ریسک زنجیره تأمین در محیط های آشفته، یک مدل مفهومی برای مدیریت ریسک شبکه زنجیره تأمین
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|1354||2009||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||1 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Production Economics, Volume 119, Issue 2, June 2009, Pages 247–258
Supply risk or the likelihood of supply disruptions is emerging as a key challenge to supply chain management. The ability to identify which supplier has greater potential of a disruption is a critical first step in managing the frequency and impact of these disruptions that often significantly impact on the supply chain. This paper presents preliminary research concepts regarding a new approach to the identification and prediction of supply risk. This approach to the assessment and classification of suppliers is based on supplier's attributes, performances and supply chain characteristics, while it is also modified by factors in the supplier's specific environment. The challenges posed to supply chains due to a turbulent environment (both from within the industry and external influences) are examined. A new method for the assessment and classification of suppliers based on their characteristics, performances and the environment of the industry in which they operate is presented. The findings are explained within the contingency theory.
The risk of disruptions caused by both factors within supply chains (SCs) and outside environmental forces is one of the main concerns of both practitioners and researchers. Supply chain risk management (SCRM) is therefore a field of escalating importance and is aimed at developing approaches to the identification, assessment, analysis and treatment of areas of vulnerability and risk in SCs (Neiger et al., 2009). Various trends that enhance exposure to risks, such as the increased use of outsourcing, globalisation, reduction of the supplier base; reduced buffers, increased demand for on-time deliveries or shorter product life cycles (Norrman and Jansson, 2004) are ratcheting up the importance of SCRM. This is highlighted by several practical examples of the high cost of improper preparation for and response to various events (Chopra and Sodhi, 2004). Currently, SCRM approaches seek to measure either supplier attributes or the SC structure, use the findings to compare suppliers and predict disruption. The results are then used to prepare proper mitigation and response strategies associated with these suppliers. SCRM is most often a formal process that involves identifying potential losses, understanding the likelihood of potential losses, and assigning significance to these losses (Giunipero and Eltantawy, 2004). A typical example of such an approach is the PRAM methodology developed by the Dow Chemical Company to measure SC risk and its impacts. This approach examines the following factors of a SC: supply market risk, supplier risk, organisation risk and supply strategy risk (Hackett Group, 2007). Due to the relative newness of the SCRM field it is currently chaotic and somewhat disorganised. There are several different classifications of risks and methodologies and too often they focus only on the prediction of disruptive events instead of the root causes of uncertainties. Frequently, only disruptive events (such as bankruptcy, natural disaster or the possibility of a terrorist attack) are included, whereas continuous changes due to a turbulent environment (e.g. a change in customer tastes, technology shifts or supplier priorities) are ignored. While important, such approaches also usually neglect the fact that the market, technology and environmental turbulence in the supplier's particular market segment are significant factors influencing the relationship between supplier attributes, performance in a SC and the potential for disruptions. Since various suppliers (and suppliers’ suppliers) operate in different markets and environments, their turbulence varies and therefore the forces influencing a supplier also differ. While a certain supplier strategy (e.g. ordering large batches to decrease procurement costs or single-source suppliers with long contractual commitments) may be acceptable in a non-turbulent environment, it may be detrimental in a more turbulent one (e.g. in the presence of quick technological advances such as microprocessors or large commodity price swings). Considering all of this, the same supplier attributes, strategy and structure may pose considerably different risks of disruption. Therefore, a comprehensive approach to SCRM has to include supplier-associated turbulence as well as various sources of uncertainty due to supplier attributes such as strategy, structure and performance. This paper suggests a framework for the assessment of supplier risk of disruption based on their strategy, structure, performance and attributes as modified by turbulence in their specific environment. The approach is grounded within the contingency theory. Since there is no single best way of organising SCs to manage uncertainties and risks, firm-to-firm risk comparisons are therefore the result of environmental demands and attributes that tend to be firm-specific. The structure of this paper is as follows. First, the role and challenges of SCM in a turbulent environment are presented. Then the main sources of uncertainty and risks are identified and classified. The role of endogenous (market, technology) and exogenous uncertainty in SCRM is analysed. Several approaches to supplier selection, performance measurement and management are discussed. The role of SC strategy and structure is emphasised. Then, a conceptual model for measuring supplier performance is proposed along with an approach to supplier classification and portfolio management. Finally, the application of the framework is shown with the case study from automotive industry.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Judging from the growing number of papers in research journals and various stories in professional magazines, SCRM is a field of growing importance. The current approaches only offer a limited estimation of the risk of supplier non-performance. As is usual of a new field SCRM is currently disorganised and offers several different methodologies and various approaches to supplier-connected risks. The often neglected fact is that suppliers operate in different environments and those two suppliers with similar characteristics and performance can pose considerably different risks. Our approach enables the estimation of the risks and helps the company to make a more informed decision as to how much risk it is willing to take and which risks will it mitigate (either with dual/multiple sourcing or with the change of supplier). Our paper has used the contingency theory to analyse the often conflicting earlier findings on the role of environmental turbulence in SCRM. It has conceptualised several ideas and constructs using the premise that market, technology and environmental turbulence in the supplier's market segment is a significant factor modifying the relationship between supplier characteristics, SC strategy/structure and the supplier risk of non-performance. It has provided a classification of uncertainties arising from a turbulent environment and offered a new way of looking at supplier-connected risks. A valuable synthesis and classification of earlier research and practitioners’ efforts in the SCRM field was conducted. The application of the concepts and the framework were shown in a case study from automotive industry. The paper has added an important insight into and extension of the contingency theory in two respects. First, both the environment of the supplier and the strategy of the focal company should be considered when estimating the likeliness of supplier non-performance. The same supplier characteristics can entail considerably different risks in different situations. Second, the supplier portfolio matrix introduces the notion that the role of a supplier as one of the suppliers in the chain should be included. The fit between the supplier portfolio and the SC strategy is crucial for successful operation of the chain. Several important considerations for SC managers also arise from the findings. Our approach enables the ex ante prediction of possible supplier non-performance. Such suppliers should be closely monitored or (if possible) replaced. The approach also offers an important insight into the decision about investment in supplier development programmes or joint project/supplier integration. The focal company should not lock itself in with the suppliers that either cannot cope with the turbulence or do not fit within the SC strategy. The main future work is a detailed study of especially the SC strategy and structure construct. Currently, only the variables SC type, supplier type, geographical dispersion and business structure are included, with all being based on the literature review. A further conceptual extension of the construct along with statistical validation may be needed. Also, while the framework enables a coherent estimation of supplier-connected risks, it does not directly include the potential impact/loss due to a disruption or costs of mitigating a disruption (through e.g. a change of supplier or double sourcing). A multiple case study involving an analysis of not only the suppliers of the focal firm but also the suppliers’ suppliers would also be beneficial; several studies usually focus on a dyadic relationship instead of a sequence or even a network of several firms in the chain. The ability of the supplier to absorb the shocks and turbulence of its suppliers would be particularly interesting.