challengefor JBS, evidencing that stakeholders cooperation is an important key to improvesustainable performance.(Flynn 2010) argues that not keeping good relationships with stakeholders can result in adamaging effect, not just on reputation but also on actual business outcomes.Notwithstanding, there can be misunderstandings and pitfalls in stakeholder engagement,requiring a deliberate analysis on what works and what does not. Stakeholder engagementshould be considered as part of day-to-day operations in organizations core business, andstakeholders involved appropriately, with focus and the adequate processes (Basu 2011).Quality control programmes at farms levelPoor quality raw materials can cause serious problems to an organization that is dependentupon supply chain partner performance. Thus, quality management policies and practices ofsuppliers must be aligned with the standards of the company (Larsen et al 2007).Moreover, acceptable quality standards require that buyers and suppliers work together todevelop practices, policies, and management systems (Larsen et al 2007). In this way,constant improvements in quality management help to reduce risks of costly andembarrassing failures in supply chains that can result in consumer dissatisfaction, regulatorynoncompliance and, in some cases, public criticism of the corporate management practices(Flynn 2010).JBSs supplier code for meat and edible animal byproducts procurementBlowfield (2007) and Prieto-Carron et al. (2006) argue against the benefits of relying oncodes of conduct in bringing about environmental improvements. Brammer, Hoejmose &Millington (2011) claim that codes tend to be relatively static and unresponsive to new issuesor changes in stakeholder expectation. More specifically, Andersen and Skjoett-Larsen(2009) criticize the codes of conduct as being irrelevant to the needs of the employeesgenerating resistance to their content. Codes can also embody culturally alien demands thatdo not fit local needs, reinforcing further resistance to them (Brammer, Hoejmose &Millington 2011). Besides, Lund-Thomsen (2008, p. 1016) suggests that for the codes towork, the concerns of the beneficiaries of the codes must be incorporated into the design,implementation, monitoring and impact assessment of the codes in order to achieveenvironmental improvements.10While cognizant of problems with the use of codes, the UN Global Compact (2010, p. 21)states that the codes of conduct are critical to establishing and managing expectations forboth customers and suppliers, creating a shared foundation for sustainability in order tomake informed decisions.JBSs supplier code is proposed based on the concept of moving towards collaborationrather than command and control style of management of relationships. Using this methodthe focus is on generating shared value. The goal is to build strong relationships with thefarmers resembling a joint venture relationship.Course of ActionsJBS will establish a partnership with The Forest Trust (TFT). TFT will engage suppliers toanalyze their policies and systems as a means to identify specific farms that supply to JBSand undertake Responsible Sourcing Guidelines (RSG) assessment of these farms (TFT2011).A risk analysis will be conducted to ensure JBS does not outsource meat or byproducts froman RSG compliant farm if the parent companys other operations, does not have qualitycontrol standards approved by JBS and/or have a deforestation footprint. Notwithstanding,TFT will collaborate with suppliers on a continuous basis to provide them with the expertiseand resources to improve their environmental performance, as the exclusion of noncompliantsuppliers is not an effective way to secure compliance (Lund-Thomsen 2008). TFTwill develop