From Governance Signalling to Supplier Implementation: Supplier Sustainability Governance Among Singapore Exchange‐Listed Firms

Abstract

ABSTRACT Public reporting among Singapore Exchange‐listed firms now presents supplier sustainability governance with considerable visibility, although whether that visibility reflects institutionalised supplier control rather than disclosure alignment remains uncertain. This study addresses that question, and its implications for buyer–supplier trust and supply chain management education, through semi‐structured executive interviews and an AI‐assisted, evidence‐linked documentary analysis of 30 most recent publicly available corporate reports, including sustainability, ESG, integrated and annual reports where relevant. The reviewed evidence indicates strongest convergence at the disclosure‐architecture level rather than at the level of enforceable supplier governance. Scope 3 disclosure appears in 100.0% of firms, framework alignment in 96.7%, board accountability in 83.3% and supplier‐sustainability linkage in 93.3%; by contrast, relational implementation is present in 66.7%, supplier performance metrics in 23.3%, mandatory enforcement in 23.3% and multi‐tier reach in 3.3%. When the original composite logic is applied to the AI‐reviewed scores, six firms achieve full convergence and the mean weighted governance intensity index is 0.547. Taken together, the results are more consistent with partial than near‐complete institutionalisation. Formal ESG alignment appears widely diffused, whereas public disclosure of supplier‐facing enforcement, measurement and upstream reach remains limited. The paper therefore extends the institutionalised trust infrastructure model by distinguishing framework convergence from implementation convergence and identifies four competency requirements for supply chain management graduates.