University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

788
action) and the sense made of this (i.e. by owners, managers and others) in context;
with impact(s) here, and on the process, from current policies and processes (i.e. how
action occurs with links to, for example, an external orientation) and current sense
and practice(s).
From the perspective of this research, and with the current literature and the desire to
affect change in practice as necessary as a backdrop, there is clearly a need to engage
in order to interpret and understand the (actual) behaviour of SMEs in the case
organisation’s supply-chain. Essentially this will be achieved through the
investigation of current supplier/SME practices, the sense made of such practices and
the underpinning processes. This will lead an understanding/description of what
happens (in this case) and this will lead the development of an approach to
intervention(s) and change(s) to attitudes and behaviour (as necessary). The focus
here being on engaging what does happen not what should happen and, whilst ESCM
theory often engages the whole chain, the focus here will be on SMEs in the first tier
of the own label chain as this is the focus of the management system (related to
control rather than influence) and thus the area where impact/the affecting of change
is most likely (at this time and in this case in practice).
Research Methodology and Method(s)
Overall Comment and Support for the Research Approach
Wolfe (1998), with support from others (E.g. Berger et al, 2005; Shrivastava, 1994;
Stubbs, 2000; Welford, 2003), identifies that much of the business and sustainable
development research:
• is written from a narrow scientific perspective and fails to engage social
dimensions; and
• has thus not effectively placed business in the context of the wider ‘systems’
(and processes) within which they operate.
Wolfe (1998) suggests that this focus on engineering and science, and positivism,
comes from:
• the ‘natural scientific’ (and pragmatic) background of early research (and
need for ‘facts’);
• the desire to provide solutions as a result of, and based on, a deductive
approach;
• the misplaced belief in the higher value of (positive) ‘science’ based research;
and
• a lack of true engagement with a critical research agenda, associated practices
and developments and the failure to seek in-depth understanding of
phenomenon (E.g. social dimensions and processes).