2014
DOI: 10.1504/ijscor.2014.065453
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supply chain management resilience: a theory building approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Table 3 shows different supply chain performance measures identified through the literature. Carvalho et al (2014) focus on total cost and lead time ratio to increase the firm performance. Betts and Tadisina (2009)point to incomplete performance measures existing among industries for assessment of the entire supply chain and suggest focusing on manufacturing lead time and inventory holding costs.…”
Section: Supply Chain Performance Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Table 3 shows different supply chain performance measures identified through the literature. Carvalho et al (2014) focus on total cost and lead time ratio to increase the firm performance. Betts and Tadisina (2009)point to incomplete performance measures existing among industries for assessment of the entire supply chain and suggest focusing on manufacturing lead time and inventory holding costs.…”
Section: Supply Chain Performance Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to increase the performance and resiliency of the supply chain, many researchers investigate the supply chain and draw out the indicators; for example, Carvalho et al (2014) pointed out the redundancy and transport flexibility as the indicators in their study about the Portugal automotive supply chain. While Elleuch et al (2016) suggested collaboration, flexibility and redundancy are indicators when examined the agri-food industry.…”
Section: Supply Chain Performance Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[54], [65], [84] [81], [3] [81] [81] [66], [4], [36], [14], [47], [80], [90] [5] [11] [83], [91], [92], [59] [49], [28], [38], [54], [84], [85], [86], [59], [96], [97] [37], [72], [91], [44], [109], [110] [57], [58] [108] [58] [67], [35], [111] [37], [4], [47], [111], [101] [57], [80] ζ 11 [89] [88], [ [114] [13], [5], [55] [35], [79], [13] [13] [5] [72], [13] [73], [47] [35], [66], [13],…”
Section: Literature Evidenceunclassified
“…Thus, over the last decade, researchers and practitioners have increased the degree of attention paid to SCM. This has resulted in a rich stream of research mainly focused on particular management aspects of supply chains that include, among many others: supplier alliances (Lee et al, 2009;Kannan and Tan, 2004), supplier selection (Ageron et al, 2013;Viswanadham and Samvedi, 2013), supplier management (Reuter et al, 2010), involvement of suppliers (Johnsen, 2011), upstream supply chain (SC) related research (Finne and Holmström, 2013;Oosterhuis et al, 2012), supply chain resilience (Carvalho et al, 2014), manufacturer and retailers linkages (Li and Zhang, 2015;Zhao et al, 2008) and SCM practices (Narasimhan and Schoenherr, 2012;Li et al, 2006;Li et al, 2005). Traditionally, SCM research has concentrated on improving profitability, efficiency, customer satisfaction, quality and responsiveness, which had been the dominant concern for organisations (Green et al, 2012), However, in order to respond to governmental environmental regulations and the growth of customer demands for products and services that are environmentally sustainable, companies have now been forced to rethink how they manage their supply chains to also consider the environmental dimension.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%