Dinh Thi Hao1, Nguyen Thi Mai Anh1, Tran
Phuong Anh1, Nguyen Thi Thai Ha1*
1 School of Economics - Hanoi University
of Industry
*Corresponding author E-mail: ha.nguyen22@haui.edu.vn
DOI:
Dinh Thi Hao1, Nguyen Thi Mai Anh1, Tran
Phuong Anh1, Nguyen Thi Thai Ha1*
1 School of Economics - Hanoi University
of Industry
*Corresponding author E-mail: ha.nguyen22@haui.edu.vn
DOI:
ABSTRACT
This study investigates the
structural relationships among customer pressure, customer orientation, green
innovation and green competitive advantage in logistics service providers in
Hanoi, Vietnam. Grounded in stakeholder theory and the resource-based view
(RBV), the research develops a mediated structural model in which green
innovation functions as a dynamic capability linking external institutional
pressure and internal strategic orientation to competitive advantage. Using a
quantitative approach and structural equation modeling (SEM), the study
validates both measurement and structural models. The empirical results confirm
that customer pressure and customer orientation significantly enhance green
innovation capability, which in turn exerts a strong positive effect on green
competitive advantage. Mediation analysis further demonstrates that green
innovation fully transmits the effects of both antecedents on competitive
advantage. Managerial implications emphasize the importance of embedding
customer-driven sustainability expectations into organizational innovation
systems.
Keywords: Customer pressure, Customer orientation, Green innovation, Green
competitive advantage, Logistics services.
INTRODUCTION
Sustainability
has become a dominant strategic imperative in contemporary supply chain and
logistics management [1]. Increasing environmental degradation, regulatory
constraints and stakeholder scrutiny have forced firms to integrate
environmental considerations into their core operational and strategic
decision-making processes [2]. In particular, logistics service providers are
under increasing pressure to adopt green practices due to their significant
environmental footprint across transportation, warehousing and distribution
activities [3].
From
a theoretical perspective, stakeholder theory suggests that firms are
influenced by the expectations and demands of external stakeholders, especially
customers who increasingly require environmentally responsible products and
services [4]. Customer pressure, therefore, functions as an external
institutional force that drives firms toward environmental compliance and
sustainable transformation [5].
In
parallel, the resource-based view (RBV) argues that internal firm-specific
resources and capabilities determine competitive advantage [6]. Within this
framework, customer orientation is considered a strategic intangible capability
that enables firms to understand, anticipate and respond effectively to
customer needs, including sustainability-related expectations [7]. Firms with
stronger customer orientation are more likely to translate market intelligence
into innovation activities that support environmental performance improvement
[8].
Despite
the growing body of research on green innovation, existing studies remain
fragmented in explaining how external pressure (customer pressure) and internal
orientation (customer orientation) jointly contribute to green competitive
advantage [9]. More importantly, the mediating mechanism through which these
factors influence competitive outcomes is still insufficiently examined in
logistics service contexts, particularly in emerging economies such as Vietnam
[10].
Green
innovation has been identified as a critical dynamic capability that enables
firms to integrate environmental considerations into product, process and
operational design [11]. It serves as a bridge between external institutional
pressure and internal strategic orientation, allowing firms to convert
sustainability demands into competitive advantage [12].
Accordingly,
this study develops and tests a mediated structural model in which green
innovation acts as the central mechanism linking customer pressure and customer
orientation to green competitive advantage in logistics service providers in
Hanoi, Vietnam.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Customer pressure reflects external environmental expectations imposed
on firms regarding sustainability performance. In logistics, customers
increasingly demand reduced emissions, green packaging and sustainable
operations beyond traditional cost and service criteria [3, 5].
From stakeholder theory, customers represent a key external force
shaping firm legitimacy and strategic responses [4]. Such pressure encourages
firms to adjust operations toward environmental compliance and innovation-based
responses [5]. Prior studies confirm that external pressure stimulates
environmental restructuring and innovation adoption [1, 6].
Accordingly, customer pressure is expected to drive green innovation in
logistics firms.
H1: Customer
pressure has a positive impact on green innovation.
Customer orientation is a firm’s capability to understand and respond to
customer needs, serving as an important intangible resource under the RBV
framework [6]. It enables firms to interpret market signals and integrate
customer expectations into strategic decisions [7, 16].
In sustainability contexts, customer-oriented firms are more likely to
identify green demands such as low-carbon logistics and eco-friendly delivery,
thereby accelerating innovation responses [8].
Thus, customer orientation is expected to enhance green innovation
capability.
H2: Customer
orientation has a positive impact on green innovation.
Green innovation refers to the implementation of environmentally
friendly processes and technologies that improve both sustainability and
operational efficiency [11, 19]. In logistics, it includes energy-efficient
transport, waste reduction and green supply chain practices.
Green competitive advantage is derived from RBV and reflects superior
performance achieved through non-imitable environmental capabilities [1, 10].
It enhances differentiation, reputation and long-term competitiveness in
logistics markets [12].
Therefore, green innovation is a key driver of green competitive
advantage.
H3: Green
innovation has a positive impact on green competitive advantage.
The effects of customer pressure and customer orientation on competitive
advantage are not direct but are transmitted through innovation capability.
External pressure pushes firms toward environmental compliance, while internal
orientation enables interpretation of customer needs; both require
transformation through innovation mechanisms [9, 11].
Green innovation thus acts as a central mediating mechanism linking both
drivers to competitive outcomes [10, 12].
Therefore, hypotheses H4, H5 are
proposed:
H4: Green
innovation plays a mediating role in the relationship between customer pressure
and green competitive advantage.
H5: Green
innovation plays a mediating role in the relationship between customer
orientation and green competitive advantage.
MATERIALS &
METHODS
Measurement Scales
Through a comprehensive review of relevant literature in the field, the
author developed the research model and adopted measurement scales from
previous studies. Specifically, (1) customer pressure (AL) is measured by 5
items [9, 13]; (2) customer orientation (DH) is measured by 5 items [11]; (3)
green innovation (DM) is measured by 5 items [1, 6]; and (4) green competitive
advantage (LT) is measured by 5 items [14, 15].
Research Sample
Quantitative data for this study were collected through an online survey
using Google Forms, combined with questionnaires sent directly via email to
managers of logistics service providers in Hanoi. After two months of the
official survey, the authors received a total of 200 responses, of which 162
valid responses were retained for analysis.
The collected data were coded and processed using SPSS 26 and AMOS 20
software to perform scale reliability testing, exploratory factor analysis
(EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and research hypothesis testing.
RESULT
Scale Reliability Assessment
The analysis results indicate that all Cronbach's Alpha coefficients are
greater than 0,7. The Corrected Item-Total Correlation coefficients for all
observed variables are above 0,3. This demonstrates that the research
constructs formed by these observed variables are acceptable and will be
utilized in the subsequent factor analysis.
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure is 0,885 (> 0,5), which meets
the required threshold and confirms the appropriateness of the factor analysis.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity yields a Significance (Sig.) value of 0,000 (<
0,05), indicating that the test is statistically significant and the observed
variables are correlated. Consequently, the observed variables in the
population are correlated, making Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) suitable.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
The results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for the
standardized measurement model indicate that the goodness-of-fit indices meet
the required thresholds: Chi-square/df = 1,650 (< 3), TLI = 0,952 (> 0,9),
CFI = 0,981 (> 0,9), GFI = 0,872 (> 0,8), and RMSEA = 0,052 (< 0,08).
Therefore, the CFA results ensure the necessary level of statistical
significance, and the measurement scales demonstrate adequate reliability.
Hypothesis Testing and Model Fit Assessment
Table 1. Hypothesis Testing Results
|
Hypotheses |
Estimate |
S.E. |
C.R. |
P |
Decision |
|
AL->DM |
0,324 |
0,083 |
3,904 |
*** |
Accept |
|
DH->DM |
0,415 |
0,091 |
4,560 |
*** |
Accept |
|
DM->LT |
0,378 |
0,088 |
4,295 |
*** |
Accept |
Note: * =P<0.05; ***=P<0.001 (Source:
Data analysis results)
The hypothesis testing results presented in Table 1
indicate that the majority of the research hypotheses are supported with high
statistical significance. Specifically, hypothesis H1, which proposes that
customer pressure has a positive impact on green innovation within the
enterprise, is supported (Estimate = 0,324; C.R. = 3,904; P < 0,001); thus,
H1 is accepted. Similarly, hypothesis H2 is also accepted, as customer
orientation exerts a positive influence on green innovation (Estimate = 0,415;
C.R. = 4,560; P < 0,001). Regarding hypothesis H3, the analysis results show
that green innovation has a statistically significant positive impact on green competitive advantage (Estimate
= 0,378; C.R. = 4,295; P < 0,001) Mediation Effect Testing Results:
This study applied the bootstrapping method to test
the mediating roles. The results are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Mediation Testing Results
|
Hypothesis |
Beta |
P |
Reliability |
Result |
|
|
Lower |
Upper |
||||
|
H4: AL->DM->LT |
0,092 |
0,000 |
0,041 |
0,215 |
Accept |
|
H5: DH->DM->LT |
0,124 |
0,000 |
0,015 |
0,282 |
Accept |
(Source: Data
analysis results)
Synthesizing the above
results indicates that green
innovation plays a statistically
significant mediating role in both research relationships. Although the
magnitude of these indirect effects is relatively small, all impacts are
positive, thereby contributing to clarifying the mechanism through which
customer pressure and customer orientation influence green competitive advantage via green
innovation.
DISCUSSION
This study confirms that customer pressure and customer orientation both
significantly enhance green innovation in logistics firms, consistent with
stakeholder theory and RBV. External customer pressure drives firms toward
environmental responsiveness, while customer orientation strengthens internal
capability to transform market needs into innovation [4, 6, 7].
Green innovation is found to have a significant positive effect on green
competitive advantage, supporting the view that sustainability-based innovation
is a key source of differentiation in logistics industries [11, 12].
Mediation results show that green innovation fully transmits the effects
of customer pressure and customer orientation on green competitive advantage.
This highlights green innovation as a core dynamic capability linking external
pressure and internal orientation to competitive outcomes [9, 18].
The study contributes by integrating stakeholder theory and RBV and
demonstrates the central role of green innovation in emerging market logistics
contexts.
Declaration by Authors
Ethical Approval: Approved
Acknowledgement: None
Source of Funding: None
Conflict of Interest: No
conflicts of interest declared.
REFERENCES
[1] Esan, O., Ajayi, F. A., & Olawale, O. (2024).
Supply chain integrating sustainability and ethics: Strategies for modern
supply chain management. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 22(1),
1930-1953. Doi: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.22.1.1259
[2] Benn, S., Dunphy, D., & Martin, A. (2009).
Governance of environmental risk: New approaches to managing stakeholder
involvement. Journal of environmental management, 90(4),
1567-1575.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.05.011
[3] Leung, T. C. H., Guan, J., & Lau, Y. Y.
(2023). Exploring environmental sustainability and green management practices:
evidence from logistics service providers. Sustainability Accounting,
Management and Policy Journal, 14(3), 461-489.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-03-2022-0133
[4] Barney, J. B. (2000). Firm resources and sustained
competitive advantage.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-3322(00)17018-4
[5] Zhong, D., & Um, K. H. (2025). How customer
integration drives green innovation: exploring the influence of regulatory
pressures and market changes. Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, 36(3), 731-754.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2024-0420
[6] Enríquez-de-la-O, J. F. (2015). Resource-based
view and dynamic capabilities–Achieving competitive advantage through internal
resources and competences. VEZETÉSTUDOMÁNY, 46(11),
50-61.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.14267/VEZTUD.2015.11.05
[7] Ortiz‐Avram, D., Ovcharova, N., & Engelmann,
A. (2024). Dynamic capabilities for sustainability: Toward a typology based on
dimensions of sustainability‐oriented innovation and stakeholder
integration. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(4),
2969-3004.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3630
[8] Tseng, C. H., Chang, K. H., & Chen, H. W.
(2019). Strategic orientation, environmental innovation capability, and
environmental sustainability performance: The case of Taiwanese
suppliers. Sustainability, 11(4), 1127.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041127
[9] Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K. H. (2008).
Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management.
International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 261–273.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.11.003
[10] Nguyen Van, I., Kotaskova, A., Ferraris, A.,
& Le, T. T. (2025). Linking innovation and firm performance in an emerging
market: does supply chain play a mediation role?. European Journal of
Innovation Management, 28(3), 1061-1094.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-04-2023-0302
[11] Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., & Ali, S. S.
(2017). Exploring green supply chain management. International Journal of
Production Economics, 183, 291–305.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.003
[12] Phan, B., Long, R., Heng, L., & Breng, T.
(2025). Logistic Service Quality Innovation: Unlocking Competitive Advantage in
Supply Chain Management. Journal of Economics, Business, and Commerce, 2(1),
245-261.
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0931-1530
[13]. Gualandris, J., &
Kalchschmidt, M. (2014). Customer pressure and innovativeness: Their role in
sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Management, 20(2), 92-103.
Doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2014.03.001
[14]. Zhang, S., Chen, M., & Tang, G. (2024). How
green human resource management can promote green competitive advantage: the
role of green innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(5),
4613-4625.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3715
[15]. Huang KF, Dyerson R, Wu LY, Harindranath G. From
temporary competitive advantage to sustainable competitive advantage. British
Journal of Management. 2015; 26(4):617-636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12104
[16]. Anh, N. T. M., Khoa, V., Giang, P., & Toan,
D. V. (2025). The impact of green logistics practices on sustainable
performance–An empirical study of small and medium logistics service providers
in Hanoi. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management
(IJSRM), 13(01), 8245-8254.
[17]. Nguyen Thi, M. A., & Vu Dinh, K. (2025).
Social capital and sustainable performance: examining the mediating role of
supply chain resilience in an emerging economy. Discover Sustainability, 6(1),
764.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01692-x
[18]. Nguyen, M. A. T., Lei, H., Vu, K. D., & Le,
P. B. (2019). The role of cognitive proximity on supply chain collaboration for
radical and incremental innovation: a study of a transition economy. Journal
of Business & Industrial Marketing, 34(3), 591-604.
Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2017-0163
[19]. Khoa, V.
D., Anh, N. T. M., Chinh, T. T. Q., Cuong, T., & Nga, N. V. (2024). Impact
of green logistics practices on sustainable performance: A comprehensive
analysis. International Journal of Religion, 5(11),
8302-8312.
