Postponement in supply chain risk management: a complexity perspective

Abstract

International audienceWhile the poor response implications of supply are often not elaborated on in literature, postponement has recently been mentioned as a useful tool for managing supply risk and disruptions. To interpret this in a more complete manner, this paper has attempted to explore the role of postponement in supply chain risk management from a complexity perspective. After a review of the relevant literature, it first draws insights emerging from normal accident theory that addresses the system characteristics of catastrophic accidents and applies them to supply chain disruptions. This is followed by the utilisation of normal accident theory to explain the role of postponement in supply chain risk management. Building on this, this paper also investigates the complexity implications of some commonly recommended measures to mitigate supply chain disruptions. In certain circumstances, the introduction of those measures may add to the complexity of a system and thus become inherently infeasible. The paper concludes with a summary and some suggestions for further research

The impact of supply base complexity on disruptions and performance: the moderating effects of slack and visibility

“…In addition, long lead-time supply chains may also have less transparency enhancing the potential for disruptions. Subsequently, H1c: The higher the delivery complexity of a firm's supply base, the higher the frequency of supply disruptions With very geographically dispersed suppliers creating a truly global supply chain, the unpredictability of that supply chain increases in terms of delivery reliability (Manuj and Mentzer 2008) suggesting the potential for more frequent disruptions (Yang and Yang 2009). For example, Holweg, Reichhart, and Hong (2011) suggest that global supply chains are more likely to suffer from inventory obsolescence, stock-outs, greater expediting and increased stock holdings due to the risk of disruption to product flow.…”

Managing supply chain resilience to pursue business and environmental strategies

“…Several studies focus on preventing SC against disruptions before they occur through minimizing the risk of their occurrence (Chang, Wilkinson, Seville, & Potangaroa, 2010;Skipper & Hanna, 2009;Yang & Yang, 2010), which is known as the anticipation stage of SCR (Kamalahmadi & Parast, 2016).…”

Communicating supply chain risks and mitigation strategies: a comprehensive framework

“…The novelty of the model lies in the fact that an analytical tool is proposed enabling the specific business preferences to be taken into consideration in making the strategic decision on SCRM. This is different from most of SCRM literature that focus on either the assessment of supply chain risks (Pan and Chen 2012;Wang et al, 2012;Samvedi et al 2013) or the evaluation of risk mitigation strategies (Tang and Tomlin 2008;Yang and Yang 2010;Xiao ad Chen 2011). Second, through the case application, the incorporation of fuzzy risk assessment, fuzzy Delphi, and fuzzy TOPSIS as an integrated methodology has been proved to be a systematic and practical decision-making tool supporting a very effective supply chain risk communication and risk mitigation strategy evaluation.…”