Journal of Supply Chain Management最新文献

Considerable research has focused on how supply chains can better handle disruptions. Consequently, concepts such as supply chain robustness and engineering resilience have emerged, with the dominant emphasis being that disruptions are a wholly bad thing to be avoided or resisted. However, recent discourse in the supply chain disruption management literature, such as the social–ecological interpretation of supply chain resilience, suggests that disruptions can be positioned more positively as potential catalysts for growth. Yet little is known about the capabilities required for a supply chain to grow following disruption. The emerging concept of supply chain antifragility focuses specifically on growth, providing an arrowhead for investigating what enables firms to grow following disruption. Utilizing a metaphorical transfer method, this research translates the capabilities of individuals—those who grow psychologically and emotionally after experiencing trauma—into supply chain capabilities that enhance antifragility. Five key capabilities for building antifragility in supply chains are identified: supply chain mindfulness, supply chain transformative learning, supply chain plasticity, supply chain bricolage, and supply chain collaboration. Furthermore, a hierarchy of capabilities is revealed that points to a sequential approach to capitalizing on the potential growth opportunities presented by supply chain disruptions. The findings are sense-checked through focus groups with practitioners, informing the development of five propositions. This research contributes to theory development on handling supply chain disruptions by providing a capability blueprint for post-disruption growth that complements the literature on social–ecological supply chain resilience. Finally, this research highlights the value of metaphorical transfer as an innovative approach for understanding contemporary supply chain phenomena and advancing novel theoretical frameworks.

The worsening climate, biodiversity, and inequity crises have existential implications. To help resolve these crises, supply chains must move beyond a minimal harm approach. Instead, supply chains must make positive contributions to and harmoniously integrate with the living systems around them. Despite agreement on this urgent need, supply chain management research still lacks a shared roadmap for establishing economically sustainable supply chains that actively regenerate social–ecological systems. This essay deepens the understanding of regenerative supply chains, inviting supply chain scholars and practitioners to rally around timely questions and codevelop new answers. We first scrutinize the paradigmatic assumptions that continue to anchor contemporary research and practice in supply chain management, showing how these once helpful assumptions now hold the community back from seeking much needed solutions. We then offer real-world examples and synthesize emerging arguments from multiple disciplines to propose three new principles of regenerative organizing: proportionality, reciprocity, and poly-rhythmicity. We also delve into the implications of pursuing these regenerative principles for supply chain coordination, governance, and resilience. Finally, we reflect on the fit of empirical research designs and methods for examining the creation of new regenerative supply chains and the conversion of existing supply chains.

Supply failures are persistent and costly in contemporary supply chains. Viewed through the lens of agency theory, such failures are potentially caused by hidden actions of the supplier under information asymmetry and goal incongruence in the buyer–supplier relationship (as principal–agent). However, by reversing the direction of information asymmetry, an alternative cause arises: hidden expectations, where the supplier has good intentions but incomplete information regarding the buyer's true preferences and specifications. Further, following a failure, the buyer forms a causal attribution and takes subsequent action. Yet these attributions suffer from cognitive biases potentially causing buyers to misattribute supply failures, leading to costly conflict and even relationship termination. Combining agency and attribution theories, this article develops a theoretical framework to explain antecedents to a buyer's attribution process under conditions of two-sided asymmetric information. It discusses the harmful relationship effects of misattribution. The framework can assist in identifying and minimizing cognitive biases causing misattribution, hence avoiding the unintentional deterioration of relationships that often follow a supply failure. A research agenda to examine hidden expectations and misattribution is also provided.

Low-income markets have unique constraints that trigger the co-evolution of innovation and disruption in such markets. When disruptions occur in global supply chains, and in particular, in low-income markets, they spur innovations that may be necessary to address both existing and potential future disruptions. However, such innovations in turn create disruptions to existing supply chains, and they may also create new supply chains. Therefore, this study theorizes in support of the mutual causality between innovation and disruption in low-income markets. The focus is on low-income market contexts because of the unique opportunities and constraints that exist in these contexts, resulting in interesting and unique dynamics between innovation and disruption. Further, the mechanisms through which innovation-disruption mutual causality occurs—as well as the boundary conditions for these mechanisms—are identified. This culminates in a theoretical framework surrounding the interrelationship between disruption and innovation in low-income markets. Theoretical and practical implications are explored, and potential areas for future research are delineated.

Existing research provides contrasting perspectives on the implications of product recalls for firms. While some studies find that recalls represent failures that can motivate firms to innovate, others suggest that the resource-intensive nature of recalls may inhibit firms from innovating. This study presents a theoretical framework that reconciles these two perspectives by proposing an inverted U-shaped relationship between a firm's product recall frequency and innovation output. The paper also evaluates the effect of the firm's growth potential on the recall frequency–innovation relationship. Analysis of data on vehicle recalls and recall-related patents in the automotive sector from 1980 to 2019 confirms the inverted U-shaped relationship and shows that the relationship is steepened by the growth potential of the firm. Overall, the study presents a more nuanced understanding of learning from product recalls and bridges the supply chain disruption and innovation literature in the context of product recall.