There is a conflict between the company's efforts to
reduce supply chain costs and maintain sustainability
and the measures to protect the environment, which
have increased supply chain costs.
Secondly, the intercept term for the inventory
turnover ratio is 7.4175, which means that the
community does not affect the inventory turnover
ratio. Among the other two sustainability variables,
the growth of people increases the inventory turnover
rate, which shows the positive effect of having
enough dedicated employees on the sustainability of
supply management. On the contrary, the
environment decreases the inventory turnover, i.e., -
0.3322, which indicates a negative correlation
between the two. The initiative to recycle soft plastics
has caused inventory turnover to become more
difficult.
Finally, in the direction of the operating cycle, the
intercept term is 49.5899 (approximately equal to 50
days). In this case, the Community still does not play
any role, and the People component is negative with
an impact value of -0.4608, which again implies that
a sufficient number of dedicated employees can help
reduce the operating cycle, thus facilitating the SCM
to change strategy. On the other hand, the
environment had a positive impact with a value of
2.2503, which means that the increased task of
collecting soft plastics made the reform of the supply
chain, which was already poorly turned around,
difficult.
To summarize, after identifying the optimal 𝛼
variable through Lasso analysis, it can get the
following conclusions: the People variable has a good
impact on all SCM variables (except COGs), the
Community has no impact, and the environment (the
initiative to recycle soft plastics) may have increased
the burden on SCM. Specific reasons for this, as well
as measures for improvement, will be explored
below.
4.4 Bootstrap Stability Analysis and
Risk Management
To assess the risk associated with the three
sustainability variables (people, community, and
environment), the report performs a risk analysis by
looking at the variability of the predictions made by
the model. A bootstrap approach was used to generate
predictive distributions for each variable, and metrics
such as variance or confidence intervals were then
looked at for those predictions. It will provide an
estimate of risk based on the variability of the model's
predictions. A high standard deviation of the
bootstrap predictions indicates a high risk or
uncertainty in the model predictions.
By comparing the mean and standard deviation of
the predictions, this model remains essentially stable
after doing the Lasso regression. Taking COGs as an
example, the predicted mean of COGs is 3893.0600,
which is the same as the predicted means of the other
sustainability variables (3902.1845, 3968.0725, and
4005.6815), which means that the model tends to
fundamentally remain linear into the future (i.e.,
future studies can utilize linear regression as well).
Similarly, in the standard deviation, the variance of
COGs is 57.6611, which is the same as the standard
deviation of the other sustainable variables, again
indicating the stability of the model. After utilizing
Bootstrap for prediction, the stability of the model
was ensured, avoiding widespread measurement error
and multicollinearity.
5 DISCUSSION
5.1 Result Analysis and Reason
Explanation
By combining the regression results, the modeling
study shows a significant association between JB Hi-
Fi's sustainability indicators and supply chain
management indicators. In particular, employee
engagement (the "People" variable) positively affects
the supply chain management variables (except the
cost of goods), indicating that active employee
participation is essential for improving supply chain
efficiency and reducing operational cycle time.
Employees with good engagement can speed up the
supply chain process to a certain extent, improve
supply chain management efficiency, and avoid delay
problems. Meanwhile, the Community component
does not significantly impair, confirming that
community investment does not create any enablers
or impediments to the supply chain. However,
environmental protection measures (especially the
soft plastic recycling program) seem to hurt supply
chain costs and inventory turnover, suggesting that
promoting sustainable practices may have a negative
impact on supply chain efficiency and cost-
effectiveness.
There are multiple reasons for this phenomenon.
First, environmental protection measures usually
require initial capital investment and operating costs,
which may temporarily increase the overall cost of
the supply chain; as mentioned by Morcillo-Bellido
and Duran-Heras in their study, environmental
protection is a "difficult and complex" process