sustainability

Article
How Do Technological Skills Improve Reverse
Logistics? The Moderating Role of Top Management
Support in Information Technology Use
and Innovativeness
Encarnación García-Sánchez 1, * , Jaime Guerrero-Villegas 2 and Javier Aguilera-Caracuel 3
1 Department of Management, Faculty of Education, Economics and Technology, University of Granada,
51001 Ceuta, Spain
2 Department of Management and Marketing, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain;
[email protected]
3 Department of Management, Faculty of Economic and Business Sciences, University of Granada,
18071 Granada, Spain; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 26 November 2018; Accepted: 19 December 2018; Published: 22 December 2018


Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence of human resource management on
reverse logistics (RL) in the context of high-tech firms. Using the resource-based view of the firm,
we analyzedthe effect of employees’ technological skills on RL. The study also investigated whether
top management support (TMS) for information technology (IT) and innovativeness moderate this
relationship. We collected data from European high-tech firms from May to September 2010, obtaining
160 responses representing a 17.7% response rate. Multivariate regressions were used to assess all
of the relations established. The results indicated that technological skills have direct and positive
effects on RL in high tech-firms. The authors also report that both TMS for IT and innovativeness act
as positive moderators in the relationship between technological skills and RL. This study suggests
the importance of considering two important organizational variables that enhance the effect of
technological skills on RL in high-tech firms. First, using TMS for IT not only provides tangible
resources but also strongly supports employees’ technological development in RL. Second, a high
level of firm innovativeness leads high-tech firms to create the right conditions to take advantage of
their technological skills to improve their RL. Moreover, theresults indicate the contingent role of
innovativeness and TMS for IT use in the relationship between technological skills and RL.

Keywords: reverse logistics; technological skills; top management support; innovativeness

1. Introduction
The current global scenario, characterized by competitive and dynamic markets, has led firms to
focus their efforts on developing more sustainable strategies. In this context, supply chain management
(SCM) has become pivotal for sustainable development of firms, since it involves major business and
industrial activities such as raw materials extraction, procurement, manufacturing, packaging and
transportation, all of which can pose negative environmental and social impacts if not managed
appropriately [1].
Reverse logistics (RL) is a key element of SCM. RL can be defined as “the process of planning,
implementing, and controlling the efficient, cost effective flow of raw materials, in-process inventory,
finished goods, and related information from the point of consumption to the point of origin for the
purpose of creating or recapturing value, or proper disposal” [2] (pp. 271). A higher volume of returns

Sustainability 2019, 11, 58; doi:10.3390/su11010058 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 2 of 17

(e.g., product warranties, end-of-use, end-of-life) and recalls makes RL essential to firms’ success.
Within the Resource-Based View [3,4], RL can be understood as a strategic resource that can help the
firm obtain a competitive advantage through the efficient recovery of the value of products [5]. From
this perspective, human resources are considered as one of the crucial intangible resources for the
development and maintenance of efficient RL activities. Thus, effective RL can positively affect the
company’s economic, social and environmental sustainability by recapturing value remaining in the
returned product [6].
Studies have focused on describing and analyzing RL system planning, reverse channel activities
and problems that firms encounter in the RL process. Another line of research examines the ways
different elements in the RL process interact and share information [7,8]; development of and
relationships among members of the supply chain [9,10]; collaborative production models for planning
returns [11]; governance policies [12,13]; warehousing and environmental sustainability (green RL) [14],
among others. However, how human resources can contribute to the development of RL has received
little study.
Some authors indicatethe key role played by internal and external factors in facilitating
or inhibiting implementation of RL [15,16]. The majority of these studies analyze economic
issues, environmental issues, market issues andproduct quality, among other issues. Additionally,
the literature has shown that information technology (IT) resources are required for effective decision
making in RL [17]. All of these activities require advanced IT systems. While organizations have
developed sophisticated forward-logistics technology, IT that supports RL lags significantly, creating
serious challenges [6,18]. As both control throughout the supply chain and transparency depend on
IT [19], not developing appropriate IT systems hinders the efficiency of RL processes [20].
Despite all of these advances, the literature has paid little attention to analyzing the role played
by human resource management in firms’ RL activities. Specifically, little research has explored the
influence of workers’ technological skills, which can be key intangible resources [21,22]. Yet, these
skills are highlyrelevant to RL processes within organizations in very dynamic, unstable high-tech
sectors. First, RL requires processes that incorporate a continuous flow of information among the agents
involved in the supply chain to coordinate and execute the return process efficiently [23–25]. Achieving
this goal takes effort and dedication from the firm’s workers in developing technological skills [26,27]
such that workers can access information simultaneously [28] and achieve greater collaborative support
among the agents involved. Human capital can affect RL, since human resources are the company’s
most valuable asset in providingcompetitive advantage [22,29].
Second, when analyzing the impact of workers’ technological skills on RL processes, one must
consider a series of organizational variables that help to strengthen this relationship. Specifically, we
analyzed the Top Management Support (TMS) for IT use and innovativeness. On the one hand,
diverse studies have indicated that TMS is a critical component to the success of any logistics
process [26,30]. The costs and risk involved in RL processes in the high-tech sector currently require
top managers who areoriented to these processes and support them, focusing intensely on the use and
implementation of new technologies to ensure good acceptance and implementation. This support
is necessary to committing sufficient funding through a suitable level of technological and human
resources—hiring, training and developing employeesand coordinating the different players involved
in the RL processes [31]. An effective increase of employees’ technological skills and professional
development depends on TMS, as top managers allocate resources and develop the plansthat guide
their companies in pursuit of their strategic goals [32]. Organizations can benefit from this knowledge
in RL processes if managers truly bid for technological training and improvement and train employees
to obtain complex, tacit technological skills that are difficult to copy.
Innovativeness, on the other hand, makes firms adopt new technologies earlier [31] and implies
seeking creative or novel solutions to problems [33]. Companies must innovate to succeed in RL,
which differs from forward logistics and outbound flows, requiring dedication of further resources
and special handling [34]. Organizational creativity and flexibility are two essential elements of
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 3 of 17

innovativeness that help organizations to meet this need, as they enhanceemployees’ technological
skills, improving RL performance [31,35].
Bearing the foregoing in mind, this study aimedto analyze the following research questions in
high-tech firms: To what extent do employees’ technological skills affect the company’s RL activities?
What role do organizational variables such as TMS and innovativeness play in the relationship between
employees’ technological skills and the RL? In answering these questions, this study contributes to
the literature in several ways. First, it highlights the role played by human resource management in
the development of RL activities. Specifically, it provides support to demonstrate that firms whose
employees possess technological skills enhance RL. Second, the paper advances the literature on
the manager’s role, by going beyond previous work to study the importance of TMS in RL and by
suggesting that specific top managers’ support for IT is needed to develop RL. Third, this paper
enriches the RL literature by considering the contingent role of innovativeness in the relationship
between technological skills and RL.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. The next sectionestablishesthe theoretical framework
and develops the hypotheses. The third section explains the methodology, including description of
the sample and definition of the variables. Results are presented in the fourth section. The fifth and
final section provides discussion, conclusions andlimitations of the study and recommendations for
further research.

2. Hypotheses

2.1. Technological Skills and RL

The last two decades have produced a drastic change in the functioning of firms that perform
SCM, especially in RL. RL activities may affect firms’ sustainability. For example, effective RL strategies
can decelerate or prevent environmental degradation and require employees’ new skills, and product
and process technology capacities [36]. Thus, we can draw on the resource-based view [21,22] to
argue that skills possessed by employees are key to developing efficient RL activities [31]. Specifically,
technological skills are defined as “the know-how needed to build IT applications using available
technology and to operate them to make products or provide services” [37] (p. 498). Technological
skills include knowledge of programming languages, understanding of communication protocols
and products and experience with operating systems. Thus, there are various reasons why firms that
perform RL processes need their workers to develop technological skills.
First, the complexity and speed of logistics operations make information management a priority
for firms globally. This finding is especially true for high-tech firms, which are often characterized
by uncertainty and the need for rapid synchronization of processes and processing of information
and actions [24]. In some industries, for example, prediction of the type and number of returns can
be based on historical information; however, these predictions are more difficult to establish in the
technology sector, where information varies and changes over time [24]. In addition to predicting what
products will be returned when, companies must respond quickly to customer requests, processing
and managing product flows quickly and accurately. Given the complexity of interactions among the
various parties, companies should optimize coordination among them by prioritizing effective access
to and exchange of information [24].
Second, skilled employees can exploit the power of technology to organize information and make
it available to multiple users whenever needed. Thus, employees must know how to maximize use of
the tools available (e.g., databases, varied media, simulation software, portals/forums and networks
for communication and exchange of information and knowledge [28,38]). Furthermore, possession of
technological skills by an organization’s workers is always an important element for the firm, as it is a
means of strengthening technological knowledge and exploring new results [39]. These skills are even
more noteworthy in high-tech firms, which perform RL processes that involve continuous innovation
and incorporation of new technology in the entire process of asset recovery. For example, technological
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 4 of 17

skills are necessary in the application of software for storing and gathering data that enable one to
know at what moment packages are returned by the supplier, whether the products are defective or
unused, etc. [40].
Third, technological skills are needed to support collaborative communication with supply
chain members, that is, in the collaborative relationships among the agents of the supply chain,
through significant and opportune exchange of information [41]. RL succeeds when the different
members of the chain know and trust each other [39]. Meetings and frequent information exchange
foster and improve relationships to ground effective collaboration on RL operations [42]. Such
collaboration also depends on a shared vision that subordinates individual and short-term interests
to the long-term commitment [43,44]. Using technologies and developing technological skills that
encourage communication and mutual trust can be considered precursors to a stable, committed
relationship among supply chain agents [45]. Precisely due to the variability of RL processes,
commercial members should work together to ensure the punctuality and efficiency of the activity.
Following the resource-based view of firm rationality, human resources are key to developing
RL activities. They are even more crucial in the high-tech sector, which is characterized by constant
research and innovation, and thus requires that personnel be not only highly qualified but also
constantly up-to-date. Not only are continuous training and renewal essential to being technologically
competitive [46], employees must be able to change, adapt and coordinate in new processes as the
organization evolves. Such flexibility often necessitates acquiring new technological knowledge. Thus,
we conclude that workers with technological skills will be able to improve their RL processes by
developing and disseminating technological knowledge among all agents in the supply chain.

Hypothesis 1. Technological skills are positively related to RL in high-technology firms.

2.2. The Moderating Role of TMS for IT Use in the Relationship between Technological Skills and RL
Once the relation between technological skills and RL has been analyzed, we must identify other
factors that can affect the firm’s RL activities [47]. TMS for IT is one factor that influences firms’
tendency to develop RL processes [31].
Various studies have noted that logistics processes depend on TMS [24,30,48]. Firms should
take into account human intangible resources to develop their RL strategies. Thus, the promotion
and support of employee technological skills becomes crucial [21,22,49]. From this point of view, top
managers usually plan carefully to allocate sufficient resources (monetary and human), training and
implementation of RL. Only thenwill their firms be prepared to succeed despite the risk and expense
involved [31].
First, the TMS is shown in investment in IT and in the acquisition of tools and applications,
among other items, that permit development of RL processes and thus create a competitive advantage
through the development of resources that are sustainable and inimitable over time [27,50]. IT can
enhance the firm’s competitive ability to create and capture value through positioning advantages in
its industry and/or coordination advantages in its value chain [51,52]. According to [26], one strategic
concern for top managers is the deployment of IT in the supply chain. TMS “reflects, in many ways,
the importance that top management executives place on technology” [53] (pp. 246). The CEO and the
Chief Information Officer (CIO) typically determine firms’ IT strategy and investment [54]. Unless
CEOs understand the magnitude of the investment required, they are unlikely to approve major
projectsor the resources required for successful implementation. In the absence of such understanding,
projects of great importance to the firm’s position in its sector may not receive sufficient funding [48,54].
Second, TMS can be reflected in good personnel selection and training policies. On the one hand,
selection policies help the company to strengthen its personnel’s technological skills by incorporating
people who already possess these skills when they join the company [37]. For example, manufacturing
firm managers’ decision to invest in technology specific to RL could lead to including personnel with
specific technological abilities in automated materials handling, equipment monitoring, computerized
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 5 of 17

entry of returns and exchange of electronic data [8] that permit rapid response to customers. Such
technological support would help to recover value that would otherwise be lost, improving the
relationship among supply chain agents through customer service and satisfaction [24].
On the other hand, TMS can influence the increase and perfecting of continuous and intensive
training programs on RL processes [29]. Managers’ concern for the professional development of their
employees largely determines the resources dedicated to training as a significant element of the firm’s
strategic plan [32].
In sum, we propose that the positive effect of technological skills on RL is more evident for
firms with a high level of TMS for IT. In other words, TMS for IT has a positive effect on the
relationship between technological skills and RL in high-technology firms, as formulated in the
following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2. TMS for IT use is likely to strengthen the positive relationship between technological skills and
RL in high-technologyfirms.

2.3. The Moderating Role of Organizational Innovativeness in the Relationship between Technological Skills
and RL
In today’s volatile, competitive markets, competition pushes organizations to change rapidly and
innovate [55]. Various studies stress the specific importance of innovation in RL programs [30].
We can define innovativeness as the organization’s adoption of new technologies earlier than
peers [56] or the discovery oforiginal solutions to problems [33]. RL depends more intensely on
innovation than other processes because reverse flows are so different from forward, requiring different
treatment and greater investment in resources [34]. Organizations that dedicate attention to RL
processes and remain current with changes in technology will be better able to adopt new technologies
to excel in RL and, in turn, in market performance [31].
Several studies highlight that certain organizational factors enhance innovativeness. According to
Fundación COTEC for innovation, an environment inclined to innovation is one that bids for and values
innovation possesses the processes and tools needed and allocates resources to managing them. One
of the most striking issues in establishing such an environment is creativity. Following the theoretical
framework, firms that promote employees’ creative capacities, tolerate risks and support personal
development improve product innovation outputs [35]. In such situations, firms are more likely to
develop and renew their products and processes, abandoning obsolete ones and encouraging the firm’s
growth and profitability in the long term [57]. Failure to adopt emerging technologies and remain
current will, in contrast, prevent the company from competing with more innovative competitors.
According to Frohman (1998) [58], organizations that sustain a climate of innovation: (1) foster
ongoing horizontal communication, (2) reward employees for innovative ideas, (3) promote employee
feedback, (4) establish methods to measure learning and (5) celebrate rather than punish mistakes,
which are viewed as learning opportunities.
Creative, flexible development over time throughout the organization nurtures RL process
innovation, giving rise to strategic initiatives [38]. Organizations with these characteristics can better
(1) predict customer demand, preference, and dissatisfaction with products and services; (2) establish
new return policies, collection points or customer services that make the process more efficient; and
(3) use information from the entire supply chain network to develop products and services that better
satisfy customers’ needs, optimizing asset recovery [59].
In sum, we propose that organizational innovativeness can strengthen the positive relationship
between technological skills and RL in high-tech firms. Specifically, a high level of innovativeness
can facilitate access to information, the search for creativity and provision of unusual solutions to
problems, and the ability of employees to develop their technological skills, positively impacting RL.
 In sum, we propose that organizational innovativeness can strengthen the positive
relationship between technological skills and RL in high-tech firms. Specifically, a high level of
innovativeness can facilitate access to information, the search for creativity and provision of
unusual solutions to problems, and the ability of employees to develop their technological
skills, positively impacting RL.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 6 of 17

Hypothesis 3. Organizational innovativeness is likely to strengthen the positive relationship

between technological
Hypothesis skills and
3. Organizational RL in high-technology
innovativeness is likely to firms.
strengthen the positive relationship between
technological skills and RL in high-technology firms.
Figure 1 presents the proposed theoretical model.

Figure 1 presents the proposed theoretical model.

Innovativeness

H3

Technological H1
skill Reverse logistics

H2

Top management
support for IT

Figure 1. Research model.

3. Methodology Figure 1. Research model.

3. Methodology
3.1. Sample
The study population was composed of high-technology firms within the territory of the European
3.1. Sample
Union due to the importance of RL in the technology sector. The sample of 900 firms was drawn
The study(2009)
from Amadeus population was composed
[60], acomplement of high-technology
to Thomson firms within
Reuters’ Datastream, the compiles
which territory thorough
of the
European Union due to the importance of RL in the technology sector. The
information on the financial and business assetsof some19 million companies in 43 countries sample of 900 firms in
was drawn
Europe. from Amadeus
We prepared (2009)questionnaire
a structured [60], acomplement
to study to how
Thomson Reuters’ tackle
organizations Datastream, which on
RL, drawing
compiles
our thorough
knowledge information
of the literature, on scholarly
expert the financial and business
and managerial assetsof
contacts, some19 interviews
and additional million
companies
with in 43 countries
other scholars in Europe.
and managers. We
The list of prepared a structured
these organizations’ CEOsquestionnaire
was obtained to in
study how
partthrough
organizations
funding from the tackle RL, drawing
Regional Ministry on our knowledge
of Economy, of theand
Innovation literature, expert
Science of scholarly
Andalusia’s and
Regional
managerial and
Government contacts, and additional
the Spanish Ministry interviews withResearch.
of Science and other scholars and managers. The list of
these organizations’
CEOs, CEOs was obtained
our main respondents, provided insignificant
partthrough funding
input from the Regional
for constructing Ministry
and refining of
the study
Economy,CEOs
variables. Innovation
were theand main Science of Andalusia’s
respondents because ofRegional Government
their responsibility and theand
to evaluate Spanish
monitor
Ministry of Science and Research.
in-depth information throughout the organizationand to establish norms for employee behavior [61].
CEOs, our
Additionally, CEOsmain respondents,
outline provided significant
the organization’s goalsandinput plan for
andconstructing and refining the
oversee implementation of its
study variables.
initiatives CEOstoward
and progress were thethemmain
[62].respondents because of their responsibility to evaluate
andThrough
monitor stratified
in-depth random
information throughout
sampling the organizationand
by country, we divided the to establish
study norms(10
population forEU
countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, The Netherlands,
the United Kingdom) into strata, with random sampling within strata through systematic sampling.
We then selected 16 companies from each of the 10 countries. The CEOs were assured that their
responses would be confidential and reported only in aggregate form. CEOs were offered the
opportunity to receive the study results, with a comparative analysis of their firm’s variables.
This procedure yielded a 17.7% response rate (Table 1).
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 7 of 17

Table 1. Technical details of the research.

High-tech manufacturing firms (pharmaceutical industry,

Sectors hardware and other computer science equipment, automotive
industry, space and aeronautics products).
Europe (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy,
Geographical location
Poland, Spain, The Netherlands, United Kingdom)
Methodology Structured questionnaire
Universe of population 5441 firms
Sample (response) size 160 firms (17.7%)
Sample error 7.7%
Confidence level 95%, p − q = 0.50; Z = 1.96
Period of data collection From May 2010 to September 2010

The EU context was suitable for this study because of the significant role of its RL and technologies
in promoting green supply management practices internationally [63]. We compared responding and
non-responding businesses’ to reduce likelihood of non-response bias. The results for return on
assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE) and return on sales (ROS) showed no significant difference
between respondents and non-respondents [64]. The use of a single survey instrument required testing
for common method bias, in this case with Harman’s one-factor test (see [65]). From the principal
components analysis of the questionnaire, eight factors with Eigen-values over 1.0 explained 64% of
the variance. Thus, method variance did not seem to be a concern. We identified several factors, rather
than merelyone, and no single factor explained the majority of the variance [66].

3.2. Variables
Technological skills. Scales from Ray et al. (2005) [67] and Byrd and Davidson (2003) [53] were
used to measure technological skills on a four-item 7-point Likert scale (1 “completely disagree”,
7 “completely agree”) (Appendix A). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (χ2 2 = 1.26, NFI= 0.99,
NNFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.99, CFI = 0.99) demonstrated the scales’ one-dimensionality, high validity and
reliability (α = 0.849).
Organizational innovativeness. We measured organizational innovativeness using four-item,
7-point Likert-type scales (1 “completely disagree”, 7 “completely agree”) from Zahra (1993) [68]
[Appendix A]. CFA was used to validate this scale (χ2 2 = 4.30, NFI = 0.98, NNFI = 0.97, GFI = 0.99,
CFI = 0.99). The results showed its one-dimensionality and satisfactory validity and reliability
(α = 0.792).
Top management support. Byrd and Davidson (2003) [53] and Ray et al. (2005) [67] provided
the four items to measure TMS [Appendix A]. CFA (χ2 2 = 1.19, NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.99,
CFI = 0.99) was used to validate the scales and confirm their one-dimensionality, high validity and
reliability (α = 0.80).
Reverse logistics. RL was measured using six items from Mihi-Ramirez (2012) [63] and an
adaptation from [2] [Appendix A]. CFA (χ2 2 = 1.21, NFI = 0.99, NNFI = 0.97, GFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.99)
was used to validate the scales and confirm their one-dimensionality, high validity and reliability
(α = 0.812).
Organizational performance. A six-item, 7-point Likert-type scale (1 “Much worse than my
competitors” to 7 “Much better than my competitors”) by Murray and Kotabe (1999) [69] was used to
assess organizational performance relative to direct competitors. Scales have been used extensively
in recent research to evaluate performance relative to main competitors [70,71]. In many studies,
the managers’ subjective perceptions have been the basis for determining the success of the firms’
outcomes. In others, researchers have used objective data, such as ROA. Research has confirmed the
high correlation and concurrent validity of objective and subjective data on performance. Both are
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 8 of 17

considered valid to calculate organizational performance [72,73]. Although the interview questions
were also formulated to obtain both subjective and objective information, CEOs preferred to give
general opinions rather than numerical data (Appendix A). We confirmed the correlation between
subjective and objective data and found that they were high and significant. The scales were validated
using CFA (χ2 2 = 24.60, NFI = 0.94, NNFI = 0.94, GFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.96) and were demonstrated to be
one-dimensional with high reliability (α = 0.816).
Table 2 summarizes variables and their operationalization.

Table 2. Variables and operationalization.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Variable Operationalization
(CFA)/Reliability
Technical information technology (IT) skills refer to
Confirmatory factor analysis:
general, explicit skills (e.g., programming)
χ2 2 = 1.26, NFI = 0.99,
possessed by the firm’s IT staff that are needed to
Technological skills NNFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.99,
develop IT applications; and encompass both
CFI= 0.99
firm-specific techniques and scientific
Reliability: α = 0.849.
understanding (Ray et al., 2005) [67].
The ability of the organization to adapt or execute
Confirmatory factor analysis:
new ideas, processes or products satisfactorily,
χ2 2 = 4.30, NFI = 0.98,
Organizational emphasizing creating new business through
NNFI = 0.97, GFI = 0.99,
innovativeness market developments or by undertaking product,
CFI = 0.99
process, technological and administrative
Reliability: α = 0.792.
innovations (Zahra, 1993) [68].
Top management support (TMS) for IT reflects the Confirmatory factor analysis:
importance that the top management executives χ2 2 = 1.19, NFI = 0.99,
Top management
place on IT, the level of funding for IT and the NNFI = 0.99, GFI = 0.99,
support for IT
facilitation of technology transfer throughout the CFI = 0.99
firm (Byrd and Davidson, 2003) [53]. Reliability: α = 0.80
Implementation and control of the flow of raw
Confirmatory factor analysis:
material, inventory in process, finished products
χ2 2 = 1.21, NFI = 0.99,
and information from point of consumption to
Reverse logistics NNFI = 0.97, GFI = 0.98,
point of origin, to be done as efficiently and
CFI = 0.99
economically as possible in order to recover its
Reliability: α = 0.812
value (Rogers and Tibben-Lembke, 1999) [2].
Market performance consisted of two composite
measures of strategic market performance and
Confirmatory factor analysis:
financial market performance, using managers’
χ2 2 = 24.60, NFI = 0.94,
Organizational subjective perceptions to measure beneficial
NNFI = 0.94, GFI = 0.98,
Performance outcomes for firms and others objective data, such
CFI = 0.96
as return on assets (ROA) (Homburg et al., 1999;
Reliability: α = 0.816
Murray and Kotabe, 1999; Venkatraman and
Ramanujam, 1986) [69,72,73].

4. Results
A multiple moderated regression analysis [74] was used to test the hypotheses, with the
moderating effect servingas multiplicative variable. Then, we assessed the probability of common
method variance, whether the data followed the distribution expected fromour analytic tools, and the
independent variables’ degree of multicollinearity. We developed the multiplicative terms by fixing
both independent and moderating variables on their means to prevent multicollinearity [75]. According
to the results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the variable distributions generally conformed to the
normality assumption of regression analysis. The condition indices and variance inflation factors
(VIF) enabled us to discount the possibility that multicollinearity skews the results, as the VIF values
were below the maximum of five recommended in the literature [76]. Additionally, we tested for
heteroscedasticity using the Breusch-Pagan test. The result indicated that there were no problems of
heteroscedasticity in our model. The descriptive statistics and correlations are shown in Table 3.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 9 of 17

Table 3. Descriptive statistics and correlations.

Top
Standard Reverse Technological
Mean Firm Size Sector 1 Sector 2 Sector 3 Performance Management
Deviation Logistics Skills
Support for IT
Reverse logistics 0.00 1.00 1.00
Firm size 3.81 1.76 0.27 *** 1.00
Sector 1 0.26 0.57 0.19 ** 0.01 1.00
Sector 2 0.23 0.55 −0.10 † −0.25 ** 0.32 *** 1.00
Sector 3 0.32 0.59 −0.07 0.04 0.22 0.26 1.00
Performance 0.00 1.00 0.18 ** 0.22 ** 0.03 0.09 0.06 1.00
Technological skills 0.00 1.00 0.27 *** 0.11 † 0.02 0.14 * 0.11 * 0.28 *** 1.00
Top management
0.00 1.00 0.35 *** 0.18 ** 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.41 *** 0.65 *** 1.00
support for IT
Innovativeness 0.00 1.00 0.35 *** 0.18 ** 0.17 * 0.11 † 0.15 * 0.32 *** 0.42 *** 0.57 ***
† p < 0.10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. N = 160.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 10 of 17

Table 4 shows the results of the regression analyses testing the hypotheses.

Table 4. The results of the hierarchical moderating regression analysis.

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Constant −0.47 * (0.19) −0.34 ** (0.2) †
−0.32 (0.18) −0.36 * (0.18)
Firm size 0.12 ** (0.04) 0.09 * (0.04) 0.18 * (0.09) 0.09 * (0.04)
Sector 1 0.43 ** (0.14) 0.39 * (0.14) 0.33 (0.13) 0.36 ** (0.13)
Sector 2 −0.19 (0.15) −0.28 * (0.06) −0.34 * (0.14) −0.26 (0.15)
Sector 3 −0.19 (0.13) −0.17 (0.13) −0.21 (0.12) −0.22 (0.13)
Performance −0.19 * (0.13) 0.03 (0.07) 0.07 (0.07) 0.04 (0.08)
Technological skills 0.17 ** (0.08) 0.29 *** (0.08) 0.13 * (0.09)
Top management support for IT 0.32 ** (0.11) 0.32 ** (0.11)
Innovativeness 0.22 ** (0.08) 0.26 ** (0.08)
TMS X technological skills 0.11 ** (0.05)
Innovativeness X technological skills 0.21 *** (0.05)
R2 0.15 0.25 0.31 0.26
2
R adjusted 0.12 0.21 0.28 0.25
F change 5.34 ** 9.28 ** 15.92 *** 4.93 **
Notes: Dependent variable: Reverse logistics. R2 , Reliability; Standardized Structural Coefficients; † p < 0.10,
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

In Model 1, the control variables were entered: firm size, type of industry and performance.
In Model 2, we added the independent variables: technological skills, TMS for IT use and innovativeness.
Model 3 included the moderating effect of TMS on IT use in the relationship between technological
skills and RL. Finally, Model 4 considered the moderating effect of innovativeness on the relationship
between technological skills and RL. Our models showed good fit, with an adjusted R2 value greater
than 0.20 for all four. We now highlight our main results.
First, the results showed that technological skills werepositively and significantly related to RL,
supporting H1. Second, since the greater the TMS for IT use, the stronger the relationship between
technological skills and RL, TMS for IT use strengthened the positive effect of technological skills
on the development of green RL. Figure 2 illustrates this relationship. Consequently, Hypothesis 2
is supported. Sustainability2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 20

Figure 2. Moderating effect of TMS for IT use on the relationship between reverse logistics (RL) and
Figure 2. Moderating effect of TMS for IT use on the relationship between reverse logistics (RL) and
technological skills.
technological skills.
Finally, since the greater the level of firm innovativeness, the stronger the relationship
between technological skills and RL, innovativeness strengthened the positive effect of
technological skills on the implementation of RL processes. Figure 3 illustrates our findings.
Hence, Hypothesis 3 is also supported by our data.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 11 of 17

Finally, since the greater the level of firm innovativeness, the stronger the relationship between
technological skills and RL, innovativeness strengthened the positive effect of technological skills on
the implementation of RL processes. Figure 3 illustrates our findings. Hence, Hypothesis 3 is also
supportedSustainability2018,
by our data. 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 20

3. Moderating effect of innovativeness on the relationship between RL and technological skills.

FigureFigure
3. Moderating effect of innovativeness on the relationship between RL and technological skills.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion and Conclusions
and Conclusions
Due to RL’s importance as an element of SCM [77,78] and to the increasing attention
Due devoted
to RL’s importance as an element of SCM [77,78] and to the increasing attention devoted to it,
to it, organizations have begun to shift from merely serving customers with a single
organizations have
(initial) begun totoshift
transaction fromcustomers’
serving merely serving
long-term customers with a single
needs, especially when (initial)
productstransaction
are to
returned, exchanged
serving customers’ long-term or needs,
superseded by a new
especially product
when [79,80]. are returned, exchanged or superseded
products
by a new productThis study tested the proposed research model using multiple and moderated regression
[79,80].
This study tested test
analyses [74] to the the hypotheses
proposed by introducing
research modelthe moderating
using multipleeffect
andas amoderated
multiplicative regression
variable.Via this methodology, the study found, first, that the development of technological
analyses [74] to test the hypotheses by introducing the moderating effect as a multiplicative
skills by workers involved in RL processes improved the accessibility of information and
variable.Via this methodology,
collaboration among people theand
study found,while
processes, first,also
that thethese
using development of technological
more efficiently to enable the skills by
workers involved
organization in to
RLimprove
processes improvedposition
its competitive the accessibility
[31]. of information and collaboration among
Second, the
people and processes, greater
while alsothe TMS these
using for IT,more
the stronger
efficiently the to
relationship
enable thebetween technological
organization to improve its
skills and RL;
competitive position [31]. that is, TMS for IT strengthened the positive effect of technological skills on the
development of RL processes. TMS for IT use significantly affected RL projects by enabling the
Second, the greater the TMS for IT, the stronger the relationship between technological skills and
construction of a solid infrastructure to generate greater commitment of the organization’s
RL; that is, TMS for IT strengthened the positive effect of technological skills on the development of
employees to foster learning and develop technological abilities [81].
RL processes.InTMS for ITthe
addition, usegreater
significantly
the degree affected RL projectsthe
of innovativeness, by stronger
enablingthe therelationship
construction wasof a solid
between
infrastructure technological
to generate greater skills and RL. Today’s
commitment dynamic environments
of the organization’s employees require firmslearning
to foster to and
participate more extensively
develop technological abilities [81]. in sustainable management business activities, which strengthen
companies’
In addition, theability to face
greater theongoing
degree environmental
of innovativeness,change.the Innovative
stronger strategies and SCM-based
the relationship was between
strategies of entrepreneurial culture are critical to such flexibility [82]. Fosteringemployees’
technological skills and RL. Today’s dynamic environments require firms to participate more
technological skills requires having innovative environments that are flexible and creative and
extensively in sustainable management business activities, which strengthen companies’ ability to face
that permit the organization to improve its RL processes [35], thus strengthening its competitive
ongoing environmental change. Innovative
advantage. Innovativeness can improve strategies
the impactand SCM-basedskills
of technological strategies
on RL of entrepreneurial
processes,
reducing
culture are criticalcosts and wait
to such times in[82].
flexibility returnFosteringemployees’
processes, and thus, develop the flexibility
technological to adjust
skills to having
requires
rapid changes in the business environment [83]. Creating and establishing
innovative environments that are flexible and creative and that permit the organization to improve entrepreneurial
its RL processes [35], thus strengthening its competitive advantage. Innovativeness can improve the
impact of technological skills on RL processes, reducing costs and wait times in return processes, and
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 12 of 17

thus, develop the flexibility to adjust to rapid changes in the business environment [83]. Creating and
establishing entrepreneurial initiatives contributes to generating innovation, renewing the productive
fabric and creating new jobs through the dissemination and exploitation of knowledge [84].

5.1. Implications for Researchers

Technology firms constitute a sector with high volatility and great change over time. Firms that
compete in this sector must exploit new opportunities that enable them to develop activities to improve
their competitive position [85]. Such firms can integrate RL activities into the supply chain to survive
in the medium and long term. This study makes three main theoretical contributions.
First, thefindings showed the importance of employees’ technological skills for RL activities in
high-tech manufacturing firms.Second, theresults demonstrated the crucial role of TMS in IT, not only
in providing tangible resources but also in supporting employees’ professional development in RL.
Managers’ good management of employees’ technological skills fosters good practices in RL processes
(i.e., recycling and reuse of materials), which can support the supply chain in solving problems of
incompatible data, environmental resistance from the customer and greater social consciousness
in the RL chain [85]. Finally, the key influence of innovativeness on organizational flexibility and
creativity [31] can strengthen the relationship between technological skills and RL.

5.2. Implications for Managers

Regarding the implications for business management, TMS can mean investment in RL based on
new technologies that enable better coordination with customers in RL processes. Firms that seek to
improve SCM, and particularly to perform RL processes, must invest more in IT infrastructure and
exploit their employees’ IT knowledge and skills. That is, in addition to possessing new technologies,
the firm must know how to exploit its internal resource base and the potential of its labor capacity to
create intangible value and differentiate itself from the competition [85].
Collaborating with customers to deliver RL increases customers’ satisfaction and the firm’s
reputation and brand value. PerkinElmer (a technology firm related to health and the environment)
used RL practices to foster sustainable development in its supply chain by encouraging customers
through a 10% discount to return equipment to the firm once they no longer needed it. PerkinElmer
implemented this strategy to reduce its environmental impact and that of its products, improve
relationships with customer and lower processing cost (remanufacturing costs less than manufacturing
new equipment) [85].

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

Among this study’s limitations, the transversal character of the research advises caution in
interpreting the results to behavior over time. As our data were collectedin 2010, it would be interesting
to repeat the study and compare the results. Our theoretical framework took care, however, to attempt
to determine formal cause-effect relationships. Future longitudinal studies would improve this
study’s accuracy.
Similarly, we attempted to mitigate common method bias. Podsakoff et al. (2003) [86] argued that
two major measures can be taken to reduce the risk ofthis bias: (1) anonymity of the survey results,
and (2) improvement of items used to measure constructs. We incorporated both recommendations.
The study goals were stated clearly, and respondents were assured that the survey would remain
anonymous. Furthermore, following the significant recommendations of Podsakoff et al. (2003) [86], we
tested and validated scales carefully to ensure that the items were clearly worded and not ambiguous.
Additionally, we developed our scales from previously tested scales.
In accordance with suggestions in the very recent and relevant literature (e.g., [23]), it would
be of great interest for future studies to use a holistic model to analyze internal and external issues
that condition the RL process. In this respect, first, it would be very useful to distinguish between
technological and non-technological capabilities when defining the internal organizational factors
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 13 of 17

that play a stronger role in conditioning RL processes. Second, we stress the importance of studying
the influence of stakeholders on the performance of RL practices and processes. In fact, we should
not forget that multiple agents outside the firm are involved in a firm’s RL process. Finally, future
studies could deepen understanding of the use of a contingent model that permits establishment of
whether the antecedents that explain RL performance can be conditioned by such issues as the firm’s
innovation capacity, innovative culture, activity sector (especially sectors that require high investment
in technology) and internationalization process.

Author Contributions: The authors contributed equally in designing and development of the paper. Furthermore,
the corresponding author did lead the review response process and resubmission tasks to the journal.
Funding: This research was funded by Andalusian Regional Government [Research Project P11.SEJ.7988],
the Ministry of Economy and Competence of Spain through Project [ECO2016-75909-P; ECO2017-88222], project
of the University of Granada [PPJI2017-01], and the program of the Faculty of Economic and Business Sciences of
the University of Granada for the revision of scientific texts.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
• Top Management Support for IT.
Indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about top
management support.

1. Top management cultivates technology project champions.

2. Top management ensures adequate funding of technology research and development.
3. Top management restructures work processes to leverage technology opportunities in
the organization.
4. Top management facilitates technology transfer throughout the organization.

• Technological Skills.
Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements in relation to the
units’ technical skills. Answers may refer to a department or the person in charge of technology.

1. Unit skills in the object-oriented languages and systems for customer-server application
development are excellent.
2. Item measures for IT department technical skills in business application software
performance are very superior to those of the closest competitors.
3. Item measures for IT department technical skills in communication services efficiency are
very superior to those of the closest competitors.
4. Information systems unit skills in fourth-generation programming languages areas
are excellent.
• Organizational Innovativeness.
Where applicable, indicate the extent of changes that have taken place in your company over the
past three years.

1. Your company’s spending on new product/process development activities.

2. Number of new products/processes added and introduced by your company.
3. Your adoption of technologies developed by other companies or industries.
4. Top management emphasis on R&D, technological leadership and innovation rather
than marketing.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 14 of 17

• Reverse Logistics.
Please indicate your degree of agreement or disagreement with the following statements related
to the characteristics of your company. Reverse logistics processes are important or might be
important for my company because:

1. They involve cost reduction.

2. They improve service quality.
3. They result in better prices.
4. They improve the return policy (returned material).
5. They improve product variety.
6. They improvedelivery speed (time).
• Organizational Performance
Relative to your main competitors, what is your firm’s performance in the last three years in the
following areas?

1. Organizational performance measured by return on assets (economic profitability or ROA)

2. Organizational performance measured by return on equity (financial profitability or ROE)
3. Organizational performance measured by return on sales (percentage of profits over
billing volume)
4. Recovery of investments
5. Organization’s market share in its main products and markets
6. Growth of sales in its main products and markets

References
1. Wisner, J.D.; Tan, K.C.; Leong, G.K. Principles of Supply Chain Management: A Balanced Approach, 2nd ed.;
South-Western, Cengage Learning: Mason, OH, USA, 2008.
2. Rogers, D.S.; Tibben-Lembke, R.S. Going Backwards: Reverse Logistics Trends and Practices; Reverse Logistics
Executive Council: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1999.
3. Wernerfelt, B. A Resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1984, 5, 171–180. [CrossRef]
4. Hart, S.L. A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 986–1014. [CrossRef]
5. Mihi Ramírez, A. Un Análisis Causal de la Relación Entre la Creación del Conocimiento y la Logística Inversa;
Universidad de Granada: Granada, Spain, 2010; Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10481/4935
(accessed on 10 December 2018).
6. Lee, C.K.M.; Lam, J.S.L. Managing reverse logistics to enhance sustainability of industrial marketing.
Ind. Mark. Manag. 2012, 41, 589–598. [CrossRef]
7. Faisal, M.N. Sustainable Supply chains: A study of interaction among the enablers. Bus. Process Manag. J.
2010, 16, 508–529. [CrossRef]
8. Jayaraman, V.; Ross, A.; Agarwal, A. Role of information technology and collaboration in reverse logistics
supply chain. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2008, 11, 409–425. [CrossRef]
9. Beske, P.; Seuring, S. Putting sustainability into supply chain management. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2014,
19, 322–331. [CrossRef]
10. Dubey, R.; Gunasekaran, A.; Childe, S.J.; Wamba, S.F.; Papadopoulos, T. The impact of Big Data on world-class
sustainable manufacturing. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 84, 631–645. [CrossRef]
11. Ferreira, M.A.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. Maturity levels of material cycles and waste
management in a context of green supply chain management: An innovative framework and its application
to Brazilian cases. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2015, 19, 516–525. [CrossRef]
12. Luthra, S.; Garg, D.; Haleem, A. An analysis of interactions among critical success factors to implement
green supply chain management towards sustainability: An Indian perspective. Resour. Policy 2015, 46,
37–50. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 15 of 17

13. Walker, H.; Jones, N. Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector. Supply Chain
Manag. Int. J. 2012, 1, 15–28. [CrossRef]
14. Hazen, B.T.; Cegielski, C.G.; Hanna, J.B. Diffusion of green supply chain management: Examining perceived
quality of green reverse logistics. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2011, 22, 373–389. [CrossRef]
15. Prakash, C.; Barua, M.K. Integration of AHP-TOPSIS method for prioritizing the solutions of reverse logistics
adoption to overcome its barriers under fuzzy environment. J. Manuf. Syst. 2015, 37, 599–615. [CrossRef]
16. Ravi, V.; Shankar, R. Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics. Technol. Forecast.
Soc. Chang. 2005, 72, 1011–1029. [CrossRef]
17. Mai, E.; Chen, H.; Anselmi, K. The role of returns management orientation, internal collaboration and
information support in reverse logistics. J. Transp. Manag. 2012, 23, 45–59.
18. Myerson, P.A. Supply Chain and Logistics Management Made Easy: Methods and Applications for Planning,
Operations, Integration, Control and Improvement, and Network Design; FT Press: Upper Saddle River, NJ,
USA, 2015.
19. Sharma, S.K.; Panda, B.N.; Mahapatra, S.S.; Sahu, S. Analysis of barriers for reverse logistics: An Indian
perspective. Int. J. Model. Optim. 2011, 1, 101–106. [CrossRef]
20. Srivastava, S.K. Reverse Supply Chains: Issues and Analysis; CRC Press Inc.: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013.
21. Barney, J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120. [CrossRef]
22. Grant, R.M. Toward a knowledge based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1996, 17, 109–122. [CrossRef]
23. Ansari, Z.N.; Kant, R. A state-of-art literature review reflecting 15 years of focus on sustainable supply chain
management. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 2524–2543. [CrossRef]
24. Daugherty, P.J.; Myers, M.B.; Richey, R.G. Information support for reverse logistics: The influence of
relationship commitment. J. Bus. Logist. 2002, 23, 85–106. [CrossRef]
25. Daugherty, P.J.; Richey, R.G.; Genchev, S.E.; Chen, H. Reverse logistics: Superior performance through
focused resource commitments to information technology. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2005, 41,
77–92. [CrossRef]
26. Christopher, M. Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 4th ed.; Henry Ling: Dorchester, UK, 2011.
27. Wade, M.; Hulland, J. The resource-based view and information systems research: Review, extension, and
suggestions for future research. MIS Q. 2004, 28, 107–142. [CrossRef]
28. Benavides Velasco, C.A.; Quintana Garcia, C. Proceso y sistemas organizativos para la gestión del
conocimiento: El papel de la calidad total. Bol. ICE Econ. 2005, 2838, 37–52.
29. Ho, G.T.S.; Choy, K.L.; Lam, C.H.Y.; Wong, D.W.C. Factors affecting implementation of reverse logistics:
A survey among Hong Kong businesses. Meas. Bus. Excell. 2012, 16, 29–46. [CrossRef]
30. Richey, R.G.; Genchev, S.E.; Daugherty, P.J. The role of resource commitment and innovation in reverse
logistics performance. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2005, 35, 233–257. [CrossRef]
31. Huscroft, J.R.; Hazen, B.T.; Hall, D.J.; Skipper, J.B.; Hanna, J.B. Reverse logistics: Past research, current
management issues, and future directions. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2013, 24, 304–327. [CrossRef]
32. McCracken, M.; Wallace, M. Towards a redefinition of strategic HRD. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 2000, 24, 281–290.
[CrossRef]
33. Christmann, P. Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of
complementary assets. Acad. Manag. J. 2000, 43, 663–680.
34. Huang, Y.C.; Yang, M.L. Reverse logistics innovation, institutional pressures and performance. Manag. Res.
Rev. 2014, 37, 615–641. [CrossRef]
35. Martin-de Castro, G.; Delgado-Verde, M.; Navas-López, J.E.; Cruz-González, J. The moderating role of
innovation culture in the relationship between knowledge assets and product innovation. Technol. Forecast.
Soc. Chang. 2013, 80, 351–363. [CrossRef]
36. Sarkis, J.; Helms, M.M.; Hervani, A.A. Reverse Logistics and Social Sustainability. Corp. Soc. Responsib.
Environ. Manag. 2010, 17, 337–354. [CrossRef]
37. Mata, F.J.; Fuerst, W.L.; Barney, J.B. Information technology and sustained competitive advantage: A resource
based analysis. MIS Q. 1995, 19, 487–505. [CrossRef]
38. García-Sánchez, E.; García-Morales, V.J.; Bolívar-Ramos, M.T. The influence of top management support for
ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge acquisition, transfer, and utilisation. Rev. Manag. Sci.
2017, 11, 19–51. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 16 of 17

39. Morgan, T.R.; Glenn Richey, R., Jr.; Autry, H.W. Developing a reverse logistics competency: The influence of
collaboration and information technology. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2016, 46, 293–315. [CrossRef]
40. Civi, E. Knowledge management as a competitive asset: A review. Mark. Intel. Plan. 2000, 18, 166–174.
[CrossRef]
41. Anderson, J.C.; Narus, J.A. A model of the distributor’s perspective of distributor-manufacturer working
relationship. J. Mark. 1984, 48, 62–74. [CrossRef]
42. Aitken, J.; Harrison, A. Supply governance structures for reverse logistics systems. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag.
2013, 33, 745–764. [CrossRef]
43. Gu, Q.; Jiang, W.; Wang, G.G. Effects of external and internal sources on innovation performance in Chinese
high-tech SMEs: A resource-based perspective. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 2016, 40, 76–86. [CrossRef]
44. Bowersox, D.J.; Close, D.J.; Stank, T.P. How to master cross-enterprise collaboration. Supply Chain Manag. Rev.
2003, 7, 18–27.
45. Lewis, I.; Talalayevsky, A. Logistics and information technology: A coordination perspective. J. Bus. Logist.
1997, 18, 141–157.
46. Rajeswari, K.S.; Anantharaman, R.N. Development of a scale to measure stress among software professionals:
A factor analytic study. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCPR Conference, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 10–12 April
2003; pp. 34–43.
47. Agrawal, S.; Singh, R.K.; Murtaza, Q. A literature review and perspectives in reverse logistics. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 97, 76–92. [CrossRef]
48. Wittstruck, D.; Teuteberg, F. Understanding the success factors of sustainable supply chain management:
Empirical evidence from the electrics and electronics industry. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2012, 19,
141–158. [CrossRef]
49. Grant, R.M. The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation.
Calif. Manag. Rev. 1991, 33, 114–135. [CrossRef]
50. Tsai, W.C.; Tang, L.L. A model of the adoption of radio frequency identification technology: The case of
logistics service firms. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 2012, 29, 131–151. [CrossRef]
51. Ngai, E.W.T.; Chau, D.C.K.; Poon, J.K.L.; Chan, A.Y.M.; Chan, B.C.M.; Wu, W.W.S. Implementing an
RFID-based manufacturing process management system: Lessons learned and success factors. J. Eng.
Technol. Manag. 2012, 29, 112–130. [CrossRef]
52. Porter, M.E. The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Special Issue on HBS Centennial. Harv. Bus. Rev.
2008, 86, 78–93.
53. Byrd, A.; Davidson, N. Examining possible antecedents of IT impact on the supply chain and its effect on
firm performance. Inf. Manag. 2003, 41, 243–255. [CrossRef]
54. Ravichandran, T.; Liu, Y. Environmental determinism and strategic choice: Exploring the determinants of
information technology investment strategy. Decis. Sci. 2011, 42, 537–574. [CrossRef]
55. Lee, J.; Park, S.; Baker, R. The moderating role of top management support on employees’ attitudes in
response to human resource development efforts. J. Manag. Organ. 2018, 24, 369–387. [CrossRef]
56. Rogers, E. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003.
57. Pesämaa, O. Personnel and action control in gazelle companies in Sweden. J. Manag. Control 2017, 28,
107–132. [CrossRef]
58. Frohman, A. Building a culture for innovation. Res. Technol. Manag. 1998, 41, 9–12. [CrossRef]
59. Pérez, D.; Dressler, M. Tecnologías de la información para la gestión del conocimiento. Intang. Cap. 2007, 15,
31–59.
60. Amadeus. 2009. Available online: http://amadeus.bvdep.com/ip/ (accessed on 6 April 2010).
61. Baer, M.; Frese, M. Innovation is not enough: Climate for initiative and psychological safety, process
innovations, and firm performance. J. Organ. Behav. 2003, 24, 45–68. [CrossRef]
62. Westphal, J.D.; Fredickson, J.W. Who directs strategic change? Director experience, the selection of new
CEOs, and change in corporate strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 2001, 22, 1113–1137. [CrossRef]
63. Mihi-Ramirez, A. Product return and logistics knowledge: Influence on performance of the firm. Transp. Res.
Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2012, 48, 1137–1151. [CrossRef]
64. Armstrong, J.S.; Overton, T.S. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J. Mark. Res. 1977, 14, 396–403.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 58 17 of 17

65. Konrad, A.M.; Linnehan, F. Formalized HRM structures: Coordinating equal employment opportunity or
concealing organizational practice? Acad. Manag. J. 1995, 38, 787–820. [CrossRef]
66. Podsakoff, P.M.; Organ, D.W. Self-reports in organization research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986,
12, 531–544.
67. Ray, G.; Muhanna, W.A.; Barney, J.B. Information technology and the performance of the customer service
process: A resource-based analysis. MIS Q. 2005, 29, 625–652. [CrossRef]
68. Zahra, S.A. Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: A taxonomic approach.
J. Bus. Ventur. 1993, 8, 319–340. [CrossRef]
69. Murray, J.; Kotabe, M. Sourcing strategies of U.S. service companies: A modified transaction-cost analysis.
Strateg. Manag. J. 1999, 20, 791–809. [CrossRef]
70. Choi, J.; Kim, B.; Liu, X.; Simunic, D. Audit pricing, legal liability regimes, and Big 4 premiums: Theory and
cross-country evidence. Contemp. Account. Res. 2008, 25, 1–49. [CrossRef]
71. Douglas, T.J.; Judge, W.Q. Total quality management implementation and competitive advantage: The role
of structural control and exploration. Acad. Manag. J. 2001, 44, 158–169.
72. Homburg, C.; Workman, J.P., Jr.; Krohmer, H. Marketing’s influence within the firm. J. Mark. 1999, 63, 1–17.
[CrossRef]
73. Venkatraman, N.; Ramanujam, V. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison
of approaches. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1986, 11, 801–814. [CrossRef]
74. Cohen, J.; Cohen, P. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed.;
Laurence Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1983.
75. Venkatraman, N. Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct, dimensionality and
measurement. Manag. Sci. 1989, 35, 942–962. [CrossRef]
76. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle
River, NJ, USA, 2009.
77. Lambert, D.M. An Executive Summary of Supply Chain Management: Process, Partnerships, Performance;
The Hartley Press, Inc.: Jacksonville, FL, USA, 2008.
78. Rogers, P.; de Silva, R.; Bhatia, R. Water is an economic good: How to use prices to promote equity, efficiency
and sustainability. Water Policy 2002, 4, 1–17. [CrossRef]
79. Mason, S. Backward progress. IIE Solut. 2002, 34, 42–46.
80. Tibben-Lembke, R. Life after death: Reverse logistics and the product life cycle. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist.
Manag. 2002, 32, 223–244. [CrossRef]
81. Liang, H.; Saraf, N.; Hu, Q.; Xue, Y. Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures
and the mediating role of top management. MIS Q. 2007, 31, 59–87. [CrossRef]
82. Sharma, S. Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of
environmental strategy. Acad. Manag. J. 2000, 43, 681–697.
83. Stundza, T. Supply Chain Innovation Is Important, Purchasing. 2009. Available online: http://www.
purchasing.com/article/354518Supply_chain_innovation_is_important.php (accessed on 10 December 2018).
84. Acs, Z.; Plummer, L. Penetrating the knowledge filter in regional economies. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2005, 39, 439–456.
[CrossRef]
85. Ajamieh, A.; Benitez, J.; Braojos, J.; Gelhard, C. IT infrastructure and competitive aggressiveness in explaining
and predicting performance. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 4667–4674. [CrossRef]
86. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research:
A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).