Ssrn-Id1523785 - SCM in Retailer Industry - Walmart

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.
org
by DUKE UNIVERSITY on 11/02/09. For personal use only.
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
The Impacts of Wal-Mart:

The Rise and Consequences
of the Worlds Dominant
Retailer
Gary Geref1,2 and Michelle Christian2
1
Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness, 2 Department of Sociology,

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708; email: ggere@soc.duke.edu,
mmc22@soc.duke.edu
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009. 35:57391
Key Words
First published online as a Review in Advance on

April 6, 2009
globalization, labor, community mobilization, buyer-driven

commodity chains
The Annual Review of Sociology is online at

soc.annualreviews.org
This articles doi:
10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115947
c 2009 by Annual Reviews.
Copyright
All rights reserved
0360-0572/09/0811-0573$20.00
Abstract
Wal-Mart has been both praised and pilloried as a template for twentyrst century capitalism. Therein lies the challenge in analyzing the
worlds largest retailer. We examine the sociological impact of WalMart in terms of four themes: its business model and organizational
structure, the dual impact of Wal-Marts labor relations in terms of its
own stores and working conditions in its global supply chain, the genesis and effectiveness of community mobilizations against Wal-Mart,
and how Wal-Marts growth is linked to the emergence of buyer-driven
commodity chains in the global economy. Wal-Mart underscores the
value of a public sociology agenda that embraces three research criteria:
the incorporation of new media and audiences, the need to go global
with our research, and the ability to work for change from within.
573
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
Serious differences among social scientists occur not between those who observe without
thinking and those who would think without
observing; the differences have rather to do
with what kinds of thinking, what kinds of observing, and what kinds of links, if any, are
made between the two.
C. Wright
Imagination
Mills,
The
Sociological
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

INTRODUCTION
The adjectives used to describe Wal-Mart command a range of superlatives: retail juggernaut,
the template for a global economic order, most
inuential company in the world, cultural gatekeeper, and insidious beast. Often there is little
agreement among those who talk, write, and
research the company. Whether they fall in the
pro, anti, or middle of the road categories in the
broad Wal-Mart debate, most interpretations
regarding the retailers impact center around
ve sociologically relevant themes: Wal-Marts
business model, its economic impact, its labor
relations, its community mobilization, and
its ties to the global economy. Within these
categories are many subthemes, such as the
pursuit of everyday low prices, supply-chain
management, culture, jobs, pricing, working
conditions, and so on. Schaeffer (2003) warns
against generalizing or universalizing about
globalization, and the same can be applied to
Wal-Mart. He writes, only by taking a careful,
historical analysis of its implementation in
particular settings can any assessment be made
of its benets and disadvantages (Schaeffer
2003, p. 11). The welter of ideas and interests
surrounding this retail giant makes it virtually impossible to form blanket judgments
regarding its overall impact.
The divergent perspectives regarding
Wal-Mart are rooted in disciplinary orientations, the types of questions asked, and basic
assumptions that divide the social scientists,
humanists, and nonacademics who are writing
about Wal-Mart. Where economists (Basker
2005, Hicks 2007, Vedder & Cox 2006) have
574
Gereffi
Christian
focused on the dynamics of prices, ination,

and jobs using advanced econometric modeling, historians (French 2007, Lichtenstein
2007) highlight how Wal-Marts labor relations
connect to new capitalist forms. Researchers
in business strategy (Bergdahl 2004, Grant
2003) have surveyed the companys rise and its
operational model, whereas geographers (Graff
2006, Vias 2004) examine the spatial dimension
of Wal-Marts growth. All the disciplines
have scholars who are criticizing as well as
praising Wal-Mart for varying reasons. It is
the nonacademics, however, who are leading
the most publicly centered and contentious
investigations of Wal-Mart (Ehrenreich 2001;
Fishman 2006; National Labor Committee
2002, 2007; Norman 1999; Ortega 1998).
Where does sociology t into this mix?
Sociologists have researched Wal-Mart with
various theoretical, methodological, and
conceptual lenses, and they have touched
on many relevant contemporary topics. We
believe that sociologists can play a unique role
in connecting the multidisciplinary inquiries
into Wal-Mart, especially if a public sociology
stance is adopted. Therefore, our review includes writings by a broad set of sociologically
oriented social scientists and nonacademics.
An inclusive approach is required because
Wal-Mart has galvanized a large literature
about its sociological implications, even when
the authors are not sociologists.
This is illustrated in Lichtensteins (2006)
Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First Century Capitalism and Brunns (2006) Wal-Mart World, the
rst edited volumes in which social scientists,
historians, and activists collaborated to evaluate
the evolution, impact, and future of Wal-Marts
footprint. Both Lichtensteins and Brunns collections address the companys impact on multiple facets of society, and they serve as a model
for public sociology.
Wal-Mart also can be viewed in the context of structural changes in the global economy
and its connection to the U.S. retail revolution.
Wal-Mart is a driver and organizer of global
processes, and it garners benets from the international environment. The most common
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
Table 1
2 June 2009
9:41
Polarized themes in Wal-Mart debates

Positive
Negative
Lowers prices
Exploits labor
Supports diversity
Practices gender/racial discrimination
Increases business efciency
Pushes down wages
Provides jobs
Increases unemployment
Employs nontraditional workers
Increases poverty, welfare allocations
Industry leader
Erodes downtown business centers
Promotes environmental sustainability
Increases environmental degradation
positive and negative characteristics used to describe Wal-Mart (see Table 1) arise from this
situation, and Wal-Marts corporate culture has
adapted to this reality. Wal-Mart is the emblematic case for how giant corporations impact the
global economy via the growth of trade, foreign
direct investment, and the neoliberal agenda
of economic deregulation, which has repercussions on wages, labor relations, and communities in the United States and beyond.
The rise of Wal-Mart is signicant for
its scale, scope, and sociological relevance.
Zook & Graham (2006) note that in 2002
Wal-Mart surpassed Exxon Mobil to become
the worlds largest corporation in terms of
sales. Wal-Mart estimates that more than 200
million shoppers visit its U.S. stores each year,
including Wal-Mart supercenters, discount
stores, Neighborhood Markets, and Sams Club
warehouses. Wal-Marts statistics for 2008 help
us to grasp the magnitude of the companys
size and reach (see Table 2). Wal-Mart had
global net sales of $375 billion, over 2 million
Table 2
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., facts, 2008
Total net sales
$375 billion
Net sales, U.S.
$284 billion
Net sales, international
$91 billion
Total associates
2 million +
Total stores, U.S.
4141
Total stores, international
3121
Distribution centers
112
U.S. customers
200 million +
Suppliers
60,000 +
Countries in supplier network
55 +
Source: Wal-Mart Annual Report, http://www.

walmartfacts.com. Accessed February 2009.
employees, and 60,000 suppliers located in

more than 55 countries. One-fth of its prots
come from Wal-Mart stores located in 15 countries, and Wal-Marts global reach is expanding.
In this article we focus on Wal-Marts business model and organizational structure, its impact on labor relations, community campaigns
against the giant retailer, and its connections
to the global economy. We forgo an analysis of
the companys economic impact per se because
this eld has been well covered by economists
(see sidebar, Economic Impact Debate: Prices
versus Wages). Within our four main topics,
ECONOMIC IMPACT DEBATE: PRICES

VERSUS WAGES
The most common topics involving the economic impact of WalMarts presence are pricing, wages, and jobs. The ndings vary
according to store location and the statistical tools used by researchers to control variables outside the model (Hicks 2007).
One of the most widely cited economic ndings is that Wal-Marts
expansion from 1985 to 2004 brought savings of $263 billion to
U.S. consumers owing to reduced prices (Global Insight 2005).
Global Insight, the economic consulting rm hired by Wal-Mart
to conduct a national study of retail wages, employment, and
prices, updated this study in 2007, arguing that the cumulative
price savings after adding the years of 2005 and 2006 totaled $287
billion (Global Insight 2007). Bernstein et al. (2006, pp. 1, 4) nd
the original Global Insight study to be implausible because of
the lack of robustness of the econometric analysis as well as the
logic of their arguments. They claim that the price-versus-wages
dispute is as much a debate about politics and values as economics because the belief that lower prices are more important
than higher wages neglects the larger economic climate in terms
of the increased costs in housing, health care, and transportation.
www.annualreviews.org The Impacts of Wal-Mart
575
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
we address both the positive and negative aspects of Wal-Mart. In the concluding section,
we sketch in greater detail our view of what a
public sociology of Wal-Mart might look like.
We support Burawoys (2005) call to engage
multiple publics in multiple ways. Academic
rigor and working to create eventful change can
be complementary forces rather than contested
terrains. This is the essence of a public sociology agenda.

WAL-MARTS SOCIOLOGICAL
IMPACT
Four broad themes characterize Wal-Marts sociological impact: (a) a new business model
based on low prices and global sourcing, an
unprecedented expansion of store locations at
home and abroad, and a corporate culture that
is struggling to reconcile its conservative roots
with its cosmopolitan aspirations; (b) labor relations in the largest U.S. private employer,
which confront different issues across WalMarts global supply chain; (c) how local communities are reacting to Wal-Mart in their efforts to preserve autonomy and control; and
(d ) how Wal-Marts rise ts into broader
changes in the global economy, particularly the
emergence of buyer-driven commodity chains.
Business Model
Wal-Marts business model focuses on its discount format, location strategy, and corporate
culture. Its rise as a retail leader embodies
its commitment to business efciency and low
prices, mediated by a passion for technologydriven supply-chain management, while embracing a folksy, regional Ozark Mountains,
Arkansas, corporate culture. Recently, WalMart has reformulated its business model with
an emphasis on new social and environmental
standards that may reshape its core strategies
(Wal-Mart 2007). We highlight implications of
this shift in our public sociology section.
Discount formateveryday low prices,
organizational structure, and supply-chain
management. Wal-Marts everyday low
576
Gereffi
Christian
prices slogan shapes all its business decisions,

including the use of technology, branding,
imports, and broad supplier and labor relations.
Ortega (1998, p. xiv) writes that Wal-Mart
saw its mission as simple: offer the lowest
price. Cut costs to the bone, and keep cutting
so you can offer the lowest price. George
& Wilson (2004) argue that Wal-Mart reduces complexity in its business strategies
to maintain low costs by focusing on design
simplication and centralized communication
channels. For Bergdahl (2004, p. 3), company
founder Sam Waltons low price mantra was
solidied through the core business principles
he espoused, such as treating the customer
right, taking care of the staff, being honest
in dealings, passing savings along to the customer, keeping things simple, thinking small,
controlling costs, and constantly improving
operations.
In-store decisions such as pallet use, key item
product focus, convenient packaging, and private label brand imaging are implemented in
a way that maintains costs at the retail end,
whereas upstream activities in the supply chain
are monitored by Wal-Marts 1,000-person information division (Bianco 2006). Wal-Mart
has the largest private computer database in
the business world. It controls inventory and
distribution channels with Retail Link, centralizes in-store performance gures, and works
with suppliers to coordinate product development and vendor-managed replenishment
procedures. Because of these technical competencies, Wal-Mart has become the major
drive of technology-based productivity gains in
the American economy (Petrovic & Hamilton
2006, p. 138).
Friedman (2005) calls Wal-Marts strength
at inventory control through supply-chain
management a great attener of the world.
He labels the distribution centers that WalMart operates globally the Wal-Mart symphony with no nale; it just plays over and
over (Friedman 2005, p. 152). Wal-Mart revolutionized the speed and efciency of getting products to stores through its distribution center location strategy and cross-docking

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
techniques. All Wal-Mart stores are typically

located within a days drive of a distribution
center, and the company works closely with its
suppliers to streamline deliveries. Grant (2003,
p. 87) notes how the cross-docking process of
receiving products directly from manufacturers with little handling in between eliminates
store inventory overows. Inbound trucks are
immediately unloaded and the containers are
reloaded on outbound trucks, bypassing wait
times in warehouse inventory. Wal-Mart took
out the middleman (wholesalers/distributors)
and revolutionized stock delivery to become the
discount format leader.
Lichtenstein (2006) argues that entire countries economies revolve around Wal-Marts
supply chain because it includes so many products. The sheer size of the enterprise, in which
almost every consumer good is part of WalMarts symphony (Friedman 2005), is what
differentiates Wal-Mart from other retail innovators like Woolworths and Sears (Strasser
2006). Many researchers note, however, that
managing this symphony through the desire to
streamline its goods and follow its low-price
mandate has had a dramatic impact upon WalMarts vendors. Petrovic & Hamilton (2006,
p. 108) argue that Wal-Marts relationship with
suppliers is a market-making phenomenon
because it shapes trade, pricing, contracts, conduct, and the standards manufacturers must follow to bring goods to market. Both Petrovic
& Hamilton (2006) and Fishman (2006) view
this market-making capability as the most profound and potent of Wal-Marts effects. Bloom
& Perry (2001) nd that Wal-Mart suppliers
with high market shares (typically large multinationals) perform better than matched competitors who do not supply Wal-Mart, but suppliers with smaller market shares do not do as
well nancially.
Fishmans (2006) The Wal-Mart Effect and
Frontlines (2004) inuential documentary Is
Wal-Mart Good for America? reveal Wal-Marts
upper hand in contract negotiations with suppliers. Traditional marketing techniques for
producers, such as slotting fees for sale items,
are not allowed in Wal-Mart stores. Wal-
Mart has pushed costs onto suppliers through

more exacting product-specication demands
and relentless pressure to lower prices and improve quality. Many argue that the pressures
to continually cut costs and to improve supplychain performance have worsened conditions
in global production facilities and squeezed
out small manufacturers. Keller et al. (2006)
note that Mexican soap, detergent, and surfactant suppliers that could not attain economies
of scale often failed as vendors, but that local suppliers who were afliated with larger
transnational companies like Unilever were
more successful.
Wal-Mart has pushed for trade liberalization
to ensure a steady stream of imports, even during their ballyhooed but infamously short-lived
Buy American campaign. Wal-Mart founder
Sam Walton claims the origin of Buy American came from a trip to Central America where
he witnessed sweatshop conditions. A more accurate picture, according to Ortega (1998), is
that Walton thought the campaign would be excellent public relations and would force stiffer
competition among his suppliers. Throughout
its Buy American phase, Wal-Mart was an aggressive importer. Many of the nished consumer goods that claimed to be Made in America actually had inputs that were sourced from
abroad.1
Location strategiesdomestic ripples and
international hubs. Under founder Sam
Walton, Wal-Marts initial role was as provider
of goods for communities and rural households,
which were mostly forgotten consumers. When
it rst expanded from the Ozarks in Arkansas
to Oklahoma and Texas, Wal-Marts growth
strategy resembled concentric circles around
its distribution centers, a rippling pebble effect
(Bernstein et al. 2006, describing Dube et al.
2005). The proximity helped guarantee fast
inventory replenishment. Zook & Grahams
(2006) research on the density patterns
1
Wal-Mart opened its rst buying ofce in Hong Kong in

1981, and by 1985, 43% of all apparel sold by Wal-Mart was
imported (Ortega 1998, pp. 2045).
577
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
surrounding Wal-Mart stores reveals that 60%

of the entire U.S. population lives within 5 miles
of a Wal-Mart location and 96% are within
20 miles and that there is an inverse relationship between population density and the number of stores (pp. 2021).
As Wal-Mart grew, it became a shrewd business negotiator, demanding tax breaks, infrastructure improvements, and zoning changes
from localities. In a widely referenced report,
Good Jobs First estimated that Wal-Mart has
received upwards of $1 billion in subsidies and
tax breaks for 244 of its stores and distribution centers (Mattera & Purinton 2004). The
most recent November 2008 report from Good
Jobs First claims Wal-Mart keeps more than
$70 million per year in sales taxes through sales
tax diversion programs (Mattera & McIlvaine
2008, p. i). The size of the subsidies and WalMarts habit of closing or relocating stores in order to open supercenters nearby, often creating
grayelds or ghostboxesabandoned, slightly
used, vacant commercial real estateis commonly maligned by critics for its potential to
create neighborhood blight.
Creating supercenters was one of WalMarts most important growth strategies. Graff
(2006) argues that since Wal-Mart opened its
rst supercenter (i.e., a grocery store with general merchandise) in Washington, Missouri, in
1988, it has destabilized traditional grocery retailing. Grocery stores, whose workers are commonly unionized, have less turnover and higher
overheads and thus nd it hard to compete.
Fishman (2006) writes that since the onset of
Wal-Marts supercenter strategy, 31 supermarket chains have sought bankruptcy protection,
with 27 of them directly citing Wal-Mart as
part of their decline. In 2003, Wal-Mart surpassed Kroger to become the largest grocery
chain in the United States, although its market share varies across U.S. metropolitan areas
(Lord 2006).
Wal-Marts entry into the grocery retail sector helped fuel its internationalization process. Global markets offered the attraction of
potentially rapid economic development, increased consumer spending, and the ability for

ANRV381-SO35-27
578
Gereffi
Christian
multinational retailers to leverage their superior distribution/logistics and information

technology systems (Wrigley & Lowe 2002,
pp. 16162). Wal-Mart purchased ASDA, a UK
supermarket chain, in 1999. Wal-Mart brought
technological efciencies and new supplier relations to ASDAs business format, along with a
stronger role for multinational suppliers (Burt
& Sparks 2006a).
Supermarket growth, particularly in developing countries where a supermarket revolution is taking place (Reardon et al. 2004), is impacting local food production systems in lasting
ways. As in the United States, Wal-Mart has
attempted to push out middlemen in Mexico
and Honduras and source directly from growers, most recently from agricultural producers
and small-scale farms, as witnessed through its
agreements with the Yucatecan farmers cooperative and Honduran producers (Biles 2006,
Charles 2008). The latter strategy could be a
mixed blessing for farmers. On the one hand,
they receive more money for their produce
from Wal-Mart and they are participating in
the global economy, but on the other hand they
are also subject to stricter standards and regulation that many cooperatives do not have the
capital to meet (Dolan & Humphrey 2004). Ultimately, though, the lure of participating in the
global economy is powerful.
Despite the strength of its U.S. supercenter
growth, Wal-Marts expansion to overseas
locations has not been a completely smooth
process. Although the company has prospered
in Mexico, the United Kingdom, and Canada,
it has oundered in Germany, South Korea,
Japan, Hong Kong, and Indonesia. Wal-Marts
expansion abroad has been a very uneven process. As Tilly (2007, p. 1809) writes, Despite
important commonalities, a global Wal-Mart
is a varied Wal-Mart. In its global expansion
strategy, Wal-Mart has participated in joint
ventures (Mexico, Brazil, China) and straight
acquisitions (Canada, United Kingdom,
Germany), as well as smaller investments
( Japan) (Luo 2002).
Burt & Sparks (2006b) describe Wal-Marts
internationalization process as having three

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
phases: The rst involved expansion to adjacent

markets (Canada, Mexico), which was considered successful; the second was a world-market
focus, where Wal-Marts moves were limited
by regulatory issues and the incompatibility
of some facets of its business model; and the
last was a strategic planning approach in which
Wal-Mart concentrated on key locations, such
as China. For Govindarajan & Gupta (2001),
the only way for Wal-Mart to win local battles
internationally is to adapt to the landscape and
to balance customer demands with Wal-Marts
core business model.
According to Geref & Ong (2007, p. 46),
to succeed abroad, particularly in China, WalMart confronts three strategic imperatives: go
global, go native, go upmarket. Over 80% of
the more than 60,000 factories in Wal-Marts
database of suppliers are in China, with projected estimates for Chinese-sourced projects
reaching $30 billion by 2010 (Bianco 2006,
p. 15). The retailers global procurement ofce
is located in Shenzhen, and it has a network
of more than a dozen eld ofces around the
world, sourcing from more than 60 countries
(Bonacich & Wilson 2006; also Frontline 2004).
Although Wal-Marts local supplier network is
robust, inefciencies in distribution channels
and stiff competition have limited its expansion in China (Burt & Sparks 2006b). Nonetheless, according to Lo et al. (2006, pp. 323, 325),
Chinese shoppers are appreciative of the rms
localization strategy, spacious, clean, and airconditioned stores, and its symbol of globalization and modernization.
Tilly & Alvarez

Galvan (2006) note that
Wal-Mart in Mexico has adopted much of the
companys main business model but differs
regarding its wages and its nominal acceptance
of unionization. (The unions in Mexicos
Wal-Mart are labeled protection contracts.)
Wal-Marts pullout from Germany in 2006,
losing an estimated $200 million every year of
its eight-year operation, was its greatest failure
(Christopherson 2006, 2007). Christopherson
(2007) blames Wal-Marts inability to change
its business model to cater to Germanys regulatory environment and social norms, which
include working with consultative organizations and collective bargaining agreements,

as the most important reason for its demise.
Citing regulatory, cultural, and competitive
problems in the cases of Wal-Mart in Germany
and Japan, Aoyama & Schwarz (2006) contend
that there is a myth of Wal-Martization with
regard to its global inuence. Wal-Mart faced
additional cultural and market challenges in
Japan that limit its success there (IGD 2002).
In South Korea, Wal-Mart found that its
bare-bones warehouse retail style turned away
South Korean customers and that local distribution channels were weak. Han et al. (2002)
argue that the lack of a competitive supply chain
that cultivated relationships with supply-chain
partners hastened the companys fall. Halepete
et al. (2008, pp. 7057) claim that Wal-Mart also
misunderstood the local retail market, which
cultivates a festive social setting and the
expectations of customers who wanted more
value-priced food rather than electronics.
Moreover, many local Korean retailers actually
launched Buy Korean campaigns as a way to
compete with the U.S. retail giant.
Notwithstanding its spotty international
record, Wal-Mart now hopes to break into the
burgeoning Indian market. The company has
entered into a joint venture with Bharti Enterprises, the countrys largest mobile phone company. The challenges the company faces in India are immense (Halepete et al. 2008). The
heterogeneity of the billion-plus population,
with highly diverse values, food habits, buying
power, and access to transportation and markets, makes product specication difcult. In
addition, the company faces competition from
the 12 million family-run kirana stores that
know local preferences and offer competitive
prices (Halepete et al. 2008, p. 709). Wal-Marts
potential success will depend on appreciating
these local demands and nding solutions to the
countrys infrastructure and supply-chain problems, which make efcient and low-cost distribution complicated.
Corporate culture. Wal-Mart corporate
culture is often characterized as praising
579
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
small-town values, hard work, conformism,

and strong patriotism. This is a testament to
Wal-Marts roots in the Ozark Mountains of
Arkansas, where homogeneity, isolation, and
rural development forged an All-American
brand for the average familya market segment Sam Walton felt was ignored by city
retailers. The corporate culture envisioned by
Sam Walton fostered boisterous annual shareholder meetings and company cheers, strict
employee manuals outlining behavior expectations and testimonials about why unions are
bad, and Management Tool Boxes that teach
managers how to prevent and bust unions. For
Scanlon (2005, p. 175), Wal-Mart supports
a culture that allows for the performance
of patriotism through consumerism. Annual
meetings are cultural events, where Wal-Mart
values are gloried and the spirit of Sam Walton
is deied. The annual meeting can be seen as a
monologue from the top that perpetuates uneven power relations while mythologizing the
creation of equality (Schneider 1998, p. 299).
Researchers highlight how Wal-Mart tries
to connect its corporate culture to the symbolic
roots of American lifehard work, democracy, patriotism, and consumerism (Warf &
Chapman 2006, Arnold et al. 2006). Zukin
(2004, p. 80) notes that by distributing consumer goods with everyday low prices, the
company has helped spearhead a new order
of shopping. She argues that low prices dene our conception of democracy and that
Wal-Mart has attempted to create a universal space where class lines disappear in the
name of value. The Wal-Martization is described by Lichtenstein (2006, p. 17) as Christian entrepreneurial and faux egalitarianism.
For Bosshart (2006), it is the paradox between
the processes of globalization that make products faster, better, cheaper, and bigger, while
accelerating inequality.
Wal-Marts corporate culture is most visible in its management style that centers
around increased prots, while Christian values, frugality, hard work, loyalty, and patriotism are praised (Rosen 2006, Hoopes 2006).
This management style cultivates a workforce

ANRV381-SO35-27
580
Gereffi
Christian
environment in which conformism is praised

and individualism is frowned upon. Associates
were expected by managers to embody WalMarts people philosophy and Sam Waltons
cultural beliefs of respect for the individual,
serve the customer, and strive for excellence
(Bergdahl 2004). Most importantly, however,
the managers key goal is to maintain costs.
Bergdahl (2004) notes how managers are measured by the overarching goal of increasing
sales and minimizing costs. The centralization
of Wal-Marts operation, which controls managers budgets and the number of workers they
can hire, leaves little room for management autonomy or divergence from authority coming
from Wal-Marts headquarters in Bentonville,
Arkansas (Rosen 2006).
Wal-Marts Direct and Indirect

Impact on Labor Relations
How Wal-Mart treats its workers (known in
the company as associates), and the behavior
of the companys global suppliers toward its
workers, is a subject of intense controversy
by labor unions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and academics alike. According to Tilly (2007, pp. 182122), Wal-Mart
is willing to develop different labor strategies
and business forms, depending on the market, institutions, and culture of the host countries where it operates. The economic literature
also reveals that Wal-Marts employment practices vary considerably (Vias 2004, Ketchum &
Hughes 1997, Basker 2005, Stone 1997).
Wal-Marts labor strategies have had major
sociological consequences. Lichtenstein (2006,
p. 8) argues that Wal-Mart is a leading force
behind the most sweeping process of proletarian industrialization since the dawn of
the factory revolution nearly two centuries
ago. The reproletarianization process is situated in a revamped global economy that
strengthened the power of transnational retailers, eroded New Deal legislation, and helped
to create a large pool of low-skill service jobs
around the worlda process that connects
sales clerks in Bentonville to truck drivers at

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
the U.S.-Mexico border and line workers in

Guangdong.
Bair & Bernstein (2006) echo Lichtensteins
sentiment that the true power of the company
is witnessed in its ability to shape labor relations beyond the organizational connes of its
retail empire. Indirect workers (those in WalMarts global supply chain) and competitors
workers (other retail outlets) feel Wal-Marts
inuence in their relations with their direct employers. Harris (2006) claims that even ecofriendly Whole Foods is following Wal-Marts
antiunion stance.
Wal-Marts indirect impact on workers can
be seen in the logistics sector. Bair & Bernstein
(2006) document Wal-Marts inuence on
the Southern California grocery workers of
the United Food and Commercial Workers
(UFCW) Union, which wanted to strike against
the supermarket chains. The threat of WalMarts entry into Southern California forced
supermarkets to reduce costs, which inhibited
union and supermarket contract negotiations.
Bonacich and colleagues claim that unionized
logistics workers felt the push from part-time
and noncontract workers (Bonacich & Wilson
2005, 2006; Bonacich & Hardie 2006). Because
of these workers racial and immigrant status,
the authors assert, Wal-Mart feels less pressure to ensure basic worker rights, and this undercuts the drive of part-time and noncontract
workers for unionization. In February 2009,
Wal-Mart settled a racial discrimination lawsuit
for $17.5 million. The suit claimed that WalMart discriminated against African Americans
in the recruitment and hiring of truck drivers
for their private eet (Swift 2009).
Employees of Wal-Marts vast global supply
chain may also be considered an indirect workforce. The working conditions experienced by
Wal-Marts suppliers abroad rst gained public
notoriety in the Dateline NBC television expose
on child labor in Bangladesh. In an interview
with Dateline, then Wal-Mart CEO David Glass
stated that Bangladeshi children should be seen
differently from American children (Ortega
1998, p. xiv). This was followed by the Kathie
Lee Gifford scandal. Giffords Wal-Mart line of
apparel was being produced in Central America with a workforce that included underage
children. Wal-Mart and Gifford blamed their
suppliers and tried to deny their responsibility.
Brooks (2005) argues that the focus on child
labor, however, blunts an analysis of other violations such as gender, class, and age discrimination that are chronic in global supply chains,
such as those orchestrated by Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart originally began monitoring its
offshore suppliers in the early 1990s. Li (2007)
argues that the companys codes of conduct lack
transparency and accountability, particularly in
a Chinese context. Wai-ling (2005) notes that
labor disputes on Chinese shop oors have increased, and workers are beginning to press for
change. However, the companys global stance
on unions seems malleable rather than rigid.
Tilly (2007, p. 1816) writes, When it comes to
unionization, Wal-Mart appears to ght unions
in rich countries but accommodate them in
poorer ones.
Almost all of Wal-Marts international associates are unionized, but the levels and forms
of unionization vary. In China the unions are
state sponsored and make up part of the ofcial All China Federation of Trade Unions;
strikes are banned. In Mexico, Tilly & Alvarez

Galvan (2006), claim the unions are invisible,
but in Brazil the unions are leftist and militant
leaning. Nevertheless, the companys antiunion
stance in the United States and Canada remains
strong, as witnessed by Wal-Marts decision to
close a Quebec tire center in October 2008
that became unionized (Tomesco & Bell 2008)
and a similar store closing in 2005 in Quebec
and the elimination of unionized meat cutters
in Jacksonville, Texas, in 2000 (Bianco 2006).
This resolve will be further tested in 2009 as
some U.S. Democratic lawmakers are expected
to push for the passage of the Employee Free
Choice Act, a law that will make unionization
easier, particularly by eliminating secret-ballot
elections (Greenhouse 2009).
The labor theme, more than any, has galvanized activists and unions to conduct their own
studies and issue reports that document working conditions in Wal-Mart facilities around the
581
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
world. Human Rights Watch conducted an indepth study of Wal-Marts domestic employee
relations (Pier 2007), and the National Labor
Committee (2002, 2007) examined working
conditions in the supply chains of top U.S.
retailers and marketers, including Wal-Mart.
The advocacy group Wal-Mart Watch (2007)
has also issued reports. Recently, SweatFree
Communities (2008) highlighted abuses in a
Bangladeshi company that primarily supplies
Wal-Mart. Although these reports are not academically based, they help us to understand the
sociological impact of Wal-Mart, and they t
into the public sociology agenda on Wal-Mart
that we address at the end of this review.
Many of these studies, along with rst-hand
accounts of Wal-Mart workers and suppliers
(Pierce 2006, Oluleye 2007, Ehrenreich 2001),
highlight mechanisms Wal-Mart uses to control labor costs for direct employees, such as
using part-time and nontraditional labor, having associates work off the clock or through
breaks, aggressively ghting unions, cultivating
a climate of fear, and instituting wage disparities between men and women. Many of these
mechanisms are the focus of lawsuits. The company reached a settlement of $33 million in a
case with the U.S. Department of Labor involving violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Acts overtime provisions. The case involved
87,000 salaried and hourly workers who were
not paid at the proper overtime rates. As of
2007, there were over 80 wage violation cases
pending against Wal-Mart (Wal-Mart Watch
2007).
Wal-Mart is accused of civil rights violations
as well (Seligman 2006). The company is currently involved in the largest class action civil
rights case in Dukes v. Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is
charged to be in breach of Title VII of the 1964
Civil Rights Act owing to gender discrimination in promotions, job placement, and pay. In
Selling Women Short, Featherstone (2004) tells
the personal stories of many of the plaintiffs
in the case. The stories of Cleo Page, Christine Kwapnoski, and Deborah Gunter put a face
to what the sociologist expert witness in the
case, William Bielby, labels pervasive discrim-

ANRV381-SO35-27
582
Gereffi
Christian
ination made possible by Wal-Marts company

culture (Featherstone 2004, p. 68). Alleged discriminatory mechanisms included not posting
job openings, excluding women from the informal all boys networks, segregating women
into female departments, and using stereotypical gender assumptions to justify lower paid job
assignments for female workers. In February
2009, Wal-Mart received a minor victory in the
case when a Californian federal appeals court
agreed to reconsider whether the lawsuit will
proceed as a class action case (Swift 2009).
Community MobilizationSite Fights

The expansion of Wal-Mart has led numerous
U.S. communities to mobilize site ghts against
the company. Some academic studies chronicle
the success or failure of these anti-Wal-Mart
movements (Halebsky 2006, DeWeese-Boyde
2006, Walker et al. 2006, Barcus 2006), whereas
others focus more broadly on issues like a living
wage (Robinson 2004) and the politics of local
community development (Bianchi & Swinney
2003, Mitchell 2006, Norman 1999, Shuman
2006). Similar to the case of the labor relations
literature, these works are often instigated by
community activists and not academics. Most
are impassioned pleas for community control
that explain how to partake in site battles. They
are sociologically pertinent because, like labor activism, they symbolize how Wal-Mart
has spurred new forms of community mobilization against the scale and scope of global
retailers.
Wal-Mart has spent large sums of money
to combat these community initiatives. WalMart Watch (2008) estimates that there are 69
current site ghts against the company as of
August 2008. Halebsky (2006) studied six antisuperstore conicts in small cities to determine
which movements were most likely to succeed.
He found that success was determined by ve
criteria: widespread opposition, broadly framed
issues, media support, no counter movement,
and key mistakes made by Wal-Mart in ghting the opposition. The last characteristic is also
attributed to Wal-Mart losing site ght battles
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
in Flagstaff, Arizona, and Inglewood, California

(Bianco 2006, Fishman 2006).

Global Retailers and Buyer-Driven

Commodity Chains
The nal area of research on Wal-Mart is
less about Wal-Mart specically and more on
the global environment that fostered WalMarts rise. Whereas the global division of labor
characterized by Wallersteins (1974) worldsystem paradigm focused on core, peripheral,
and semiperipheral states that occupied distinct production roles as manufacturers (core)
and input suppliers (periphery/semiperiphery),
contemporary globalization has generated a
new division of labor that involves the production of goods and services in cross-border
value-added activities that redene the kind of
production processes contained within national
boundaries (Geref 2005, p. 163).
Dicken (2007) posits that the landscape of
contemporary global economic structures is
one of fragmentation and dispersion, based
on supply chains that extend beyond national
boundaries. Although transnational manufacturers initially pioneered the search for cheap
offshore labor through the use of exportprocessing zones to make consumer goods like
clothes, shoes, and toys, they were displaced in
the 1970s and 1980s by global sourcing networks set up by retailers (Sears, JC Penney,
Kmart, and Wal-Mart, among others) and marketers (such as Nike, Liz Claiborne, The Gap,
and Disney). These new global buyers gave the
orders, specications, and product standards
to their international suppliers, and thus they
pioneered the shift from producer-driven to
buyer-driven global commodity chains (Geref
1994, 2005). According to McMichael (2008),
the world during this period moved from the
development project to the globalization
project.
The edited volumes by Geref &
Korzeniewicz (1994) and Bair (2009) examine how these new sourcing networks in
the global economy have evolved to transform
production relationships between global buyers, local suppliers, and their associated workforces around the world (also Dicken 2007).
Large global retailers such as Wal-Mart play a
particularly powerful role in this international
subcontracting system. U.S. retailers led the
way, as they cut back on their domestic orders to
take advantage of the opportunity for increased
imports, and they became more concentrated
in the process (Wrigley & Lowe 2002). New
chain specialty stores, such as The Gap, Home
Depot, and Best Buy, emerged alongside the
large discount retailers, such as Target, Kmart,
and Wal-Mart (Petrovic & Hamilton 2006). As
buyer-driven commodity chains with retailers
like Wal-Mart became fully established, they
also created demand-responsive economies in
East Asia, such as Taiwan and South Korea
(Hamilton & Geref 2009).
Offshore procurement was made more efcient with technological innovations in supplychain management. Retailers invested in technology such as Universal Product Codes (UPC)
and distribution centers to curtail overstocking
and to satisfy customer preferences. The new
economic development models that advocated
export-led growth in developing countries were
creating the capabilities to meet the needs of the
global buyers in the form of lean retailing and
just-in-time delivery (Abernathy et al. 1999).
Halebsky (2004) calls this the rationalization
of retail development.
This is the global context in which WalMart became the worlds biggest retailer. This
also led to a de facto joint venture between
Wal-Mart and the worlds largest exporter of
low-cost goods, China (Geref & Ong 2007).
The documentary Is Wal-Mart Good for America? explores this phenomenon, as does its
supplementary Web site in a section called
The China Connection (Frontline 2004). The
strong ties between Wal-Mart and China have
fueled U.S. labor and NGO opposition to WalMarts global sourcing model on the grounds
that it promotes a race to the bottom in terms
of favoring countries with relatively weak labor
and environmental standards.
583
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
A PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY VIEW OF

WAL-MARTS ROLE IN SOCIETY

The writers who are part of the four themes

we highlight encompass the entire spectrum of
the Wal-Mart debate. Whereas those who focus on the business model and global economic
context of the company tend to take a more analytical stance devoid of nal judgment, writers in the labor relations and community mobilization camps have veered to the negative
side of the debate. Researchers who contribute
to the economic impact literature, although
not part of this review, are positioned on both
ends of the spectrum (see sidebar, above, Economic Impact Debate: Prices versus Wages).
Overall, the range of perspectives regarding
Wal-Mart is rooted, as critical sociologist C.
Wright Mills (2000) wrote nearly 50 years
ago, in the type of thinking, observing, and
links researchers and writers make between the
two.
Sociology as a discipline has a unique capability to bring together the disparate research
strategies and views on Wal-Mart. Burawoy
(2005) highlighted the role of public sociology in his 2004 American Sociological Association presidential address. His typology of
sociologistsprofessional, policy, public, and
criticalis a useful bridge in considering the
literature on Wal-Mart because the labels cater
to different standards, goals, and research audiences. What separates a public sociology
agenda from ordinary research is that knowledge is not left within the connes of academia.
It educates and helps to promote desirable
change. This is only possible by acknowledging that all kinds of research are needed: In
Burawoys (2005) typology, they can be harnessed toward an organic solidarity and
interdependence, all the while representing
a public form creating both reexive and
instrumental knowledge.
As sociologists, we have the tools to understand how Wal-Mart and other corporations
play a powerful role in distributing societal resources and benets. This characteristic allows
meaningful engagement in the Wal-Mart debate that ts into the four literatures we have
584
Gereffi
Christian
outlined. For us, this engagement entails a form

of public sociology based on three objectives:
(a) embrace new media, (b) go global, and
(c) work for change from within.
New Media
Academics have been slow to adopt new ways of
presenting their work that go beyond the traditional book and peer-reviewed journal format.
We should also not be conned to the customary public sociology venues, like op-eds and
newspapers. Web sites, blogs, and documentaries are looking at Wal-Mart in ways sociologists should embrace. We also need to cater our
research and writing style to a wider audience.
We can learn from journalists like Ehrenreich,
who wrote Nickel and Dimed (2001), Featherstone, who wrote Selling Women Short (2004),
and Fishman, who authored The Wal-Mart Effect (2006). Lichtensteins (2006) edited volume
is a good example of an effective public sociology text. Based on an interdisciplinary conference, he brought together a diverse group of
writers, theorists, and activists to focus on WalMart based on their research traditions and expertise, which led to an extremely accessible and
informative volume.
Although books and journal articles are still
highly valued publication forms, the future may
lie in Internet Web sites, blogs, and documentaries. These sites are reaching new audiences as
a means of education, debate, and change. The
two most popular Wal-Mart sites, Wal-Mart
Watch
(http://www.walmartwatch.com)
and WakeUp Wal-Mart (http://www.
wakeupwalmart.com), incorporate factsheets, organizer recommendations, media
reports, and publications, and they provide
fora for personal stories and commentary.
These Web sites/blogs are sometimes chastised
for their activist positions and special interest
funding (e.g., labor unions),2 but they are
undeniably reaching a wide audience.
2
The UFCW union launched WakeUp Wal-Mart, and the

Service Employees International Union gave $1 million in
seed money for Wal-Mart Watch, although the latter is a

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
One of the biggest accomplishments of

these fora is in creating an interactive userfriendly interface to address sociological phenomena (Wal-Mart Watchs issues section includes entries on corporate culture, supply
chain, labor relations, environment, health
care, and discrimination). Wal-Mart has fought
back through its own Web site, http://
www.walmartfacts.com, and also with its own
controversial blogs, Working Families for WalMart and Wal-Marting Across America.3 The
company has recently launched a mommy
bloggers initiative where moms make videos
on how to save money.
Documentaries are another medium that
captures the publics attention while dissecting complex subjects into tangible examples,
such as Robert Greenwalds (2005) documentary Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices and
PBSs Frontline (2004), Is Wal-Mart Good For
America? They combine academic commentary,
including several sociologists, along with personal stories of individuals whose lives were altered by Wal-Mart in some way. Pelads (2001)
documentary Store Wars, which focuses on community mobilization against Wal-Mart, is another example.
Go Global
A second challenge for public sociology is to
go global. As the research on Wal-Mart has
shown, Wal-Marts growth has been conditioned by a number of broad trends, historical events, mitigating circumstances, and diverse institutional arrangements (Brunn 2006).
Wal-Mart may have started in a rural mountain town in Arkansas, but its reach, inuence,
and continued growth have touched individuals and groups from workers in the Pearl River
Delta in China, to farmers in Chile, truckers in
Mexico, and consumers in Brazil. These actors
coalition of various social groups, including labor, environmental, and religious organizations.
3
Wal-Mart has disbanded http://workingfamiliesforwalmart.

com owing to criticism that it was a fake blog.
need to be on our research agenda, and we need

to be working with international sociologists in
local research settings to do more comparative
research.
Change from Within

Lastly, public sociology includes engagement
with Wal-Mart itself. Dialogue and interrogation with Wal-Mart may lead to quicker and
more lasting results than direct confrontation.
A key question is: How can Wal-Mart become part of the solution? Given Wal-Marts
size, power, and global reach, working to make
change from within the company, or pressuring
the company from outside but through direct
engagement with it, can revolutionize the ability to create lasting change throughout all segments of society. Fishman (2006, p. 181) writes
that the result could be a completely new kind
of Wal-Mart effect. Many large companies are
now driven to pursue more socially responsible initiatives for intrinsic as well as extrinsic
reasons. Milton Friedmans famous claim that
corporations only responsibility is to increase
prots is increasingly without merit if corporations share responsibility for societal problems
and their solutions.
Since former CEO Lee Scotts 2005 speech
entitled Twenty First Century Leadership,
Wal-Mart has been engaged in a wellpublicized campaign to recast its business
model. Low prices are still the baseline, but
the company is now making a strong business
case for more ethical practices with regard to
supplier relations, labor, and the environment.
The environment has been a central focus for
Wal-Mart in this regard (see sidebar on WalMarts Environmental Initiatives). In October
2008, it unveiled a new agreement with over
20,000 Chinese suppliers, who will be expected
in 2009 to meet new environmental and social
standards. Plans are also in the works for a Sustainability Index Summit with multiple stakeholders (Birchall 2008, Roberts 2008). WalMart has started a Jobs and Opportunity Zone
program to help small businesses in the markets they are entering. In the area of supplier
585
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41

WAL-MARTS ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES

Wal-Mart claims that it has always had a concern for the environment, including instituting recycling into its early business model
(McInerney & White 1995). Since former CEO Lee Scotts 2005
speech Twenty First Century Leadership, however, the company proclaimed that environmental sustainability would be a staple for all of the companys business decisions (Wal-Mart 2005).
Wal-Mart has lofty goals such as zero waste, 100% renewable
energy, and more sustainable products (Wal-Mart 2007). These
initiatives, to date, have been greeted with both praise and skepticism. Some critics such as the Big Box Collaborative of 23 nonprot organizations have questioned Wal-Marts commitment
and motivation (Miu 2007, Barbaro 2008). Nevertheless, prominent NGOs such as Environmental Defense Fund, which has
set up an ofce near Wal-Marts headquarters in Bentonville,
Arkansas, believe that working with Wal-Mart may bring forth
faster and better changes in the long run. The future relationship
between Wal-Mart and these organizations highlights the tradeoffs NGOs face in working directly with corporations. Are incremental and selective environmental initiatives better than none,
or does partnering with Wal-Mart to promote change damage
the credibility of the environmental movement? These are crucial and ongoing questions for researchers and advocates alike.
labor standards, they have reemphasized their

Ethical Standards Program, conducting 16,700
audits in 8,873 companies in 2006 (Wal-Mart
2006). Lastly, in health care they are working
to create more accessible and affordable health
care for their associates and customers, even
carrying out discussions with Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International
Union.
These initiatives do not mean that the negative fallout from Wal-Mart has ceased or that
Wal-Mart has truly implemented meaningful
change. Wal-Mart has been accused of making changes for public relations purposes. Their
ethical standards audits were self-administered,
and only 26% of them were unannounced
(Wal-Mart 2006).4 Furthermore, their green
initiatives do not tackle larger environmental
concerns regarding the big-box retail format.
Nevertheless, their efforts provide an opening
to work with the company to address the insights and concerns of their multiple stakeholders. They also provide an important area for further research by sociologists regarding the conditions under which large rms might change
their business models and the implications of
such shifts at both local and global levels.
A public sociology stance does not require
a partisan position. Synergies can be pursued
between disciplines, and bridges can be built.
Massey is correct when he argues that effective
action requires an accurate understanding of
the groups and structures one seeks to modify
(quoted in Clawson et al. 2007, p. 13). Without empirically driven studies, solid arguments
cannot be made, but without engagement and
accountability to multiple publics, particularly
those who are most marginalized and without
voice, social research might miss opportunities
to generate knowledge in the service of society.
By examining the impacts of one of most powerful global companies in contemporary capitalism, recent research on Wal-Mart shows how
we can also advance a public sociology template
for the twenty-rst century.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The authors are not aware of any biases that might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this
review.
LITERATURE CITED
Abernathy FH, Dunlop JT, Hammond JH, Weil D. 1999. A Stitch in Time: Lean Retailing and the Transformation
of ManufacturingLessons From the Apparel and Textile Industries. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
4
According to the companys most recent factsheet, they are attempting to create a single third party auditing system for
retailers, which may help improve their auditing standards.

586
Gereffi
Christian

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
Aoyama Y, Schwarz G. 2006. The myth of Wal-Martization: retail globalization and local competition in
Japan and Germany. See Brunn 2006, pp. 27591
Arnold SJ, Bu N, Gerhard U, Pioch E, Sun Z. 2006. The institutional semiotics of Wal-Mart yers and signage
in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and China. See Brunn 2006, pp. 14362
Bair J, ed. 2009. Frontiers of Commodity Chain Research. Palo Alto: Stanford Univ. Press
Bair J, Bernstein S. 2006. Labor and the Wal-Mart effect. See Brunn 2006, pp. 99113
Barbaro M. 2008. Wal-Marts detractors come in from the cold. New York Times, June 5. http://www.
nytimes.com/2008/06/05/business/05walmart.html?scp=1&sq=Wal-Mart%20Watch&st=cse
Barcus H. 2006. Wal-Mart-scapes in rural and small-town America. See Brunn 2006, pp. 6375
Basker E. 2005. Job creation or destruction? Labor market effects of Wal-Mart expansion. Rev. Econ. Stat.
87(1):17483
Bergdahl M. 2004. What I Learned from Sam Walton: How to Compete and Thrive in a Wal-Mart World. Hoboken:
Wiley
Bernstein J, Bivens J, Dube A. 2006. Wrestling with Wal-Mart: tradeoffs between prots, prices and wages. Work.
Pap. 276, Econ. Policy Inst., Washington, DC
Bianchi D, Swinney D. 2003. Wal-Mart: a destructive force for Chicago communities and companies. Spec. Rep.
New Chicago Sch. Community Econ. Dev., Cent. Labor Community Res., Chicago, IL
Bianco A. 2006. The Bully of Bentonville: How the High Cost of Wal-Marts Everyday Low Prices Is Hurting America.
New York: Doubleday
Biles J. 2006. Globalization of food retailing and the consequences of Wal-Martization in Mexico. See Brunn
2006, pp. 34355
Birchall J. 2008. Wal-Mart seeks green in China. Financ. Times, Oct. 21. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/
67a5e066-9faa-11dd-a3fa-000077b07658.html?nclick check=1
Bloom P, Perry V. 2001. Retailer power and supplier welfare: the case of Wal-Mart. J. Retail. 77:37996
Bonacich E, Hardie K. 2006. Wal-Mart and the logistics revolution. See Lichtenstein 2006, pp. 16387
Bonacich E, Wilson J. 2005. Hoisted by its own petard: organizing Wal-Marts logistics workers. New Labor
Forum 14(2):6775
Bonacich E, Wilson J. 2006. Global production and distribution: Wal-Marts global logistics empire (with
special reference to the China/Southern California connection). See Brunn 2006, pp. 22742
Bosshart D. 2006. Cheap: The Real Cost of the Global Trend for Bargains, Discounts and Consumer Choice. Philadelphia: Kogan Page
Brooks E. 2005. Transnational campaigns against child labor: the garment industry in Bangladesh. In Coalitions
Across Borders: Transnational Protests and the Neoliberal Order, ed. J Bandy, J Smith, pp. 12139. Lanham,
MD: Rowan & Littleeld
Brunn S, ed. 2006. Wal-Mart World: The Worlds Biggest Corporation in the Global Economy. New York: Routledge
Burawoy M. 2005. For public sociology. Am. Sociol. Rev. 70(1):428
Burt S, Sparks L. 2006a. ASDA: Wal-Mart in the United Kingdom. See Brunn 2006, pp. 24360
Burt S, Sparks L. 2006b. Wal-Marts world. See Brunn 2006, pp. 2743
Charles D. 2008. The supermarket revolution moves into Honduras. National Public Radio, Aug. 5.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93050486
Christopherson S. 2006. Challenges facing Wal-Mart in the German market. See Brunn 2006, pp. 26174
Christopherson S. 2007. Barriers to US style lean retailing: the case of Wal-Marts failure in Germany.
J. Econ. Geogr. 7:45169
Clawson D, Zussman R, Misra J, Gerstel N, Stokes R, et al., eds. 2007. Public Sociology: Fifteen Eminent
Sociologists Debate Politics & the Profession in the Twenty-First Century. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press.
DeWeese-Boyde M. 2006. Community versus development? Land use and development policy in Vermont as
a tool toward community viability. Community Dev. 41(3):33451
Dicken P. 2007. Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. New York: Guilford. 5th
ed.
Dolan C, Humphrey J. 2004. Changing governance patterns in the trade in fresh vegetables between Africa
and the United Kingdom. Environ. Plan. A 36:491509
Ehrenreich B. 2001. Nickel and Dimed. On (Not) Getting By in America. New York: Owl Books
Spurred by Burawoys
(2005) presidential
address to the American
Sociological
Association, sociologists
debate legitimacy,
academic standards,
knowledge production,
disciplinary boundaries,
and power and privilege
in sociology.
587

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
Wal-Marts supplier
relations, impact on
communities, American
jobs, and close ties with
China are addressed
with academic
commentary by
sociologists (Gary
Gereffi and Edna
Bonacich) and other
observers; narration by
Hedrick Smith.
588
9:41
Featherstone L. 2004. Selling Women Short: The Landmark Battle in Workers Rights at Wal-Mart. New York:
Basic Books
Fishman C. 2006. The Wal-Mart Effect: How the Worlds Most Powerful Company Really Worksand How Its
Transforming the American Economy. New York: Penguin
French JD. 2007. Wal-Mart, retail supremacy, and the relevance of political economy: the intermestic challenge
of contemporary research (academic, agitational, and constructive). Labor Stud. Work. Class Am. 4(1):3340
Friedman TL. 2005. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Farrar, Straus &
Giroux
Frontline. 2004. Is Wal-Mart Good for America? Public Broadcasting System (PBS) television documentary, Nov. 16. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/etc/script.html.
George M, Wilson S. 2004. Conquering Complexity in Your Business: How Wal-Mart, Toyota, and Other Top
Companies Are Breaking Through the Ceiling on Prots and Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill
Geref G. 1994. The organization of buyer-driven global commodity chains: how U.S. retailers shape overseas
production networks. See Geref & Korzeniewicz 1994, pp. 95122
Geref G. 2005. The global economy: organization, governance, and development. In The Handbook of Economic
Sociology, ed. N Smelser, R Swedberg, pp. 16082. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. 2nd ed.
Geref G, Korzeniewicz M, eds. 1994. Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism. Westport, CT: Greenwood
Geref G, Ong R. 2007. Wal-Mart in China: Can the worlds largest retailer succeed in the worlds most
populous market? Harvard Asia Pac. Rev. 9(1):4649
Global Insight. 2005. Measuring the economic impact of Wal-Mart on the U.S. economy. http://www.globalinsight.
com/walmart/2005study
Global Insight. 2007. The price impact of Wal-Mart: an update through 2006. http://www.globalinsight.
com/MultiClientStudy/MultiClientStudyDetail2438.htm
Govindarajan V, Gupta A. 2001. The Quest for Global Dominance: Transforming Global Presence into Global
Competitive Advantage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Graff TO. 2006. Unequal competition among chains of supercenters: Kmart, Target and Wal-Mart. Prof.
Geogr. 58(1):5464
Grant R. 2003. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., May 2002. In Cases in Contemporary Strategy Analysis, ed. RM Grant,
KE Neupert, pp. 7197. Oxford: Blackwell. 3rd ed.
Greenhouse S. 2009. Bill easing unionizing is under heavy attack. New York Times, Feb. 9.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/09/us/09labor.html?html?ref=us&pagewa
Greenwald R. 2005. Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices. Documentary. http://www.walmartmovie.com
Halebsky S. 2004. Superstores and the politics of retail development. City Community 3(2):11534
Halebsky S. 2006. Explaining the outcomes of anti superstore movements: a comparative analysis of six
communities. Mobilization 11(4):44360
Halepete J, Seshadri Iyer KV, Park SC. 2008. Wal-Mart in India: a success or failure? Int. J. Retail Distrib.
Manag. 36(9):70113
Hamilton G, Geref G. 2009. Global commodity chains, market makers, and the rise of demand-responsive
economies. See Bair 2009, pp. 13661
Han D, Kwon IG, Bae M, Sung H. 2002. Supply chain integration in developing countries for foreign retailers
in Korea: Wal-Mart experience. Comput. Ind. Eng. 43:11121
Harris MT. 2006. Welcome to Whole-Mart: rotten apples in the social responsibility industry. Dissent
53(1):6166
Hicks M. 2007. The Local Economic Impact of Wal-Mart. Youngstown, NY: Cambria
Hoopes J. 2006. Growth through knowledge: Wal-Mart, high technology, and the ever less visible hand of
the manager. See Lichtenstein 2006, pp. 83104
IGD. 2002. Wal-Mart in JapanThe Implications. Watford, Herts., UK: IGD
Keller W, Smarzynska Javorcik B, Tybout JR. 2006. Openness and industrial responses in a Wal-Mart world: a case
study of Mexican soaps, detergents and surfactant producers. CEPR Disc. Pap. 5823, Cent. Econ. Policy Res.,
London, UK. www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP5823.asp
Ketchum BA, Hughes JW. 1997. Walmart and Main: the effects on employment and wages. Maine Bus. Indic.
42(2):6
Gereffi
Christian

ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
Li Y. 2007. Beyond codes of conduct: Wal-Mart and China workers rights. Seminar in Int. Labor Rights Glob.
Econ., Harvard Law Sch., Cambridge, MA
Lichtenstein N, ed. 2006. Wal-Mart: The Face of the Twenty-First Century Capitalism. New York: New Press
Lichtenstein N. 2007. Supply chains, workers chains, and the new world of retail supremacy. Labor Stud.
Work. Class Hist. Am. 4(1):1731
Lo L, Wang L, Li W. 2006. Consuming Wal-Mart: a case study in Shenzhen. See Brunn 2006, pp. 31530
Lord D. 2006. Wal-Mart supercenter market share of grocery retailing in U.S. metropolitan areas. See Brunn
2006, pp. 5561
Luo Y. 2002. Multinational Enterprises in Emerging Markets. Copenhagen, Den.: Copenhagen Bus. Sch. Press
Mattera P, McIlvaine L. 2008. Skimming the Sales Tax: How Wal-Mart and Other Big Retailers (Legally)
Keep a Cut of the Taxes We Pay on Everyday Purchases. Washington, DC: Good Jobs First. http://www.
goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/skimming.pdf
Mattera P, Purinton A. 2004. Shopping for Subsidies: How Wal-Mart Uses Taxpayer Money to Finance its NeverEnding Growth. Washington, DC: Good Jobs First. http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/wmtstudy.pdf
McInerney F, White S. 1995. The Total Quality Corporation: How 10 Major Companies Turned Quality and
Environmental Challenges to Competitive Advantage in the 1990s. New York: Truman Talley Books
McMichael P. 2008. Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge. 4th
ed.
Mills CW. 2000. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. 40th anniversary ed.
Mitchell S. 2006. Big-Box Swindle: The True Cost of Mega-Retailers and the Fight for Americas Independent
Businesses. Boston: Beacon
Miu Y. 2007. At Wal-Mart green has various shades. Washington Post, Nov. 16. http://www.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/15/AR2007111502519.html
National Labor Committee. 2002. Toys of Misery: Made in China, Mattel, MGA, Sega, Wal-Mart. New York:
Natl. Labor Comm.
National Labor Committee. 2007. Another Wal-Mart Bargain Made in China. New York: Natl. Labor Comm.
Norman A. 1999. Slam-Dunking Wal-Mart! How You Can Stop Superstore Sprawl in Your Hometown. Atlantic
City: Raphael Marketing
Oluleye K. 2007. Life with Wal-Mart: A Vendors Story. Stone Mountain: IROK Solutions
Ortega B. 1998. In Sam We Trust: The Untold Story of Sam Walton, How Wal-Mart Is Devouring America. New
York: Times Business
Pelad M. 2001. Store Wars: When Wal-Mart Comes to Town. Documentary. PBS television broadcast, Aug. 28.
http://www.pbs.org/itvs/storewars
Petrovic M, Hamilton G. 2006. Making global markets: Wal-Mart and its suppliers. See Lichtenstein 2006,
pp. 10741
Pier C. 2007. Discounting rights: Wal-Marts violation of U.S. workers right to freedom of association. Rep. Human
Rights Watch, New York, NY
Pierce J. 2006. The Wal-Mart Way Not Sams Way: An Associates View from Inside the Stores. Philadelphia:
Xlibris
Reardon T, Timmer P, Bergedue J. 2004. The rapid rise of supermarkets in developing countries: induced organizational, institutional, and technological change in agri-food systems. Conf., Int. Soc. New Inst. Econ., Tucson,
AZ, Sept. 30Oct. 3
Roberts D. 2008. Wal-Mart plans a crackdown on Chinese suppliers. Business Week, Oct. 24.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/oct2008/gb20081024 159130.htm?chan=top+
news top+news+index+-+temp global+business
Robinson T. 2004. Hunger discipline and social parasites: the political economy of the living wage. Urban Aff.
Rev. 40(2):24668
Rosen E. 2006. How to squeeze more out of a penny. See Lichtenstein 2006, pp. 24359
Scanlon J. 2005. Your ag decal wont get you into heaven anymore: U.S. consumers, Wal-Mart, and the
commodication of patriotism. In The Selling of 9/11: How a National Tragedy Became a Commodity, ed. D
Heller, pp. 17499. New York: Palgrave MacMillian
Schaeffer R. 2003. Understanding Globalization: The Social Consequences of Political, Economic, and Environmental
Change. Lanham: Rowan & Littleeld
589
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41
Schneider MJ. 1998. The Wal-Mart annual meeting: from small-town America to a global corporate culture.
Hum. Organ. 57(3):29299
Shuman M. 2006. The Small-Mart Revolution: How Local Businesses Are Beating the Global Competition. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler
Seligman B. 2006. Patriarchy at the checkout counter: the Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., class action suit. See
Lichtenstein 2006, pp. 23142
Stone K. 1997. Impact of the Wal-Mart phenomenon on rural communities. In Increasing Understanding of
Public Problems and Policies, pp. 189200. Oak Brook: Farm Found.
Strasser S. 2006. Woolworth to Wal-Mart: mass merchandising and the changing culture of consumption. See
Lichtenstein 2006, pp. 3156
SweatFree Communities. 2008. Sweatshop Solutions? Economic Ground Zero in Bangladesh and Wal-Marts Responsibility. Bangor, Maine: SweatFree Communities
Swift K. 2009. Wal-Mart settles discrimination lawsuit. Wall Street Journal, Feb 20. http://online.
wsj.com/article/SB123516971846636581.html?mod=rss whats news us
Tilly C. 2007. Wal-Mart and its workers: NOT the same all over the world. Conn. Law Rev. 39(4):180523
Tilly C, Alvarez
Galvan JL. 2006. Lousy jobs, invisible unions: the Mexican retail sector in the age of globalization. Int. Labor Work. Class Hist. 70(Fall):125
Tomesco F, Bell K. 2008. Wal-Mart closes Quebec tire center after labor accord. Bloomberg.com, Oct. 16.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2067001&refer=canada
Vedder R, Cox W. 2006. The Wal-Mart Revolution: How Big-Box Stores Benet Consumers, Workers, and the
Economy. Washington, DC: AEI Press
Vias A. 2004. Bigger stores, more stores, or no stores: paths of retail restructuring in rural America. J. Rural
Stud. 20:30318
Wai-ling J. 2005. Chinese migrant workers in action: bringing Wal-Mart to global corporate responsibility.
Soc. Policy 3236
Walker M, Walker D, Villagomez

Velaz Y. 2006. The Wal-Martication of Teotihuacan: issues of resistance
and cultural heritage. See Brunn 2006, pp. 21324
Wallerstein I. 1974. The Modern World-System. New York: Academic
Wal-Mart. 2005. Twenty rst century leadership. Presented by CEO H. Lee Scott. Oct. 24 http://
walmartfacts.com/reports/2006/sustainability/documents/21stCenturyLeadership.pdf
Wal-Mart. 2006. Sourcing ethically through a socially responsible program. http://walmartfacts.com/
reports/2006/ethical standards/documents/2006ReportonEthicalSourcing.pdf
Wal-Mart. 2007. Sustainability progress to date 20072008. http://walmartfacts.com/reports/2006/
sustainability/documents/SustainabilityProgressToDate20072008.pdf
Wal-Mart. 2008. Annual Report. http://walmartstores.com/sites/AnnualReport/2008
Wal-Mart Watch. 2007. Wal-Marts wage and hour violations. http://walmartwatch.com/img/blog/wage and
hour.pdf
Wal-Mart Watch. 2008. Battle mart site ghts. http://walmartwatch.com/battlemart/site fights
Warf B, Chapman T. 2006. Cathedrals of consumption: a political phenomenology of Wal-Mart. See Brunn
2006, pp. 16378
Wrigley N, Lowe M. 2002. Reading Retail. A Geographical Perspective on Retailing and Consumption Spaces.
London: Arnold
Zook M, Graham M. 2006. Wal-Mart nation: mapping the reach of a retail colossus. See Brunn 2006,
pp. 1525
Zukin S. 2004. Point of Purchase, How Shopping Changed American Culture. New York: Routledge

ANRV381-SO35-27
RELATED RESOURCES
Wal-Mart. 2009. http://www.walmartfacts.com
In an effort to rebut critics, Wal-Mart set up this Web site to provide factsheets on the company
ranging from health care, wages, associate benets, diversity, and community giving, along
with its latest corporate reports.
590
Gereffi
Christian
ANRV381-SO35-27
ARI
2 June 2009
9:41

WakeUp Wal-Mart. 2009. http://www.wakeupwalmart.com

One of the most prominent of the anti-Wal-Mart Web sites, WakeUp Wal-Mart highlights the
companys alleged poor record on social issues like labor, health care, and wages and offers
tips for organizing against the company.
Wal-Mart Watch. 2009. http://www.walmartwatch.com
Wal-Mart activists use this Web site to distribute the latest news about the company, and it provides
forums for networking, along with bilingual Spanish resources.
591
AR348-FM
ARI
2 June 2009
9:48
Annual Review
of Sociology

Contents
Volume 35, 2009
Frontispiece
Herbert J. Gans p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xiv
Prefatory Chapters
Working in Six Research Areas: A Multi-Field Sociological Career
Herbert J. Gans p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 1
Theory and Methods
Ethnicity, Race, and Nationalism
Rogers Brubaker p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p21
Interdisciplinarity: A Critical Assessment
Jerry A. Jacobs and Scott Frickel p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p43
Nonparametric Methods for Modeling Nonlinearity
in Regression Analysis
Robert Andersen p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p67
Gender Ideology: Components, Predictors, and Consequences
Shannon N. Davis and Theodore N. Greenstein p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p87
Genetics and Social Inquiry
Jeremy Freese and Sara Shostak p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 107
Social Processes
Race Mixture: Boundary Crossing in Comparative Perspective
Edward E. Telles and Christina A. Sue p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 129
The Sociology of Emotional Labor
Amy S. Wharton p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 147
Societal Responses toTerrorist Attacks
Seymour Spilerman and Guy Stecklov p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 167
Intergenerational Family Relations in Adulthood: Patterns, Variations,
and Implications in the Contemporary United States
Teresa Toguchi Swartz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 191
AR348-FM
ARI
2 June 2009
9:48
Institutions and Culture

Sociology of Sex Work
Ronald Weitzer p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 213
The Sociology of War and the Military
Meyer Kestnbaum p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 235
Socioeconomic Attainments of Asian Americans
Arthur Sakamoto, Kimberly A. Goyette, and ChangHwan Kim p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 255
Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts
Douglas Schrock and Michael Schwalbe p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 277
Formal Organizations
American Trade Unions and Data Limitations: A New Agenda
for Labor Studies
Caleb Southworth and Judith Stepan-Norris p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 297
Outsourcing and the Changing Nature of Work
Alison Davis-Blake and Joseph P. Broschak p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 321
Taming Prometheus: Talk About Safety and Culture
Susan S. Silbey p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 341
Political and Economic Sociology
Paradoxes of Chinas Economic Boom
Martin King Whyte p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 371
Political Sociology and Social Movements
Andrew G. Walder p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 393
Differentiation and Stratification
New Directions in Life Course Research
Karl Ulrich Mayer p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 413
Is America Fragmenting?
Claude S. Fischer and Greggor Mattson p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 435
Switching Social Contexts: The Effects of Housing Mobility and
School Choice Programs on Youth Outcomes
Stefanie DeLuca and Elizabeth Dayton p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 457
Income Inequality and Social Dysfunction
Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate E. Pickett p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 493
Educational Assortative Marriage in Comparative Perspective
Hans-Peter Blossfeld p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 513
vi
Contents
AR348-FM
ARI
2 June 2009
9:48
Individual and Society

Nonhumans in Social Interaction
Karen A. Cerulo p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 531
Demography
Social Class Differentials in Health and Mortality: Patterns and
Explanations in Comparative Perspective
Irma T. Elo p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 553

Policy
The Impacts of Wal-Mart: The Rise and Consequences of the Worlds
Dominant Retailer
Gary Geref and Michelle Christian p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 573
Indexes
Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 2635 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 593
Cumulative Index of Chapter Titles, Volumes 2635 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 597
Errata
An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Sociology articles may be found at
http://soc.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml
Contents
vii

Ssrn-Id1523785 - SCM in Retailer Industry - Walmart

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ssrn-Id1523785 - SCM in Retailer Industry - Walmart

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.

The Impacts of Wal-Mart:

Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness, 2 Department of Sociology,

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009. 35:57391

First published online as a Review in Advance on

globalization, labor, community mobilization, buyer-driven

The Annual Review of Sociology is online at

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

focused on the dynamics of prices, ination,

Polarized themes in Wal-Mart debates

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

Practices gender/racial discrimination

Increases business efciency

Pushes down wages

Employs nontraditional workers

Increases poverty, welfare allocations

Erodes downtown business centers

Promotes environmental sustainability

Increases environmental degradation

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., facts, 2008

Total net sales

Net sales, U.S.

Net sales, international

Total stores, U.S.

Total stores, international

Countries in supplier network

Source: Wal-Mart Annual Report, http://www.

employees, and 60,000 suppliers located in

ECONOMIC IMPACT DEBATE: PRICES

www.annualreviews.org The Impacts of Wal-Mart

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

prices slogan shapes all its business decisions,

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

techniques. All Wal-Mart stores are typically

Mart has pushed costs onto suppliers through

Wal-Mart opened its rst buying ofce in Hong Kong in

surrounding Wal-Mart stores reveals that 60%

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

multinational retailers to leverage their superior distribution/logistics and information

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

phases: The rst involved expansion to adjacent

Tilly & Alvarez

include working with consultative organizations and collective bargaining agreements,

small-town values, hard work, conformism,

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

environment in which conformism is praised

Wal-Marts Direct and Indirect

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

the U.S.-Mexico border and line workers in

strikes are banned. In Mexico, Tilly & Alvarez

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

ination made possible by Wal-Marts company

Community MobilizationSite Fights

in Flagstaff, Arizona, and Inglewood, California

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

Global Retailers and Buyer-Driven

www.annualreviews.org The Impacts of Wal-Mart

A PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY VIEW OF

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009.35:573-591. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

The writers who are part of the four themes

outlined. For us, this engagement entails a form

The UFCW union launched WakeUp Wal-Mart, and the