Search results

This paper provides evidence based quantification of both “actual” disruption of industries as well as a measure of disruption “hype”. The data cover a seven-year period from 2012 to 2018 across 12 industries. The authors’ complemented the research with a survey of 2000 business executives. Whereas there has been some measures of disruption in the past, no research to the authors’ knowledge has been conducted that measure both actual disruption and disruption hype.

The current fascination with disruption hides an awkward truth, we assume it is happening, but do we really know for sure? Disruption is rarely defined and almost never measured. Equally, the influence of the hype around disruption is hard to gauge. The authors do not know to what extent hype is driving management action. This is worrisome as the disruption “noise level” can lead to unhealthy collective thinking and bad business decision-making. Some rigour is required. To craft winning strategies, executives should take a more evidence-based approach for managing disruption.

The authors’ failed to find evidence of any correlation between the hype around an industry disruption and actual disruption within that industry. So the important conclusion for executives is “do not believe the hype”. We found some surprising differences by industry between actual disruption and the hype by industry.

Disruption is one of the most talked about subject in the field of strategy, yet there is little quantification. With this research, the authors’ aim is to advance the fact-based understanding of disruption. Disruption hype is never measured but has a strong influence on executives. The authors have quantified hype using online, search, social media and survey sources. Much more is needed to be able to measure hype more accurately.

The authors’ recommend a set of practical guidelines for executives to support fact-based strategy formulation: analysis of actual disruption, scenario planning and strategic responses.

The “noise” around industry disruption is so high that it is assumed to happen. Much of what is written is quasi-fake news. The authors need to rebalance the debate with fact-based analysis.

To authors’ knowledge, there has never been any fact-based analysis of both actual and hype disruption levels.

The purpose is to replicate and extend Ambulkar et al.’s (2015) work testing resource reconfiguration as a mediator of the supply chain disruption/firm resilience relationship and testing risk management infrastructure as a moderator. This study extends the work of Ambulkar in that it uses analysis of survey data gathered from manufacturing firms during an actual disruption event (COVID-19). The previous work is also in extended in that the authors include a pandemic disruption impact variable and supply chain performance is an expanded model.

Partial least squares structural equation modeling techniques were used to analyze data gathered from 184 US manufacturing managers during the height (Summer 2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Two of four of Ambulkars et al.’s (2015) hypotheses were confirmed as relevant to firm resilience during the pandemic while two were not confirmed. Results also show that supply chain disruption orientation, risk management infrastructure and resource reconfiguration combine to improve firm resilience, which in turn improves supply chain performance while mitigating the disruption impact of COVID-19.

Previous work is replicated and extended, using data from an actual disruption event (COVID-19). This study presents a more comprehensive model using a newly developed and validated scale to measure pandemic impact and including supply chain performance.

The present manuscript assesses how firms should manage frequent supply chain disruption triggers and whether these firms should use existing supply chain competencies, develop new ones or both to mitigate any adverse consequences on financial performance.

Data for the study come from a survey administered to professionals in India. India was an appropriate base for the study because of its developing economy and businesses often facing SC disruptions in the marketplace.

The findings show that the negative association between the frequency of supply chain disruption triggers and financial performance is weaker when a firm utilizes supply chain exploitation competencies. Conversely, the negative association between the frequency of supply chain disruption triggers and financial performance becomes stronger when using supply chain exploration competencies. Most significantly, however, the authors show that a strategy of supply chain ambidexterity – one that combines both exploitation and exploration practices – is more beneficial in mitigating the impact of frequent disruption triggers on firm financial performance compared to the other strategies.

These findings contribute to the literature, extending the benefits of ambidexterity beyond domains of innovation, manufacturing flexibility, competitiveness and firm performance to include mitigation of supply chain disruptions.

This paper aims to formally conceptualize service mega-disruptions as any far-reaching and unforeseen general environmental stressor or threat that impacts a service organization’s ability to provide a desired level of service. The authors differentiate sudden large-scale general environmental threats from traditional service failures in scope and scale of impact via number of customers and sectors affected and duration and speed of the disruption.

This paper draws from service recovery theory to build a conceptual model of service mega-disruptions. The resulting conceptual model maps service failure recovery strategies against a service mega-disruption recovery approach to examine consumer response to changes in service value. This work further articulates additional research needs including conceptualization, measurement and methods as traditional drivers of service recovery and the value of the service experience change in response to service mega-disruptions.

This work proposes a research agenda to investigate whether service mega-disruptions can bypass the need for service recovery due to a consumer self-moderating process. As past research shows, the less control a service provider has over a failure, the more customers attribute fault to the situation and transfer blame away from an organization. This paper suggests that this self-moderating process disrupts the need for service providers to court forgiveness for a failure with perceptions of similarity and controllability providing an alternate pathway to customer forgiveness. Similarly, it is suggested that service mega-disruptions play a role in transforming service ecosystems into tighter, more contractual systems with less agency for service providers and poorer ability to adjust to market conditions. The duration and longevity of effects on service providers’ control, agency and ability to adjust following a service mega-disruption must be researched further.

This paper builds theory to develop a conceptual model of service mega-disruptions and their role in customer engagement and reshaping the service ecosystem. This paper culminates in the proposition of a research agenda that aims to build research capacity among services marketing scholars as service providers’ coordination and market conditions are challenged by service mega-disruptions.

This paper aims to minimize the mean-risk cost of sustainable and resilient supplier selection, order allocation and production scheduling (SS,OA&PS) problem under uncertainty of disruptions. The authors use conditional value at risk (CVaR) as a risk measure in optimizing the combined objective function of the total expected value and CVaR cost. A sustainable supply chain can create significant competitive advantages for companies through social justice, human rights and environmental progress. To control disruptions, the authors applied (proactive and reactive) resilient strategies. In this study, the authors combine resilience and social responsibility issues that lead to synergy in supply chain activities.

The present paper proposes a risk-averse two-stage mixed-integer stochastic programming model for sustainable and resilient SS,OA&PS problem under supply disruptions. In this decision-making process, determining the primary supplier portfolio according to the minimum sustainable-resilient score establishes the first-stage decisions. The recourse or second-stage decisions are: determining the amount of order allocation and scheduling of parts by each supplier, determining the reactive risk management strategies, determining the amount of order allocation and scheduling by each of reaction strategies and determining the number of products and scheduling of products on the planning time horizon. Uncertain parameters of this study are the start time of disruption, remaining capacity rate of suppliers and lead times associated with each reactive strategy.

In this paper, several numerical examples along with different sensitivity analyses (on risk parameters, minimum sustainable-resilience score of suppliers and shortage costs) were presented to evaluate the applicability of the proposed model. The results showed that the two-stage risk-averse stochastic mixed-integer programming model for designing the SS,OA&PS problem by considering economic and social aspects and resilience strategies is an effective and flexible tool and leads to optimal decisions with the least cost. In addition, the managerial insights obtained from this study are extracted and stated in Section 4.6.

This work proposes a risk-averse stochastic programming approach for a new multi-product sustainable and resilient SS,OA&PS problem. The planning horizon includes three periods before the disruption, during the disruption period and the recovery period. Other contributions of this work are: selecting the main supply portfolio based on the minimum score of sustainable-resilient criteria of suppliers, allocating and scheduling suppliers orders before and after disruptions, considering the balance constraint in receiving parts and using proactive and reactive risk management strategies simultaneously. Also, the scheduling of reactive strategies in different investment modes is applied to this problem.

This study examines the firm-level financial consequences caused by supply chain disruptions during COVID-19 and explores how firms' supply chain diversification strategies, including diversified suppliers, customers and products, moderate the negative effect on firm performance.

Based on data drawn from 222 publicly traded firms in China, the authors use event study methodology to estimate the effects of supply chain disruptions on the financial performance of affected firms. Regression analyses are conducted to examine the moderating effects of supply chain diversification.

Firms affected by supply chain disruptions during COVID-19 experienced a significant decline in shareholder value in two weeks and a subsequent decrease in operating performance in one year. Diversified suppliers, customers and products act as shock absorbers to alleviate the negative effects. Further regression shows a substitution effect between customer and product diversification. Cross-industry comparisons reveal that service firms experienced more loss than manufacturing firms. Customer diversification mitigates the adverse effects of supply chain disruptions for both manufacturing and service firms. Supplier diversification exerts a noteworthy role in manufacturing firms, while product diversification is beneficial for service firms.

The study provides empirical evidence on the magnitude of financial consequences of supply chain disruptions during COVID-19 in both the short term and long term and enriches the current understanding of how to build resilience from the supply chain diversification perspective.

The purpose of this study is to examine the new normal within a continuum of three types of disruption, each of varying duration. References to the new normal draw attention to the periodic and rising importance of different levels, types, and consequences of game-changing disruption for those in governance roles.

In this conceptual research, given the discussion of a return to normalcy near the expected end of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors organize the literature on disruption in governance into a disruption continuum – emergency, crisis and super crisis – to demonstrate the differences in each type of disruption to establish a distinct view of the new normal.

Within the three types of disruption, the first two suit the rational authority model in which disruption is turned over to those in governance roles. However, the rational authority model comes under attack in the super crisis and is increasingly associated with the post-truth era.

In Type 3 disruptions or super crises, the failure of those in control to set the parameters of the new normal raises concerns that the center no longer holds, and as a result, the assumption of an attentive public splinter into multiple contending publics, each with its version of data, facts and images.

The new normal is typically treated after the result of a black swan or rare and surprising long-lived disruption. In this work, the formulation of the recurrence, ubiquity and controversy engendered by super crises suggests that it is one of the features attenuating and giving rise to fractious incivility in the post-truth era.

In most economies, there are rules from the market regulators or government to sell at an equal wholesale price (EWP). But when one upstream channel is facing a negative demand disruption and another positive, EWP can create extra pressure on the disadvantageous supply chain partner, which faces negative disruption. The purpose of this study is to analyse the impact of EWP and the scope of the discriminatory wholesale price (DWP) during disruptions.

For the study, the authors used a dual-channel supply chain consisting of a manufacturer, online retailer (OR) and traditional brick-and-mortar (BM) retailer. Stackelberg game is used to model the interaction between the upstream and downstream channel partners, and the horizontal Nash game to analyse the interaction within downstream channel partners. For modelling asymmetric disruption, the authors took instances from the lock-down and post-lock-down periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, where consumers flow from BM retailer to OR store.

By analysing the disruption period, the authors found that this asymmetric disruption is detrimental to the BM channel, favourable to OR and has no impact on the manufacturer. But with DWP, the authors found that the profit of the BM channel and manufacturer can be increased during disruption. Though the profit of the OR decreased, it was found to be higher than in the pre-disruption period. Under DWP, the consumer surplus increased during disruption, making it favourable for the customers also. Thus, DWP can aid in creating a win-win strategy for all the supply chain partners during asymmetric disruption. Later as an extension to the study, the authors analysed the impact of the consumer transfer factor and found that it plays a crucial role in the optimal decisions of the channel partner during DWP.

Very scant literature analyses the intersection of DWP and disruptions. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study, for the first time uses DWP as a tool to help the disadvantageous supply chain partner during asymmetric disruptions. The study findings will assist the government, market regulators and manufacturers in revamping the wholesale pricing policies and strategies to help the disadvantageous supply chain partner during asymmetric disruption.

The main aim of this study is to explore the appropriate factors in measuring COVID-19-induced supply chain disruptions and the impact of these disruptions on the economic vulnerability of small-scale farmers in Sri Lanka.

The findings revealed that most of the farmers have continued to cultivate even during the pandemic despite several challenges which affected their economic status. Therefore, it is concluded that COVID-19-induced transportation and demand disruptions exacerbated the economic vulnerability of small-scale farmers over the disruptions in supply and production.

The findings of this study are crucial for formulating novel policies to improve the sustainability of the Sri Lankan agricultural sector and alleviate the poverty level of Agri-communities in the countryside. As farming is a vital sector in the economy, increased attention ought to be given on facilitating farmers with government-encouraged loans or allowances for their financial stability. Further, the respective government authorities should develop programs for importing and distributing adequate quantities of fertilizers among all the farmers at controlled prices so that they can continue their operations without any interruption. Moreover, the government could engage in collaboratively work with private organizations to streamline the Agri-input supply process. There should be a government initiative for critical consideration of the issues of farming families and their continued motivation to engage in agriculture. Thus, farmers' livelihoods and agricultural prosperity could be upgraded through alternative Agri-inputs and marketing strategies, providing financial assistance, encouraging innovative technology, etc.

Despite the significance and vulnerability of the vegetable and fruit sector in Sri Lanka, there is a limitation in the empirical studies conducted on the supply chain disruptions caused by COVID-19 measures and their implications on the farmers' livelihood. Furthermore, previous empirical research has not employed adequate quantitative tools to analyze the situation or appropriate variables in evaluating COVID-19-induced disruptions. Hence, the current study explored the appropriate factors for measuring COVID-19-induced supply chain disruption using exploratory factor analysis. Then, the impact of those factors on the economic vulnerability of the small scale farmers was revealed through the ordinal logistics regression analysis.

Are major and frequent disruptions transforming global supply chains? This study aims to investigate how multinational companies (MNCs) are responding to the phenomenon of accumulated major disruptions in recent years and plausible new paradigm of unstable conditions and environmental uncertainty from a supply chain resilience (SCRES) perspective.

Following an inductive interpretivist approach based on interpretive phenomenology, this study gathers insights from ten MNCs supply chain managers and international consultants who participated as key informants via semi-structured interviews, sharing their experience of the phenomenon. Additionally, secondary sources such as press releases, media articles and industry reports were used for data collection.

Findings include five categories of recovery actions, i.e. levelling, rationing, buffering, bridging and boundary redefining, key strategic changes in competitive priorities, internal organisation and coordination structures, and a hierarchy between SCRES characteristics, integrated in an empirically derived conceptual framework connecting these constructs. This contributes to middle-range theories within SCRES body of knowledge. The authors also identify a set of areas for future SCRES research.

Findings can support MNCs’ supply chain professionals in designing and managing resilient global supply chains, based on learnings from the recent highly disruptive environment, particularly, regarding recovery actions and resilience-building strategic changes contributing to agility and robustness in global supply chains.

Non-positivist interpretive and inductive works are scarce in SCRES research. By adopting this novel approach for this field, the authors broadened the categorisation of responses used in previous works and identified prominent strategic changes and SCRES characteristics and relations among constructs, thus bringing conceptual clarity to SCRES research within the context of the study.