Integrated detection of disruption scenarios, the ripple effect dispersal and recovery paths in supply chains
- 58 Downloads
The studies on supply chain (SC) disruption management frequently assume the existence of some negative scenarios and suggest ways to proactively protect and reactively recover the SC operations and performance if such scenarios occur. Though, there is a paucity of research on how to support methodologically the detection of realistic disruption scenarios, ideally of different risk aversion degrees. The contribution of our study lies in a conceptualization of a new methodical approach to the detection of disruption scenarios, ripple effect dispersal and recovery paths in supply chains on the basis of structural genomes. The objective is to integrate and expand the existing knowledge gained isolated in robustness analysis and recovery planning into a comprehensive framework for building a theory as well as for managerial purposes. The outcomes of this research constitute a useful decision-making support tool that allows detecting disruption scenarios at different risk-aversion levels based on the quantification of the structural robustness with the use of the genome method and observing the scope of disruption propagation, i.e., the ripple effect. The advantage of using a robustness computation by the genome method is that this allows detecting both the disruption scenarios of different severity, the ripple effect dispersal, and the corresponding recovery paths. Our results can be of value for decision-makers to compare different supply chain structural designs regarding the robustness and to identify disruption scenarios that interrupt the supply chain operations to different extents. The scenario detection can be further used for identifying optimal reconfiguration paths to deploy proactive contingency and reactive recovery policies. We show a correlation between the risk aversion degree of disruption scenarios and the outcomes of the reconfiguration policies.
KeywordsSupply chain Resilience Ripple effect Recovery Graph theory Genome Scenarios Fuzzy systems
The authors are grateful to two anonymous reviewers who helped us improving the manuscript immensely.
The research described in this paper is partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Grants 16-29-09482-ofi-m, 17-29-07073-ofi-i, 19–08–00989), state order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation No. 2.3135.2017/4.6, state Research 0073–2019–0004.
- Altay, N., Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2018). Agility and resilience as antecedents of supply chain performance under moderating effects of organizational culture within humanitarian setting: A dynamic capability view. Production Planning and Control,29(14), 1158–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chopra, S., & Meindl, P. (2015). Supply chain management—Strategy, planning and operation (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
- Colbourn, C. J. (1987). The combinatorics of network reliability. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Demirel, G., MacCarthy, B. L., Ritterskamp, D., Champneys A., & Gross, T. (2019). Identifying dynamical instabilities in supply networks using generalized modeling. Journal of Operations Management. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/joom.1005. Accessed 2 Oct 2019.
- Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S. J., Wamba, S. F., Roubaud, D., & Foropon, C. (2019b). Empirical investigation of data analytics capability and organizational flexibility as complements to supply chain resilience. International Journal of Production Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1582820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2020). A digital supply chain twin for managing the disruption risks and resilience in the era of Industry 4.0. Production Planning and Control (forthcoming).Google Scholar
- Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., Das, A., & Sokolov, B. (2019a). Digital supply chain twins: Managing the ripple effect, resilience and disruption risks by data-driven optimization, simulation, and visibility. In D. Ivanov, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of ripple effects in the supply chain (pp. 309–332). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., & Sokolov, B. (Eds.). (2019b). Handbook of ripple effects in the supply chain. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-3-030-14301-5.Google Scholar
- Kinra, A., Ivanov, D., Das, A., Dolgui, A. (2019). Ripple effect quantification by supplier risk exposure assessment. International Journal of Production Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1675919.
- Kopytov, E. A., Pavlov, A. N., & Zelentsov, V. A. (2010). New methods of calculating the Genome of structure and the failure criticality of the complex objects’ elements. Transport and Telecommunication,11(4), 4–13.Google Scholar
- Pavlov, A., Ivanov, D., Pavlov, D., & Slinko, A. (2019). Optimization of network redundancy and contingency planning in sustainable and resilient supply chain resource management under conditions of structural dynamics. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03182-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pyt’ev, Y. P. (2002). The method of the possibility theory in the problems of optimal estimation and decision making: VI. Fussy sets. Independence. P-complection methods for estimation fuzzy sets and their parameters. Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis,12(2), 107–115.Google Scholar
- Ryabinin, I. A. (1976). Reliability of engineering systems. Mir: Principles and Analysis.Google Scholar
- Schmidt, W., & Simchi-Levi, D. (2013). Nissan Motor Company Ltd.: Building operational resiliency (pp. 13–149). Cambridge: MIT Sloan Management.Google Scholar
- Sheffi, Y. (2005). The resilient enterprise: Overcoming vulnerability for competitive advantage. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar