IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v18y2016i2p184-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supplier Evasion of a Buyer’s Audit: Implications for Motivating Supplier Social and Environmental Responsibility

Author

Listed:
  • Erica L. Plambeck

    (Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Terry A. Taylor

    (Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720)

Abstract

Prominent buyers’ brands have been damaged because their suppliers caused major harm to workers or the environment, e.g., through a deadly factory fire or release of toxic chemicals. How can buyers motivate suppliers to exert greater care to prevent such harm? This paper characterizes a “backfiring condition” under which actions taken by prominent buyers (increasing auditing, publicizing negative audit reports, providing loans to suppliers) motivate a supplier to exert greater effort to pass the buyer’s audit by hiding information and less care to prevent harm. Intuitively appealing actions for a buyer (penalizing a supplier for harming workers or the environment, or for trying to deceive an auditor) may be similarly counterproductive. Contrary to conventional wisdom, squeezing a supplier’s margin (by reducing the price paid to the supplier or increasing wages for workers) motivates the supplier to exert greater care to prevent harm—under the backfiring condition. Whereas the necessary and sufficient condition depends on the relative convexity of the supplier’s hiding cost function, a simple sufficient condition is that the supplier is likely to successfully hide information from the auditor, in equilibrium. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the backfiring condition is prevalent or becoming increasingly so. Similar insights apply to mitigation of unauthorized subcontracting.

Suggested Citation

  • Erica L. Plambeck & Terry A. Taylor, 2016. "Supplier Evasion of a Buyer’s Audit: Implications for Motivating Supplier Social and Environmental Responsibility," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 184-197, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:184-197
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2015.0550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2015.0550
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2015.0550?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiangmin Liu & Rosemary Batt, 2007. "The Economic Pay-Offs to Informal Training: Evidence from Routine Service Work," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 61(1), pages 75-89, October.
    2. Arun S. Malik, 1990. "Avoidance, Screening and Optimum Enforcement," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(3), pages 341-353, Autumn.
    3. Felipe Caro & Charles J. Corbett & Tarkan Tan & Rob Zuidwijk, 2013. "Double Counting in Supply Chain Carbon Footprinting," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 545-558, October.
    4. Baiman, S & Evans, Jh & Nagarajan, Nj, 1991. "Collusion In Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 1-18.
    5. Innes, Robert, 2001. "Violator Avoidance Activities and Self-Reporting in Optimal Law Enforcement," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 239-256, April.
    6. Locke, Richard M. & Qin, Fei & Brause, Alberto, 2007. "Does monitoring improve labor standards? Lessons from Nike," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59405, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Sang-Hyun Kim, 2015. "Time to Come Clean? Disclosure and Inspection Policies for Green Production," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(1), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Charles J. Corbett & Gregory A. DeCroix, 2001. "Shared-Savings Contracts for Indirect Materials in Supply Chains: Channel Profits and Environmental Impacts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(7), pages 881-893, July.
    9. Kambhu, John, 1989. "Regulatory Standards, Noncompliance and Enforcement," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 103-114, June.
    10. John Kambhu, 1989. "Regulatory standards, noncompliance and enforcement," Research Paper 8902, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    11. Kashi R. Balachandran & Suresh Radhakrishnan, 2005. "Quality Implications of Warranties in a Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(8), pages 1266-1277, August.
    12. Brian Tomlin, 2006. "On the Value of Mitigation and Contingency Strategies for Managing Supply Chain Disruption Risks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 639-657, May.
    13. Volodymyr Babich & Christopher S. Tang, 2012. "Managing Opportunistic Supplier Product Adulteration: Deferred Payments, Inspection, and Combined Mechanisms," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 301-314, April.
    14. Stanley Baiman & Paul E. Fischer & Madhav V. Rajan, 2000. "Information, Contracting, and Quality Costs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 776-789, June.
    15. Fahad Khalil & Jacques Lawarrée & Sungho Yun, 2010. "Bribery versus extortion: allowing the lesser of two evils," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 179-198, March.
    16. Iny Hwang & Suresh Radhakrishnan & Lixin (Nancy) Su, 2006. "Vendor Certification and Appraisal: Implications for Supplier Quality," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(10), pages 1472-1482, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li Chen & Hau L. Lee, 2017. "Sourcing Under Supplier Responsibility Risk: The Effects of Certification, Audit, and Contingency Payment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(9), pages 2795-2812, September.
    2. Aadhaar Chaturvedi, 2021. "Excessive Competition and Supplier Non‐Performance Risk: Trade‐offs in Reverse Auctions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3073-3093, September.
    3. Soo-Haeng Cho & Xin Fang & Sridhar Tayur & Ying Xu, 2019. "Combating Child Labor: Incentives and Information Disclosure in Global Supply Chains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 692-711, July.
    4. Erica L. Plambeck & Terry A. Taylor, 2019. "Testing by Competitors in Enforcement of Product Standards," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1735-1751, April.
    5. Murat Erkoc & Haresh Gurnani & Saibal Ray & Mingzhu Jin, 2023. "Quality investment, inspection policy, and pricing decisions in a decentralized supply chain," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(1), pages 207-226, January.
    6. Jing Chen & Hang Wei & Lei Xie, 2022. "Mitigating Product Quality Risk under External Financial Pressure: Inspection, Insurance, and Cash/Collateralized Loan," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(1), pages 304-317, January.
    7. Ying‐Ju Chen & Mingcherng Deng, 2013. "Supplier certification and quality investment in supply chains," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 175-189, April.
    8. Hong Wan & Xiaowei Xu & Tian Ni, 2013. "The incentive effect of acceptance sampling plans in a supply chain with endogenous product quality," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(2), pages 111-124, March.
    9. Carmen Arguedas, 2013. "Pollution standards, technology investment and fines for non-compliance," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 156-176, October.
    10. Mariya Bondareva & Edieal Pinker, 2019. "Dynamic Relational Contracts for Quality Enforcement in Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1305-1321, March.
    11. Yoo, Seung Ho & Cheong, Taesu, 2018. "Quality improvement incentive strategies in a supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 331-342.
    12. Yim, Andrew, 2010. "Quality Cost and Failure Risk in the Choice of Single versus Multiple Sourcing," MPRA Paper 27858, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Dionisia Tzavara and Adrienne Héritier, 2011. "Quality and Environmental Regulation: Verifying Compliance along the Supply Chain," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 16, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    14. Pun, Hubert & Sebastian Heese, H., 2014. "Outsourcing to suppliers with unknown capabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(1), pages 108-118.
    15. Dongryul Lee & Kyung Hwan Baik, 2017. "Concealment and verification over environmental regulations: a game-theoretic analysis," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 235-268, June.
    16. Pei†Cheng Liao & Suresh Radhakrishnan, 2013. "A Commitment†Based Explanation for Outsourcing Multiple Tasks," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 1063-1081, September.
    17. Friehe Tim & Mungan Murat C., 2020. "A Note on Productive and Dynamic Inefficiencies of Intermediate Regulatory Sanctions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(1), pages 1-8, January.
    18. Gary H. Chao & Seyed M. R. Iravani & R. Canan Savaskan, 2009. "Quality Improvement Incentives and Product Recall Cost Sharing Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1122-1138, July.
    19. Yang Dong & Kefeng Xu & Yi Xu & Xiang Wan, 2013. "Quality Assurance Contracts in a Multi-Level Supply Chain," Working Papers 0206mss, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    20. Shalpegin, Timofey, 2020. "Collaborative product development: Managing supplier incentives for key component testing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(2), pages 553-565.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:18:y:2016:i:2:p:184-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.