LEAD 4023 Module 4 Global Supply Chain Stakeholder Analysis Example

From Sugarbush to Tokyo Shelf: How a Maple Company's Global Supply Chain Affects Its Stakeholders

Student Name

American College of Education

LEAD4023: International Business Leadership

Module 4 Assignment

Instructor Name

November 2, 2026

Introduction

Exporting to Japan extends the maple company's supply chain from a few counties in northern Michigan to a store shelf in Tokyo, and every link in that chain touches people and places beyond the company. This paper maps the chain stage by stage, identifies who is affected at each stage and analyzes the economic, social and environmental effects of adding an export program. It uses the idea of sustainable supply chain management, which asks firms to integrate environmental and social goals with economic ones across the chain (Carter & Rogers, 2008), and closes with recommended practices.

Mapping the Chain

The chain has seven stages. Sap and syrup supply: sap from the company's own sugarbush is combined with sap and bulk syrup purchased from about forty neighboring producers, most of them small family operations. Processing: syrup is filtered, graded, blended and bottled or made into sugar and cream at the company's plant. Packaging inputs: glass bottles come from a regional glass maker, tins from a supplier in the Midwest and labels, now including Japanese labels, from a printer in Michigan. Domestic freight: trucks carry consolidated pallets to a West Coast port. Ocean freight: containers cross the Pacific in several weeks. Distribution in Japan: the importer clears customs, stores and delivers to retailers. Retail and consumers: specialty shops and department store food halls sell to shoppers and gift-givers.

A Framework for Weighing Effects

Carter and Rogers (2008) described sustainable supply chain management as the strategic integration of an organization's social, environmental and economic goals through the coordination of key processes across firms, supported by risk management, transparency and an organizational culture that values sustainability. Their framework is useful here because a small company tends to see the chain only through its own costs. Applying the three dimensions to each stage forces a wider view: a freight decision is also an emissions decision, a supplier contract is also a decision about the survival of a family farm and a label is also a promise to a consumer on another continent. The sections that follow take each stakeholder group in turn and ask what the export program gives it, what it costs it and what risks it carries.

Neighboring Producers

The export program's largest local effect falls on the forty neighboring producers. Additional demand means the company will buy more of their syrup, likely at better prices, which supports small farms in a region with few other sources of income. But export commitments also create a risk for them. In a poor sugaring season, the company might be tempted to meet its Japanese contract by squeezing domestic purchases or pressing suppliers for volumes they cannot produce. A review of the field found that firms often manage sustainability in supply chains through supplier management, setting expectations and supporting suppliers to reduce risk (Seuring & Müller, 2008); for this company, that means fair, transparent agreements rather than pressure.

Employees and the Community

Inside the company, export volumes add bottling work across the year, smoothing a seasonal workload and supporting the part-time export assistant role. The community benefits from more steady employment and from the region's name appearing on shelves abroad. A risk is overwork during the spring sugaring season, when export inventory must be built alongside domestic orders; the company will plan staffing so that export production happens in the slower summer months rather than in the busiest weeks.

The Environment

Environmental effects run in two directions. Shipping heavy glass across the Pacific adds greenhouse gas emissions, mostly from the domestic trucking leg and the ocean voyage, and glass itself is energy-intensive to make. On the other hand, maple production depends on keeping forests standing, and income from exports gives families a reason to preserve woodlots rather than sell them for timber or development. The export program's environmental case rests less on freight, which it cannot avoid, than on whether it helps keep maple forests intact. Climate change adds a direct risk: warmer, less predictable winters shorten and shift sugaring seasons, threatening supply for every stakeholder in the chain.

Partners and Customers in Japan

In Japan, the importer bears the regulatory responsibility for each shipment, so labeling errors or delays at the company's end become the importer's problem with authorities. Retailers depend on reliable delivery for seasonal gift periods, when a late shipment could mean empty shelves at the most important time of year. Consumers rely on accurate labels and on product quality, including a best-before date that leaves enough shelf life after a long voyage. Each of these stakeholders is affected by the company's reliability more than by any single price.

Regulators and Transparency

Regulators in both countries are stakeholders as well. On the United States side, the company must keep records that allow any lot to be traced back to the producers who supplied it, and the plant remains subject to food safety inspection. On the Japanese side, imported food must meet labeling and additive rules, and maple syrup sold as pure must contain nothing else. Transparency serves all of these parties at once. If each bottle carries a lot code linked to the producers and the date of bottling, a quality question raised by a shopper in Osaka can be answered within a day, and the importer can show authorities that the company knows exactly what it shipped. Traceability is a modest cost for a small processor, but it protects the reputation of every producer in the chain.

Resilience

A global chain is exposed to disruptions the company has never faced: port congestion, container shortages and shipping delays like those many exporters experienced in recent years, alongside the older risk of a poor season. Christopher and Peck (2004) argued that resilient supply chains are built through deliberate design, including some redundancy and flexibility, close collaboration with partners and a culture that takes risk seriously. For a small exporter, resilience means three things: holding a reserve of syrup so that one weak season does not break commitments, booking freight early for gift seasons and keeping the importer informed promptly when anything changes.

Recommended Practices

Five practices follow from the analysis. First, offer neighboring producers multi-year purchase agreements with a published pricing formula and a clause that export commitments never take priority over buying what suppliers can produce. Second, maintain a strategic reserve of about a quarter of annual export volume in bulk syrup, rotated each year. Third, ship to Japan in tins for bulk and retail sizes where buyers accept them, which are lighter than glass, while keeping glass for premium gift items. Fourth, schedule export production in summer and book ocean freight at least three months ahead of each gift season. Fifth, join a forest stewardship program for the company's own woods and encourage suppliers to do the same, telling that story to Japanese buyers who value origin and care.

Conclusion

The export program affects stakeholders at every link of a chain that now runs from Michigan woodlots to Tokyo shelves. It can strengthen small local producers, steady local employment and help keep forests intact, while adding freight emissions and new risks of supply strain and disruption. Fair supplier agreements, a syrup reserve, lighter packaging, early freight planning and forest stewardship balance those effects. Module 5 prepares the cross-cultural negotiation and communication plan for the first meetings in Japan.

References

Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360-387. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030810882816

Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090410700275

Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699-1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020