Neshat, N (2013) Conceptualization, measurement and empirical exploration of selected supply chain risk constructs. DSc thesis, ETH Zürich, Switzerland.
Abstract
In today’s business environment, supply chains are important ingredients of the global economy. Companies are no longer in a position to be alone when providing service and producing products for their customers. Instead, they rely more than ever on their supply chains when competing with each other and serving customers across the globe. However, odd events happen and this can cause various problems including failure to deliver the right product to the right customer at the right time and place. In the past decade, supply chains have been challenged with factors both externally and internally. In the era of lean, globalized and outsourced operations where companies operate inside networks, managing the supply chain vulnerability and risk is an obligation. Recent events around the world (e.g. 9/11 terrorist attacks, SARS epidemic, Japan’s earthquake) have provided frequent reminders that the world is more unpredictable and changing than ever. Natural disasters, industrial disputes and terrorism threats have all resulted in serious disruptions to supply chain activities. In situations like this, ‘business as usual’ is not an option. Nowadays, tougher and more frequent natural and man-made disasters make supply chains more vulnerable and disruptions more probable. During and after supply chain disruptions, companies may lose revenues and incur high recovery costs. If supply chain managers were more capable of measuring and managing supply chain risks and vulnerability, they can reduce the number of disruptions and their impact. Therefore, supply chain risk management became an evolving field of both research and practice. This thesis explores various aspects of supply chain vulnerability and risk. We develop a quantitative approach based on graph theory to quantify supply chain vulnerability. This aids managers in assessing the vulnerability of their supply chains (e.g., across and between supply chains, or over time) and in comparing the effectiveness of different risk mitigation strategies. Furthermore, regarding management of supply chain risks, we use a mathematical approach to design a risk identification framework, presented in a form of a risk scorecard to evaluate supplier in services and manufacturing sectors. Eventually, we provide a literature review and qualitative interviews to develop a novel supply chain risk orientation concept. Our framework illustrates how managers can enhance supply chain risk orientation of their firm and how supply chain risk orientation is able to explain a firm’s superior performance in turbulent supply chain environments.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | failure; measurement; revenues; disputes; earthquake; manufacturing; risk identification; risk management; supplier; natural disaster; man-made disaster; interview |
| Index terms: | risk identification, literature review, scorecard, effectiveness, strategy, manager, terrorism, risk mitigation, recovery, earthquake, Japan, dispute, natural disaster, supply chain risk management, option, risk management, graph theory, vulnerability, interview, exploration, revenue |
| Subjects: | financial risk, economic analysis, data analysis and analytics, theoretical framing, practitioner, data collection methods, environmental hazards, environmental resource management, supply chain risk, management, performance management, risk assessment, decision analysis, Geography, terrorism studies, dispute resolution, performance measurement, operations management |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Research Practice, Supply Chain Management, Project Management, Quality Management, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Geographical Context, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here