Supplier resilience under the COVID-19 crisis in apparel global value chain (GVC): The role of GVC governance and supplier’s upgrading

Guest Editorial: A purchasing and supply management view of supply resilience for better crisis response

“…3 ). These aspects include factors that positively and negatively impact SR ( Lorentz et al, 2021 ; Sturm et al, 2021 ; Taghizadeh et al 202; Giannoccaro and Iftikhar, 2022 ; Verghese et al, 2022 ), innovative supply risk management practices ( Choksy et al, 2022 ; Meyer et al, 2022 ; Raj et al, 2022 ), and the role of PSM organizations ( Kaur and Singh, 2022 ). However, two themes were particularly emphasized by the SR literature since COVID-19: The idea of SR as a dynamic capability that continuously evolves according to the characteristics and complexity of the supply network ( Ivanov and Dolgui, 2020 ; Azadegan and Dooley, 2021 ; Feizabadi et al, 2021 ; Wiedmer et al, 2021 ; Choksy et al, 2022 ; Wissuwa et al, 2022 ) The idea that SR is a capability that can be built by selecting the most suitable suppliers and including “supplier resilience” criteria in supplier selection models ( Mohammed et al, 2021 ; Taghizadeh et al, 2021 ; Shishodia et al, 2022 ; Wissuwa et al, 2022 ) …”

“…The idea of SR as a dynamic capability that continuously evolves according to the characteristics and complexity of the supply network ( Ivanov and Dolgui, 2020 ; Azadegan and Dooley, 2021 ; Feizabadi et al, 2021 ; Wiedmer et al, 2021 ; Choksy et al, 2022 ; Wissuwa et al, 2022 )…”

“…From an operational perspective, these SR capabilities are built through the risk management practices implemented by suppliers and buyers. Studies published since COVID-19 (i.e., Sturm et al, 2021 ; Choksy et al, 2022 ; Dube et al, 2022 ; Küffner et al, 2022 ; Meyer et al, 2022 ; Raj et al, 2022 ; Spieske et al, 2022b ) suggest that SR practices can be classified through the lens of resource dependency theory to face a crisis, rather than compare proactive vs. reactive practices. Such a classification is made according to (1) whether the practices strengthen existing supply chain relationships (i.e., bridging) or establish new relationships (i.e., buffering) and (2) whether they are short-term (i.e., temporary) or long-term (i.e., permanent) orientated.…”

“…

Fig. 5 Classification of SR practices during crises (authors' elaboration based on Sturm et al, 2021 ; Choksy et al, 2022 ; Dube et al, 2022 ; Küffner et al, 2022 ; Meyer et al, 2022 ; Raj et al, 2022 ; Spieske et al, 2022b ).

…”

“…The possibility of deploying these practices (and developing high and robust SR capabilities to face crises) depends on two factors. First, we have the characteristics of the supply network ( Wiedmer et al, 2021 ; Choksy et al, 2022 ; Giannoccaro and Iftikhar, 2022 ; Dube et al, 2022 ; Spieske et al, 2022b ). Notably, the more complex the supply network ( Azadegan and Dooley, 2021 ; Taghizadeh et al, 2021 ; Wiedmer et al, 2021 ), the more intertwined the relationships between suppliers ( Ivanov and Dolgui, 2020 ; Feizabadi et al, 2021 ) and the more difficult the access to previous SR capabilities.…”