Brainstorming with generative AI to come up with a preliminary MBA dissertation proposal prototype: about supply chain risk management and ESG.
As
a part-time MBA student learning to do a dissertation project, I am interested
in the crude research theme of "the interrelated concern of supply chain
risk management and ESG of Asian regional MNCs". In addition, I would like
to include the following key words for my dissertation proposal formulation:
pragmatism, exploratory research, food service sector, corporate risk
management". Could you suggest 4 concrete research themes for me to
consider based on these ideas and preference of mine.
Based on your interests in supply chain risk
management, ESG, Asian MNCs, and your methodological preference for pragmatism
and exploratory research in the food service sector, here are four concrete,
MBA-dissertation-ready research themes you can consider:
1.
Exploring how Asian food-service MNCs integrate ESG criteria into supply chain
risk management frameworks
- Focus: How regional MNCs in the
food service sector (e.g., restaurant groups, cloud kitchens, food
distributors) embed ESG factors (environmental stewardship, labour
practices, governance transparency) into their corporate risk management
and supply chain risk processes.
- Why it fits:
Directly links ESG and supply chain risk management in an Asian MNC
context, with clear relevance to operations and strategy.sciencedirect+1
- Methodological angle: Pragmatist, exploratory, qualitative (e.g., multiple case studies
of 3–5 Asian food-service MNCs, using interviews with risk/ESG/procurement
leaders and document analysis).
- Possible research question:
- How do Asian regional food-service MNCs
incorporate ESG considerations into their supply chain risk management
practices, and what practical challenges do they face?
2.
ESG-driven supply chain risks and resilience strategies in Asian food-service
MNCs: An exploratory study
- Focus: Identify and categorise
ESG-related supply chain risks (e.g., climate impacts on ingredients,
labour violations in suppliers, regulatory ESG disclosures) and explore the
resilience strategies these MNCs adopt.
- Why it fits:
Connects “corporate risk management” and “supply chain risk management”
with ESG, but narrows to the food service sector where traceability and
reputation risks are salient.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih+1
- Methodological angle: Pragmatist, exploratory, mixed methods (e.g., initial interviews
to map risk categories, followed by a short survey of managers to see
which mitigation/resilience practices are most used).
- Possible research question:
- What types of ESG-related supply chain risks
are most salient for Asian food-service MNCs, and what resilience
strategies do they employ to manage these risks?
3.
The role of ESG performance in shaping supply chain risk perceptions and
decisions among Asian food-service MNCs
- Focus: Examine whether and how an
MNC’s own ESG performance (or public ESG ratings) influences how its
managers perceive and prioritise supply chain risks, and how that shapes
risk-mitigation investments.
- Why it fits:
Brings in a more “decision-making under uncertainty” angle that suits a
pragmatist stance: what actually guides managers’ choices in practice, not
just what frameworks say.backend.orbit.dtu+1
- Methodological angle: Pragmatist, exploratory, primarily qualitative (e.g.,
semi-structured interviews with risk officers, CFOs, sustainability heads;
scenario-based discussion of how they would react to ESG scandals or
supply disruptions).
- Possible research question:
- How does an Asian food-service MNC’s ESG
performance or reputation influence managers’ perceptions of supply chain
risk and their subsequent risk management decisions?
4.
Barriers and enablers to aligning ESG and supply chain risk management in Asian
food-service MNCs: A pragmatic, exploratory inquiry
- Focus: Investigate
organisational, regulatory, and market-level factors that help or hinder
the integration of ESG and supply chain risk management in practice (e.g.,
conflicting KPIs, data gaps, supplier power, regulatory pressure in
different Asian jurisdictions).
- Why it fits: Very
MBA-relevant: it moves from “what is the link?” to “what makes it work or
not work in real firms?”, which is ideal for recommendations to
practitioners.gsdi.gtk.uni-pannon+1
- Methodological angle: Pragmatist, exploratory, qualitative comparative case study
(e.g., 2–3 MNCs at different stages of ESG–SCRM integration, plus inputs
from auditors/consultants).
- Possible research question:
- What organisational and external factors
enable or constrain the alignment of ESG objectives with supply chain
risk management in Asian regional food-service MNCs?
How
these align with your keywords
- Pragmatism: All
four themes are framed around “what works in practice” and managerial
decision-making, not just theory testing.
- Exploratory research: Each is designed to map an under-researched intersection (ESG +
SCRM + Asian food-service MNCs) rather than test a single hypothesis.
- Food service sector: All themes explicitly focus on food-service MNCs, giving you a
clear industry boundary.
- Corporate risk management: Themes 2–4 especially foreground how ESG and supply chain risks
are handled within overall corporate risk frameworks and decision
processes.
I
am interested in theme 3: "The role of ESG performance in shaping supply
chain risk perceptions and decisions among Asian food-service MNCs".
Please suggest some related research issues and public-media reported issues on
this topic. Also suggest 3 academic theories (with references in Harvard
reference format) to me.
Here are research issues and public‑media cases you
can draw on for Theme 3, plus three suitable academic theories with Harvard‑style
references.
Key
research issues for “ESG performance and supply chain risk
perceptions/decisions” in Asian food‑service MNCs
You can frame these as sub‑questions or angles
within your dissertation:
1. How
ESG performance shapes what managers count as a supply chain risk
o
Do firms with stronger ESG ratings/scores treat
labour, animal welfare, or deforestation risks in their ingredient supply
chains as “core” corporate risks, or still as peripheral CSR issues?
o
How does ESG performance affect the salience
of different risk categories (environmental vs social vs governance) in
internal risk registers and board papers?
2. ESG
performance, stakeholder pressure, and the speed of risk response
o
High‑ESG firms may be more sensitive to
reputational threats: does this make them respond faster to supplier scandals
(e.g., labour abuse, food safety breaches) than low‑ESG peers?
o
How do NGOs, media, and investors use ESG data to
push food‑service MNCs to act on specific supply chain risks in Asia?
3. Decoupling
between ESG reporting and actual risk decisions
o
Many Asian food firms publish ESG reports but still
lack concrete responsible sourcing policies for animal protein, deforestation,
or labour rights.greenqueen
o
Is there a gap between “good ESG disclosure” and
tangible changes in supplier selection, auditing, or contract terms? What
explains this gap?
4. Cross‑border
institutional differences and perceived risk
o
Asian MNCs often source from countries with weaker
labour and environmental protections, creating upstream ESG risks even if the
HQ country is strong on ESG.sbr.com+1
o
How do managers perceive and prioritise risks when
their suppliers operate under very different regulatory and legitimacy
contexts?
5. ESG
as a lens for prioritising supply chain investments
o
Do firms with higher ESG performance allocate more
budget to supply chain traceability systems, third‑party audits, or sustainable
sourcing programmes?
o
How do ESG metrics influence capital allocation decisions
(e.g., investing in cold‑chain, blockchain traceability, or supplier
development) in the food‑service sector?
Public‑media
reported issues you can use as illustrations or case anchors
These are well‑documented, media‑covered incidents
that show how ESG‑related supply chain problems translate into reputational and
operational risk for food and food‑service firms in Asia:
1. Taiwan
“gutter oil” scandal (Chang Guann, 2014)
o
A Taiwanese edible oil producer was found to be
selling cheap recycled oil from kitchen waste, leather by‑products, and
slaughterhouse waste, mixed with lard, to hundreds of manufacturers and
restaurants.foodnavigator-asia
o
Over 900 restaurants and food plants were
identified as using the contaminated oil; major chains in Hong Kong (e.g., 7‑Eleven,
Starbucks, Maxim’s) were implicated via their suppliers.foodnavigator-asia
o
The incident triggered massive product recalls,
regulatory investigations, fines, and criminal charges; it also led to labour‑rights
violations being uncovered at the same company.foodnavigator-asia
o
Relevance to your theme:
This is a classic governance + food‑safety + supply‑chain risk episode. You can
explore how a firm’s prior ESG performance/reputation might shape how managers perceive
and respond to such upstream risks, and how stakeholders (media,
regulators, consumers) react.
2. Asian
food companies’ weak disclosure on responsible animal‑protein sourcing (2022
study)
o
A baseline study of 158 Asian companies in food
& beverage, hospitality, retail, and catering found that only 16% put responsible
animal‑protein sourcing policies at the centre of their ESG disclosures.greenqueen
o
Most ESG reports focused on easier metrics (energy,
water, packaging) while largely avoiding deforestation, animal welfare, and
antimicrobial‑resistance risks linked to their supply chains.greenqueen
o
Relevance: Highlights a widespread pattern where ESG
reporting exists but does not fully capture key supply chain risk exposures.
This supports a research angle on decoupling between ESG performance/disclosure
and actual risk perception/management.
3. Singapore/FMCG
upstream ESG risks from overseas suppliers (2025 report)
o
A 2025 report noted that 84% of MSMEs in Southeast
Asia (including Singapore) have adopted at least one ESG practice, with
Singaporean firms showing relatively strong ESG compliance.sbr.com
o
However, the key risk lies in sourcing from
overseas countries with weaker social and environmental protections, creating
upstream ESG risks even for relatively “high‑ESG” firms.sbr.com
o
Relevance: Useful for discussing how managers in higher‑ESG
jurisdictions perceive and manage risks that originate in lower‑ESG supplier
countries, tying into institutional distance and legitimacy issues.
You do not need to use all of these in depth; one
or two can serve as rich contextual cases to ground your interview questions or
scenario discussions.
Three
academic theories to underpin your study (with Harvard references)
These theories align well with a pragmatist,
exploratory design and with your focus on ESG, risk perception, and decision‑making.
1.
Stakeholder Theory
Stakeholder theory helps you argue that ESG
performance changes which stakeholders matter most and how their
concerns shape managers’ perceptions of supply chain risk. It also explains why
stakeholder reactions (NGOs, media, investors, consumers) can turn ESG issues
into material corporate risks.link.springer+1
- Core idea for your thesis: Firms with stronger ESG performance may be more attentive to
stakeholder expectations around sustainability, so they perceive ESG‑related
supply chain issues as more salient risks and respond more proactively.
Key reference (Harvard style):
Freeman, R.E., Harrison, J.S., Wicks, A.C., Parmar, B.L. and de Colle, S.
(2010) Stakeholder theory: Managing for the interests of stakeholders.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
A widely cited foundational article is:
Donaldson, T. and Preston, L.E. (1995) ‘The stakeholder theory of the
corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications’, Academy of Management
Review, 20(1), pp. 65–91.journals.aom
2.
Institutional Theory (including institutional distance and legitimacy)
Institutional theory lets you analyse how different
regulatory, normative, and cognitive environments across Asian countries shape
what is seen as “acceptable” or “risky” in supply chains. It is particularly
relevant where MNC HQs and suppliers operate under very different institutions.onlinelibrary.wiley
- Core idea for your thesis: ESG performance may reflect a firm’s alignment with global
institutional pressures (e.g., investor ESG expectations), but managers’
risk perceptions are also shaped by the institutional distance between HQ
and supplier countries. This can create paradoxes where both parties feel
“legitimate” locally, yet stakeholders still perceive high risk.
Key reference (Harvard style):
Gugerli, D. and Habisch, A. (2012) ‘Sustainability and the false sense of
legitimacy: How institutional distance augments risk in global supply chains’, Journal
of Business Logistics, 35(4), pp. 312–324. (Conceptual paper applying
institutional theory to supply chain sustainability risks.)onlinelibrary.wiley
A classic institutional theory source you can cite
alongside:
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional
isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American
Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–160.
3.
Legitimacy Theory
Legitimacy theory complements institutional theory
by focusing on how firms seek to maintain or restore their social licence to
operate. ESG performance and disclosures are often interpreted as legitimacy‑seeking
actions; supply chain scandals threaten that legitimacy.link.springer+1
- Core idea for your thesis: Firms with higher ESG performance may perceive ESG‑related supply
chain incidents as greater threats to their legitimacy, prompting stronger
risk perceptions and more decisive mitigation actions (e.g., cutting off
suppliers, increasing audits).
Key reference (Harvard style):
Suchman, M.C. (1995) ‘Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional
approaches’, Academy of Management Review, 20(3), pp. 571–610.
You can explicitly link legitimacy theory to
sustainability‑related supply chain risks as in:
Busse, C., Schleper, M.C., Niemann, S. and Wagner, S.M. (2017) ‘A foundation of
sustainability‑related supply chain risks in stakeholder theory’, in Sustainable
supply chains: Managing risks and opportunities (or related journal
articles building on this conceptualisation).
I
intend to do a single case study, with case study research methodology on this
topic with my employer with its Hong Kong regional office. Could you come up
with a dissertation proposal with project title, 4 research objectives, 3
research questions, a brief research methodology, as well as some comments on
the originality, academic and practical values of this 4-month part-time MBA
project.
Proposed
dissertation title
“How ESG performance shapes supply chain risk
perceptions and decisions: A single case study of an Asian food‑service MNC’s
Hong Kong regional office”
Research
objectives
1. To
explore how the case firm’s ESG performance and ESG‑related stakeholder
pressures influence managers’ perceptions of supply chain risks in the food‑service
sector.
2. To
examine how ESG considerations are integrated (or not) into the firm’s
corporate risk management and supply chain risk management processes at
regional level.
3. To
identify the organisational and institutional factors that enable or constrain
the alignment between ESG performance and supply chain risk decisions in the
Hong Kong regional office.
4. To
develop pragmatic, practice‑oriented recommendations for strengthening the link
between ESG performance and supply chain risk management in Asian food‑service
MNCs.
Research
questions
1. How
do managers in the Hong Kong regional office perceive and prioritise ESG‑related
supply chain risks in light of the firm’s ESG performance and external
stakeholder expectations?
2. In
what ways does the firm’s ESG performance (including disclosures and ratings)
influence actual supply chain risk management decisions at regional level
(e.g., supplier selection, auditing, contracting, mitigation investments)?
3. What
organisational and institutional factors (e.g., internal incentives, data
availability, regulatory environment, supplier country contexts) facilitate or
hinder the alignment of ESG performance with supply chain risk decisions in the
case firm?
Brief
research methodology (single case study, pragmatist, exploratory)
Research design:
- Single, in‑depth case study of your employer’s Hong Kong regional office, treated as a
“critical” or “revelatory” case of an Asian food‑service MNC operating in
a high‑visibility, ESG‑sensitive market.
- Philosophical stance: pragmatism –
focused on “what works in practice” and generating actionable insights for
managers, rather than testing a single theory.
- Approach: exploratory, qualitative,
inductive–abductive (moving between data and theory to build a plausible
explanation of how ESG performance shapes risk perceptions and decisions).
Data collection (approx. 8–10 weeks within the 4‑month
project):
- Semi‑structured interviews (12–20) with:
- Regional risk / compliance / internal audit
leaders
- Supply chain / procurement managers
- Sustainability / ESG leads
- Selected business unit heads (e.g.,
operations, finance) who make or influence sourcing and risk decisions
- Document analysis, including:
- Corporate ESG/sustainability reports, risk
reports, internal policies on responsible sourcing and supplier codes of
conduct
- Board or management presentations on risk and
ESG (where accessible)
- Relevant media coverage of the firm’s supply
chain/ESG incidents (if any)
- Optional short internal survey (if feasible and approved) to triangulate interview findings on
how different functions perceive ESG‑related supply chain risks.
Data analysis:
- Thematic analysis of interview transcripts and
documents, using an initial coding framework informed by:
- Stakeholder theory (which stakeholders matter, how their concerns shape risk
salience)
- Institutional theory / institutional distance (HQ vs supplier country contexts, regulatory and normative
pressures)
- Legitimacy theory (how ESG performance and incidents affect the firm’s social
licence and risk responses).
- Iterative refinement of themes to develop a context‑specific
explanatory narrative of how ESG performance influences risk
perceptions and decisions in this case.
Ethics and access:
- Anonymise the firm and participants (use
pseudonyms, aggregate roles).
- Obtain formal employer approval and, if
required, university ethics clearance before data collection.
- Ensure no commercially sensitive or
confidential information is disclosed in the final dissertation without
explicit permission.
Originality,
academic and practical value
Originality
- Sector and region focus: Most existing ESG–supply chain risk research is either multi‑industry
or focused on manufacturing/retail; relatively little is centred on Asian
food‑service MNCs, despite their complex, cross‑border ingredient
supply chains and high reputational exposure.
- ESG performance as a lens on risk perception: Rather than treating ESG only as an outcome or as a set of
practices, your study foregrounds how ESG performance and related
stakeholder pressures reshape managers’ subjective risk perceptions and
subsequent decisions. This micro‑level, perceptual angle is under‑explored,
especially in Asia.
- Single, insider case study: As an employee‑researcher, you can access rich, practice‑level
data (internal debates, trade‑offs, informal processes) that external
researchers rarely capture, enhancing the depth and realism of the
analysis.
Academic
value
- Theory development in context: By applying stakeholder, institutional, and legitimacy theories
to a concrete Asian food‑service MNC, you can refine how these theories
explain ESG‑related supply chain risk dynamics in a region with
diverse institutions and rapid ESG regulatory change.
- Bridging ESG and supply chain risk literatures: Your work can contribute to the emerging literature that
integrates ESG management and supply chain risk management
(SCRM), showing how they are linked in managerial cognition and
decision processes, not just in formal policies.
- Methodological contribution: A well‑executed, theory‑informed single case study can serve as a
reference for future qualitative work on ESG and risk in Asian MNCs,
illustrating how to combine pragmatist philosophy with established
management theories.
Practical
value (for your employer and industry)
- Diagnostic insights for your firm: The study will surface where and how ESG performance is (or is
not) influencing real risk decisions in your regional office, highlighting
gaps between ESG aspirations, risk frameworks, and day‑to‑day managerial
behaviour.
- Actionable recommendations: You can propose concrete improvements, such as:
- Adjusting risk registers and KPIs to better
reflect ESG‑related supply chain risks
- Enhancing cross‑functional coordination
between ESG, risk, and procurement teams
- Refining supplier assessment and monitoring
processes to account for ESG performance and institutional distance.
- Broader relevance to Asian food‑service MNCs: Many regional players face similar challenges (weak upstream ESG
controls, intense stakeholder scrutiny, diverse regulatory environments).
Your findings and framework can inform industry peers, regulators, and
investors interested in more effective ESG‑linked risk management in
the food‑service sector.
