采购4.0、工业4.0循环经济外文翻译文献中英文2020

1、外文文献翻译原文及译文标题：采购 4.0、工业 4.0 循环经济中英文 2020文献出处：Surajit Bag, Lincoln C. Wood, Sachin K. Mangla, Sunil Luthra.JResources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 152, January 2020, Article 104502译文字数：5000 多字英文Procurement 4.0 and its implications on business process performance in a circular economySurajit Ba

2、g, Lincoln C.Wood, Sachin K.Mangla, Sunil LuthraAbstractThe purpose of this study is to identify how Procurement 4.0 and digital transformations are related and how digital transformation impacts the intention to optimize the procurement process in the circular economy. The moderating effect of info

3、rmation processing capability is also investigated. We survey South African manufacturers and analyze survey results using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) approach to test the research hypotheses and our theoretical framework. Finally, a sample business process is s

4、imulated to evaluate how Industry 4.0 automation can influence organizational procurement process optimization and circular economy performance. The findings of this empirical study indicate that Procurement 4.0 strategy positively influences buyers intention to optimize business processes. Second,

5、Procurement 4.0 performance review positively influences buyers intention to optimize business processes. Third, information processing capability moderates the effect of Procurement 4.0 performance review on buyers intention to optimize business processes. Finally, buyers intention to optimize busi

6、ness processes plays a key role in enhancing circular economy performance. The simulation results demonstrate the potential benefits from industry4.0 applications in the procurement function in a circular economy.Keywords：Business process，Circular economy，Dynamic capability view theory，Optimization，

7、Procurement 4.01. IntroductionIncreasing global competition is impacting manufacturing businesses as intense competition creates a strain on scarce resources, which affect their availability and cost competitiveness (Feger, 2014). Therefore, many firms have investigated the opportunity to develop a

8、circular economy (CE) business model. CE business modelscan minimize the excess utilization of scarce natural resources and also reduce the volume of waste generation (Schroeder et al., 2018), and therefore sustainable development (SD) goals would be achieved through CE principles (Ellen MacArthur F

9、oundation, 2016). The current study focuses on the CE as a concept becoming increasingly important due to international efforts and market reactions that focus attention and laws on sustainability improvements (Wood et al., 2018).The study will, therefore, provide managerial levers or areas that man

10、agers can directly influence that will result in improvements in CE performance. While Procurement 4.0 can bring many benefits (Bienhaus and Haddud, 2018), it is not always clear how to translate the technologies into CE performance gains. This study establishes a foundation for explaining these con

11、nections, and makes two primary contributions. First, it explores the emerging phenomenon of Procurement 4.0 and procurement process optimization in the CE. Second, it examines the moderating role of information processing capability. Since research on Procurement 4.0 remains nascent, and most relat

12、ed studies are conceptual and exploratory, this empirical study elaborates on the growing theory in this area.The subsequent section presents a synthesis of literature reviews, presents the research propositions, and develops a conceptual research framework. Next, research methods are presented. The

13、 manuscript then presents the results obtained through the empirical survey, followed by simulation results. The final section discusses managerial implications and conclusions.2. Literature reviewIn this section, we present a review of Procurement 4.0 and CE to develop a common understanding of how

14、 these subjects are related.2.1. Procurement 4.0Managers treat time as a critical element separate from elements such as workforce and working capital. Cutting down wastage in movement and material handling can eliminate delays and potentially enhance customer satisfaction. Reduction in lead times c

15、an be a competitive advantage for firms. Time management is the mirror image of cost management and yield management (Tersine andHummingbird, 1995). Therefore, firms can reap benefits by reducing total cycle time in all operational activities such as design time reduction, procurement cycle time red

16、uction, manufacturing setup time reduction, manufacturing time reduction and better delivery times (Ng et al., 1997). Ng et al. (1997) reported that less focus had been given by past researchers towards the reduction of cycle times in procurement activities.The procurement function includes purchasi

17、ng and supply management, along with managing inbound and outbound logistics. These activities consume the most time for manufacturing firms while executing sales orders and, therefore, can be considered as a significant aspect of the firms sustainability. Supplier selection ultimately plays a key r

18、ole as it can influence the delivery lead times. Also, the procurement transaction process (manual/semi-automated/automated) impacts the cycle time. Finally, the procurement cycle time can also vary depending on the nature of collaborative relationships with suppliers (Ng et al., 1997). Strategic pu

19、rchasing and the strategic flexibility of the firm can significantly improve supply chain agility (Chiang et al., 2012).It has been established that procurements connection with the firms corporate strategy on cutting-edge production varies between country groups and over time. In Europe- or U.S.-ba

20、sed firms, there is evidence of a link bewteen procurement strategy and corporate strategy (Yang et al., 2013). The next generation of manufacturing focuses on smart manufacturing technologies (Kusiak, 2018). Compared to traditional measures such as costs and quality; modern manufacturing demands hi

21、gh supply security and the ability of supply networks to restore normal operations immediately after disruptions (Brennan et al., 2015).Tools and guides have been proposed to support managers understanding of digitalization, such as a grid providing two categories of digitalization technologies used

22、 by modern manufacturers in the procurement function (Srai and Lorentz, 2018). The first category consists of basic technologies (Internet) and the second category comprises of advanced technologies (e.g., the use of IoT, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), big data analytics (BD

23、A), blockchain technologies, andadvanced manufacturing technologies).Companies are using basic technologies in e-procurement (e.g., e-ordering and e- sourcing that is often poorly integrated with e-tendering and e-informing applications) while advanced technologies are used for burden reduction (aut

24、omated procure to pay, material flow, automated supplier helpdesk, virtual procurement assistant and smart maintenance); internal development (real-time spend and other KPIs through mobile apps, realistic TCOs with data, AI-based category management, and smart contract management) and broad value co

25、ntribution (virtual supplier room with scorecards, supply chain dashboards, blockchain-based product information record, virtual product assessments, cloud-based risk analytics systems and virtual supply markets) and audits through external resource management and supply knowledge generation (Nicole

26、tti, 2018).The volume of unstructured data generating from a variety of sources in this smart manufacturing era has given birth to big data and predictive analytics (BDPA) approaches. The wide-spread use of the internet and other information technology (IT) advances have enabled manufacturers to ext

27、ract information in real-time due to improved communication and flow of information (Kache and Suering, 2017).The benefits derived from BDPA drive manufacturers towards increased adoption and application of digital technologies. BDPA plays an instrumental role in the management of business processes

28、 and faster decision making (Brinch, 2018). BDPA can be a game-changer in todays complex supply chain networked environment by allowing manufacturers to arrange timely supply, reduce buffer inventories and operate in a lean way. Businesses can improve their supply chain performance by implementing B

29、DPA (Bag, 2017), and specific performance improvements can be developed, such as improved lead times (Kache and Suering, 2017).De Brca et al. (2006) found that IT complexity moderates the relationship between service practices and service performance. Information and communication technologies (ICT)

30、 can transform manufacturing in this digital age. ICT can empower top floor management decision making to shop floor workers in their day to dayoperations (Leyer et al., 2018). Data-driven decision support systems can better drive success than older, human-based systems (Wood et al., 2017).The integ

31、ration of operations with suppliers enables firms to capture the benefits from the exchange of information (Vanpoucke et al., 2017). Vanpoucke et al. (2017)additionally reported that IT use is an important foundation for the integration of suppliers.The gradual movement of firms towards digitalizati

32、on earmarks the era of the fourth industrial revolution, popularly called I4.0. In an I4.0 environment, firms can increasingly connect and integrate with suppliers (upstream) and customers (downstream) in the network through the wireless internet of everything. Secondly, transparency of information

33、can create virtual copies of the physical plant. Thirdly, cyber-physical systems can enable decentralized decision making, and lastly, decision support systems (using mobile apps) can provide technical assistance. These principles can be used as a basis to design principles for digitalizing procurem

34、ent function (Tham and Luo, 2013; Kltzer and Pflaum, 2015).The combination of digitization and procurement is an emerging area; in this research, the term Procurement 4.0 (application of I4.0 tools in procurement) has only been found in one article (Bienhaus and Haddud, 2018) with a focus on the und

35、erlying business processes. Prior literature revealed that firms faced hiccups while adopting enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems and they further focused on strategic sourcing and managing supplier relationships to successfully implement ERP systems (Huang and Handfield, 2015).Huang and Hand

36、field (2015) suggested two important considerations. First, ERP systems can enable real-time information sharing and integration of business functions. Second, the same set of indicators can prove useful to firms in the adoption of Procurement 4.0 systems.However, the development of Procurement 4.0

37、systems is not necessarily a simple endeavor. Bienhaus and Haddud (2018) provided a list of barriers that are impeding the development of Procurement 4.0 systems. They suggested that focus on procedures, capacity and capability can eliminate the bottlenecks. Therefore, while theexisting literature r

38、eveals the importance of the procurement function to manufacturers, there is little literature on Procurement 4.0. More empirical research is required to provide a basis to extend the knowledge base.2.2. Circular economy (CE)The concept of CE has become more popular since the 1970s. The Ellen MacArt

39、hur Foundation has supported significant progress in this field through extensive research dissemination. They provided a platform for collaboration between industry, policymakers, and academia. Countries like Germany and Japan have adopted CE by integrating it into their National laws so that every

40、one follows it equally. CE is a blend of reducing, recycling, and reusing based actions. However, past researchers sometimes omit to mention that CE requires a universal shift (Kirchherr et al., 2017). CE is mainly driven by government bodies, NGOs and consultancy firms. Moreover, key strategies ado

41、pted by businesses for CE implementation include engineering for eco-efficiency and eco-effectiveness, working towards stock optimization, and developing methods to minimize waste and 4Rs (reduction, reuse, recycling and recovery) (Kalmykova et al., 2018). Industry and policymakers should focus majo

42、rly on remanufacturing, refurbishing and repurposing, which are shorter loop material retention alternatives (Reike et al., 2018). However, in the heavy vehicle industry remanufacturing remains the preferred alternative to end- of-life management (Saidani et al., 2018). Improvements in disassembly t

43、ime during remanufacturing and the reduction of costs will change the viability of extending the product life and improve the financial sustainability of CE (Vanegas et al., 2018). Such support can often be in the form of government policies that support CE initiatives (Raut et al., 2019).Simon (201

44、9) attempted to bring the plastics business into the closed-loopsystem of the circular economy. Industrial symbiosis development is increasing rapidly to motivate CE and sustainable practices, specifically focusing on the manufacturing area (Domenech et al., 2019). Operations based on big data analy

45、tics to develop options for reducing and reuse optimization in addition to innovative recycling are the main practices of industrial symbiosis (Tseng et al., 2018). There areeight types of relationships that relate sustainability and CE (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017); e.g., conditional; normal or stron

46、g conditional relationships, those relations that are necessary but not sufficient; beneficial, and subsets of relationships (structured & unstructured) and those of varying degrees; and, cost-benefit trade-offs and selective relationships. These relationships must be understood to align CE with SD

47、goals. However, de Sousa Jabbour et al. (2018) examined the link between I4.0 and CE and proposed simple steps to guide digital technology implementation in the CE context. In the first step, businesses should select an approach for the ReSOLVE framework (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2016); secondly,

48、 identify suitable I4.0 technologies that will fit in the business environment; thirdly, adopt sustainable operations management decisions; fourthly build cooperation in supply chain and finally set key performance indicators.Based on the synthesis of existing literature, we inferred that Procuremen

49、t 4.0 and CE are two emerging research areas and require further investigation to extend the knowledge base (Mangla et al., 2018a, 2018b).3. Theoretical underpinning Dynamic capability view theoryThe dynamic capabilities view (Teece and Pisano, 1994; Teece et al., 1997) has become the theoretical ch

50、oice of management researchers recently for explaining strategic selections under various environmental circumstances (Barreto, 2010). The business environment is constantly changing, and it is important to address such changes in a timely fashion to avoid negative consequences on firms overall perf

51、ormance. Timely responses are not easily managed, and management experts suggest that a dynamic capabilities method is the answer to handling such situations and effectively manage change in turbulent environments through the creation of successive temporary advantages (Barreto, 2010). EasterbySmith

52、 et al. (2009) provided several challenges on dynamic capabilities and future research directions, such as how they link to other functional areas such as IT.Various definitions of dynamic capabilities have been provided, but we draw on the recent definition for dynamic capabilities by Teece (2007,

53、p. 1319): “the capacity(1) to sense and shape opportunities and threats, (2) to seize opportunities, and (3) to maintain competitiveness through enhancing, combining, protecting, and, when necessary, reconfiguring the business enter prises intangible and tangible assets.” Thus, dynamic capabilities

54、are a multidimensional construct as it refers to four different but related dimensions (Barreto, 2010).Beske (2012) used the dynamic capability concept in sustainable supply chain research as such supply chains are often unstable. Reconfiguring resources and capabilities create sustained competitive

55、 advantage for survival in this cut-throat competition.The dynamic capability theory was developed based on the criticism received by the research community on the resource view theory (RBV). The RBV theory considers firms comprising a bundle of resources, and the firm can use the resources to provi

56、de a competitive advantage if the resources are rare, precious, and difficult to duplicate. The resources are not spread homogeneously, and the variation in distribution continues over time (Barney, 1991). However, the business environment constantly changes and RBV fails in such situations.The dyna

57、mic capabilities perspective is the modern approach to look at businesses in dynamic situations and their development of sustained competitive advantages. Therefore, deployment of dynamic capabilities can be useful to achieve long term competitive advantage, based on the constant reconfiguring of co

58、mpetencies from both within and outside of the firm (Cavusgil et al., 2007).The international business (i.e., a business operated at global levels) suffers from fierce competition and fast technological changes. Four types of dynamic internationalization capabilities that influence international per

59、formance are disruption capabilities that support growth, other value-adding capabilities, threshold capabilities, and the consolidation of capabilities for survival (Prange and Verdier, 2011). Therefore, dynamic capabilities include a range of resources that can be used to seize opportunities and sustain competitiveness. One such way of developing capabilities is through the development of supplier manageme