Accepted author manuscript, 460 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Chapter
Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Chapter
}
TY - CHAP
T1 - The future of resilient supply chains
AU - Donadoni, Mattia
AU - Roden, Sinead
AU - Scholten, Kirstin
AU - Stevenson, Mark
AU - Caniato, Federico
AU - van Donk, Dirk Pieter
AU - Wieland, Andreas
PY - 2019/1/3
Y1 - 2019/1/3
N2 - While supply chain resilience has been touched upon frequently, research remains (with the exception of often repeated anecdotal examples) relatively disparate on what disruptions actually are. This research aims to advance theoretical and managerial understandings around the management of supply chain disruptions. A two-stage research process is used which focuses first on polling academic experts. This stage is followed by the extraction of insights from practitioners in the automotive, electronics and food industries. Our findings coalesce around: (1) the types of disruptions that respondents are most concerned about; (2) the associated strategies suggested to cope with disruptions; and, (3) how resilience can be measured. It is apparent that there are some areas where academics and practitioners agree and others where they agree to a lesser extent. Both sets of actors tend to agree on how resilience can be quantified, with recovery time the preferred indicator. However, there is a discrepancy around how resilience is achieved within the supply chain. Academics emphasise the importance of redundancy while practitioners refer more to flexibility. Also, they disagree around what constitutes “key disruptions”: academics suggested high-profile events, while practitioners are more concerned with day-to-day problems.
AB - While supply chain resilience has been touched upon frequently, research remains (with the exception of often repeated anecdotal examples) relatively disparate on what disruptions actually are. This research aims to advance theoretical and managerial understandings around the management of supply chain disruptions. A two-stage research process is used which focuses first on polling academic experts. This stage is followed by the extraction of insights from practitioners in the automotive, electronics and food industries. Our findings coalesce around: (1) the types of disruptions that respondents are most concerned about; (2) the associated strategies suggested to cope with disruptions; and, (3) how resilience can be measured. It is apparent that there are some areas where academics and practitioners agree and others where they agree to a lesser extent. Both sets of actors tend to agree on how resilience can be quantified, with recovery time the preferred indicator. However, there is a discrepancy around how resilience is achieved within the supply chain. Academics emphasise the importance of redundancy while practitioners refer more to flexibility. Also, they disagree around what constitutes “key disruptions”: academics suggested high-profile events, while practitioners are more concerned with day-to-day problems.
KW - Supply chain resilience
KW - Expert interviews
KW - Disruption
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-030-03813-7_10
DO - 10.1007/978-3-030-03813-7_10
M3 - Chapter
SN - 9783030038120
T3 - Springer Series in Supply Chain Management
SP - 169
EP - 186
BT - Revisiting supply chain risk
A2 - Zsidisin, George A.
A2 - Henke, Michael
PB - Springer
CY - Cham
ER -