Designing Resilience into Service Supply Chains: A Conceptual Methodology

  • Sigurd S. PettersenEmail author
  • Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett
  • Stein O. Erikstad


This chapter presents a methodology for designing resilient service supply chains. The approach combines system design methods with methods from risk assessment. Service supply chains consist of multiple assets, cooperating to fulfill an operation. Each asset has functionality to perform a set of tasks in the operation, and the combined functionalities of the fleet of assets must cover the activities the service supply chain are to perform. When a module in one asset in the fleet experiences loss of functionality, it constitutes a disruption in the service supply chain, a failure mode. The objective of the proposed methodology is to give decision support reducing the vulnerabilities of the service supply chain through design actions that can increase overall service supply chain resilience. The methodology consists of four steps. The first step includes breakdown of operation and service supply chain, mapping of modules to tasks, and selection of service supply chain configuration based on costs and utility. In the second step, failure modes are identified and their criticality assessed. In the third step, we propose design changes to reduce the impact of disruptions. These are evaluated in Step 4, where decisions regarding redesign are made. The recommendations from this methodology can be used to plan for how to redesign in the case of contingencies, or be used as part of an iterative process where the new information is incorporated in the evaluation of initial service supply chain design.


  1. Asbjørnslett, B. E. (2009). Assessing the vulnerability of supply chains. In G. A. Zsidisin & B. Ritchie (Eds.), Supply chain risk—A handbook of assessment, management, and performance (pp. 15–33). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  2. Asbjørnslett, B. E., Norstad, I., & Berle, Ø. (2012). Risk-based design of maritime transport systems. In P. Hokstad, I. B. Utne, & J. Vatn (Eds.), Risk and interdependencies in critical infrastructures (pp. 161–174). London, UK: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asbjørnslett, B. E., & Rausand, M. (1999). Assess the vulnerability of your production system. Production Planning & Control, 10(3), 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berle, Ø., Asbjørnslett, B. E., & Rice, J. B., Jr. (2011a). Formal vulnerability assessment of a maritime transportation system. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 96(6), 696–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berle, Ø., Rice, J. B., Jr., & Asbjørnslett, B. E. (2011b). Failure modes in the maritime transportation system: A functional approach to throughput vulnerability. Maritime Policy & Management, 38(6), 605–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craighead, C. W., Blackhurst, J., Rungtusanatham, M. J., & Handfield, R. B. (2007). The severity of supply chain disruptions: Design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sciences, 38(1), 131–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Weck, O. L., Roos, D., & Magee, C. L. (2011). Engineering systems: Meeting human needs in a complex technological world. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Eppinger, S. D., & Browning, T. R. (2012). Design structure matrix: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fitzgerald, M. E. & Ross, A. M. (2012a). Mitigating contextual uncertainties with valuable changeability analysis in the multi-epoch domain. In 6th Annual IEEE Systems Conference (pp. 281–288).Google Scholar
  11. Fitzgerald, M. E. & Ross, A. M. (2012b). Sustaining lifecycle value: Valuable changeability analysis with era simulation. In 6th Annual IEEE Systems Conference (pp. 202–208).Google Scholar
  12. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McManus, H. L., & Hastings, D. E. (2006). A framework for understanding uncertainty and its mitigation and exploitation in complex systems. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 34(3), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Papanikolaou, A. D. (2009). Risk-based ship design. In: A. D. Papanikolaou (Ed.), Springer: Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  15. Peck, H. (2005). Drivers of supply chain vulnerability: An integrated framework. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(3/4), 210–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Peck, H., Abley, M., Christopher, M., Hayford, M., Saw, R., Rutherford, C., et al. (2003). Creating resilient supply chains: A practical guide. Cranfield, UK. Available at
  17. Rausand, M. (2011). Risk assessment: Theory, methods, and applications (1st ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rice, J. B., Jr., & Caniato, F. (2003). Building a secure and resilient supply network. Supply Chain Management Review, 7(5), 22–30.Google Scholar
  19. Ross, A. M., & Hastings, D. E. (2005). The tradespace exploration paradigm. In INCOSE International Symposium 2005.Google Scholar
  20. Ross, A. M., Rhodes, D. H., & Hastings, D. E. (2008). Defining changeability: Reconciling flexibility, adaptability, scalability, modifiability, and robustness for maintaining system lifecycle value. Systems Engineering, 11(3), 246–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sheffi, Y., & Rice, J. B., Jr. (2005). A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(1), 41–48.Google Scholar
  22. Steward, D. V. (1981). The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-28(3), 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wasson, C. S. (2005). System analysis, design, and development: Concepts, principles, and practices. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sigurd S. Pettersen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Bjørn E. Asbjørnslett
    • 1
  • Stein O. Erikstad
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Marine TechnologyNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations