An Analysis of the Trade Off Between Minimizing Operational Downtime and Selecting Ethical Suppliers: Implications for Cost Efficiency and Occupational Safety

Abstract

Operational downtime puts immense pressure on procurement decisions, often leading to the selection of fast and low-cost suppliers despite their unverified ethical and safety standards. This study aims to examine how decision-makers in the manufacturing industry perceive and manage the trade-off between downtime minimization and ethical supplier selection, as well as its implications for cost efficiency and occupational safety. Using a qualitative approach with a single case study at a mid-sized manufacturing firm, data was collected through semi-structured interviews with eight informants, observations of emergency procurement, and document analysis. The data was subsequently analyzed thematically and complemented by a Weighted Decision Matrix to compare two suppliers. The findings indicate that downtime pressure shifts priorities toward speed, causing ethical criteria to be postponed during emergency purchases. Components from unverified suppliers trigger recurring failures and increase near-miss incidents, whereas the certified supplier proves superior with a weighted score of 4.05 compared to 2.65. Consequently, this trade-off proves largely illusory in the long run when evaluated through Total Cost of Ownership. Companies are advised to implement supplier prequalification, dual sourcing, safety stock management, and emergency procurement pathways with minimum ethical screening, all supported by top-management mandates.