Table 1 A comparison of dimensions of... | Emerald Publishing

Table 1

A comparison of dimensions of the LARG paradigm

	Lean	Agile	Resilient	Green
Definition	A series of activities to minimize waste and maximize value (Carvalho et al., 2011)	Flexibility and responsiveness to market changes (Cabral et al., 2012)	Ability to withstand and recover from disruptions to its initial state (Saraji et al., 2023)	Environmental sustainability and reducing ecological footprint (Carvalho et al., 2011)
Primary goal	Reduce costs by eliminating non-value-added activities (Cabral et al., 2012)	Satisfy customers by quickly adapting to changing demands (Sharma et al., 2021)	Ensure continuity with permissible time and cost in the face of unexpected disturbances (Sharma et al., 2021)	Reducing environmental impacts while improving ecological efficiency, and improving company image (Cabral et al., 2012; Saini et al., 2023)
Some of the practices	Just-In-Time, Value Stream Mapping, Total Quality Management (Azevedo et al., 2010; Sharma et al., 2021)	Utilizing IT to integrate activities, Collaborative relationships, and market sensitivity analysis (Azevedo et al., 2010; Sharma et al., 2021)	Strategic stock, Reducing lead times, Flexible sourcing, Information sharing (Azevedo et al., 2010; Ruiz-Benitez et al., 2019)	Eco-friendly materials, Energy-efficient processes, Recycling (Luthra et al., 2016)
The urgency	Companies need to reduce their price to satisfy end-user requirements (Manzouri et al., 2013)	Client needs are changing all the time (Ramirez-Peña et al., 2020)	The causes and consequences of risks are increasingly difficult to foresee (Karmaker et al., 2021)	Community and consumer pressure for environmental protection is growing (Rao and Holt, 2005)
Historical evolution (Doğan and Derici, 2025)	1990s	2000s	The mid-to-late 1990s and early 2000s	1990s
Theory	RBV (Prajogo et al., 2016)	DCT (Altay et al., 2018)	DCT (Altay et al., 2018)	RBV (Karmaker et al., 2023)

	Lean	Agile	Resilient	Green
Definition	A series of activities to minimize waste and maximize value (Carvalho et al., 2011)	Flexibility and responsiveness to market changes (Cabral et al., 2012)	Ability to withstand and recover from disruptions to its initial state (Saraji et al., 2023)	Environmental sustainability and reducing ecological footprint (Carvalho et al., 2011)
Primary goal	Reduce costs by eliminating non-value-added activities (Cabral et al., 2012)	Satisfy customers by quickly adapting to changing demands (Sharma et al., 2021)	Ensure continuity with permissible time and cost in the face of unexpected disturbances (Sharma et al., 2021)	Reducing environmental impacts while improving ecological efficiency, and improving company image (Cabral et al., 2012; Saini et al., 2023)
Some of the practices	Just-In-Time, Value Stream Mapping, Total Quality Management (Azevedo et al., 2010; Sharma et al., 2021)	Utilizing IT to integrate activities, Collaborative relationships, and market sensitivity analysis (Azevedo et al., 2010; Sharma et al., 2021)	Strategic stock, Reducing lead times, Flexible sourcing, Information sharing (Azevedo et al., 2010; Ruiz-Benitez et al., 2019)	Eco-friendly materials, Energy-efficient processes, Recycling (Luthra et al., 2016)
The urgency	Companies need to reduce their price to satisfy end-user requirements (Manzouri et al., 2013)	Client needs are changing all the time (Ramirez-Peña et al., 2020)	The causes and consequences of risks are increasingly difficult to foresee (Karmaker et al., 2021)	Community and consumer pressure for environmental protection is growing (Rao and Holt, 2005)
Historical evolution (Doğan and Derici, 2025)	1990s	2000s	The mid-to-late 1990s and early 2000s	1990s
Theory	RBV (Prajogo et al., 2016)	DCT (Altay et al., 2018)	DCT (Altay et al., 2018)	RBV (Karmaker et al., 2023)