onze klanten en andere partijen naar grondstoffen en naar kleding…’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Hierdoor [the production in Bulgaria] hebben wij wat minder problemen als dat je je kleren laat produceren in Bangladesh. Dus wij vermijden nu vrij veel problemen door niet te produceren in derdewereld landen en het hier binnen Europa te doen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Dat betekent voor ons dat wij hier in ons bedrijf in Nederland tussen de 7% en 10% mensen in dienst hebben met een afwijking, die dus in een normaal proces moeilijk aan de bak komen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘We gaan aan de slag met een leefbaar loon in de productie. Nu is er een minimumloon en wij betalen wel wat meer maar we zijn bezig met het maken van stappen naar een leefbaar loon. Leefbaar loon wil zeggen dat iemand in Bulgarije die alleen werkt, ook zijn gezin kan onderhouden. Dat is een heel mooi streven maar dit is niet heel makkelijk.’ (Owner, proactive case)
74
‘Na die gebruiksfase zou je natuurlijk willen dat jouw kleding ook op de een of andere manier duurzaam verwerkt wordt. Hier hebben wij processen voor ingericht om die kleding in te nemen en vervolgens weer te verwerken tot nieuwe grondstoffen om daar weer andere producten van te maken.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Dat wij eigenlijk onze footprint die wij als bedrijf achterlaten zo gering mogelijk maken. We willen eigenlijk zorgen dat alles waar we energie verbruiken of waar we een impact op milieu hebben, of waar we een impact hebben op de CO2-emissie, dat we dat proberen tot een minimum te beperken. En daar doen we alles aan om dat te reduceren.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘En dan zitten er nog wel wat andere componenten aan en dat is met name ook een sociale component. Wij proberen ook zoveel mogelijk in social return te denken door bij wijze van spreken mensen in dienst te nemen die afstand hebben tot de arbeidsmarkt en daar werken we ook mee om uiteindelijk ook die bijdrage te leveren.’ (Sustainability manager, proactive case) ‘Circulair is het circulaire verhaal dat wij erin willen brengen van circulair textiel. Dus dan heb ik het over dat we van oude kleding weer nieuwe producten willen maken. Daar zijn we nu heel veel mee bezig maar dat is eigenlijk het ultieme doel.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
SMEs organizational culture
Friendly atmosphere within the organization
‘Het gaat hier heel relaxed. We kunnen grapjes maken, we lopen te dollen, we doen graag een biertje samen op het eind van de dag maar het kan ook zeker serieus zijn als het moet. Dus heel vriendschappelijk en familiair zelfs.’ (Owner, reactive case) ‘Heel erg open en informeel. Ik zei al dat we een deel van elkaars taken overnemen en dat kan dan ook echt. Je kan het inmiddels eigenlijk vergelijken met een echte vriendengroep, gelukkig.’ (Warehouse manager, reactive case) ‘Ja het is eigenlijk heel gezellig hier. Er zijn echt wel eens issues en ruzietjes want we blijven gewoon mensen maar in principe is het gewoon gezellig en heel vriendschappelijk. We drinken samen een kop koffie. Op vrijdagmiddag is er vaak een borrel, vooral toen dat nog kon.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘Wij zijn hier echt familiair & vriendelijk, wat voor elkaar willen doen.’ (Owner, proactive case) ‘Wij hebben een hele goeie sfeer vind ik. Iedereen kent elkaar eigenlijk en dat is gewoon ontzettend fijn. ‘Zaken kunnen direct met elkaar besproken worden en er hangt eigenlijk gewoon een hele vriendelijke sfeer. Iedereen kent elkaar.’ (Purchase manager, proactive case)
Open and horizontal organization
‘Ouwe jongens krentenbrood haha. Ja dat is echt hoe het hier gaat. Ik denk dat we redelijk gelijk zijn aan elkaar en we gedragen ons niet dat de een boven de ander staat. Tuurlijk moet iemand af en toe het voortouw nemen en besluiten van we gaan zo of zo maar ik denk dat we alles tegen elkaar kunnen zeggen hier en dat kan met een flinke lach maar af en toe ook eens flink mopperen tegen elkaar en dat is ook goed.’ (Store manager, reactive case) ‘We hebben een vrij platte organisatie en hierdoor hebben wij een hele open cultuur waarin zaken direct met elkaar besproken kunnen worden. We hebben ook een hands-on mentaliteit, alles kan zeggen we altijd maar zo mits je erover praat maar we zijn vrij open.’ (Production manager, proactive case) ‘De eigenaar noem je ook gewoon bij zijn voornaam en die kun je ook gewoon aanspreken op bepaalde zaken. We zijn ook vrij direct en spreken elkaar meteen op zaken aan. Dan wordt gewoon gevraagd joh waarom heb je dat gedaan want dat klopt gewoon niet.’ (Production manager, proactive case)
75
‘Wij zijn ook gewoon mensen inderdaad maar het is wel gewoon de bedoeling dat wanneer er wat aan de hand is je gewoon even naar deze persoon toe loopt en het even open bespreekt. Alles is bespreekbaar.’ (Production manager, proactive case)
