Skip to main content

An analysis of international coauthorship networks in the supply chain analytics research area

Scientometrics volume 111, pages 1703–1731 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

This work characterized the research community of supply chain analytics (SCA) with respect to coauthorship, a special kind of collaboration. A characterization of coauthorship in terms of researchers’ countries, institutions and individuals was elaborated, so three different one-mode networks were studied. Besides, the SCA research community is characterized in terms of Supply Chain Management (SCM) research streams. Coauthorship among researchers working on different streams is also analyzed. Metrics that depict the importance of the network nodes were studied such as degree, betweenness and closeness. This study found out an intense collaboration between USA and countries such as China, India, United Kingdom and Canada. Researchers from Canada and Ireland are better situated (central) in the network, although they have not published a considerable amount of papers. The presence of cliques and the small-world effect were also observed in these networks. In terms of research streams, more research on SCA located at the Strategic Management, Technology-focused and Logistics streams was found. The most common links between research streams are on the one side, Technology-focused with both Strategic Management and Logistics and on the other side Strategic Management with both Logistics and Organizational behavior. SCA researchers are rarely working with a focus on Marketing. This study contributes to the SCA literature by identifying the most central actors in this area and by characterizing the area in terms of SCM research streams. This study may contribute to the development of more focused research incentive programs and collaborations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Abbasi, A., Hossain, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 403–412. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behara, R. S., Sunil, B., & Smart, P. A. (2014). Leadership in OM research: A social network analysis of European researchers. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(12), 1537–1563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnes, K. (2014). Predictive analytics for supply chains: A systematic literature review. In 21st twente student conference on IT. Netherlands.

  • Borgatti, S. P. (2002). Netdraw: Graph visualization software. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2014). UCINET. In R. Alhajj & J. Rokne (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social network analysis and mining (pp. 2261–2267). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bose, R. (2009). Advanced analytics: Opportunities and challenges. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(2), 155–172. doi:10.1108/02635570910930073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cainelli, G., Maggioni, M. A., Uberti, T. E., & De Felice, A. (2015). The strength of strong ties: How coauthorship affect productivity of academic economists? Scientometrics, 102(1), 673–699. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1421-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., Ellram, L. M., & Tate, W. L. (2007a). The use of social network analysis in logistics research. Journal of Business Logistics, 28(1), 137–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., Leuschner, R., & Rogers, D. S. (2007b). A social network analysis of the Journal of Supply Chain Management: Knowledge generation, knowledge diffusion and thought leadership. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 43(2), 15–28. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493X.2007.00028.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Chiang, R. H. L., & Storey, V. C. (2012). Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1165–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colicchia, C., & Strozzi, F. (2012). Supply chain risk management: A new methodology for a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(4), 403–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Côrte-Real, N., Ruivo, P., & Oliveira, T. (2014). The diffusion stages of business intelligence & analytics (BI&A): A systematic mapping study. Procedia Technology, 16, 172–179. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croom, S., Romano, P., & Giannakis, M. (2000). Supply chain management: An analytical framework for critical literature review. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 6(1), 67–83. doi:10.1016/S0969-7012(99)00030-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H. (2014). How strategists use “big data” to support internal business decisions, discovery and production. Strategy & Leadership, 42(4), 45–50. doi:10.1108/SL-05-2014-0034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Jeanne, G. H. (2007). Competing on analytics: The new science of winning. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., Morison, R., & Harris, J. G. (2010). Analytics at work: Smarter decisions, better results. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Stefano, D., Giordano, G., & Vitale, M. P. (2011). Issues in the analysis of coauthorship networks. Quality & Quantity, 45(5), 1091–1107. doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9493-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 187–203. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabbe-Costes, N., & Jahre, M. (2008). Supply chain integration and performance: A review of the evidence. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 19(2), 130–154. doi:10.1108/09574090810895933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finardi, U., & Buratti, A. (2016). Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: An analysis of international coauthorship. Scientometrics, 109(1), 433–446. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1927-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbach, K., Putzke, J., & Schoder, D. (2011). Coauthorship networks in electronic markets research. Electronic Markets, 21(1), 19–40. doi:10.1007/s12525-011-0051-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakis, M. (2012). The intellectual structure of the supply chain management discipline. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 25(2), 136–169. doi:10.1108/17410391211204392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearnshaw, E. J. S., & Wilson, M. M. J. (2013). A complex network approach to supply chain network theory. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(4), 442–469. doi:10.1108/01443571311307343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henneberg, S. C., Swart, J., Naudé, P., Jiang, Z., & Mouzas, S. (2009). Mobilizing ideas in knowledge networks: A social network analysis of the human resource management community 1990–2005. The Learning Organization, 16(6), 443–459. doi:10.1108/09696470910993927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C., Lee-Post, A., & Pakath, R. (2014). A unified foundation for business analytics. Decision Support Systems, 64, 130–141. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2014.05.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, C., & Racherla, P. (2010). A social network perspective of tourism research collaborations. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(4), 1012–1034. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2010.03.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilubi, I. (2016). Investigating current paradigms in supply chain risk management—a bibliometric study. Business Process Management Journal, 22(4), 662–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohavi, R., & Rothleder, N. J. (2002). Emerging trends in business analytics. Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 45–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S. (2015). Coauthorship networks: A review of the literature. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(1), 55–73. doi:10.1108/AJIM-09-2014-0116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S. (2016). Efficacy of a giant component in coauthorship networks. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 68(1), 19–32. doi:10.1108/AJIM-12-2014-0172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S., & Jan, J. M. (2014). Relationship between authors’ structural position in the collaboration network and research productivity. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 48(4), 355–369. doi:10.1108/PROG-01-2013-0002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L. (2010). Supply chain integration through business intelligence. In International conference on Management and Service Science (MASS) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. http://doi.org/10.1109/ICMSS.2010.5576813.

  • Marion, L. S., Garfield, E., Hargens, L. L., Lievrouw, L. A., White, H. D., & Wilson, C. S. (2003). Social network analysis and citation network analysis: Complementary approaches to the study of scientific communication sponsored by SIG MET. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 40(1), 486–487. doi:10.1002/meet.1450400186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., & Nix, N. W. (2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 1–25. doi:10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00001.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milojević, S. (2010). Modes of collaboration in modem science: Beyond power laws and preferential attachment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1410–1423. doi:10.1002/asi.21331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munoz, D. A., Queupil, J. P., & Fraser, P. (2016). Assessing collaboration networks in educational research. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(3), 416–436. doi:10.1108/IJEM-11-2014-0154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(Suppl), 5200–5205. doi:10.1073/pnas.0307545100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooy, W. De. (2003). Fields and networks: Correspondence analysis and social network analysis in the framework of field theory. Poetics, 31(5–6), 305–327. doi:10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00035-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington, A., & Meredith, J. (2009). The evolution of the intellectual structure of operations management—1980–2006: A citation/co-citation analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 27(3), 185–202. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2008.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisinghani, M. S., & Meade, L. L. (2005). Strategic decisions in supply-chain intelligence using knowledge management: An analytic-network-process framework. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 10(2), 114–121. doi:10.1108/13598540510589188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, W. S., & Mello, J. E. (2012). Grounded theory: An inductive method for supply chain research. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42(8/9), 863–880. doi:10.1108/09600031211269794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahay, B. S., & Ranjan, J. (2008). Real time business intelligence in supply chain analytics. Information Management & Computer Security, 16(1), 28–48. doi:10.1108/09685220810862733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangari, M. S., & Razmi, J. (2015). Business intelligence competence, agile capabilities, and agile performance in supply chain: An empirical study. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 26(2), 356–380. doi:10.1108/IJLM-01-2013-0012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenherr, T., & Speier-Pero, C. (2015). Data science, predictive analytics, and big data in supply chain management: Current state and future potential. Journal of Business Logistics, 36(1), 120–132. doi:10.1111/jbl.12082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, M., & Yu, W. (2013). Supply chain management and financial performance: Literature review and future directions. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(10), 1283–1317. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-03-2012-0112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloane, A., & O’Reilly, S. (2013). Production planning & control: The management of operations the emergence of supply network ecosystems: A social network analysis perspective. Production Planning and Control: The Management of Operations, 24(7), 621–639. doi:10.1080/09537287.2012.659874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souza, G. C. (2014). Supply chain analytics. SOURCE Business Horizons, 57(5), 595.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanovic, N., & Stefanovic, D. (2009). Supply chain business intelligence: Technologies, issues and trends. In M. Bramer (Ed.), Artificial intelligence an international perspective (pp. 217–245). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03226-4_12.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stock, J. R., & Boyer, S. L. (2009). Developing a consensus definition of supply chain management: A qualitative study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(8), 690–711. doi:10.1108/09600030910996323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trkman, P., McCormack, K., de Oliveira, M. P. V., & Ladeira, M. B. (2010). The impact of business analytics on supply chain performance. Decision Support Systems, 49(3), 318–327. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ye, Q., Li, T., & Law, R. (2011). A coauthorship network analysis of tourism and hospitality research collaboration. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 37(1), 51–76. doi:10.1177/1096348011425500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Administration, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627 - Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil

    Marcelo Werneck Barbosa & Marcelo Bronzo Ladeira

  2. Department of Software Engineering and Information Systems, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais, Av: Dom José Gaspar, 500 Coração Eucarístico, Belo Horizonte, MG, 30535-901, Brazil

    Marcelo Werneck Barbosa

  3. Department of Industrial Technologies, University of Deusto, Avda. de las Universidades, 24, 48007, Bilbao, Spain

    Alberto de la Calle Vicente

Authors
  1. Marcelo Werneck Barbosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcelo Bronzo Ladeira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alberto de la Calle Vicente
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcelo Werneck Barbosa.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barbosa, M.W., Ladeira, M.B. & de la Calle Vicente, A. An analysis of international coauthorship networks in the supply chain analytics research area. Scientometrics 111, 1703–1731 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2370-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2370-6

Keywords

  • Social network analysis
  • Coauthorship networks
  • Big data analytics
  • Business analytics
  • Supply chain analytics