Search

Global supply chains operate in a volatile environment characterized by risks like the 2008–2009 financial crisis, trade disputes, and the COVID‐19 pandemic. Maritime shipping firms, the backbone of global supply chains, are particularly affected by this volatility. In response, these firms have pursued two strategies. First, they have acquired tangible assets to increase their capacity. These assets, however, are neither easily re‐deployable to other uses nor quickly adjustable, preventing firms from flexibly matching supply and demand. Second, these firms have pursued global supply chain integration by acquiring similar firms or firms in their upstream or downstream supply chain to diversify into other supply chain activities. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some firms have successfully pursued these strategies, but others have failed, eventually exiting the market. We posit that one explanation for this difference may be how effectively these firms manage their assets relative to their supply chain integration activities. We test this proposition by drawing from resource‐based theory and transaction cost economics and using longitudinal data for 148 maritime shipping firms. We also test post hoc whether typically acquired supply chain activities are beneficial. Our findings offer insights into asset management and global supply chain integration and offer advice to practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The supply management literature assumes that supplier selection is devoid of emotions and unaffected by the history and experience associated with a previously‐selected supplier. In this paper, we relax these assumptions. Specifically, we consider the following sourcing opportunity: a sourcing professional had (alternatively, had not) recommended a critical‐component supplier that originated an avoidable (alternatively, unavoidable) supply disruption (aka, the "disrupted supplier"). In the aftermath of this supply disruption, the sourcing professional is asked to recommend a supplier for a new‐to‐beoutsourced critical component (i.e., one unrelated to the component whose flow was interrupted), taking into consideration the influence of guilt as an emotional reaction to the supply disruption. Analyses of data from 286 sourcing professionals participating in a scenario‐based, roleplaying experiment reveal that sourcing professionals experience higher levels of guilt when (a) they (versus their predecessor) had been responsible for selecting a disrupted supplier and (b) they deem the supply disruption to be controllable (versus uncontrollable) by the disrupted supplier. Guilt‐laden sourcing professionals are then more likely to recommend a riskier albeit more advantageous supplier for a new‐to‐be‐outsourced critical component. Our results provide the first evidence that prior supplier selection decisions gone awry influence future supplier selection decisions through the emotion of guilt. Moreover, they demonstrate that supply disruptions in one context have carryover effects on future sourcing decisions in unrelated contexts—an insight that is absent from the literature on supply disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore resources or capabilities that enable medium-sized firms to be resilient, namely, to avoid and recover from supply chain disruptions. Design/methodology/approach: A case-study method is employed with four medium-sized manufacturing firms headquartered in the USA that have global supply chains. Data are collected from semi-structured interviews with key informants from diverse functions and managerial levels, archival documents, observation and a resilience assessment. Findings: Internal social capital emerged as a resilience-enhancing resource, comprising: structural capital grounded in small network size, geographical proximity among decision makers and low hierarchy; relational capital grounded in close relationships, commitment and respect; and cognitive capital grounded in long employee tenure. Originality/value: This is the first paper in the supply chain management literature to examine the resilience of medium-sized firms, an under-researched context. It is also the first paper to introduce internal social capital as a resilience-enhancing resource. Hence, this is among the few papers to propose a resilience-enhancing resource rooted not in a firm's supply chain operations but its human resources. This paper, moreover, identifies several facets of internal social capital within medium-sized firms. Finally, the paper makes several managerial contributions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]