Advertisement

Supply Chain Risk Management in the Transmission and Amplification of Disruptions

  • Artur SwierczekEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The concept of risk management within the supply chain framework ought to involve indirect effects of disruptions. In other words, not only should it take into consideration the risk sources and their direct consequences, but also look into the indirect disruptions that may be transmitted and amplified in the supply chain structure. The transmission of disruptions means that the negative effects of risk are extended to a larger number of participants in a supply chain. If the negative risk effects are additionally magnified during the transmission, this suggests the occurrence of the amplification of disruptions. In other words, the subsequent links in a supply chain are exposed to a stronger impact of disruptions in the transmission. Thus, the supply chain management needs to apply a certain approach that enables to mitigate the negative consequences of the transmission and amplification of disruptions in supply chains. In this chapter, we review the extant literature on the essence, sources and factors of the transmission and amplification of disruptions in supply chains. In particular, we put emphasis on the issue of supply chain integration that may either drive or inhibit the transmission and amplification of disruptions. Having linked the obtained findings with the classical concepts of risk management, we develop and assess a framework of risk management that aims at mitigating the transmission and amplification of disruptions in supply chains.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The study was financed by the National Science Centre as a research project no. DEC-2012/05/E/HS4/01598.

References

  1. Aczel, A. D. (1993). Complete business statistics (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Boston.Google Scholar
  2. Ainuddin, R., Beamish, P., Hulland, J., & Rouse, M. (2007). Resource attributes and firm performance in international joint ventures. Journal of World Business, 42(1), 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aven, T., & Kristensen, V. (2005). Perspectives on risk: Review and discussion of the basis for establishing a unified and holistic approach. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 90(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg, E., Knudsen, D., & Norrman, A. (2008). Assessing performance of supply chain risk management programs: A tentative approach. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 9(3), 288–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Billington, C., Johnson, B., & Triantis, A. (2002). A Real options perspective on supply chain management in high technology. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 15(2), 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackhurst, J., Craighead, C., Elkins, D., & Handfield, R. (2005). An empirically derived agenda of critical research issues for managing supply-chain disruptions. International Journal of Production Research, 43(19), 4067–4081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng, S., & Kam, B. (2008). A conceptual framework for analyzing risk in supply networks. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22(4), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). NJ: Lawrence-Erlbaum, Mahwah.Google Scholar
  9. Christopher, M. (2002). Supply chain vulnerability. Cranfield: Research Report.Google Scholar
  10. Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). The five principles of supply chain resilience. Logistics Europe, February, 16–21.Google Scholar
  11. Christou, M., & Amendale, A. (1998). How lessons learned from exercises can improve the quality of risk studies. In A. Mosleh & R. A. Bari (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Davison, A., & Hinkley, D. (2003). Bootstrap methods and their application. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ellegaard, Ch. (2008). Supply risk management in a small company perspective. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 13(6), 425–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gilbert, G., & Gips, M. (2000). Supply-side contingency planning. Security Management, 44(3), 70–74.Google Scholar
  18. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Hillson, D. (2002). The risk breakdown structure (RBS) as an aid to effective risk management. In: 5th European Project Management Conference. Cannes, France, 1–11.Google Scholar
  20. Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(4), 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hult, G., Hurley, R., & Knight, G. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jarvis, C., Mackenzie, S., Podsakoff, P., Mick, D., & Bearden, W. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Juttner, U. (2005). Supply chain risk management. Understanding the business requirements from a practitioner perspective. International Journal of Logistics Management, 16(1), 120–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Juttner, U., Peck, H., & Christopher, M. (2003). Supply chain risk management: Outlining an agenda for future research. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 6(4), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kern, D., Moser, R., Hartmann, E., & Moder, M. (2012). Supply risk management: Model development and empirical analysis. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42(1), 60–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kersten, W., Hohrath, P. H., & Böger, M. (2007). An empirical approach to supply chain risk management: Development of a strategic framework. In 18th Annual POMs Conference, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
  27. Kersten, W., Schroeder, M., Skirde, H., & Feser, M. (2012). The development of supply chain risk management (SCRM) implementation model. In 23rd Annual POMs Conference, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  28. Khan, O., & Burns, B. (2007). Risk and supply chain management: Creating a research agenda. International Journal of Logistics Management, 18(2), 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kleindorfer, P., & Saad, G. (2005). Disruption risk management in supply chains. Production and Operations Management, 14(1), 53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McDonald, R. (1996). Path analysis with composite variables. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 31(2), 239–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mentzer, J. (2004). Global supply chain risk management. White Paper: University of Tennesee. September 30.Google Scholar
  32. Nishiguchi, T., & Baaudet, A. (1998). The Toyota Group and the Aisin fire. Sloan Management Review, 49–59.Google Scholar
  33. Norrman, A., & Jansson, U. (2004). Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk management approach after a serious sub-supplier accident. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 34(5), 434–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  35. O’Leary-Kelly, S., & Vokurka, R. (1998). The empirical assessment of construct validity. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peck, H. (2004). Resilience—surviving the unthinkable. Logistics Manager, March, 16–18.Google Scholar
  37. Radjou, N., Orlov, L., & Nakashima, T. (2002). Adapting to supply network change. The TechStrategy TM Report, March.Google Scholar
  38. Rao, S., & Goldsby, T. J. (2009). Supply chain risk: A review and typology. Journal of Logistics Management, 20(1), 97–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rice, J., & Caniato, F. (2003). Building a secure and resilient supply chain. Supply Chain Management Review, 7(5), 22–30.Google Scholar
  40. Sheehan, N. T. (2009). Making risk pay: The boards’ role. Journal of Business Strategy, 30(1), 33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smeltzer, L., & Siferd, S. (1998). Proactive supply management: The management of risk. International Journal of Purchasing and Material Management, 34(1), 38–45.Google Scholar
  42. Soler, M., & Bassetto, S. (2008). Analyse des risques de la chaine d’approvisionnements. Janvier.Google Scholar
  43. Spekman, R., & Davis, E. (2004). Risky business: Expanding the discussion on risk and the extended enterprise. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 34(5), 414–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stecke, K., & Kumar, S. (2009). Sources of supply chain disruptions, factors that breed vulnerability, and mitigating strategies. Journal of Marketing Channels, 16(3), 193–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Straub, D., Boudreau, M., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 380–427.Google Scholar
  46. Svensson, G. (2000). A conceptual framework for the analysis of vulnerability in supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 30(9), 731–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Swierczek, A. (2012). Propagation of amplified disruptions in supply chains. Conceptual perspective and practical implications. In 23rd Annual POMS Conference, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  48. Swierczek, A. (2013). An identification of the ‘rippling effect’ in the transmission of disruptions. The dilemmas of theoretical study and empirical research. Journal of Economics & Management 12, 83–96.Google Scholar
  49. Swierczek, A. (2014). The impact of supply chain integration on the ‘snowball effect’ in the transmission of disruptions: An empirical evaluation of the model. International Journal of Production Economics, 157, 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Swierczek, A. (2016). The ‘snowball effect’ in the transmission of disruptions in supply chains: The role of intensity and span of integration. International Journal of Logistics Management, 27(3), 1002–1038.Google Scholar
  51. Tang, C. S. (2006). Perspectives in supply chain risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(2), 451–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tenenhaus, M., Esposito, V., Chatelin, Y., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modelling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tsai, J., Bowring, E., Marsella, S., & Tambe, M. (2013). Empirical evaluation of computational fear contagion models in crowd dispersions. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 27(2), 200–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tsang, E. (2002). Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9), 835–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. van Dorp, J., & Duffey, M. (1999). Statistical dependence in risk analysis for project networks using Monte Carlo methods. International Journal of Production Economics, 58(1), 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van Dorp, J. (2004). Statistical dependence through common risk factors: With applications in uncertainty analysis. European Journal of Operations Research, 16(1), 240–255.Google Scholar
  57. Werts, C., Linn, R., & Joreskog, K. (1974). Intraclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zsidisin, G., & Ritchie, B. (Eds.). (2009). Supply chain risk. A handbook of assessment, management, and performance. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business LogisticsUniversity of Economics in KatowiceKatowicePoland

Personalised recommendations