Paradoxes in supply chains: a conceptual framework for packed products

• Date: 11 August 2020
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-12-2019-0338
• Pages: 423-442
• Published date: 11 August 2020
• Author: Henrik Pålsson,Erik Sandberg
• Subject Matter: Management science & operations,Logistics

Paradoxes in supply chains:

a conceptual framework for

packed products

Henrik P



alsson

Faculty of Engineering, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, and

Erik Sandberg

Department of Logistics and Quality Management, Link€

oping University,

Link€

oping, Sweden

Abstract

Purpose –Grounded in paradox theory, and with the objective of structuring and extending existing

knowledge of conflicts of interest (e.g. trade-offs) in packaging logistics, the purpose of this paper is to identify

categories of paradoxical tensions in packaging systems used in supply chains, and to develop a conceptual

framework that describes these categories.

Design/methodology/approach –This research uses a theory building approach.It develops a conceptual

framework of paradoxical tensions for packed products in supply chains. It revises and extends current

knowledge in this domain by applying paradox theory from organisational research.

Findings –The paper develops a generic, conceptual framework that identifies, categorises and describes

packed product paradoxes on two system levels: supply chain and company levels. The categories of

paradoxes refer to performing, organising, belonging and learning.

Research limitations/implications –The framework provides a new theoretical explanation of conflicts of

interest in packaging logistics in terms of paradoxical tensions related to packed products in supply chains. It

structures and increases general understanding of such tensions within and between actors in a supply chain.

The paper also discusses differences in terminology between tensions which are possible to settle and those

which lead to paradoxes.

Practical implications –The framework provides a structure for analysing the organisational impact of

strategic packaging decisions. It can help highlight different stakeholders’organisational constraints related to

packaging.

Originality/value –The framework’s systematic categorisation of four types of paradoxical tensions, with

thorough descriptions of the meaning of packed product paradoxes of each type, offers an expanded and in-

depth explanation of the organisational impacts of packed products in supply chains.

Keywords Packaging, Paradoxes, Tensions, Trade-offs

Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction

To be effectively managed in supply chains, products are protected by packaging. Packaging

must fulfil several functions to meet the economic, environmental, ergonomic and legal

requirements placed upon it. Packaging should protect and contain products, unitise and

apportion products, provide convenience and communication, and enable logistics efficiency.

Logistics efficiency originates from the fact that packaging influences every single logistics

activity throughout the supply chain from point of filling to point of emptying, as well as

Paradoxes in

supply chains

423

© Henrik P



alsson and Erik Sandberg. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is

published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce,

distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial

purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence

may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode.

The authors would like to thank Formas (the Swedish government research council for sustainable

development) for funding this research (registration number: 2017–00792).

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0957-4093.htm

Received 9 December 2019

Revised 20 April 2020

29 June 2020

8 July 2020

Accepted 9 July 2020

The International Journal of

Logistics Management

Vol. 31 No. 3, 2020

pp. 423-442

Emerald Publishing Limited

0957-4093

DOI 10.1108/IJLM-12-2019-0338

several activities within reverse logistics and packaging end-of-life, such as returns, recycling

and reuse. Usual logistics activities that are influenced by packaging occur, for instance, at a

supplier’s or producer’s (e.g. filling, storing and handling), during transport to warehouses

(e.g. volume and weight efficiency), within warehouses (e.g. picking, stacking and storing),

during distribution to stores (e.g. loading and unloading, and volume utilisation), within

stores (e.g. replenishment, handling and waste handling), at consumers’(e.g. handling and

emptying), and finally, in the recycling process. This “interface between packaging and

logistics throughout supply chains, which demonstrates and supports the importance of

viewing the physical flow of goods and its related information flow as one integrated system”

(p. 5, P



alsson, 2018) is defined as “packaging logistics”. In short, packaging logistics

operationalizes supply chain management (SCM) philosophy. It contributes to the operational

understanding of SCM concepts and theories, such as supply chain integration, collaboration

and organisation.

Packaging has become a crucial and increasingly complex matter, driven by increased

legislation and consumer awareness of the environmental performance of packaging (White

et al., 2015), globalisation (Trent and Monczka, 2003) and the need for short lead times

(Christopher, 2016). Managing these complexities can lead to significant positive impacts on

the economic and environmental performance of supply chain actors (Çankaya, and Sezen,

2019). The complexity arises from the fact that no single package can fulfil all the

requirements for packed products. It takes a packaging system in which primary (in contact

with the product), secondary (contains a number of primary packages) and tertiary

packaging (contains a number of secondary packages) interact with each other. For instance,

if the secondary packaging provides sufficient product protection, the need for primary

packaging protection can be reduced. In addition to the complexities within the packaging

system itself, complexities also arise between companies and organisational areas since

several of them have interests in the packaging system. These include marketing for

increased sales and logistics for increased material handling and transport efficiency, and

various requirements from companies in the supply chain.

The view taken in this paper is that these complexities are caused by conflicts of interest in

packaging both within and between organisations. The need to identify and make informed

decisions regarding these conflicts, mainly referred to as trade-offs in logistics research, has

previously been well described and motivated in the literature (e.g. Lockamy III, 1995;Paine,

1990;P



alsson, 2018). The current literature analyses trade-offs in packaging systems through

the use of different models and methods, such as a packaging scorecard (Olsmats and

Dominic, 2003), packaging selection models in specific industries (e.g. Lai et al., 2008;P



alsson

et al., 2013), and life-cycle assessment (LCA) tools (Gr€

onman et al., 2013;Verghese et al., 2010).

The literature also suggests empirically based tools to identify trade-offs between costs and

marketing (e.g. Garc



ıa-Arca and Prado Prado, 2008) and the use of contracts (Selviaridis et al.,

2016). Packaging logistics knowledge also emphasises the need for organisational support to

manage packaging trade-offs within and between organisations. For instance, based on a

case study, Klev



as (2005) suggests that to secure high logistics performance, the organisation

of packaging in a product-developing company should have strong links to both logistics and

product development. In a similar vein, Bramklev (2009) focuses on the organisational links

between product and packaging development. To minimise the environmental footprint of

packaging in supply chains, Molina-Besch and P



alsson (2014) show that internal and external

collaborations are necessary.

The current discussions and analyses of conflicts of interest in packaging logistics

originate from a systems approach (Hellstr€

om and Olsson, 2017), even though this is not

always explicitly stated. Such an approach acknowledges the existence of trade-offs (Azzi

et al., 2012). It also accentuates how a change in one part of the system can cause

disproportionate changes in the whole system due to interactions with other factors

IJLM

31,3

424