Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology

Kumar, Manoj; Joji, Rao T Article Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology Cogent Business & Management Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Kumar, Manoj; Joji, Rao T (2023) : Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN 2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 10, Iss. 2, pp. 1-27, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/294535 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oabm20 Cogent Business & Management ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oabm20 Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology Manoj Kumar & Rao T Joji To cite this article: Manoj Kumar & Rao T Joji (2023) Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology, Cogent Business & Management, 10:2, 2234697, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Published online: 21 Jul 2023. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 570 View related articles View Crossmark data MANAGEMENT | RESEARCH ARTICLE Study of the interplay among internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry using the total ISM and MICMAC methodology Manoj Kumar 1 * and Rao T Joji 2 Abstract: Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) has received growing attention in the last few years. Due to public awareness, economic, environmental, or legislative reasons, the requirement of GSCM has increased. The Indian leather industry is considered to be the most polluted industry in India in terms of all forms of pollution, i.e. water, land, and air. In the recent past, the Indian leather industry has been changing basic assumptions. The world’s largest exporter of leather is currently becoming a net importer of the bovine hide. Manufacturing industries have started adopting the green concept in their supply chain management recently to focus on environmental issues. However, industries still struggle to identify the relationship between internal and external barriers hindering green supply chain management implementation. In this context, this study aims to develop Manoj Kumar ABOUT THE AUTHORS Manoj Kumar holds his Master of Business Administration (MBA) in Manufacturing Management from BITS Pilani, India. His research interests are green supply chain management inventory and supply chain modeling and optimization. In addition, he is pursuing his Ph.D. in Logistics and supply chain management from the University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, India. Rao specialization is Finance and Energy Risk Management. Dr. Rao’s academic experience encompasses 18 years of teaching and research. Dr. Rao served organizations namely St Stephens (Delhi), Hindustan Times Ltd, and Sintex Industries Ltd (International Division). Dr. Rao holds a strong flare for research and his research has been published in leading global journals such as Renewable and Sustainable Energy Review, Energy Policy, Energy Strategy Review, Energy Research & Social Science, Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, and Journal of Risk Finance to name a few. He was awarded the Best Researcher Award (2017) by CIMA (London) & UPES for his contribution to the field of Energy Research. PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT Environmental pollution is a major concern for humankind as it not only affects the current lifestyle of human beings but also threatens the future of human life on this planet. Development plays a vital role in the progress of humans and enables them to achieve impossible milestones in life. , however, any progress has its disadvantages. The Indian Leather industry is one of the most unorganized sectors in India and getting the finished product in hand demands tons of environmental waste in all possible forms, i.e. water, land, and air pollution. GSCM is the best answer to these concerns as it encompasses everything from sourcing to the final product and its disposal too. GSCM seems very easy to implement but always finds roadblocks in terms of internal and external barriers. Understanding these barriers will surely help the highdemanding Indian leather industry curb the concern raised above. Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 1 of 27 Received: 02 February 2023 Accepted: 13 May 2023 *Corresponding author: Manoj Kumar, School of bussiness, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, A 83 Pushpanjali Upvan, Mathura - 281004, Uttar Pradesh, India E-mail: [email protected] Reviewing editor: Nitika Sharma, International Management Institute, New Delhi, India Additional information is available at the end of the article © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. a structural model between internal and external barriers to implementing GSCM in the Indian leather industry. To assess the link between internal and external barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather sector, empirical research was carried out utilizing a Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method called Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM). ISM is a useful approach for understanding the complex relationships between various internal and external barriers and their hierarchies in the context of green supply chain management (GSCM) adoption. It can be used to identify the key barriers that influence the effective adoption of GSCM in the Indian leather industry, as well as the interdependencies between these barriers. This can help GSCM decision-makers in the Indian leather industry to better understand the challenges and opportunities for implementing sustainable practices throughout their supply chain and to develop effective strategies for addressing them. Additionally, ISM can be used to identify the key drivers and barriers to GSCM adoption, which can inform the development of targeted interventions to promote sustainable practices in the Indian leather sector. The findings indicate that inconsistent quality and lack of motivational laws are the most crucial barriers to overcoming the remaining obstacles and implementing GSCM successfully in the Indian leather sector. Subjects: Resource Management - Environmental Studies; Environmental History; Environmental Ethics; Environmental health; Administration and Management; Management & Organization; Keywords: green supply chain management; barriers to implementing GSCM; interpretive structural modeling 1. Introduction The Indian leather industry dates back to 3000 BC, making it the country’s oldest manufacturing sector. According to claims, leather was tanned utilizing domestic methods such as fat scrubbing, fumigation, and dyeing and was mostly utilized for practical items including clothes, tents, footwear, and chairs (2018). Moktadir et al. (2018) Jumping ahead to the 19th century, the British colonial era, they developed the first shoe factory (1880) at Kanpur, after which they introduced the most cutting-edge chrome tanning technology (1857). A total of 24 tanneries were approved for operation by 1913 in various locations throughout India, taking into account the expanding demand. A significant development for the leather sector was the founding of the Central Leather Research Institute in independent India in 1948. India strategically forbids the export of unprocessed hides and skins, reserving the manufacturing of leather and its related products solely for the small-scale industry. In 1972, a group headed by Dr. A Seetharamiah suggested that exports be restricted to finished leather and other items with value-added. The 1990s saw the full development of forex markets in terms of trade liberalization, able to dictate actions at multiple levels, namely national and global. Committee (2012). It was believed that trade liberalization would help a variety of developing nations that have comparative advantages in the exploitation of natural resources and the production of labor-intensive goods. As the Indian government has always given this sector a high priority. Efforts like (the Working Group Report GOI, 2011; Foreign Trade Policy 2010–15, published in 2009; Government of India, 5 years plan 2012–17, published in 2011) have demonstrated to be a very consistent foreign exchange earner for our country, making it the top sector for creating jobs and the leading foreign exchange earner (Bechtsis et al., 2018) Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 2 of 27 The Indian leather, leather products, and footwear industries are important to the Indian economy. This sector is well-known for its consistently high export revenues and is one of the country’s top 10 foreign exchange-earners. During the 2020–21 fiscal year, India exported $3.68 billion in footwear, leather, and leather products. The sector has an abundance of raw materials because India has 20% of the world’s cow and buffalo population and 11% of the world’s goat and sheep population. Added to this are the advantages of trained labor, new technology, increased industrial compliance with international environmental standards, and the unwavering support of linked industries. The leather industry is an employment-intensive sector, employing over 4.42 million people, the majority of whom come from lower-income families. Women make up 30% of the workforce in the leather products business. India is the world’s second-largest exporter of leather garments, the third-largest exporter of saddlery and harnesses, and fourth largest exporter of leather goods. All industries have experienced an increased drive to include green practices in their daily operations in recent decades. In the area of green supply chain management, pressure on the industry to implement environmental efforts is growing. From the moment an idea is conceived until the finished product is delivered to the consumer, GSCM is used. All essential supply chain operations, including process design, purchasing, production, logistics, disposal, recovery, and reuse, as well as worker health and safety, must incorporate GSCM. Therefore, a wide viewpoint is necessary to achieve social and economic sustainability for all participants in the food chain and to make it a norm in society (Mohanty & Prakash, 2014) The positive application of GSCM in the Indian leather industry is always hindered by the various barriers faced on the ground by various leather industries. Understanding various internal and external barriers is much needed and it needs hours. Understanding the relationship between various internal and external barriers will help the Indian leather industry successfully implement GSCM (Shao et al., 2016). Organizations like the Network of Professional Social Workers(NPSW) which is an International Association of professional Social Workers can play a vital role in establishing green supply chain management practices on the ground. NPSW connects with Social Workers across the globe beyond national and regional boundaries. Social Workers from any part of the world, working with any population, organization, and setting are welcome to join hands with this global professional association. 2. GSCM barriers classification There are many barriers to GSCM implementation, and they can be divided into external, internal, and individual factors. External factors might include inadequate infrastructure, lack of resources, or geopolitical events such as trade tensions. Internal factors could be related to poor communication, inadequate forecasting and planning, and differences in legal and regulatory requirements. Finally, individual factors might involve a lack of knowledge or skills, a lack of motivation, or the prioritization of other tasks. The Indian leather industry faces several barriers to implementing GSCM practices, including a lack of awareness, inadequate government policies, and a lack of resources. Let’s consider a case study on the barriers to GSCM in the Indian leather industry. A leather goods manufacturer in India is looking to implement GSCM practices to reduce its environmental footprint and improve its sustainability. However, it faces several barriers to achieving this goal. A small case study was conducted through online interviews of experts in the field of the Indian leather industry and the following major barriers are reflected in the study: - (1) Lack of knowledge. The manufacturer faces a lack of knowledge about GSCM practices and their benefits among its suppliers and employees. Many of them are not aware of the environmental impact of their actions or the importance of adopting sustainable practices. Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 3 of 27 (2) Inadequate Government Policies.The Indian government has not yet implemented sufficient policies to encourage the adoption of GSCM practices. This lack of regulatory support makes it challenging for companies to invest in sustainable practices. (3) Economics-related issues.Implementing GSCM practices can require significant investments in technology, infrastructure, and human resources. Many small and medium-sized enterprises in the Indian leather industry may face Economics related issues to implement these practices. (4) Technology and infrastructure. Technology and infrastructure can play a crucial role in promoting Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) in the Indian leather industry. Energyefficient technologies such as LED lighting, efficient motors, and advanced control systems can help reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. (5) Market and Competitors. The market and competitors for Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) in the Indian leather industry are constantly evolving. As environmental concerns continue to rise, there is growing demand for environmentally sustainable products and supply chain practices. (6) Top management involvement. The top management involvement is critical for the success of GSCM practices in the Indian leather industry. They should provide leadership, allocate resources, monitor and evaluate, collaborate, and promote training and awareness to promote sustainable practices in the supply chain. Further to the above case study and after conducting a thorough review of the literature on GSCM barriers, 25 carriers can be grouped into seven separate categories. These include technology and infrastructure-linked issues (T & I), governance and supply chain process-linked issues (G & SC), economic-linked issues (E), knowledge-linked issues (K), policy-linked issues (P), market and competitors-linked issues, and management-linked issues. Each of these categories has issues that could hinder the successful implementation of GSCM. Knowing this will help organizations, as they look to develop more effective GSCM strategies. GSCM barriers classification. Sources: (Bouzon et al., 2015; Dhillon et al., 2016; Lahane & Kant, 2021; Muduli et al., 2013).The below Table 1 is made with two columns indicating classification and barriers. The variables here are the barriers to GSCM, and they are further classified as internal and external barriers. (IN) denotes the internal barriers and (EX) denotes the external barriers. For GSM implementation in the Indian leather industry. 3. Research highlights A systematic literature review was undertaken to understand various barriers to GSCM. Various barriers play a major roadblock in the successful implementation of GSCM in the Indian leather industry. Although there might be various other reasons like social, economic, and environmental reasons for non-implementation various internal and external barriers play a major role in nonimplementation. Notwithstanding the above, the Indian government is working very closely with various agencies to implement GSCM for the Indian industry. However, the Indian industry faces the challenge of ground logistics groundwork and the government is pushing for GSCM at the ground level. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, very few or no GSCM published in various Peer-English-speaking publications in the Indian setting have examined the link between various internal and external obstacles. In light of this, we outline the proposed solution approach, Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM), and study findings. 4. Research gaps The following are the gaps that emerge post an extensive Literature review: - (1) A thorough assessment of the literature revealed that the majority of GSCM investigations, regardless of a sub-category, were done in Western countries, China, and Southeast Asia. Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 4 of 27 There has been very little work publicized and done for the Indian leather sector in particular. (2) Majorly recent research papers talk about the environmental concerns caused by vehicle industries, pulp and paper, electrical and electronic industries, logistics services (3PL), retail sectors, infrastructure, and so on. There is a major lack in the sector of the Indian leather industry. The findings and relationships between internal and external barriers are yet to be established. (3) This study mainly attempts to address the above gaps by using ISM as a methodology. 5. Solution methodology The main objective of this work is to determine the relationship between internal and external barriers in GSCM implementation for the Indian leather industry. This objective is being achieved by investigating international peer-reviewed articles to select various internal and external barriers and finally classifying them into various categories. Furthermore, utilizing ISM, rigorous and empirical research was conducted to assess the link between internal and external barriers to GSCM adoption. A detailed study was conducted looking at the barriers to GSCM implementation in the Indian leather sector. Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) is used to explore the bilateral consequences of the barrier categories and identify internal driving barrier categories that can exacerbate other Table 1. Classification and barriers Classification Barriers Technology and infrastructure (T&I) T&I-1(IN). Absence of personnel technical skills T&I-2(IN). Absence of IT systems standards T&I-3(IN). Absence of latest technologies T&I-4(IN). Absence of in-house facilities (infrastructure) T&I-5(IN). Technology and the R&D issues linked to product recovery Governance and supply chain process linked concerns (G&SC) G&SC-1(EX). Difficulties with supply chain members (poor coordination) G&SC-2(IN). Inadequate forecasting and planning G&SC-3(IN). Unreliable quality Economic associated matters (E) E-1(IN). Absence of initial capital E-2(EX). Absence of financial support for investments in return monitoring system/storage and handling E-3(EX). Uncertainty linked to economic issues E-4(IN). Absence of economy of scale Knowledge allied concerns (K) K-1(IN). Absence of knowledge on GSCM practices K-2(EX). Absence of information on take back channels K-3(EX). Absence of awareness concerning GSCM and its benefits K-4(IN). Absence of taxation knowledge on returned products Policy linked problems (P) P-1(EX). Absence of specific laws P-2(EX). Absence of waste management practices P-3(EX). Absence of inter-ministerial communication P-4(EX). Absence of motivation laws Market and competitors (M&C) M&C-1(EX). Perception of a poorer quality product M&C-2(EX). Undeveloped recovery marketplaces M&C-3(EX). Little recognition of GSCM competitive advantage Management correlated problems(M) M-1(IN). Low importance of GSCM relative to other issues M-2(IN). Low involvement of top management and strategic planning Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 5 of 27 barrier categories. This is an important step in understanding the complexity of GSCM implementation and developing effective strategies to overcome the barriers (Luthra et al., 2011) 6. Data collection This research project sought information on barriers to GSCM adoption in the Indian leather industry context: consequently, the target audience should be aware of GSCM practices and barriers, as well as specialists in the Indian leather sector. Since this study is the first to look at how internal and external barriers to the Indian leather industry relate to one another. The development of knowledge on the subject and the accuracy of the data gathered so become increasingly significant and pertinent. Experts were chosen for their understanding of the GSCM in the Indian leather industry and their availability to answer inquiries. The list of chosen experts, years of experience, and justification for our choice are given in Table 2. The researchers have chosen two major Indian leather factories to serve as illustrations of this industry sector. Both businesses have GSCM programs in place. The environmental specialist and sustainability manager were recommended by the logistics managers at each of the organizations as experts who could best respond to the research questions. Academicians who have expertise in the GSCM sector and were available to respond to the queries were nominated. First, the potential respondents were called by phone, and an in-person interview was set up. Second, throughout the structured interviews, clarifications on GSCM obstacles were provided to ensure the best appreciation of the terminology used. Pair-wise comparison questions were utilized to study the link between GSCM implementation barriers. The data collected vide the above process is analyzed and put into thought before placing for the Interpretive structuring modeling (ISM) method to generate the relationship between internal and external barriers. The self-structural matrix is generated using this data, which will be the basis for ISM methodology at large. The relationship thereon found post-ISM will be analyzed by industry experts and researchers in the field for better understanding and apprehension. The basic flow chart for ISM implementation and application is shown below for a better and clear understanding (Figure 1). Table 2. Experts’ description and choice justification Expert Expert Experience in the field Justification Environmental Specialist 5 years Responsible for researching whether firm actions are appropriate in light of the state waste management regulation Sustainability manager 3.5 years In charge of overseeing and managing the company’s GSCM program Doctorate researcher on GSCM 7 years Researchers developing studies on product return, remanufacturing, and reverse logistics. Transversal knowledge by having worked in the field in many industries in India Full Professor on Supply ChainManagement Management 11 years Researchers who have worked on the extensive literature on GSCM and RL at many Indian companies that manufacture machinery Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 6 of 27 The above figure reflects the detailed procedure to be followed in this study for understanding the relationship between internal and external barriers to the successful implementation of GSCM in the Indian leather industry. The graphic depicts the steps used to obtain the outcome using the Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach. The creation of a structural self-interaction matrix is critical in variable analysis using ISM methodology. For a better understanding of the link among various factors in the research, a reachability matrix will be necessary 7. Literature of review (Step 1) To better establish the research gap, global peer-reviewed journals on the GSCM were discovered to determine the GSCM barriers, both internal and external. ISI Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, Springer, and Google Scholar was among the bibliographic databases searched. “GSCM” and “barriers” are the keywords used to retrieve the papers from the title, keywords, or abstract. Phatak & Sople (2018) analyzed data from Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), a multinational company with operations across various nations, to assess the operational components of environmental supplychain management. Branded and non-branded goods and services are contrasted in terms of green supply chain management strategies and are then assessed and discussed. Using the empirical study of 89 automotive firms in China, (Zhu et al., 2007)investigated the GSCM pressures/drivers (motivators), efforts, and performance of the automotive supply chain. The findings demonstrate that Chinese car supply chain firms have faced substantial and rising regulatory and market constraints while also having strong internal motivations for GSCM practice adoption. Further, the closed-loop supply chain with multi-stage products under quality control and green policies has been well explained (Abolfazl Gharaei et al., 2021). Through factor analysis (Lu et al., 2007), looked at the consistency approaches that affect the adoption and use of green supply chain management in the Taiwanese electronics industry. Nine electronic firms are utilized to rank the relative importance of four variables and twenty procedures using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process method. The statistics indicate that these companies prioritize effective supplier management while implementing GSCM. Figure 1. Flow chart for ISM. Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 7 of 27 Table 5. Reachability matrix (Rm) Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Driving Power TI-1(IN). Lack of personnel technical skills 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 TI-2(IN). Lack of IT systems standards 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 TI-3(IN). Lack of latest technologies 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 TI-4(IN). Lack of in-house facilities (infrastructure) 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 TI-5(IN). Technology and the RD issues related to product recovery 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 GSC-1(EX). Difficulties with supply chain members (poor coordination) 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 GSC-2(IN). Limited forecasting and planning 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 GSC-3(IN). Inconsistent quality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E-1(IN). Lack of initial capital 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 E-2(EX). Lack of financial support for invest in return monitoring sys/storage and handling 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 E-3(EX). Uncertainty related to economic issues 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 6 E-4(IN). Lack of economy of scale 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 K-1(IN). Lack of knowledge on GSCM practices 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 K-2(EX). Lack of information on take back channels 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 K-3(EX). Lack of awareness concerning GSCM and its benefits 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 K-4(IN). Lack of taxation knowledge on returned products 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 P-1(EX). Lack of specific laws 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 12 P-2(EX). Lack of waste management practices 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 P-3(EX). Lack of inter-ministerial communication 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 7 P-4(EX). Lack of motivation laws 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 MC-1(EX). Perception of a poorer quality product 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 (Continued) Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 14 of 27 Table 5. (Continued) Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Driving Power MC-2(EX). Undeveloped recovery marketplaces 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 MC-3(EX). Little recognition of GSCM competitive advantage 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 M-1(IN). Low importance of GSCM relative to other issues 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 9 M-2(IN). Low involvement of top management and strategic 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 12 Dependence Power 5 3 3 7 12 6 9 6 3 13 2 5 10 11 5 7 4 7 2 6 3 3 5 4 5 Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 15 of 27 Table 6. Final reachability matrix (Frm) Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Driving Power TI-1(IN). Lack of personnel technical skills 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 TI-2(IN). Lack of IT systems standards 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 TI-3(IN). Lack of latest technologies 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 TI-4(IN). Lack of in-house facilities (infrastructure) 1* 1 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 TI-5(IN). Technology and the RD issues related to product recovery 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 GSC-1(EX). Difficulties with supply chain members (poor coordination) 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 GSC-2(IN). Limited forecasting and planning 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 GSC-3(IN). Inconsistent quality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 E-1(IN). Lack of initial capital 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 E-2(EX). Lack of financial support for invest in return monitoring sys/storage and handling 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 E-3(EX). Uncertainty related to economic issues 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 E-4(IN). Lack of economy of scale 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 K-1(IN). Lack of knowledge on GSCM practices 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 25 K-2(EX). Lack of information on take back channels 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 K-3(EX). Lack of awareness concerning GSCM and its benefits 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 K-4(IN). Lack of taxation knowledge on returned products 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 P-1(EX). Lack of specific laws 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 25 P-2(EX). Lack of waste management practices 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 (Continued) Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 16 of 27 Table 6. (Continued) Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Driving Power P-3(EX). Lack of inter-ministerial communication 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 25 P-4(EX). Lack of motivation laws 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 MC-1(EX). Perception of a poorer quality product 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 MC-2(EX). Undeveloped recovery marketplaces 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 25 MC-3(EX). Little recognition of GSCM competitive advantage 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 25 M-1(IN). Low importance of GSCM relative to other issues 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1* 25 M-2(IN). Low involvement of top management and strategic 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 25 Dependence Power 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 23 23 23 23 23 Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 17 of 27 11.2. Level partitioning iterations The antecedent set A and intersection set R are now finally adjusted to the final level and the common level in the previous step is clubbed together to decide the top level in this case. Level partitioning interactions (Table 8) are formulated to get the top level among various levels to formulate the conical matrix in the next step. 12. Conical matrix (CM) creation (Step 7) ISM model construction (Steps 8, 9, 10, 11) The partitioned reachability matrix is reorganized by their members according to their level to produce the conical matrix (Table 9), which indicates that all elements with the same level are pooled. A digraph is a resultant graph. When the transitivity is eliminated, the digraph is eventually turned into the ISM model, as described in the ISM technique. 12.1. Driving power and matrix The subcategories are divided into four clusters or sectors according to Figure 2 autonomous, independent, dependent, and linked. Sector-I depicts, a low driving power and low reliance type of barrier composes the sector. Because this area did not receive any barrier categories, they are all connected. Depending barrier types make up Sector II, which has low driving power but high dependence power and we have inconsistency quality (8) and lack of motivational law (20) in this Sector . Sector III will be composed of barriers with both high driving power and strong reliance power and we have almost all barrier falling into this sector barring inconsistence quality (8) and lack of motivational law (20). Sector-IV depicts barriers with high driving power and low dependence power and we have no barrier in this sector Sector I—Autonomous category, Sector II—Dominated/Dependent category Sector III_ Relay/Linkage category, Sector IVDominant/independent category 13. Micmac analysis MICMAC (Matrice d’Impacts Croisés-Multiplication Appliquée à un Classement) analysis is a tool used to identify the interdependencies among the various factors affecting a particular industry. It helps in identifying the driving factors and their impact on the industry as well as the factors that are dependent on other factors. According to the experts’ responses, the following are the finding:- a. All barrier types fall into the third Sector, demonstrating that maximum obstacles have a strong dependence power and driving power in total. b. Furthermore, expect inconsistent quality and a lack of motivating laws. All other variables are interconnected and impact one another. c. The only inconsistency in quality and a lack of motivation laws come into the second Sector, which has a high dependence power and a low driving power; nonetheless, these two obstacles are interconnected to all other factors. The proposed study couldn’t investigate any possible association between these two factors. The management of these two factors would be critical for any top management or top leader to effectively adopt GSCM in India’s leather industry. 14. Findings and managerial implications Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) refers to the integration of environmental concerns into the supply chain management process. In the Indian leather industry, there are both internal and external barriers that can affect GSCM. Understanding various barriers and their relationships will help the various stakeholders in the system to enhance the adoption of GSCM. The adoption will not only help the company follow the GSCM norms within the company but also help the supply chain outside the core supply chain. There were 13 internal barriers and 12 external barriers, which were studied in this work in detail. Out of these variables, only two were found to be highly related Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 18 of 27 Table 7. Level partitioning(LP) Elements(Mi) Reachability Set R(Mi) Antecedent Set A(Ni) Intersection Set R(Mi)���A(Ni) Level 1 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 2 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 3 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 4 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 5 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 6 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 7 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 8 8, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 8, 1 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 10 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 11 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 12 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 14 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 (Continued) Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 19 of 27 Table 7. (Continued) Elements(Mi) Reachability Set R(Mi) Antecedent Set A(Ni) Intersection Set R(Mi)���A(Ni) Level 15 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 16 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 17 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 18 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 19 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 20 20, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 20, 1 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 22 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 23 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 25 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 20 of 27 Table 8. Level Partitioning Iterations Elements(Mi) Reachability Set R(Mi) Antecedent Set A(Ni) Intersection Set R(Mi)���A(Ni) Level 1 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 2 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 3 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 4 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 5 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 6 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 7 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 8 8, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 8, 1 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 10 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 11 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 12 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 14 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 15 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, (Continued) Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 21 of 27 Table 8. (Continued) Elements(Mi) Reachability Set R(Mi) Antecedent Set A(Ni) Intersection Set R(Mi)���A(Ni) Level 16 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 17 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 18 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 19 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 20 20, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 20, 1 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 22 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 23 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 25 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 12 Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 22 of 27 Table 9. Conical matrix (Cm) Variables 8 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 Driving Power Level 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 20 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 2 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 3 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 4 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 5 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 6 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 7 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 2 9 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 2 10 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 11 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 25 2 12 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 13 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 25 2 14 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 15 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 16 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 17 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 25 2 18 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 19 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 25 2 21 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 25 2 22 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 25 2 23 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 25 2 24 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 25 2 25 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 25 2 Dependence Power 24 24 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Level 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Kumar & Joji, Cogent Business & Management (2023), 10: 2234697 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2234697 Page 23 of 27