Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual framework on resilience types in supply chain networks.

Using a complex adaptive systems perspective as an organizing framework, the paper explores three forms of resilience: engineering, ecological and evolutionary and their antecedents and links these to four phases of supply chain resilience (SCRES): readiness, response, recovery, growth and renewal.

Resilient supply chains need all three forms of resilience. Efficiency and system optimization approaches may promote quick recovery after a disruption. However, system-level response requires adaptive capabilities and transformational behaviors may be needed to move supply chains to new fitness levels after a disruption. The three resilience types discussed are not mutually exclusive, but rather complement each other and there are synergies and tradeoffs among these resilience types.

The empirical validation of the theoretical propositions will open up new vistas for supply chain research. Possibilities exist for analyzing and assessing SCRES in multiple and more comprehensive ways.

The findings of the research can help managers refine their approaches to managing supply chain networks. A more balanced approach to supply chain management can reduce the risks and vulnerabilities associated with supply chain disruptions.

This study is unique as it conceptualizes SCRES in multiple ways, thereby extending our understanding of supply chain stability.

This study aims to explore the necessary role of supply management (SM) resilience capabilities in making effective trade-offs to attain an ambidextrous state, i.e. the state of attaining exploitation and exploration with dexterity, or achieving high levels of both. Sustainability requires effective trade-offs among economic, environmental and social outcomes while maintaining the longevity of the buying firm. Existing literature highlights the difficulty of making effective trade-offs due to likely tensions between divergent demands, i.e. tensions between exploitative and explorative performance goals.

This conceptual study extends insights from the dynamic capabilities approach to explore the nature of SM resilience and its role in attaining ambidexterity.

This study proposes SM resilience as a multifaceted dynamic capability that is determined by two contrasting aspects of stability (engineering and ecological resilience) that aid the buyer’s firm to ambidextrously adapt and transform in turbulent environments.

The study highlights the competencies and resilience capabilities that managers need to develop and maintain in pursuing an effective balance of exploitation and exploration in SM.

The proposed framework extends existing SM sustainability frameworks by examining the nature and dimensionality of resilience and linking it to ambidexterity. The proposed framework provides a platform for the integration of theoretical aspects from various research streams; socio-ecological literature, dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity.

During disturbances and unprecedented events, firms are required to be resilient to confront crises, recover from losses, and even capitalize on new opportunities. The aim of this paper is twofold: (1) to examine how different types of capabilities (routine, dynamic or ad hoc) steer an entrepreneurial firm into ecological, engineering and evolutionary resilience and (2) to identify strategic activities that are deployed by firms with different capabilities to achieve resilience.

Data were gathered using structured qualitative interviews with 26 entrepreneurial resilient firms that managed to survive a multitude of coinciding crises.

The findings show that each type of capability enhances the ability to achieve a specific resilience outcome: ad hoc capability for partial engineering resilience, routine capability for ecological resilience and dynamic capability for evolutionary resilience. Furthermore, ad hoc capabilities are shown to be favored when firms' losses are severe. In contrast, routine and dynamic capabilities are preferred when losses are mild. The most significant capability deployment activities related to building resilience are corporate strategic changes, global export strategy, cost reduction, stakeholder support, positive mindset, fund raising, network building, product development, efficiency improvement and restructuring. These activities are segregated based on capability and resilience types.

Practitioners are encouraged to cast off limiting assumptions and beliefs that firms are conditioned to fail when faced with unprecedented crises. This study provides an integrative portfolio of capabilities and activities as a toolbox that can be used by different entrepreneurs and policy makers to achieve resilience and better performance.

The paper undertakes a first of its kind empirical examination of the association between capabilities and resilience. The context is unique as it involves a multitude of coinciding crises including Covid-19 pandemic, city explosion, economic collapse, political instability and a severe banking crisis.

While various supply chain (SC) sustainability investigations exist, their connection to supply chain resilience (SCRes) remains largely unexplored. To fill this gap, the authors answer the question: “How do firms' sustainability actions affect their SCs' resilience and sustainability trajectories in turbulent environments?" by exploring the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The authors conducted 10 case studies in five industries located in six European countries. A total of 19 semi-structured interviews and relevant secondary data were collected and analyzed in reference to SC sustainability learning and the literature on SCRes approaches (i.e. engineering, ecological and social-ecological).

31 SC actions referring to different sustainability dimensions were identified to map SCRes learning through a temporal, spatial and functional scale analysis. While five cases are related to an engineering approach focused on “bouncing back” to pre-pandemic goals, three cases were focused on “bouncing forward” as part of an ecological approach. Moreover, the authors identified the existence of two social-ecological resilience cases which developed long-term actions, updating functional set-ups transcending the SC level. The results furthermore illustrate an influence of the SCRes approaches on SC sustainability learning, generating three different paths: flat, flat ascending and ascending SC sustainability trajectories.

The study develops an overview of the adoption of SCRes approaches due to temporal, spatial and functional scales, and their effect on SC sustainability trajectories through exploitation and exploration capabilities. Future research should elaborate on potential moderators in the proposed relationships.

A better understanding of the link between SC sustainability actions and SCRes will help practitioners to make better informed decisions in turbulent environments.

Unlike previous research, this paper provides empirical evidence on engineering, ecological and social-ecological SCRes approaches, as well as SC sustainability trajectories.

Using total interpretive structural modelling (TISM), this paper aims to “identify”, “analyse” and “categorise” the sustainable-resilience readiness factors for healthcare during the Covid-19 pandemic.

To obtain the data, a closed-ended questionnaire was used in addition to a scheduled interview with each respondent. To identify how the factors interact, the TISM approach was employed and the cross-impact matrix multiplication applied to a classification method was used to rank and categorise the sustainable-resilience readiness factors.

This study identified ten sustainable-resilience readiness factors for healthcare during the Covid-19 pandemic. The study states that the major factors are environmental scanning, awareness and preparedness, team empowerment and working, transparent communication system, learning culture, ability to respond and monitor, organisational culture, resilience engineering, personal and professional resources and technology capability.

The study focused primarily on sustainable-resilience readiness characteristics for the healthcare sector.

This research will aid key stakeholders and academics in better understanding the factors that contribute to sustainable-resilience in healthcare.

This study proposes the TISM technique for healthcare, which is a novel attempt in the subject of readiness for sustainable-resilience in this sector. The paper proposes a framework including a mixture of factors for sustainability and resilience in the healthcare sector for operations.

Resilience as a novel concept has attracted the most attention in the management of engineering systems. The main goal of engineering systems is production assurance and increasing customer satisfaction which depends on the suitable performance of mechanical equipment. “A resilient system is defined as a system that is resistant to disruption and failures and can recover itself and returns to the state before failure as soon as possible in the case of failure.” Estimate the value of the system’s resilience to increase its resilience by covering the weakness in the resilience indexes of the system.

In this article, a suitable approach to estimating resilience in complex engineering systems management in the field of mining has been presented. Accordingly, indexes of reliability, maintainability, supportability, efficiency index of prognostics and health management of the system, and ultimately the organization resilience index, have been used to evaluate the system resilience.

The results of applying this approach indicate the value of 80% resilience if the risk factor is considered and 98% if the mentioned factors are ignored. Also, the value of 58% resilience of this organization’s management group indicates the weakness of situational awareness and weakness in the vulnerable points of the organization.

To evaluate the resilience in this article, five indicators of reliability, maintainability, and supportability are used as performance indicators. Also, organization resilience and the prognostic and health management of the system (PHM) are used as management indicators. To achieve more favorable results, the environmental and operational variables governing the system have been used in performance indicators, and expert experts' opinions have been used in management indicators.

This paper aims to identify research approaches and issues in relation to the main paradigms of resilience: engineering resilience, ecological resilience and socio-ecological resilience. This paper provides a synthesis of the core elements of each resilience approach and their implications.

A critical thematic review was undertaken of the hospitality and tourism resilience literature.

Resilience is a contested boundary object with different understandings according to conceptual and disciplinary position. The dominant approach in hospitality and tourism studies is primarily informed by engineering resilience with the focus at the organizational level. The ontological and epistemological understanding of resilience and change concepts appears limited leading to a lack of appreciation of the multi-scaled nature of resilience and the importance of slow change.

The research has important implications for understanding the key elements of different approaches to resilience.

The research synthesis may help improve resilience strategy and policymaking, including indicator selection.

The research notes the relationship of resilience to sustainability, the potential for learning and decision-making practices.

In addition to thematic analysis, a model of the multi-scaled nature of resilience is provided and the key elements of the three main approaches with implications for theory and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to examine competing assumptions about the nature of resilience and selects those most appropriate for an entrepreneurial context. Assumptions are integrated into a theoretical framework highlighting how different threats require different resilience responses. Overall organizational resilience results from a portfolio of resilience capabilities.

Akin to theoretical sampling, the authors identify various theoretical insights about resilience across three disciplines of psychology, ecology and engineering. The authors use these insights to distill competing assumptions about what resilience is and evaluate those most appropriate for entrepreneurial contexts. Existing resilience literature in organization science is critiqued in terms of underlying assumptions and an alternative theoretical framework proposed based on more robust assumptions.

Other disciplines point to resilience being a process that differs for different threats and as either bouncing back, absorbing shocks or bouncing forward. When imported into entrepreneurship these characteristics lead to a conceptualization of resilience as being enacted through a capability portfolio. A routine-based capability response is preferred when threats are familiar, simple, not severe and frequent, following minimal disorganization and where resource slack is available. In contrast, heuristics-based capabilities are preferred when threats are unfamiliar, complex, severe and infrequent, following serious disorganization and where resource slack is unavailable. An absorption threshold point identifies when organizations need to switch from routine-based to heuristics-based resilience capabilities.

Building resilience across a range of adverse situations requires firms to develop a portfolio of resilience capabilities. Firms must learn to match the capability required for the specific threat profile faced. This includes a mix of routinized responses for returning to stability but also more flexible, heuristics-based responses for strategic reconfiguration.

The paper undertakes a first of its kind cross-disciplinary conceptual analysis at the level of identifying competing assumptions about the nature of resilience. These assumptions are found to be somewhat unconscious among organization researchers, limiting the conceptual development of resilience in entrepreneurship. The authors contribute a theoretical framework based on explicit and robust assumptions, enabling the field to advance conceptually.

This article seeks to broaden how researchers in supply chain management view supply chain resilience by drawing on and integrating insights from other disciplines – in particular, the literature on the resilience of social-ecological systems.

Before the authors import new notions of resilience from outside the discipline, the current state of the art in supply chain resilience research is first briefly reviewed and summarized. Drawing on five practical examples of disruptive events and challenges to supply chain practice, the authors assess how these examples expose gaps in the current theoretical lenses. These examples are used to motivate and justify the need to expand our theoretical frameworks by drawing on insights from the literature on social-ecological systems.

The supply chain resilience literature has predominantly focused on minimizing the consequences of a disruption and on returning to some form of steady state (often assumed to be identical to the state that existed prior to the disruption) implicitly assuming the supply chain behaves like an engineered system. This article broadens the debate around supply chain resilience using literature on social-ecological systems that puts forward three manifestations of resilience: (1) persistence, which is akin to an engineering-based view, (2) adaptation and (3) transformation. Furthermore, it introduces seven principles of resilience thinking that can be readily applied to supply chains.

A social-ecological interpretation of supply chains presents many new avenues of research, which may rely on the use of innovative research methods to further our understanding of supply chain resilience.

The article encourages managers to think differently about supply chains and to consider what this means for their resilience. The three manifestations of resilience are not mutually exclusive. For example, while persistence may be needed in the initial aftermath of a disruption, adaptation and transformation may be required in the longer term.

The article challenges traditional assumptions about supply chains behaving like engineered systems and puts forward an alternative perspective of supply chains as being dynamic and complex social-ecological systems that are impossible to entirely control.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how companies approach the management of cyber and information risks in their supply chain, what initiatives they adopt to this aim, and to what extent along the supply chain. In fact, the increasing level of connectivity is transforming supply chains, and it creates new opportunities but also new risks in the cyber space. Hence, cyber supply chain risk management (CSCRM) is emerging as a new management construct. The ultimate aim is to help organizations in understanding and improving the CSCRM process and cyber resilience in their supply chains.

This research relied on a qualitative approach based on a comparative case study analysis involving five large multinational companies with headquarters, or branches, in the UK.

Results highlight the importance for CSCRM to shift the viewpoint from the traditional focus on companies’ internal information technology (IT) infrastructure, able to “firewall themselves” only, to the whole supply chain with a cross-functional approach; initiatives for CSCRM are mainly adopted to “respond” and “recover” without a well-rounded approach to supply chain resilience for a long-term capacity to adapt to changes according to an evolutionary approach. Initiatives are adopted at a firm/dyadic level, and a network perspective is missing.

This paper extends the current theory on cyber and information risks in supply chains, as a combination of supply chain risk management and resilience, and information risk management. It provides an analysis and classification of cyber and information risks, sources of risks and initiatives to managing them according to a supply chain perspective, along with an investigation of their adoption across the supply chain. It also studies how the concept of resilience has been deployed in the CSCRM process by companies. By laying the first empirical foundations of the subject, this study stimulates further research on the challenges and drivers of initiatives and coordination mechanisms for CSCRM at a supply chain network level.

Results invite companies to break the “silos” of their activities in CSCRM, embracing the whole supply chain network for better resilience. The adoption of IT security initiatives should be combined with organisational ones and extended beyond the dyad. Where applicable, initiatives should be bi-directional to involve supply chain partners, remove the typical isolation in the CSCRM process and leverage the value of information. Decisions on investments in CSCRM should involve also supply chain managers according to a holistic approach.

A supply chain perspective in the existing scientific contributions is missing in the management of cyber and information risk. This is one of the first empirical studies dealing with this interdisciplinary subject, focusing on risks that are now very high in the companies’ agenda, but still overlooked. It contributes to theory on information risk because it addresses cyber and information risks in massively connected supply chains through a holistic approach that includes technology, people and processes at an extended level that goes beyond the dyad.