This study develops and tests a theory-driven conceptual model that explains variations in collaborative supply risk mitigation. It is based on data collected from manufacturing firms in Norway. The results show that collaborative risk identification, perception of supply risks, and overall focus on mitigating disruptive risks have a significant direct effect on collaborative supply risk mitigation. Further, an increase in collaborative risk identification strengthens the effect that perceived supply risk has on the level of collaborative risk mitigation, while supplier performance weakens the effect of perceived supply risk on the level of collaborative supply risk mitigation. Finally, the importance-performance map analysis shows that collaborative risk identification and the buying firm's overall focus on mitigating disruptive risks are the most important factors to explain variations in collaborative risk mitigation efforts. On the basis of the results, relevant theoretical implications are discussed and actionable managerial recommendations are provided.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to delineate key aspects of backshoring readiness and discuss how such aspects contribute to a smooth shift-back from global sourcing operations. It aims to answer the following questions: which factors constitute backshoring readiness and how these factors affect the backshoring transition. Design/methodology/approach Based on theory departure from the organizational readiness field and the emerging field on backshoring, a conceptual model is developed. A multiple qualitative case study is then conducted to exemplify the backshoring readiness factors delineated in the study. Findings The study indicates that due to previous outsourcing, limitations concerning the availability of firms’ capabilities are affected by ownership structures and that backshoring appears to be time-sensitive. The study delineates three key aspects of backshoring readiness and proposes a comprehensive understanding of readiness as an important construct to enhance successful backshoring. Research limitations/implications The findings are limited by the nature of this conceptual study, the restriction to a high-cost context and the small number of cases. Therefore, conclusions and proposed recommendations need to be further investigated in preferably larger samples of case studies. Practical implications By introducing contextual variables that go beyond traditional cost considerations, this work should be of special interest for both practitioners and academics, because the absorptive capacity for the exploitation of cutting-edge knowledge is globally scarce and hence rather expensive in Western countries compared with traditionally low-cost countries. Another practical contribution of this study is the conceptual backshoring readiness framework itself, as it can guide firms acquainting themselves with the resource availability in their home environment. Originality/value The research defines key resources needed to facilitate backshoring readiness in a conceptual framework developed from literature, which is then exemplified by a case study. This framework conceptualizes backshoring readiness as aspects of requirements to knowledge, technology and supplier infrastructures. Furthermore, the readiness framework developed provides firms and their managers with six recommendations that can enable a rigorous evaluation of a firm’s readiness to embark on backshoring and reflect on the aspect of fitness of its current strategies.
This study investigates the effect of organisational readiness, innovation and airport size and ownership on digital change at airports. Data is collected from a survey of managers at 94 airports worldwide and analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. Organisational readiness is found to have a direct effect on digital change. Organisational readiness also has a direct effect on innovation, which subsequently affects digital change. Airport size has a direct effect on digital change while the effect of ownership is not significant. The findings show that successful development of organisational readiness can be used to speed up the rate of innovation needed for digital change at airports.
Purpose This paper aims to develop a conceptual framework on interfirm conflicts in tourism value chains. The framework includes types of conflict, triggers of conflict and their preconditions, consequences of conflict and measures for preventing conflict. Design/methodology/approach The framework is developed from a review of literature that is focused largely on tourism value chains, interfirm conflicts and interorganizational relations. It draws on the ideas, concepts and empirical evidence offered in the literature. Findings Conflicts can be distinguished by their level of explicitness and by the motives on which they are grounded. They may be triggered by opportunistic behaviours, coercive demands, perceptions of unfairness or dissatisfaction with partner’s performance. Preconditions include exogenous events, asymmetrical power distribution, antagonism of goals and differences in perceptions of reality and serve as a breeding ground for the triggers. Consequences are typically destructive but may also offer opportunities for constructive outcomes. Joint implementation of formal contracting and relational governance may be used to prevent conflicts. Originality/value This paper provides a conceptual framework that can be used by scholars wishing to conduct more detailed empirical research on the subject. It can also be used by practitioners to assess interorganizational relations within their tourism value chains and to develop appropriate measures for preventing interfirm conflicts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.