Leadership styles in supply chain disruptions: a multimethod evaluation based on practitioner insights

Humanitarian supply chains and innovation: a focus on US food banks

Purpose

To effectively meet their social objectives, humanitarian organizations need to be more innovative and find novel ways to stay competitive. Yet there has been limited focus on innovation by humanitarian organizations. Part of the issue is the lack of new practices and novel approaches that can be used as benchmarks. This study focuses on food banks, a critical hub for the delivery of food in humanitarian supply chains and where the use of innovation seems to be more reported on.

Design/methodology/approach

Focusing on resource scarcity, a commonly referenced constraint by humanitarian organizations, the authors study how food and fund scarcity (versus abundance) influence the innovation efforts of twelve food banks in the United States. This study observes variations in behavior before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Findings

The authors find that food banks operating in high resource scarcity (food-scarce and fund-scarce) settings focus on process innovations. Food banks operating in low resource scarcity (food-abundant and fund-abundant) settings focus on product innovations. Food banks operating in food-abundant and fund-scarce settings focus on marketing innovations. Food banks operating in food-scarce and fund-abundant settings show the most extensive focus on innovation by relying on imitative innovations. The innovation focus for most food banks switches to process innovation during the COVID pandemic.

Originality/value

The study breaks down resource scarcity specific to food banks by differentiating food and funds, a novel approach to studying scarcity. Findings are novel as they suggest that operating context has a highly differentiating effect on what food banks focus on in terms of innovation. Operating context can lead to focus on process, product, imitative of market-related innovations. Finally, the study is novel because it explores how change in the environmental context due to disruptions can drastically modify the innovation focus of food banks.

The effects of tie strength and data integration with supply base on supply disruption ambiguity and its impact on inventory turnover

Purpose

In this paper, the authors introduce supply disruption ambiguity as the inability of a sourcing firm to attach probability point estimates to the occurrence of and to the magnitude of loss from supply disruptions. The authors drew on the “ambiguity in decision-making” literature to define this concept formally, connected it to relevant supply disruption information deficit, positioned it relative to supply chain risk assessment and hypothesized and tested its negative associations with both supply base ties and inventory turnover.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors analysed survey data from 171 North American manufacturers and archival data for a subset (88 publicly listed) of these manufacturers via Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimation after ensuring that methodological concerns with survey research have been addressed. They used appropriate controls and employed the heteroskedasticity-based instrumental variable (HBIV) approach to ensure that inferences from our results are not unduly influenced by endogeneity.

Findings

Strong supply base ties decrease supply disruption ambiguity, which, in turn, increases inventory turnover. Moreover, strong supply base ties and data integration with the supply base have indirect and positive effects on inventory turnover. As sourcing firms strengthen ties and integrate data exchange with their supply base, their inventory turnover improves from access to information relevant to detect and diagnose supply disruptions effectively.

Originality/value

Research on supply disruption management has paid more attention to the “disruption recovery” stage than to the “disruption discovery” stage. In this paper, the authors add novel insights regarding the recognition and diagnosis aspects of the “disruption discovery” stage. These novel insights reveal how and why sourcing firms reduce their overall ambiguity associated with detecting and assessing losses from supply disruptions through establishing strong ties with their supply base and how and why reducing such ambiguity improves inventory turnover performance.

Relational resources for innovation ambidexterity within coopetitive relationships: the contingent role of managerial ambidexterity

Purpose

While the performance benefits of relational resources and managerial ambidexterity have been widely discussed in coopetition literature, there is only limited evidence that illustrates the underlying relationships between these relational resources and managerial ambidexterity. Against this background, this paper aims to investigate how managerial ambidexterity moderates the innovation ambidexterity effects of relational resources (i.e. reciprocal investments and complementary resources).

Design/methodology/approach

This study forwards various hypotheses that are grounded within the theoretical tenets of the relational view and the dynamic capabilities perspective. To test the hypotheses, this study uses survey data provided by 313 firms that pursue horizontal coopetition relationships.

Findings

The research findings offer important insights in that while reciprocal investments lead to innovation ambidexterity, complementary resources do not result in such benefits. Additionally, managerial ambidexterity complements the relational resources to develop innovation ambidexterity if and only if both managerial exploration and exploitation are applied simultaneously.

Originality/value

As opposed to widely-held beliefs, this study finds that firms' use of complementary resources is not likely to lead to innovation ambidexterity even though such resources can help in developing strong relationships. In addition, although often overlooked, managerial ambidexterity plays a vital role in transforming relational resources into useful innovations for firms involved in coopetition relationships. It is crucial for firms that their managers balance their ambidextrous activities of exploration and exploitation so as to develop innovation ambidexterity.

Preparing supply chain for the next disruption beyond COVID-19: managerial antecedents of supply chain resilience

Purpose

COVID-19 once again showed the importance of building resilience in supply chains. Extant research on supply chain resilience management has successfully identified a set of organizational antecedents that contribute to supply chain resilience. However, little is known about the mechanisms by which these antecedents are developed within a firm. Drawing on the dynamic managerial capabilities theory, the current study aims to investigate the critical role that supply chain managers play in developing the organizational antecedents. Specifically, this study shows that supply chain managers' social capital, human capital and cognition are instrumental to the development of three organizational supply chain resilience antecedents: visibility, responsiveness and flexibility, which subsequently enhance the firm's supply chain resilience.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors employ survey data collected from 598 manufacturing firms in Australia, and Hayes and Preacher's (2014) parallel multiple mediator model to empirically test the hypotheses.

Findings

The findings of the study establish that supply chain managers' social capital, human capital and cognition indeed have implications for developing supply chain resilience. Furthermore, the mediators through which managers' social capital, human capital and cognition improve supply chain resilience are identified in the current study.

Originality/value

The study contributes to the extant literature on supply chain resilience, investigating the role that supply chain managers play in developing the resilience of their firm.