An empirical examination of firm financial performance along dimensions of supply chain resilience

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the impact of three critical dimensions of supply chain resilience, supply chain preparedness, supply chain alertness and supply chain agility, all aimed at increasing a firm’s financial outcomes. In a turbulent environment, firms require resilience in their supply chains to prepare for potential changes, detect changes and respond to actual changes, thus providing superior value. Design/methodology/approach Using survey data from 77 firms, this study develops scales for preparedness, alertness and agility. It then tests their hypothesized relationships with a firm’s financial performance. Findings The results reveal that the three dimensions of supply chain resilience (i.e. preparedness, alertness and agility) significantly impact a firm’s financial performance. It is also found that supply chain preparedness, as a proactive resilience capability, has a greater influence on a firm’s financial performance than the reactive capabilities including alertness and agility, suggesting that firms should pay more attention to proactive approaches for building supply chain resilience. Originality/value First, this study develops a comparatively comprehensive definition for supply chain resilience and explores its dimensionality. Second, this study provides empirically validated instruments for the dimensions of supply chain resilience. Third, this study is one of the first to provide empirical evidence for direct impact of supply chain resilience dimensions on a firm’s financial performance.

Operational resilience, disruption, and efficiency: Conceptual and empirical analyses

“…This perspective assumes that a system's ability to effectively respond to disruptions, in terms of absorbing and recovering from impacts and repositioning itself in the face of disruptions, is determined by the system's score on IBR scales. Key IBR elements used to capture the resilience construct include firm flexibility, buffers, visibility, disruption preparedness, agility, collaboration, integration, and information sharing (see e.g., Chowdhury et al, 2019;Brusset and Teller, 2017;Birkie et al, 2017;Liu et al, 2018;Li et al, 2017).…”

“…Researchers have made several attempts to examine the performance outcomes of resilience. While some studies have investigated the performance effects of resilience using IBR elements (e.g., Chowdhury et al, 2019;Liu et al, 2018;Li et al, 2017;Birkie et al, 2017), others have examined the performance outcomes of OBR elements (see e.g., Wong et al, 2019;Yu et al, 2019;Kwak et al, 2018). Despite the valuable insights these studies offer, several scholars (Dormady et al, 2019;Pettit et al, 2019;Wong et al, 2019) have called for further investigation into the resilience-performance relationship.…”

Performance indicators for supply chain resilience: review and conceptual framework

“…Revenue sharing encourages sharing the risk among supply chain accomplices (Jain et al 2017). Sharing profit with the top of the stream and down of stream accomplices to make competitive advantage (Li et al 2017). If some organization wants to collaborate for mutual benefit, then risk and revenue sharing plays a vital role (Fiksel et al 2015).…”

Evidence-Based Resilience Management for Supply Chain Sustainability: An Interpretive Structural Modelling Approach

“…[76], [63], [77], [14], [49], [82], [83], [5], [54], [65], [84], [85], [86], [59], [78], [87] [4], [51], [80], [84] [81], [57] [88], [81], [84], [78] [77], [59] [35], [81] [88], [81], [89] [81]…”