Supply chain movement risk in the sneaker industry: an empirical study
Quality & Quantity
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01166-y
Supply chain movement risk in the sneaker industry:
an empirical study
Che‑Wei Chang1
Accepted: 11 May 2021
© The Author(s) 2021
Abstract
In light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Sino–US trade war, this study proposes a grey
sharing decision-making evaluation model for production base movement and the sustainable operation of enterprises in the footwear industry. First, a focus group technique was
employed; personnel from the footwear industry, corresponding government agencies, and
the academic community were invited to jointly identify the most important criteria when
considering a production base movement. The group listed seven criteria: labor cost, materials, exchange rate fluctuation, tariff, supply chain, transfer cost, and the government. The
grey situation decision-making algorithm based on group knowledge and entropy were
used to identify the most suitable country for production base movement.
Keywords Supply chain management · Focus group · Entropy · Grey situation decisionmaking algorithm
1 Introduction
The footwear industry is labor-intensive, and is affected by various factors such as
land resources, labor costs, material supply, environmental protection, and sales markets. Consequently, in pursuit of profit maximization, major consumer markets, footwear manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers worldwide are shifting their focus to
lower-cost countries, leading to constant movement of global shoemaking bases (Kong
Cheong Shoes Group 2014). For instance, European countries such as Italy, Spain, and
Portugal began to move their shoemaking bases to countries or regions with lower costs,
such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and Hong Kong in the 1960s, and thereafter to
China in the late 1980s. Since 1996, China’s footwear industry has been growing at
a rate of 10–20% annually, and the country has become the world’s leading footwear
producer and exporter (Leo 2020). According to Wu (2018a) and the World Footwear
* Che‑Wei Chang
1
Department of Recreational and Graduate Institute of Recreational Sport Management, National
Taiwan University of Sport, No. 16, Sec. 1, Shuang‑Shih Road, Taichung, 404, Taiwan,
Republic of China
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
C.-W. Chang
Yearbook (2017) there were 30,000–40,000 shoemaking enterprises worldwide in 2016,
employing nearly 10 million individuals and producing 23 billion pairs of shoes.
Taiwan’s footwear industry has gone through five phases: (1) Early phase
(1949–1960): Under the business strategy adopted during this period, the store and factory were located in the same place, with the main service being shoe customization.
Each shoemaker could therefore make only one or two pairs of shoes per day (Zhou and
Li 2004). (2) Burgeoning phase (1961–1969): Taiwanese footwear factories introduced
Japanese shoemaking techniques. They began to apply the mass production model as
well as the business strategy of separating production and sales. At the time, there were
more than 30 export-oriented footwear factories in Taiwan, the annual average exporting 20 million pairs of shoes and constituting a major export industry in the country.
(3) Maturity phase (1970–1988): Earlier in the maturity period, favorable factors such
as low wages, abundant labor, and high quality attracted a large number of orders from
footwear manufacturers outside Taiwan. The number of footwear manufacturers in the
country surged to more than 1400, with the volume of footwear production growing
annually by 50%. In 1987, exports reached a peak of 1.8 billion pairs, making Taiwan
the world’s second largest footwear exporter. However, since 1987, the New Taiwanese dollar appreciated sharply by 45%, wages rose, and the profitability ratio began to
shrink. Manufacturers began to consider moving their production bases (Li 2017). (4)
The industrial structure adjustment phase (1988–1989): This period witnessed high
wages, rising labor consciousness, and labor shortages. Moreover, there was significant appreciation of the New Taiwanese dollar against the U.S. dollar, with US$1 being
equivalent to NT$39.85 in 1985 and NT$26.42 in 1989. With this sharp appreciation
of nearly 50%, profits and total output plummeted. During this period, manufacturers
gradually moved their shoemaking bases to countries or regions with land and labor
cost advantages such as Thailand, Vietnam, Hong Kong, and China (Xie 2017). (5) The
International Division of Labor Phase (1990–present): From a globalization context, the
number of shoemaking bases located in Taiwan has reduced drastically, whereas overseas investments have surged, forming a new pattern of international division of labor,
whereby orders are received in Taiwan and shoes are produced outside Taiwan. Nevertheless, operational activities and research and development (R&D) centers have been
retained to develop and design new shoe materials and models, and produce high valueadded and differentiated products. Taiwan still holds the leading position in the global
footwear industry (Chen 2015).
In each period, even though the footwear industry faced significant uncertainties such
as environmental changes, local governments, and competition from international brands,
Taiwanese enterprises gradually developed large-scale manufacturing capacity and manufacturing management capability, to balance quality and efficiency. To facilitate sustainable
enterprise operation and development, it is desirable for production and supply chains to
move to a cheaper country approximately every two decades. Recently, due to the COVID19 pandemic and the Sino–US trade war, the exchange rate between the NT$ and US$ has
changed dramatically, and many Taiwanese companies have begun to evaluate the feasibility of transferring production lines to countries with lower production costs. Therefore,
this study proposes a grey sharing decision-making evaluation model (GSDEM) to analyze
the movement of the production bases of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), for
the sustainable operation and development of footwear enterprises. For this purpose, first,
the focus group method was used; personnel from the footwear industry, government, and
academic community were invited to jointly identify the criteria for evaluating production
base movement. Thereafter, the grey situation decision-making (GSDM) algorithm and
13
Supply chain movement risk in the sneaker industry: an empirical…
entropy were used to construct the model. The results of this study can serve as a useful
reference for the sustainable operation of shoemaking OEMs.
2 Literature review
The shoe supply chain includes the sourcing of raw materials, transforming them into semifinished goods (shoe materials, shoemaking, finished products), and branding (distributing
goods to final users) (Marconi et al. 2017). Schwartz (2018) presented the sneaker supply
chain, which starts with design and ends with the manufactured shoe, over an 18-mon (...truncated)