Transnational Capitalism After Postcolonialism
Bridget Kustin, Juliane Reinecke, and Jimmy Donaghey recently published a powerful article entitled Transnational Capitalism After Postcolonialism: Researching the Interfaces in Global Supply Chains. The authors critically examine the ethical and analytical challenges of researching global supply chains, particularly in contexts shaped by power asymmetries between the Global North and South. Through a case study of the Bangladesh Accord, established after the Rana Plaza disaster, they argue for a better understanding of transnational interfaces where actors from different regions negotiate capitalist relations. Challenging the dominance of postcolonial theory’s discursive focus, the article draws on Vivek Chibber’s Marxian critique to reintroduce class and material power relations into the analysis. It emphasizes that a sole focus on cultural representation can obscure deeper structural inequalities embedded in global capitalism. I believe that integrating postcolonial ethics with Marxism is an innovative way to study SCM phenomena. This article could inspire future research to investigate how global capitalist dynamics shape labor, justice, and representation across complex transnational interfaces.
Kustin, B., Reinecke, J. & Donaghey, J. (2025). Transnational Capitalism After Postcolonialism: Researching the Interfaces in Global Supply Chains. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-025-05985-z
Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research
Authors struggling with how to make a strong theoretical contribution is the challenge I see most often in journal submissions. In their recent editorial, Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research, Rouse and her coauthors (2025) provide practical guidance for qualitative scholars seeking to meet high standards for theoretical contribution. The authors argue that the “inherent openness and contextual grounding [of qualitative research] can make it challenging to articulate a crisp, generalizable theoretical contribution”. To address this, they outline six key pathways: (1) leveraging the unusual beyond fascinating settings; (2) leveraging inference beyond patterns and regularities; (3) leveraging tensions beyond opening the black box; (4) leveraging visualizations beyond boxes and arrows; (5) leveraging language beyond hyperbole; and (6) leveraging the moment beyond emulating past work. A central theme is that theory must “move from description (patterns) to explanation (mechanisms) to transferrable theoretical account”. The editorial also acknowledges the new role of AI as a “co-theorist” – assisting in pattern recognition and theorization, but not replacing human interpretive depth.
Rouse, E., Reinecke, J., Ravasi, D., Langley, A., Grimes, M., & Gruber, M. (2025). Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Journal, 68(2), 257–266. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2025.4002
What the iPhone Can Teach Politicians About Trade
I increasingly wish that politicians would acquire basic knowledge of supply chains. In their insightful article The Guts of an Apple iPhone Show Exactly What Trump Gets Wrong About Trade, Dedrick, Linden, and Kraemer critique common misconceptions surrounding reshoring, using the iPhone to illustrate complexities in global supply chains. Amidst debates intensified by Trump’s tariffs on imports, the authors emphasize that China actually contributes minimal value – less than $10 per phone – to the manufacturing of an iPhone, despite high assembly costs appearing on trade deficits. Most significant value comes from the U.S., Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, reflecting a supply chain where assembly location does not equate to economic dominance. The authors demonstrate that reshoring manufacturing, particularly for products like iPhones, would neither boost the U.S. economy nor restore high-value jobs. Political decision-makers should recognize global supply chains’ complexity. What we need are informed decisions that appreciate how value is created in today’s interconnected global economy – not simplistic trade policies.
Taking Academic Ownership of the Supply Chain Emissions Discourse
I am very happy to announce that I have co-authored a new article, Taking Academic Ownership of the Supply Chain Emissions Discourse, with Felix Creutzig. In this editorial, published in the Journal of Supply Chain Management, we emphasize the need for SCM researchers to actively engage with the issue of supply chain emissions, which we define as “the total greenhouse gas emissions generated by the entire network of interconnected and interdependent actors involved in all value-related activities—from upstream to downstream” (p. 3). Our article presents a framework of corporate interventions – categorized as collaborative or authoritative and targeting either behavioral or operational changes – to reduce supply chain emissions and outlines research opportunities using propositional, processual, perspectival, and provocative theorizing. We hope that this work will inspire both academic and practical advancements, particularly by enabling SCM researchers to make meaningful theoretical contributions and assisting SCM practitioners in advancing global efforts to address the climate crisis.
Wieland, A. & Creutzig, F. (2025). Taking Academic Ownership of the Supply Chain Emissions Discourse. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 61(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12338
Theorizing Through Literature Reviews
There are many misconceptions about how to write a good literature review. In their award-winning article Theorizing Through Literature Reviews: The Miner-Prospector Continuum, Breslin and Gatrell (2023) introduce the miner–prospector continuum to guide scholars on how best to craft literature reviews. They argue that scholars can choose from eight review strategies. At the miner end, authors (1) spot conceptual gaps, (2) organize and categorize literatures, (3) problematize the literature, or (4) identify and expose contradictions. These strategies build carefully on established scholarship, ensuring incremental improvements in understanding in a relatively well-defined field. Moving toward the prospector end, reviewers may (5) transfer theories across domains, (6) develop analogies and metaphors across domains, (7) blend and merge literatures across domains, and (8) set out new narratives and conceptualizations. Such prospecting is riskier but can spark imaginative leaps and open fresh directions for the discipline. All strategies on this continuum have value and can lead to better literature reviews in SCM research.
Breslin, D., & Gatrell, C. (2023). Theorizing Through Literature Reviews: The Miner-Prospector Continuum Organizational Research Methods, 26(1), 139–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120943288
Process Research Methods for Studying SCM Phenomena
Our discipline is often dominated by propositional theorizing, which understands theories in terms of cause-and-effect relationships. In a previous post, I discussed how pluralism in theorizing styles (propositional, perspectival, and provocative theorizing) can enrich SCM research. A recent article by Julia Grimm, Ann Langley, and Juliane Reinecke (Process Research Methods for Studying Supply Chains and Their Management) introduces process theorizing as an additional option. The article outlines four approaches to studying processes: (1) evolution, which tracks how entities such as supply chains change over time; (2) narrative, which focuses on how people make sense of change; (3) activity, which examines the ongoing practices that constitute supply chains; and (4) withness, which emphasizes the co-evolution of researchers and the phenomena they study. These approaches demonstrate that supply chains are not static systems, but can be described in terms of dynamic, evolving processes. Process theorizing helps researchers better understand phenomena – such as those related to sustainability, resilience, and digitization – by focusing on how changes unfold over time.
Grimm, J., Langley, A., & Reinecke, J. (2024). Process Research Methods for Studying Supply Chains and Their Management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 60(4), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12331
The Core Building Blocks of a Theoretical Article
In Sense and Structure—The Core Building Blocks of an AMR Article, Lange and Pfarrer (2017) outline five essential steps for crafting effective Academy of Management Review articles. I believe that these five steps are useful for anyone who writes theoretical articles – not just for AMR. As an author you must (1) establish common ground by “[laying] out the basic assumptions, boundary conditions, and prescriptions of the literature, forming an agreeable starting point with your readers.” (2) You then introduce a complication (a problem, puzzle, or twist) by “pointing out to your readers some kind of complication to the common ground that you’ve already established.” (3) You demonstrate concern by providing “a compelling explanation of the complication’s importance.” (4) You present a course of action, describing “how you will be addressing and resolving your paper’s central complication.” (5) Finally, you highlight your contribution by explaining “how your work will shape or change the conversation—how it makes a distinct contribution.”
Lange, D., & Pfarrer, M.D. (2017). Editors’ Comments: Sense and Structure—The Core Building blocks of an AMR Article. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0225
Enhancing Methodological Transparency in SCM Research
Every empirical-quantitative SCM researcher has different ideas about which methodological steps to follow. The article What You See Is What You Get? Enhancing Methodological Transparency in Management Research by Aguinis, Ramani, and Alabduljader examines methodological transparency in management research. The authors emphasize the importance of transparency for the reproducibility of inferences and results, as low transparency can hide errors, dubious practices, or fraud. Their comprehensive review suggests strategies for improving transparency throughout the research process, including theory development, research design, measurement, analysis, and reporting. SCM researchers can benefit from these methodological recommendations because they can help increase the trustworthiness, replicability, validity, and reliability of studies. In addition, journal editors and reviewers in our discipline can use them to set the right standards for submissions. Of course, methodological standards are constantly evolving, and checklists such as the one described here must always be used with caution. However, I believe that the article by Aguinis et al. provides a very good methodological overview.
Aguinis, H., Ramani, R.S., & Alabduljader, N. (2018). What You See Is What You Get? Enhancing Methodological Transparency in Management Research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 83-110. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0011
A Guided Tour Through the Qualitative Research City
I am pleased to share with you a new article I co-authored with Wendy L. Tate and Tingting Yan: A Guided Tour Through the Qualitative Research City. This is my first Journal of Supply Chain Management editorial. In this piece, we draw parallels between a city’s less-visited buildings and ten research approaches: (1) grounded theory, (2) interpretive research, (3) sensemaking, (4) sociomateriality, (5) actor–network theory, (6) ethnography, (7) action research, (8) discourse analysis, (9) narrative research, and (10) historical research. Our goal is to inspire our readers to embrace the methodological diversity of our discipline, as we have noticed a tendency for many to focus on a limited set of qualitative approaches, much like tourists flocking to the Eiffel Tower but not visiting other parts of Paris. JSCM is better equipped than ever to support these and other approaches, as we and our predecessors have made great efforts to diversify and expand our team of associate editors and reviewers to ensure that we can treat a manuscript as it deserves.
Wieland, A., Tate, W.L., & Yan, T. (2024). A Guided Tour Through the Qualitative Research City. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 60(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12315
Navigating the Climate Crisis in Apple’s Global Supply Chain
This article, entitled Apple’s Supply Chain Is on a Collision Course With Climate Change, argues that Apple’s supply chain faces major risks from the climate crisis. Despite its efforts to become carbon neutral, the regions where its suppliers are located are highly vulnerable to climate-related natural disasters and have carbon-intensive energy grids. I believe it would make a great case study for business school classes, using the following questions: 1. Identify and summarize the key challenges and risks Apple faces related to its supply chain in the context of the climate crisis. 2. Propose a risk management plan that Apple can implement (short-term and long-term strategies) to address these challenges. 3. Critically evaluate Apple’s recent carbon offset initiatives. 4. How can Apple “future-proof” its operations against escalating climate challenges? 5. How does Apple’s situation compare to other global electronics companies in terms of vulnerability to the climate crisis? What are the implications for the electronics industry?
