IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ndtr09/207814.html

Interpreting Resilience: An Examination of the Use of Resiliency Strategies within the Supply Chain and Consequences for the Freight Transportation System

Author

Listed:
  • Pitera, Kelly A.
  • Goodchild, Amy V.

Abstract

Abstract - With continued increases in trade volumes, lengthening of supply chains due to globalization, and an increased focus on disruptions, resiliency has become an issue of concern within the supply chain community. Resiliency is formally defined as the ability to recover from or adjust easily to change or disruption. For this research and within the supply chain community, resiliency also includes the ability to avoid disruptions. In the past, resiliency has been discussed in nebulous terms, typically focusing on the overall concept of resiliency, past resiliency successes and failures, and generalized frameworks and flowcharts to help assess risk and mitigate for it. Absent is the discussion of how companies perceive resiliency and by what methods are they currently integrating resiliency strategies into supply chain and goods movement policies. This research explores and evaluates resiliency efforts, focusing on the goods movement within the supply chain, currently being used in practice by importing companies. Additionally, the information gathered in this research may be utilized to improve resiliency within freight transportation systems. Through a series of eleven interviews with personnel responsible for transportation and supply chain activities and operations, information was gathered to understand how companies are attempting to improve the resiliency within their supply chain in the face of increasing vulnerabilities. Responses to questions about resiliency, vulnerabilities, disruptions, and disruption procedures were used to identify fifteen resiliency strategies which were categorized as enablers or strategic resiliency strategies. Enablers, such as communication, relationships, and use of information and technology, were identified as ways to increase the effectiveness of other resiliency efforts and are often an integral part of supply chain operations prior to concerns about resiliency. Strategic resiliency strategies, including using expedited transportation, using multiple ports and/or carriers to move goods, becoming C-TPAT certified, and delivering during off-peak hours, are typically part of a long term plan of action, but are often implemented on a day to day or as needed basis. Both enablers and strategic resiliency strategies result in the reduction of exposure to supply chain disruptions and/or the mitigation of disruption impacts. Relationships between the strategies are revealed, highlighting the importance of enablers as a means of promoting the success of many other reported resiliency strategies. The strategies used by a given company are often a reflection of the company’s current exposure to risk, and therefore experience with resiliency. For example, companies with existing supply uncertainty have already implemented resiliency strategies to mitigate the impact of sourcing difficulty. Examination of resiliency strategies as a means to reduce exposure to supply chain disruptions has shown that the use of these strategies helps spread the risk of disruptions, either geographically, temporally, or across personnel. In addition to improving resiliency, many identified strategies can provide an added value to supply chains, improving operations and efficiency on a daily basis. This research provides a summary of existing strategies, but also presents a framework for discussing resilience in terms of enablers and strategies. Enablers, which allow a company to improve resilience, are the nebulous concepts often associated with resilience such as flexibility and communication. The strategies are specific actions that can have a measurable impact on an enterprise’s ability to tolerate disruptions. Understanding the implications of employing various resiliency strategies can assist companies in making strategic decisions which are in the best interest of a resilient and successful supply chain. The research also discusses how knowledge of these strategies can assist freight transportation system planners, designers, and managers in improving system resilience for the benefit of all users.

Suggested Citation

  • Pitera, Kelly A. & Goodchild, Amy V., 2009. "Interpreting Resilience: An Examination of the Use of Resiliency Strategies within the Supply Chain and Consequences for the Freight Transportation System," 50th Annual Transportation Research Forum, Portland, Oregon, March 16-18, 2009 207814, Transportation Research Forum.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ndtr09:207814
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.207814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/207814/files/2009_93_InterpretingResilience_paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.207814?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian Tomlin, 2006. "On the Value of Mitigation and Contingency Strategies for Managing Supply Chain Disruption Risks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 639-657, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schmidt, Christoph G. & Wuttke, David A. & Heese, H. Sebastian & Wagner, Stephan M., 2023. "Antecedents of public reactions to supply chain glitches," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    2. Saeed Poormoaied & Ece Zeliha Demirci, 2021. "Analysis of an inventory system with emergency ordering option at the time of supply disruption," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 43(4), pages 1007-1045, December.
    3. Jie Wu & Zhixin Chen & Xiang Ji, 2020. "Sustainable trade promotion decisions under demand disruption in manufacturer-retailer supply chains," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 115-143, July.
    4. Joshi Harit & Mukherjee, Saral, 2017. "Transitions in currency denomination structure as supply disruption and demand distortion: Efficiency, Effectiveness and Bullwhip," IIMA Working Papers WP 2017-05-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    5. Xiang Li, 2017. "Optimal procurement strategies from suppliers with random yield and all-or-nothing risks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 257(1), pages 167-181, October.
    6. Kyle Goldschmidt & Mirko Kremer & Douglas J. Thomas & Christopher W. Craighead, 2021. "Strategic Sourcing Under Severe Disruption Risk: Learning Failures and Under-Diversification Bias," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 761-780, July.
    7. Ho-Yin Mak & Zuo-Jun Max Shen, 2014. "Pooling and Dependence of Demand and Yield in Multiple-Location Inventory Systems," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 263-269, May.
    8. Tang, Liang & Jing, Ke & He, Jie & Stanley, H. Eugene, 2016. "Robustness of assembly supply chain networks by considering risk propagation and cascading failure," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 459(C), pages 129-139.
    9. Lauren Xiaoyuan Lu & Jan A. Van Mieghem, 2009. "Multimarket Facility Network Design with Offshoring Applications," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 90-108, October.
    10. Nitish Jain & Karan Girotra & Serguei Netessine, 2014. "Managing Global Sourcing: Inventory Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1202-1222, May.
    11. Mishra, Deepa & Sharma, R.R.K. & Kumar, Sameer & Dubey, Rameshwar, 2016. "Bridging and buffering: Strategies for mitigating supply risk and improving supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 183-197.
    12. Raktim Pal & Nezih Altay, 2023. "The missing link in disruption management research: coping," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 433-449, March.
    13. Sanjith Gopalakrishnan & Moksh Matta & Mona Imanpoor Yourdshahy & Vivek Choudhary, 2023. "Go Wide or Go Deep? Assortment Strategy and Order Fulfillment in Online Retail," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 846-861, May.
    14. Basu R, Jothi & Abdulrahman, Muhammad D. & Yuvaraj, M., 2023. "Improving agility and resilience of automotive spares supply chain: The additive manufacturing enabled truck model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    15. Li, Yongjian & Zhen, Xueping & Qi, Xiangtong & Cai, Gangshu (George), 2016. "Penalty and financial assistance in a supply chain with supply disruption," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 167-181.
    16. Wagner, Stephan M. & Bode, Christoph & Koziol, Philipp, 2011. "Negative default dependence in supplier networks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(2), pages 398-406, December.
    17. Preetam Basu & Soumita Ghosh & Milan Kumar, 2019. "Supplier ratings and dynamic sourcing strategies to mitigate supply disruption risks," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 46(1), pages 41-57, March.
    18. Renato Matta, 2017. "Contingency planning during the formation of a supply chain," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 257(1), pages 45-75, October.
    19. Gupta, Varun & Ivanov, Dmitry & Choi, Tsan-Ming, 2021. "Competitive pricing of substitute products under supply disruption," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    20. Christian F. Durach & Tomas Repasky & Frank Wiengarten, 2023. "Patterns in firms’ inventories and flexibility levels after a low‐probability, high‐impact disruption event: Empirical evidence from the Great East Japan Earthquake," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1705-1723, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ndtr09:207814. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.trforum.org/journal/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.