Purpose While systems theory explicitly considers interactions as part of a system’s complexity, supply chain complexity (SCC) is mostly conceptualized and measured as a linear summation of several aspects. The purpose of this paper is to challenge the general understanding by explicitly investigating interactions between and across different types (detail and dynamic) and levels (plant, supply chain, environment) of SCC. Design/methodology/approach An exploratory multiple case study methodology is adopted drawing on in-depth semi-structured interviews with respondents from eight manufacturing plants in the food processing industry. Findings On the one hand, it is found that different types add and increase overall SCC. On the other hand, the study also shows the opposite: interactions between detail and dynamic complexity can reduce the overall SCC experienced. Additionally, the findings highlight the specific food processing characteristics such as the variability of quality and quantity of raw materials that underlie interactions between types and levels of SCC. Originality/value This study adds to theory by empirically showing that interactions across and between types and levels do not automatically increase, but might also reduce SCC. As such, the findings contribute new detail to the concept of SCC: aspects of complexity do not necessarily add up linearly. Additionally, this study is one of the first to demonstrate how specific contextual aspects from the food processing industry relate to SCC.

PurposeTo date, the literature has usually assumed that a universal approach to resilience is appropriate in which different resilience capabilities are equally important for all organizations independent of contextual characteristics. In contrast this study investigates if production process characteristics affect resilience capabilities in terms of redundancy, flexibility, agility and collaboration.Design/methodology/approachAn in-depth exploratory multiple case study was carried out in eight companies across different industries. Data were gathered through multiple interviews with key informants in each company.FindingsThe authors find differences in, and trade-offs between, resilience capabilities and practices related to redundancy, agility and collaboration induced by the different configurations of production system characteristics: especially between discrete and process industries. Further, a major influential characteristic is the production strategy employed (make-to-stock or make-to-order) which stresses or limits collaboration and redundancy.Originality/valueThis is one of the first studies to explore the effects of production system characteristics as a major contingency factor on the resilience capabilities of an organization. As such it provides valuable insights into the development of a more nuanced contingency approach to how organizations can build resilience and employ specific practices that fit their situation.

PurposeRisks can easily disrupt the demand–supply match targeted by sales and operations planning (S&OP). As surprisingly little is known of how organizations identify, assess, treat and monitor risks through tactical planning processes, this paper zooms in on the S&OP set-up and process parameters to explore how risks are managed through S&OP.Design/methodology/approachA multiple case study analyzes the S&OP processes of seven organizations in the process industry, drawing on 17 in-depth interviews with high-ranking representatives, internal and external documents, and a group meeting with participating organizations.FindingsThe study finds that organizations proactively design their S&OP based on their main risk focus stemming from the planning environment. In turn, such designs proactively support organizations' risk identification, assessment, treatment and monitoring through their S&OP execution. Reactively, a crisis S&OP meeting – making use of the structure of S&OP – can be used as a risk-treatment tool, and S&OP design can be temporarily adapted to deal with emerging risks.Originality/valueThis study is among the first to empirically elucidate risk management through S&OP. S&OP design, execution and adaption are identified as three interconnected strategies that allow organizations to manage risks. The design enables risk management activities in the monthly execution of S&OP. The reactive role of S&OP in risk management is particularly novel.

Dittfeld, H. (2023). Contextualizing Risk Management and Resilience: the role of supply chain complexity, sales & operations planning and production system characteristics in managing risks and disruptions.[Thesis fully internal (DIV),