116 In the above paragraphs we have mentioned in detail why we chose to propose each phase separately. In Figure 3 we illustrate all the phases of the framework collectively.
Summarizing, organizations must first determine the speed of change that is suitable for them. Then, they must classify their organizational resistors and especially emphasize on the selection of a strategy that will face two categories, namely structural resistors and individual skills. The next step for organizations is to choose one or more of the four proposed strategies which correspond to the initial selection of the speed of change but also to the resistors they located. The last step that organizations must take, is to monitor the implementation of their change strategies, so that they can identify potential problems and be able to change their strategies accordingly.
We believe that this theoretical framework can become a useful tool for organizations in Greece, to overcome the barrier of organizational resistance and eventually apply the practices of reverse logistics. Although it is designed to address this particular barrier, we believe that it can indirectly address other reverse logistics barriers such as the lack of education, the lack of management support, the lack of awareness about reverse logistics activities and many others. This belief is based on the fact that the strategies we propose, concern and relate to other reverse logistics barriers which were not only identified in the literature but also in the Greek context. However, this remains to be proven in practice.
117 The literature findings combined with the analytical process, accommodated the identification of the benefits that drive reverse logistics implementation in Greece.
Additionally, the identified barriers were narrowed down to reveal the root cause that delays or disrupts reverse logistics from being applied in Greek organizations. Afterwards, the development of a conceptual framework was followed, as a suggestion to organizations to overcome the critical barrier that emerged.
Nonetheless, some limitations were recognized. Initially, the interviews were conducted through the telephone, thus there was a difficulty in developing rapport which is a significant factor for successful data collection. Specifically, the lack of visual cues and non-verbal behavior may disempower the meanings and the nuances of the interviews. In addition, the generalizability of the results is diminished by the short and restricted dataset.
In particular, the dataset collected is relatively limited according to the analysis and the outcomes that this paper attempts to explore. Therefore, the generalizability of the results may not be possible.
Moreover, this paper focuses on a specific country and according to Waqas et al. (2018), generalizing the results of a research that has been done in a specific economic region or country is not acceptable and reasonable. This results from the fact that different policies, operating systems and maturity level of reverse logistics activities apply in each case. In this way, we cannot state that the barriers and the solutions found in our study can take place in different contexts. Finally, the suggested conceptual framework has not been put to the test. Consequently, the actual results of using the framework to overcome reverse logistics barriers, may differ from those that are described by the paper.
Apart from the limitations, the analysis yielded numerous important results regarding barriers and benefits of reverse logistics implementation. The key implications of the research are discussed below. Considering our expectations, this paper contributes to academia and especially to managers interested in implementing reverse logistics.
118
8.1 Academic and Practical Implications
The study brings several significant academic and practical conclusions. One crucial point that derives from the analysis is that despite the fact that the Greek economic environment is not stable, organizations recognize the benefits of investing in modern practices. As mentioned in the literature, there are numerous barriers but the importance and the intensity of each one varies, depending on the country and the industry.
Specifically, the categories formulated for the analytical process are seven for reverse logistics barriers and two for reverse logistics benefits. Namely, the categories are the technological, governmental, infrastructural, collaboration and support, financial, organizational and societal barriers. Moreover, the categories for benefits are the financial and environmental.
In the first round of the analytical section, we processed the primary data collected utilizing the literature, to extract and classify the barriers and the benefits of the Greek business environment. However, the results generated by this step were based on the frequency of appearance of each barrier and benefit across the dataset and thus, were considered unstable. For this reason, the analysis proceeded into a second round which did not take into account the number of mentions.
On the contrary, barriers were declared as important according to commonalities among the datasets. In other words, the second round of analysis registered the barriers only once per interview and measured the reappearance of each category among the dataset, looking for common ground. A thing that should be mentioned is that a reverse logistics benefit analysis was not involved in the second round of analysis because a solid outcome was extracted by the first round.
Furthermore, to build a stronger and more precise conclusion, the outcomes of the first and the second analytical rounds were combined to produce the final result, which was put to the test through the dataset. Specifically, the final result which is produced by merging the outcomes of the two different analytical approaches, confirmed by running a third round looking for specific evidence.
119 The conclusions of the entire analytical process showed that Greek companies are mostly driven by financial benefits but occasionally, environmental benefits can be the starting point. On the other hand, the problem that hinders reverse logistics implementation was proved to be the organizational resistance to change. Additionally, the paper proceeds in the development of a conceptual framework to assist organizations located in Greece to overcome this particular barrier.
The first step before the formulation of the framework was to conduct a brief literature review about the perception of organizational resistance as a barrier in the context of reverse logistics. Afterwards, we proceeded in an in-depth literature search that moved around organizational resistance and change management issues. Specifically, the second literature review was conducted in order to identify various gaps and acknowledge the critical spots that should be focused by the conceptual framework. Therefore, specific theories were isolated to critically address the identified gaps. Lastly, a four-step framework was formulated to support reverse logistics implementation through organizational resistance mitigation.
The results of this paper as well as the proposed framework can provide useful insights for both academics and practitioners. From an academic point of view, the field of reverse logistics in Greece was investigated with respect to barriers and benefits. Specifically, this paper contributes to literature adding information on the status of reverse logistics in Greek organizations.
According to the literature, there were no results indicating that a previous study was carried out focusing on the Greek business environment. The majority of studied papers displayed that equivalent studies on reverse logistics have taken place regarding other countries or industries, but the Greek environment was still uncharted. Therefore, this paper is perceived as a unique contribution to the literature.
From a practical perspective, this paper strives to deliver a path that will help companies and especially those that are located in Greece to overcome organizational resistance towards the adoption of new reverse logistics practices. Particularly, the framework can act as a managerial tool to support decisions related to reverse logistics implementation.
120 Moreover, the framework addresses issues such as organizational resistors and the speed of change, which are critical factors to the main barrier identified. As a result, the conceptual framework offers an integrated approach to suppress resistance and successfully implement reverse logistics. The paper closes with a discussion over the thoughts for future research.
8.2 Recommendations for Future Research
Besides the contribution of the study, there are numerous capabilities to extend this research. Essentially, it is vital to investigate the reverse logistics context in Greece furtherly and contribute to literature analyzing the Greek business environment. It is recommended that future researchers should also validate that organizational resistance is the dominant barrier in the Greek context, collecting a larger dataset.
Moreover, the conceptual framework that is developed in this paper has not been tested in practice. One additional route of future research is to test the suggested framework in order to check its validity and reveal any possible weaknesses. Therefore, it is recommended to test the framework in different industries as the results may vary in different business environments. It is worth mentioning that the testing should not only be in organizations that vary in kind but also in size.
Particularly, testing in different industries may yield results that will support the evolution of the framework, making it more robust and generalizable. Finally, it should be clearly stated that the outcome of this paper is based on a limited dataset due to limited time frame.
Consequently, it is strongly recommended to enhance the dataset and repeat the analytical processes. This process will either reveal the instability or reinforce the outcomes of this study.
121