چشم‌انداز مدیریت صنعتی

چشم‌انداز مدیریت صنعتی

شناسایی و تحلیل موانع پیاده‌سازی زنجیره تأمین پایدار در شرکت‌های صنعتی استان یزد: رویکرد ترکیبی ISM-MICMAC و دیمتل

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
محمد زارعی محمودآبادی 1
زینب مؤمنی 2
مطهره صفری 2
1 دانشیار، گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشگاه میبد، میبد، ایران.
2 کارشناس ارشد، گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشگاه میبد، میبد، ایران.
10.48308/jimp.16.1.218
چکیده
مقدمه و اهداف: صنایع تولیدی، اگرچه نقش محوری در توسعه اقتصادی ایفا می‌کنند، اما از جمله منابع اصلی آلودگی‌های زیست‌محیطی محسوب می‌شوند. در این راستا، حرکت به سمت زنجیره تأمین پایدار به یک ضرورت استراتژیک تبدیل شده است. با این وجود، شرکت‌های صنعتی در مسیر استقرار این مفهوم با موانع متعدد و درهم‌تنیده‌ای روبرو هستند. مطالعه حاضر با هدف شناسایی، اولویت‌بندی و تبیین روابط ساختاری بین موانع کلیدی پیاده‌سازی زنجیره تأمین پایدار در شرکت‌های صنعتی استان یزد انجام شده است. درک این روابط می‌تواند به مدیران در تدوین راهبردهای مؤثر برای غلبه بر این چالش‌ها و تسریع در گذار به سمت پایداری کمک شایانی کند.
روش‌ها: این پژوهش از نظر هدف، کاربردی و از نظر نحوه گردآوری داده‌ها، در زمره پژوهش‌های آمیخته (کیفی-کمّی) قرار دارد. در گام نخست، با انجام یک مرور نظام‌مند ادبیات و بهره‌گیری از تکنیک دلفی با 12 خبرۀ دانشگاهی و صنعتی، 12 مانع کلیدی از میان 44 مانع اولیه شناسایی و احصاء شد. در گام بعد، از یک رویکرد ترکیبی شامل تکنیک‌های مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری (ISM) و دیمتل (DEMATEL) برای تحلیل روابط درونی و سلسله مراتبی این موانع استفاده شد. مدل ISM برای سطح‌بندی و ترسیم ساختار سلسله مراتبی موانع به کار رفت و تحلیلMICMAC برای دسته‌بندی موانع بر اساس قدرت نفوذ و وابستگی انجام شد. سپس، تکنیک دیمتل برای شناسایی روابط علّی-معلولی و تفکیک موانع به دو گروه علت و معلول استفاده شد.
یافته‌ها: بر اساس یافته‌های مدل ISM، موانع در چهار سطح سلسله مراتبی سازماندهی شدند. موانع سطح پایین‌تر (سطح 4)، شامل «محدودیت‌های مالی و کمبود بودجه برای اقدامات پایداری»، «مقاومت فرهنگی و نبود تعهد و انگیزش مدیریتی و سازمانی» و «فقدان برنامه‌ریزی و سیاست‌گذاری استراتژیک در زمینه زنجیره تأمین پایدار» مهم‌ترین و بحرانی‌ترین موانع پیاده‌سازی زنجیره تأمین پایدار هستند و به‌عنوان موانع بنیادین شناسایی شدند که بیشترین تأثیر را بر سایر سطوح دارند. تحلیلMICMAC نیز این یافته را تأیید و موانع M1 و M2 را در ربع "عوامل مستقل" (دارای قدرت نفوذ بالا و وابستگی کم) قرار داد که نشان از نقش کلیدی و محرک آن‌ها در سیستم دارد. نتایج تکنیک دیمتل نیز همسو با یافته‌های قبلی، شش مانع را در گروه علل (عوامل تأثیرگذار) و شش مانع دیگر را در گروه معلول‌ها (عوامل تأثیرپذیر) طبقه‌بندی کرد. موانع «محدودیت‌های مالی (M1)»، «مقاومت فرهنگی (M2)» و «فقدان برنامه‌ریزی استراتژیک (M3)» در صدر موانع علّی قرار گرفتند. ترسیم نمودار علت و معلول بر پایه ماتریس تأثیر کل، به وضوح جهت و شدت تأثیرگذاری این موانع بنیادین بر موانع دیگر مانند «فقدان سیستم‌های ارزیابی عملکرد (M9)» و «کمبود آگاهی و مهارت نیروی انسانی (M7)» را نشان داد. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که کلیه موانع علّی به‌طور دقیق با موانع سطح سوم و چهارم مدل ISM مطابقت دارند. روش دیمتل از نتایج حاصل از تکنیک‌های ISM و MICMAC پشتیبانی می‌کند. همپوشانی و تأیید نتایج حاصل از این سه تکنیک، اعتبار و قابلیت اتکای یافته‌ها را به‌طور قابل توجهی افزایش می‌دهد.
نتیجه‌گیری: یافته‌های این پژوهش به‌طور قاطع نشان می‌دهد که مسائل مالی و فرهنگی-مدیریتی، هسته اصلی چالش‌های پیاده‌سازی زنجیره تأمین پایدار در شرکت‌های صنعتی استان یزد هستند. بدون تزریق منابع مالی کافی و ایجاد تحول در نگرش و تعهد مدیران و کارکنان، سایر اقدامات اصلاحی در زمینه‌هایی مانند آموزش، فناوری‌های سبز و شفافیت اطلاعات، تأثیر مطلوب و پایداری نخواهند داشت. بنابراین، به مدیران و سیاست‌گذاران صنعتی توصیه می‌شود که اولویت برنامه‌ریزی و سرمایه‌گذاری خود را بر رفع این موانع بنیادین قرار دهند. تمرکز بر تأمین مشوق‌های مالی، فرهنگ‌سازی سازمانی و تدوین نقشه راه استراتژیک می‌تواند به‌عنوان اهرمی قدرتمند، غلبه بر طیف وسیعی از موانع ثانویه را میسر ساخته و مسیر حرکت به سوی زنجیره تأمین پایدار را هموار کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موانع پایداری
زنجیره تأمین پایدار
مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری (ISM)
تحلیل میک‌مک
روش دیمتل (DEMATEL)
شرکت‌های صنعتی یزد
تحلیل علّی
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Identification and Analysis of Barriers to Sustainable Supply Chain Implementation in Industrial Companies of Yazd Province: A Hybrid ISM-MICMAC and DEMATEL Approach

نویسندگان English

Mohammad Zarei Mahmoudabadi 1
Zeinab Momeni 2
Motahareh Safari 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Meybod University, Meybod, Iran.
2 M.Sc., Department of Industrial Management, Meybod University, Meybod, Iran.
چکیده English

Introduction and Objectives: Although manufacturing industries play a pivotal role in economic development, they are also considered among the primary sources of environmental pollution. In this regard, moving towards a sustainable supply chain has become a strategic necessity. However, industrial companies face numerous and intertwined barriers in implementing this concept. The present study was conducted with the aim of identifying, prioritizing, and elucidating the structural relationships between the key barriers to implementing a sustainable supply chain in industrial companies of Yazd Province. Understanding these relationships can greatly assist managers in formulating effective strategies to overcome these challenges and accelerate the transition towards sustainability.
Methods: In terms of purpose, this research is applied, and regarding data collection, it is classified as a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) study. In the first step, through a systematic literature review and utilizing the Delphi technique with 12 academic and industrial experts, 12 key barriers were identified and extracted from an initial set of 44 barriers. In the next step, a combined approach including Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and DEMATEL techniques was used to analyze the internal and hierarchical relationships of these barriers. The ISM model was employed for leveling and delineating the hierarchical structure of the barriers, and MICMAC analysis was performed to categorize the barriers based on their driving power and dependence. Subsequently, the DEMATEL technique was used to identify cause-and-effect relationships and to separate the barriers into two groups: cause and effect.
Findings: Based on the findings of the ISM model, the barriers were organized into four hierarchical levels. The lower-level barriers (Level 4), including 'Financial constraints and lack of budget for sustainability measures', 'Cultural resistance and lack of managerial and organizational commitment and motivation', and 'Lack of strategic planning and policymaking in the field of sustainable supply chain', are the most important and critical barriers to implementing a sustainable supply chain and were identified as fundamental barriers having the greatest impact on other levels. MICMAC analysis also confirmed this finding and placed barriers M1 and M2 in the "Independent factors" quadrant (having high driving power and low dependence), indicating their key and driving role within the system. The results of the DEMATEL technique, consistent with the previous findings, classified six barriers into the cause group (influential factors) and the other six into the effect group (influenced factors). The barriers 'Financial constraints (M1)', 'Cultural resistance (M2)', and 'Lack of strategic planning (M3)' were ranked as the top causal barriers. Drawing the cause-and-effect diagram based on the total influence matrix clearly showed the direction and intensity of the influence of these fundamental barriers on other barriers such as 'Lack of performance evaluation systems (M9)' and 'Lack of human resource awareness and skills (M7)'. The results show that all causal barriers precisely correspond with the Level 3 and 4 barriers of the ISM model. The DEMATEL method supports the results obtained from the ISM and MICMAC techniques. The overlap and confirmation of the results from these three techniques significantly increase the validity and reliability of the findings.
Conclusion: The findings of this research decisively show that financial and cultural-managerial issues are the core challenges of implementing a sustainable supply chain in the industrial companies of Yazd Province. Without injecting sufficient financial resources and creating a transformation in the attitudes and commitment of managers and employees, other corrective actions in areas such as training, green technologies, and information transparency will not have a desirable and sustainable impact. Therefore, it is recommended that managers and industrial policymakers prioritize addressing these fundamental barriers in their planning and investment. Focusing on providing financial incentives, organizational culture building, and developing a strategic roadmap can act as powerful leverage, enabling the overcoming of a wide range of secondary barriers and smoothing the path towards a sustainable supply chain.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Sustainability Barriers
Sustainable Supply Chain
Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM)
MICMAC Analysis
DEMATEL Method
Yazd Industrial Companies
Causal Analysis
1.  Abualigah, L., Hanandeh, E. S., Zitar, R. A., Thanh, C. L., Khatir, S., & Gandomi, A. H. (2023). Revolutionizing sustainable supply chain management: A review of metaheuristics. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 126, 106839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2022.106839
2.  Ahmadpour, M., Movahhedi, M. M., & Gholipour Kanaani, Y. (2023). Developing a strategic model for evaluating the performance of a sustainable supply chain in the service sector (Case study: Social Security Organization of the Country). Scientific Journal of Supply Chain Management, 25(1), Serial No. 78. (In Persian)
3.  Alem Tabriz, A., Modarresi, M., & Arab, A. (2017). Risk analysis of sustainable supply chain management using FSWARA method. International Conference on Industrial Management, Babolsar. https://civilica.com/doc/633392 (In Persian)
4.  Alinejad, M. B., & Enayati Shirazi, M. A. (2025). The effect of organizational culture dimensions on sustainable supply chain performance with the mediating role of external integration (Case study: Khuzestan Steel Company). 10th National Conference on Organizational and Management Research, Tehran, Iran. https://civilica.com/doc/2412535 (In Persian)
5.  Baig, S. A., Abrar, M., Batool, A., Hashim, M., & Shabbir, R. (2020). Barriers to the adoption of sustainable supply chain management practices: Moderating role of firm size. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1841525. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1841525
6.  Barzegar Vajehi Abadi, T., Vakil Al-Raya, Y., Aghaei, A., & Heydarieh, S. A. (2019). Sustainable supply chain model of NAJA. Andisheh-ye Amad (Logistics Thought), 18(70), 1–19. https://sid.ir/paper/390433/fa (In Persian)
7.  Cek, K., & Ercantan, O. (2023). The relationship between environmental innovation, sustainable supply chain management, and financial performance: The moderating role of environmental, social and corporate governance.
8.  Davoudi, S. M., & Sazgari, S. (2020). Identifying and ranking barriers of sustainable supply chain using fuzzy DEMATEL–ANP approach. Business Research Quarterly, 25(100), 105–130. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijts.2021.246907 (In Persian)
9.  Du, Y. W., & Li, X. X. (2021). Hierarchical DEMATEL method for complex systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 167, 113871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113871
10.  Falahpour, M., Safaei Qadikolaei, A., & Falah Lajimi, H. (2020). Identification and determination of risks in sustainable supply chain in dairy industry using CRITIC theory. Commercial Strategies, 17(16), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.22070/cs.2021.15056.1150 (In Persian)
11.  Fathi, M. R., Saei, M., Sadeghi, R., & Jandaghi, G. (2021). Risk assessment of sustainable supply chain using best–worst method and graph theory. Andisheh Amad, 21(81), 119–143. https://sid.ir/paper/1036914/fa (In Persian)
12.  Farrokh, M., Shoaleh, M., & Zabihi Jamkhaneh, M. (2019). Risk assessment of sustainable supply chain using fuzzy FMEA (Case study: Saba Battery). Industrial Management of Islamic Azad University, 14(48), 97–112. (In Persian)
13.  Formentini, M., & Taticchi, P. (2016). Corporate sustainability approaches and governance mechanisms in sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1920–1933.
14.  Fritz, M. (2019). Sustainable supply chain management. In Responsible Consumption and Production (pp. 1–14). Springer, Cham.
15.  Ghehari, N., & Safaei Qadikolaei, A. (2018). Identifying effective barriers in implementing sustainable supply chain. 4th National Conference on Applied Research in Management Sciences, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/849439 (In Persian)
16.  Gholizadeh, P., Molaalizadeh, S., & Karam Salahi, A. (2020). Interactive risk analysis model of sustainable supply chain in information technology. Technology Development Management, 8(4), 107–142. https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2021.4278.2559 (In Persian)
17.  Hadi Najafi, G., & Hajizadeh, P. (2024). Identifying and prioritizing barriers of risk management in sustainable supply chain. 7th International Conference on New Approaches in Management, Psychology and Humanities, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/2019453 (In Persian)
18.  Hussain, S. A., Ullah, A., Ayadi, N., & Deen, A. (2025). Sustainable supply chain management: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 5(1), 3023–3040.
19.  Jafari Kaliji, H., & Mohsenzadeh Ledari, A. (2025). Designing and optimizing a sustainable supply chain network for textile products and prioritizing sustainability indicators. https://civilica.com/doc/2449673 (In Persian)
20.  Karami, Z., & Estekharian Haghighi, A. R. (2025). Blockchain for the future of sustainable supply chain management in Industry 4.0. Second National Conference on the Era of Technology Explosion, Tabriz, Iran. https://civilica.com/doc/2541606 (In Persian)
21.  Karimi, F., Haghighat Monfared, J., & Keramati, M. (2024). Evaluating the resilience and sustainability of the supply chain with integrated TOC, process approach and MCDM. Industrial Management Perspective, 14(2), 34–65. https://doi.org/10.48308/JIMP.14.2.34 (In Persian)
22.  Kazancoglu, I., Ozbiltekin-Pala, M., Mangla, S. K., Kazancoglu, Y., & Jabeen, F. (2022). Role of flexibility, agility and responsiveness for sustainable supply chain resilience during COVID-19. Journal of Cleaner Production, 362, 132–431.
23.  Khorasani, E., & Momeni, M. (2023). Risk analysis in sustainable supply chain using Delphi and fuzzy MCDM (Case study: Taravat Dairy Products Company). https://civilica.com/doc/2335158 (In Persian)
24.  Khodaparast, P., Hadizadeh, M., Fakhrzadeh, M. B., & Ghasemi, A. R. (2024). Analysis of sustainable supply chain barriers in the textile industry using fuzzy DEMATEL. 3rd International Conference on Management Laboratory, Tehran, Iran. https://civilica.com/doc/2025947 (In Persian)
25.  Kiani, M., & Andelib Ardakani, D. (2023). Analysis of causal relationships of challenges in implementing sustainable supply chain management. Production and Operations Management Research, 14(2), 99–124. (In Persian)
26.  Mehrabi, A., Mehdipour, Z., Nisi, A. H., & Hasibi, P. (2022). Analysis of sustainable supply chain barriers in agriculture based on circular economy and Industry 4.0. https://civilica.com/doc/1645150 (In Persian)
27.  Mugoni, E., Kanyepe, J., & Tukuta, M. (2024). Sustainable supply chain management practices (SSCMPS) and environmental performance: A systematic review. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2023.100050
28.  Nasouhi, A., Etebarian, A., & Hadi Peykani, M. (2023). Designing a model of mutual expectations in individual–organization relations using DEMATEL. Decision Making and Operations Research, 8(2), 540–565. (In Persian)
29.  Nazari, M., Dehghan Niri, M., & Fathi Hafshejani, K. (2024). Presenting a bi-objective mathematical model of sustainable supply chain under uncertainty. Journal of Organizational Resource Management Research, 14(2). https://civilica.com/doc/2095912 (In Persian)
30.  Nikjou, Z., Safaie, N., & Roghnian, E. (2025). Selecting sustainable suppliers in pharmaceutical industry using MCDM–DEA in fuzzy environment. Industrial Management Perspective, 15(1), 225–256. https://doi.org/10.48308/jimp.15.1.225 (In Persian)
31.  Norouzi, H. (2025). Studying the impact of sustainable supply chain management enablers on competitive advantage in automotive industry. Managerial Modeling in Sustainable Development, 1(1), 47–77. https://doi.org/10.22075/mmsd.2025.38066.1005 (In Persian)
32.  Norouzi, M. (2023). The role of risk management in sustainable supply chains in achieving competitive advantage. https://civilica.com/doc/1780292 (In Persian)
33.  Omidi, F. (2024). Conceptual framework of sustainable supply chain based on competitive advantage using grounded theory. Modern Management, 28(113), 84–105. (In Persian)
34.  Ra’iyat Pisheh, S., Ahmadi Konali, R., & Abbasi, M. (2018). Identifying and evaluating sustainable supply chain indicators in petrochemical industry using MCDM. Industrial Management Studies, 16(51), 145–180. https://doi.org/10.22054/jims.2019.3955.1556 (In Persian)
35.  Raeesi Nafchi, S., & Shazandavani, A. (2025). Identifying factors affecting sustainable supply chain management. 11th National Conference on New Studies in Humanities, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/2431149 (In Persian)
36.  Rahmani Dadoukolaei, M., & Shaban Pasandi, A. H. (2025). Environmental risk management in sustainable supply chains: A systematic review. 14th International Conference on Management, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/2316691 (In Persian)
37.  Rezai, M. R., & Khaverian Garmsir, A. R. (2014). Strategic planning for development of Yazd industrial town using SOAR framework. Geographical Studies of Arid Regions, 5(18), 77–94. (In Persian)
38.  Rokneddini, S. A., Andelib Ardakani, D., Zareh Ahmadabadi, H., & Hosseini Bamakan, S. M. (2023). Modeling enablers of Industry 4.0 for sustainable supply chain using Fuzzy DEMATEL–ANP. Industrial Management Perspective, 13(1), 141–172. https://doi.org/10.48308/jimp.13.1.141 (In Persian)
39.  Rouhi, A., & Jamali, H. (2024). Investigating barriers to implementing sustainable supply chain management in Pars SEEZ. 6th National Conference on New Achievements in Engineering, Esfarayen. https://civilica.com/doc/2413975 (In Persian)
40.  Safaei, A., & Chalashi Gerkard Asiabi, M. (2018). Identifying barriers affecting sustainable supply chain management. 3rd International Conference on Dynamic Management, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/826474 (In Persian)
41.  Safi, M. R., Sangbar, M. A., & Azar, A. (2019). Fuzzy cognitive mapping for analyzing enablers of sustainable supply chain in petrochemical industry. Public Management Research, 12(43), 5–29. (In Persian)
42.  Samiei, H. A., Mehrabian, A., Ashrafi, M., & Khamaki, A. (2023). Identifying financial benefits and costs of sustainable supply chain in uncertainty. Journal of Value Creating in Business Management, 3(3), 41–64. https://doi.org/10.22034/jvcbm.2023.402968.1120 (In Persian)
43.  Sangbor, M. A., Safi, M. R., & Azar, A. (2022). Identifying and prioritizing sustainable supply chain enablers in petrochemical industry using meta-synthesis and GTMA. Journal of Industrial Management Studies, 20(64), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.22054/JIMS.2022.39256.2254 (In Persian)
44.  Shafiei Nikabadi, M., Moghadam, A., Tourani, P., & Najjar, A. A. (2024). Knowledge management strategies and sustainable supply chain performance. Organizational Knowledge Management, 27, 93–115. (In Persian)
45.  Sharifi Hosseini, V., & Seyedi, S. M. (2025). Investigating the effect of sustainable supply chain management, CRM and competitive advantage on organizational performance. 2nd International Conference on Management, Tabriz. https://civilica.com/doc/2266937 (In Persian)
46.  Sharma, V. K., Sachdeva, A., & Singh, L. P. (2021). A meta-analysis of sustainable supply chain management. International Journal of Supply and Operations Management, 8(3), 289–313. https://doi.org/10.22034/IJSOM.2021.3.4
47.  Shawn, P., et al. (2023). The new paradigm in supply chain management. Top Trader Stock Market Conference.
48.  Shebeshe, E. N., & Sharma, D. (2025). Impact of sustainable supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 74(3), 995–1025.
49.  Sirisawat, P., Hasachoo, N., & Rodbundith, T. S. (2024). Sustainable supply chain management challenges in plastic recycling SMEs. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 13, 100188.
50.  Sorooshian, S., Tavana, M., & Ribeiro Navarrete, S. (2023). From ISM to TISM and beyond: 50 years of research. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113642.
51.  Taghaddosi, S., & Alimohammadi, R. (2021). Prioritizing strategies to overcome innovation barriers in sustainable supply chain. 1st Conference on Management and Economics. https://civilica.com/doc/1406876 (In Persian)
52.  Tarighi, R., & Razavi, S. M. H. (2025). Designing a model of sustainable supply chain risk management in football industry. Journal of Sport Management and Development, 14(3), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.22124/JSMD.2023.23470.2754 (In Persian)
53.  Tavakoli Dehagani, M. R., Shahverdiani, S., & Mosaypour, H. (2017). Relationship between sustainable supply chain management and environmental & financial performance. Business Research Quarterly, 22(85), 171–194. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.17350794.1396.22.85.6.9 (In Persian)
54.  Vishwakarma, A., Dangayach, G. S., Meena, M. L., & Gupta, S. (2022). Analysing barriers of sustainable supply chain in apparel & textile sector. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2022.100073
55.  Yarahmadi, M., & Sakiniya, S. (2023). Intelligent model for supplier productivity evaluation in sustainable supply chain. Journal of Decisions and Operations Research, 8(4), 954–974. (In Persian)
56.  Zamani, A., Memarzadeh Tehran, G., Alborzi, M., & Pourmahdi, K. (2023). Model of enablers of sustainable supply chain management in governmental organizations. Andisheh-e Amār, 22(85), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.22034/LOT.2022.1270373.1239 (In Persian)
57.  Zamen, Sh., Haghighat Manfared, J., & Karamati, M. A. (2023). Designing a sustainable supply chain model in rubber industry. Journal of Advertising and Business Management. (in press). (In Persian)
58.  Zayed, E. O., & Yaseen, E. A. (2021). Barriers to sustainable supply chain management implementation in Egyptian industries: ISM approach. Management of Environmental Quality, 32(6), 1192–1209. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-02