Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management

A Conceptual Framework

Maruf H. Chowdhury, Mohammed Naim A. Dewan and Mohammed A. Quaddus

Curtin Graduate School of Business, Curtin University, Perth, Australia

Keywords: Resilience, Sustainability, Supply Chain, Disruption.

Abstract: A resilient-sustainable supply chain has become a unanimously important research agenda in business as

global supply chain is facing an increased number of risks and disruptions. In such a situation in order to be

competitive and sustainable a supply chain needs to be resilient. Literature related to supply chain

sustainability and resilience in an integrated fashion is sparse, rather issues are presented separately and no

empirical work has yet been done to develop a resilient-sustainable supply chain management (RSSCM)

framework. A resilient-sustainable supply chain management (RSSCM) framework is formulated and

measurement scale for resilience and sustainability is developed in this study. The study combines the

stakeholder theory and resource based view in line with sustainability and resilience in developing a

theoretically grounded, comprehensive framework of resilient-sustainable supply chain management.

1 INTRODUCTION

For a sustainable supply chain, a balance of

economic, social and environmental factors has

emerged enormously important as customers are

demanding sustainable supply chain and products

(Carter and Rogers, 2008). Sustainability in supply

chain is often threatened, as the world business has

become highly competitive and uncertain.

Unforeseen events often disrupt business and the

supply chain which challenge supply chain

continuity (Manuj and Mentzer, 2008; Kleindorfer

and Saad, 2005). In case of disruptions and

uncertainties supply chain needs resilience capacity

to get back to original state after disruptions (pettit et

al., 2010; Christopher and peck, 2004) and more

specifically, to prepare for unexpected events,

respond to disruptions, and recover from them to

continue its operation and to sustain Christoper and

peck, 2004; Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009). In the

situation of frequent disruption in the supply chain

without resilience capacity, sustainability is hard to

achieve (Folke et al., 2002). As a result it is crucial

to investigate whether the supply chains need

resilience to be truly sustainable? A number of

researchers (Carter and Eston, 2011; Pagell and Wu,

2009; Seuring and Muller, 2008) conducted research

on sustainable supply chain management (SSCM)

and on supply chain resilience (Ponomarov and

Holcomb, 2009; Xu, 2008; Christopher and peck,

2004; Pettit et al., 2010; Sheffi and Rice, 2005). It is

chalked out from intensive literature survey on

sustainable supply chain management and supply

chain literature that no comprehensive research has

yet been conducted integrating supply chain

resilience and sustainability though some authors

(Folke et al., 2002; Fiksel, 2003; 2006; Martin,

2004) mentioned conceptually that supply chain

resilience is a precondition for supply chain

sustainability without any clear framework. In this

theoretical lacuna the basic premise of the research

is to show the relationship between supply chain

resilience and supply chain sustainability through a

framework which we termed as resilient sustainable

supply chain management (RSSCM) model. The

model will help a supply chain to be both sustainable

and resilient. Further, it is important to develop

measurement of resilience and sustainability

indicators because without measurement one cannot

get better control (Kaplan and Norton, 1996). Hence,

the major research questions in this background are:

Q1. What constitutes the RSSCM framework?

Q2. How to measure the elements of RSSCM

framework?

2 METHODOLOGY

The aim of the research is to formulate a RSSCM

165

H. Chowdhury M., Naim A. Dewan M. and A. Quaddus M..

Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management - A Conceptual Framework.

DOI: 10.5220/0004015801650173

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Communication Networking, e-Business and Optical Communication Systems (ICE-B-2012),

pages 165-173

ISBN: 978-989-8565-23-5

 2012 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

model to make a supply chain resilient and

sustainable as there is no model in this regard.

Moreover, in supply chain management literature

there are few initiatives for theory and concept

development (Carter and Ellram, 2003). Conceptual

theory building method is a way that can create a

balance between inductive and deductive research

(Meredith, 1993), a good way of building theory

through a set of interrelated propositions leading to

testable hypothesis (Meredith, 1993). This paper is

an attempt to develop a conceptual framework and

termed as RSSCM framework through some

important propositions derived from literature

survey.

The data collection to support this methodology

occurred through a rigorous key-word search of the

literature on speciﬁc terminology such as

sustainability, resilience, sustainable supply chain

management. The conceptualization as described

above was a systematic process of reading scientific

papers, additional collection of literature, synthesis,

and reﬁnement of framework over a period of nine

months. Concepts of two major theories namely

stakeholder theory and resource based view have

been used to establish the foundation of different

links and relationship among the variables in the

model. The results of our conceptualization will be

presented to 20 supply chain managers of ready-

made garments manufacturing and textile companies

in Bangladesh to further ensure the validity of our

framework as per the process suggested by Yin

(1994). Then the refined model will be tested by

quantitative analysis of survey data using structural

equation modelling.

3 THEORETICAL

BACKGROUND

The world has experienced numerous uncertainties

arising from climate changes, frequent natural

disaster, epidemics, terrorist attacks, resource crisis,

regulation and economic ups and downs. These sorts

of uncertainties create disruptions and risks in

discharging the regular activities of supply chains

(Svensson, 2000; Hendricks and Singhal, 2003). In

an environment of disruptions developing a

sustainable system has become challenging and a

good alternative is to develop systems resilience to

resist and overcome disruptions effectively (Fiksel,

2003; Fiksel, 2006; Gunderson, 2002). Resilience is

echoed when the issue of sustainability is discussed

(Martin, 2004) because resilience enhances the

sustainability in a turbulent environment (Folk et

al., 2002). So, existing literature supports that

resilience is a precondition for sustainability.

Dragging the concept to supply chain it can also be

proposed that in order to develop a sustainable

supply chain, supply chain resilience is

indispensable. This proposition is the basis of

proposed RSSCM model and justified by

stakeholder theory and resource based view (RBV).

RBV argues that ﬁrms achieve sustainable

competitive advantages by deploying its bundle of

resources and capabilities which are unique and

internal to the firm (Wernerfelt, 1984; Barney, 1986,

1991; Grant, 1991). Further, in an environment of

uncertainty and disruptions, organizations can be

successful in the competition by overcoming threats

and uncertainties effectively (Wernerfelt, 1984).

Researchers of the RBV advocated for inclusion of

the ability to overcome disruption and contingency

as organizational resources and capabilities (Barney,

2001; Priem and Butler, 2001). Correa and Sharma

(2003) in their “contingent resource based view (C-

Rbv) of proactive corporate environmental strategy”

argue that organization’s proactive environmental

attempt to mitigate environmental uncertainties and

complexities is a valuable dynamic capability of a

firm and firms need to invest in achieving its

tangible and intangible resources for developing

capabilities in uncertain business environments.

Integrating natural resource based view (N-Rbv) and

stakeholder theory Markley and Davis (2007)

advocate the need for a capability to mitigate and

reduce the environmental uncertainties in supply

chain for reducing negative environmental and

social impact and to retain higher stakeholder value

for high performing sustainable supply chain. This

type of dynamic capability is needed for developing

a resilient sustainable supply chain management

(RSSCM) framework to overcome the uncertain and

disruptive events.

Stakeholder theory holds the idea that managers

shall take decision considering the interest and

impact of all stakeholders. If a balance among the

conflicting interests and claims of stakeholders

cannot be ensured organizational sustainability will

be questioned (Freeman, 1984). As the time passes

the attention and interest of all stakeholders is

converging towards sustainability of the

organization in terms of economic, social and

environmental factors (Wheeler et. al., 2003). A

sustainable organization tries to maximize

economic, social and environmental performance for

a sustainable and value based stakeholder relation

(Perrini and Tencati, 2006). In order to develop a

sustainable supply chain management,

ICE-B 2012 - International Conference on e-Business

166

organizations’ supply chain shall fulfil economic,

social and environmental expectations (Carter and

Rogers, 2008; Carter and Easton, 2011) as the

sustainable supply chain has now become customer,

government and stakeholder requirement (Seuring

and Muller, 2008). To Freeman (1984 p. 13-27),

with the passage of time organizations are

experiencing different types of internal and external

changes and challenges from a customers, suppliers,

government, competitor, pressure groups and so on.

In such situation organizations need the capacity to

change of concept, strategy to respond to the

environment in an inactive or reactive, proactive or

interactive way for managing the environmental

uncertainties positively so that it can reduce

uncertainties and vulnerabilities (Freeman, 1984 p

13-27). Reduction of vulnerabilities or increase in

capability to reduce impact of vulnerabilities which

is also termed as resilience (Pettit et al., 2010) is a

unique resource for organizations as per the

advocates of resource based view (Barney, 2001;

Priem and Butler, 2001).

Based on the above theoretical support it can be

proposed that supply chains with high resilience are

more sustainable in the light of economic, social and

environmental aspects and vice versa.

Proposition 1: Supply chains with high resilience

are more sustainable in the light of economic, social

and environmental aspects and vice versa.

4 LITERATURE REVIEW

4.1 Supply Chain Resilience

Resilience is a multidisciplinary concept. Holling

(1973) was one of the prime researchers to identify

resilience as the ability of system to absorb changes.

After that many authors echoed the concept of

resilience as system’s ability to recover and get back

to the original state (Mitroff and Alpasan, 2003;

Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009; Christopher, 2004).

Resilience “is an adaptive capability of the supply

chain to prepare for unexpected events, respond to

disruptions, and recover from them by maintaining

continuity of operations at the desired level of

connectedness and control over structure and

function” Ponomarov and Hollcomb (2009).

To develop a resilient system it is important to

understand measurement of resilience because the

degree of resilience a system needs is context

dependent (Carpenter, 2001). Researchers in

different disciplines emphasized on capabilities such

as adaptability, diversity, flexibility, efficiency,

cohesion, control, connectedness to measure

resilience (Pettit et al., 2010; Fiksel, 2003). In

supply chain management Pettit et al. (2010) is the

first to develop resilience measurement scale based

on fourteen major capabilities such as adaptability,

flexibility, efficiency, pro-activeness, control etc.

and seven major vulnerabilities such as turbulence,

supplier disruption, customer disruption etc. But

these capabilities and vulnerabilities are antecedents

and actually are promoters or inhibitors of resilience

of a system and not the actual measures of

resilience. Resilience shall be measured by the

relative degree such as high resilience or low

resilience based on the extent of systems departure

from desired state (Holling, 1973; Ludwig, 1996)

based on recovery time after disaster or disruptions

(Neubert and Caswell, 1997; Ortiz and Wolff, 2002;

Falasca et al., 2008), based on reduction of

consequences through resistance (Falasca et al.,

2008, Masten and Powell, 2003; and based on cost

of recovery (Martin, 2004; Vugrin, 2009). The

measurement items of supply chain resilience are

shown in table 1. In real world scenario it is not

possible to have 100% resilience of a system. Again

there is no system with zero resilience.

Table 1: Supply chain resilience measurement.

Construct

Item

Reference

Resilience

Departure from

desired state

Holling, 1973; Ludwig,

1996; Carpenter, 2001.

Recovery time

Neubert & Caswell, 1997;

Matsinos & Troumbis,

2002; Ortiz & Wolff, 2002.

Reduction of

consequences

through resistance

Masten & Powell, 2003;

Falasca et al., 2008.

Cost of recovery

Martin, 2004; Vugrin, 2009.

4.1.1 Supply Chain Disruption

Maintaining an eﬀective supply chain has become

challenging and difficult as the business supply

chains are facing an overwhelming complexities and

unexpected disruptions. The experience of

disruptions may take different forms such as delay

during transportation, port stoppages, frequent

occurrence of natural disasters, weak

communication, supply shortages, Demand

volatility, quality problem, operational issues and

terrorism are few among the lot (Colicchia et al.,

2010; Kleindorfer and Saad, 2005; blackhurst et al.,

2008). Kleindorfer and Saad (2005) classified three

main categories of supply chain disruption: 1stly,

operational disruption which envelops equipment

Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management - A Conceptual Framework

167

malfunctions and systemic failures, abrupt

discontinuity of supply, bankruptcy, fraud, or labor

strikes; 2ndly, natural hazards which include

earthquakes, hurricanes, storms; and 3rdly, terrorism

or political instability. In this way a number of

researchers such as Chirstopher and Peck (2004);

Sheffi (2005), Wu et al. (2006), Blackhurst et al.

(2008), Kleindorfer and Saad (2005) and others

discussed about supply chain disruptions and risks

which can be better understood from table 2 (see

appendix). Supply chain disruptions may be a cause

of huge loss for a company and whole supply chain

if those are not handled properly and in appropriate

time because it may be the result of signiﬁcant

supply chain delays magnifying the rate of stock-

outs, failed to meet the demand of customers on time

and customer dissatisfaction cost (Rice and Caniato,

2003, p 22). Disruptions in the supply chain are

sometimes beyond the direct control of supply chain

managers. Some disruptions can be assessed in

advance and some are not. Supply chain managers

need to be proactive to get signal of disruptions in

advance and to develop resilience capacity for

mitigating the disruptions (Peck, 2005). Based on

the above literature:

Proposition 2: Existence of high disruptions and

vulnerabilities in the supply chain leads to lower

resilience and vice versa

4.1.2 Supply Chain Capability

Supply chains need to have capabilities to create

resilience against disruptions (Christopher and Peck,

2004). Researchers in different disciplines

emphasized on capabilities such as adaptability,

diversity, flexibility, efficiency, cohesion, control,

connectedness to measure resilience (Pettit et al.,

2010; Fiksel, 2003; Ponomarov and Hollcomb,

2009). In an uncertain condition dynamic

capabilities are difﬁcult to sustain and resilience is

inevitable in such condition to achieve sustainability

(Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000). Esper et al. (2007)

enumerated a number of supply chain capabilities

that lead to improved ﬁrm performance and

sustainable competitive advantage. In the same way

Sheffi (2005), Christopher and Peck (2004),

ponomarov and Holcomb (2009), Pettit et al. (2010),

Tomlin (2006), and others mentioned a number of

supply chain capabilities for developing supply

chain resilience which is shown by table 3 (see

appendix). Based on the above literature it can be

proposed that:

Proposition 3: existence of higher capabilities in the

supply chain leads to higher resilience and vice

versa.

4.1.3 Supply Chain Orientation

Without having a supply chain orientation it is not

possible perform the supply chain functions (Min

and Mentzer, 2004). So, in order to develop supply

chain resilience the capability of smooth conduction

of supply chain functions by reducing disruptions,

supply chain orientation is very important. Min and

Mentzer (2004) mention it is important to have trust,

commitment, cooperation, compatability and top

management support to implement changes in

supply chain in a supply chain oriented organization

which is beter understood by table-4. Again, it is

important to have top management support and

approval of initiatives for disruption risk mitigation

(Buehler and Pritsch, 2003). It is possible when

there is a supply chain orientation of the

organization because supply chain orientation

ensures a formal organizational structure strategy

and clear policy framework for supply chain

activities (Esper et al., 2010).

Table 4: Elements of supply chain orientation.

Construct

Items

Reference

Supply

chain

orientation

Top management

support

Buehler & Pritsch

(2003); Min & Mentzer

(2004)

Trust

Min & Mentzer (2004)

commitment

Min & Mentzer (2004)

cooperation

Faisal et al. (2006); Min

& Mentzer

(2004)Tomlin (2006);

compatibility

Min & Mentzer (2004)

Proposition 4: Supply chains with high level of

supply chain orientation have higher resilience and

vice versa.

4.1.4 Supply Chain Design

Supply chain design decision can be illustrated as

the decision regarding supply chain node density,

complexity and criticality (Craighead et al., 2007;

Falasca et al., 2008).

When there are a large number of nodes in a

limited area the supply chain is said to have a high

density level (Craighead et al., 2007; Falasca et al.,

2008). In the research of Craighead et al. (2007) and

Falasca et al. (2008) it is evidenced that increased

density in the supply chain creates more

vulnerability.

A less complex supply chain would have fewer

nodes and or fewer interconnections between nodes

ICE-B 2012 - International Conference on e-Business

168

(Craighead et al., 2007; Falasca et al., 2008). Node

complexity also depends on number of nodes both

forward and backward chain for example existence

of supplier’s supplier and sub-supplier increases

node complexity and vulnerability (Craighead et al.,

2007). Usually increased complexity in the supply

chain creates more vulnerability (Craighead et al.,

2007; Falasca et al., 2008). However, additional

nodes that create buffer in the supply chain reduce

vulnerability though it causes increased complexity

for example sourcing from multiple suppliers instead

of single supplier increases supply chain node

complexity but reduce vulnerability and enhance

resilience (Falasca et al., 2008).

Node Criticality depends on the relative

importance of a given node or set of nodes within a

supply chain (Craighead et al., 2007). Existence of

node that is very important for example important

distributor or supplier on whom others are highly

dependent in the Supply chain and the number of

such nodes in the supply chain increases supply

chain criticality and vulnerability (Craighead et al.,

2007). Existence of critical transportation hub during

sourcing and distribution for example consolidation

of freight is done in Singapore also creates supply

chain criticality.

Proposition-5: Supply chains with low density, low

complexity and low criticality have higher resilience

and vice versa.

Table 5: Elements of supply chain design.

Construct

Item

Reference

Supply

chain

design

Node

density

Craighead et al. (2007); Falasca

et al. (2008)

Node

complexity

Craighead et al. (2007); Falasca

et al. (2008)

Node

criticality

Craighead et al. (2007); Falasca

et al. (2008)

4.2 Sustainable Supply Chain

Management (SSCM)

A sustainable supply chain is one that “manage

material, information and capital ﬂows and

cooperate among all entities in the chain with a view

to achieve the economic, environmental and social

goals deriving from customer and stakeholder

requirements” (Seuring and Muller, 2008).

Sustainable supply chain management has got

substantial interests to academic and corporate body

just over a decade (Corbett and Klassen, 2006;

Steafen and Martin, 2008). There are still

fundamental issues that need to be addressed to

assist business managers and supply chain

professionals to achieve supply chain sustainability

(Pagel and Wu, 2009). The literature related to

supply chain sustainability incorporating economic,

social and environmental aspects in an integrated

fashion is sparse, rather issues are presented

separately (Carter and Rogers, 2008; Carter and

Jennings, 2002; Murphy et al., 1996).

Organizations’ Supply chains are disrupted by

many challenges in this turbulent environment and

eventually may become unsustainable. In this

regard, it needs to develop resilience to face those

uneven and uncertain scenarios (Ponomarov and

Holcomb, 2009). It is interesting that no integrated

study has yet been conducted incorporating these

important antecedent factors for formulating

sustainable supply chain management framework.

4.2.1 Sustainability Measurement

Stakeholders demand for sustainability report

generated the need for measurement of specific

indices. As a result initiatives from different angles

put forward to the development of specific indices

and their measurement scale. Among those GRI,

IchemE, DJSI, TBL and ETHOS corporate social

responsibility indicators are related with business

level sustainability indicators (Delai and Takahashi,

2011). There are differences in the organizations

based on the multitude of product, services and

operations which shapes the requirement of indices

need for the specific organization for example some

customized sustainability indicator sets have been

developed by Labuschagne et al. (2005); Wang

(2005); Vasileiou and Morris (2006); Hutchins and

Sutherland (2008). However, some indicators are

commonly used in most cases. For example,

regarding social sustainability issues such as health

and safety, remuneration, forced and child labour,

absenteeism, child labour and forced labour in the

chain, compliance of health, safety and human rights

by the suppliers. Likewise, regarding environmental

sustainability issues such as emission, human health

effect, water pollutants, solid waste, waste Recycled

or reused, compliance of environmental legislation,

performance of suppliers regarding environmental

issues, environmental impact of products produced

and environmental certification are widely used.

Regarding economic sustainability commonly used

issues are Sales, Net income and Return on average

capital employed.

Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management - A Conceptual Framework

169

5 RESILIENT SUSTAINABLE

SUPPLY CHAIN

MANAGEMENT

The RSSCM model bridges the existent theoretical

gap between the relation of Resilience and

sustainable supply chain management and asserts the

importance of resilience for developing a sustainable

supply chain management. Through a wide literature

review mentioned on previous sessions we formulate

the RSSCM framework shown in figure-1 and define

RSSCM as the management of resources with a

view to meeting stakeholders’ expectations so as to

achieve high and subsequent sustainability of

organizations supply chain.

The RSSCM model in figure 1 depicts that a supply

chain needs to be resilient in order to be sustainable.

Here sustainability is measured on the basis of the

economic, social and environmental components

that are said to be the triple bottom lines of

sustainability. Supply chain resilience is influenced

by the antecedents of capability, vulnerability,

supply chain orientation and supply chain design.

Based on the background literature of the model it

can be remarked that a supply chain will be resilient

and sustainable when it have more capabilities, less

vulnerabilities, high supply chain orientation, less

complex and less critical supply chain design

provided that the chain has the balance of economic,

social and environmental components of

sustainability.

Figure 1: RSSCM framework.

6 DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSION

Supply chains need the capacity of resilience in

order to be sustainable which is termed as the

concept of RSSCM. A RSSCM model has been

developed showing the relationship between supply

chain resilience and supply chain sustainability. We

define RSSCM as the management of resources with

a view to meeting stakeholders’ expectations so as to

achieve high resilience and subsequent sustainability

of organizations supply chain. It is expected that the

RSSCM framework will help the supply chain

managers to overcome disruptions and

vulnerabilities in supply chain and thus help to

create a resilient-sustainable supply chain. As the

global business arena has become turbulent and

uncertainties often disrupt supply chain functions

supply chain managers will get ideas regarding

mitigation of disruptions. Managers will know the

relationship among different variables in the model,

how the variables are linked and what are the

antecedents and constructs of Resilience and

sustainability. Moreover, the paper exclusively

discusses the measurement of resilience and

sustainability which will also help the manufacturers

and supply chain managers to get idea about the

degree of resilience and sustainability to set target

and improvement needed in specific area in future to

be truly resilient and sustainable. This RSSCM

model will be refined and different links of the

model will be justified based on the data of ready-

made garments supply chain of Bangladesh in the

subsequent phases of research. Firstly, a field study

will be conducted to collect qualitative data from 20

supply chain managers regarding supply chain

resilience and sustainability. Based on the field

study the model will be refined and then different

hypotheses will be tested based on the survey result

from 300 respondents. A number of future research

areas will be interesting such as which specific

supply chain capabilities are needed for the

mitigation of specific supply chain disruptions?

Along with the triple bottom line elements:

economic, social and environmental which are other

components of supply chain sustainability?

Organizational culture and strategy, supply chain

governance and innovation and learning may be

considered important components of supply chain

sustainability along with triple bottom line

components. Investigation of these areas will be

worthwhile to develop an integrated framework for

supply chain sustainability.

REFERENCES

Barney, J. 1986. Strategic factor markets: Expectations,

luck and business strategy. Management Science 32:

1231.

ICE-B 2012 - International Conference on e-Business

170

Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive

advantage. Journal of management 17, 771

Barney, J. 2001. Is the resource-based "view" a useful

perspective for strategic management research? Yes.

Academy of Management Review 28, 41.

Brush, T. H. 1999. Toward a contingent resource based

theory: the impact of information asymmetry on the

value of capabilities in veterinary medicine. Strategic

Management Journal 20, 223.

Blackhurst, J. B., Scheibe K. P. and Johnson. D. J. 2008.

Supplier risk assessment and monitoring for the

automotive industry. International Journal of Physical

Distribution and Logistics Management 38, 143.

Blos, M. F., Quaddus, M., Wee, H. M and Watanabe, K.

2009. Supply chain risk management (SCRM): a case

study on the automotive and electronic industries in

Brazil. Supply Chain Management 14 (4): 247.

Buehler, K. S. & Pritsch. G. 2003. Running with Risk. The

McKinsey Quarterly 4: 40

Carter, C. R. 2011. Sustainable supply chain management:

evolution and future directions. International journal

of physical distribution and logistics management 41,

46.

Carter, C. R. 2008. A framework of sustainable supply

chain management: moving toward new theory.

International journal of physical distribution and

logistics management 38, 360.

Carter, C. R. & Ellram, L. 2003. Thirty Five Years of The

Journal of Supply Chain Management: Where Have

We Been and Where are We Going? The journal of

supply chain management, 39, 27.

Carpenter, S., Brian Walker, & Eries, J. M. & Abel, N.

2001. From metaphor to measurement: resilience of

what to what? Ecosystems, 4, 765

Christopher, M. & Peck., H. 2004. Building the resilient

supply chain. International Journal of Logistics

Management, 15, 1.

Christopher, M., Peck, H. Rutherford, C & Juttner. U.

2003. Supply Chain Resilience. Cranﬁeld Centre for

Logistics and Supply Chain Management. Cranﬁeld.

Corbett, C. J., & Klassen, R. D. 2006. Extending the

horizons: Environmental excellence as a key to

improving operations. Manufacturing and service

operations management 8 (1): 5.

COLICCHIA, C., DALLARIA, F. & MELACINI, M.

2010. Increasing supply chain resilience in a global

sourcing context. Production planning and control,

21, 680.

Correa, A. A., & Sharma, S. 2003. A contingent resource-

based view of proactive corporate environmental

strategy. Academy of Management Review 28, 71.

Craighead, C. W., J. Blackhurst, M. J. Rungtusanatham, &

R. B. Handfield. 2007. The severity of supply chain

disruptions: design characteristics and mitigation

capabilities. Decision Sciences 38 (1): 131.

Delai, I & Takahashi, S. 2011. Sustainability measurement

system: a reference model proposal. Social

responsibility Journal. 7 (3): 439

Epstein, M. J., & Wisner. P. S. 2001. Using a balanced

scorecard to implement sustainability. Environmental

quality management. (Winter): 1.

Esper, T. L., A. E. Ellinger. T. P. Stank. D. J. Flint & M.

Moon. 2010. Demand and supply integration: a

conceptual framework of value creation through

knowledge management. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science. 38 (1): 275.

Faisal, M. N., D. K. Banwet, & R. Shankar. 2006.

Mapping supply chains on risk and customer

sensitivity dimensions. Industrial management + data

systems 106 (6): 878

Falasca, M., C. W. Zobel & D. Cook. 2008. A Decision

Support Framework to Assess Supply Chain

Resilience. Proceedings of the 5

International

ISCRAM Conference.Washington DC, USA.

Fiksel, J. 2006. Sustainability and resilience: toward a

systems approach. Sustainability: Science, Practice,

and Policy. 2 (2): 14.

Fiksel, J. 2003. Designing resilient, sustainable systems.

Environmental Science and Technology 37(23): 5330.

Folke, C., S. Carpenter, T. Elmqvist, L. Gunderson, C.

Holling & B. Walker. 2002. Resilience and

Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity

in a World of Transformations. Ambio 31 (5): 437.

Freeman R. E. 1984. Strategic Management: a

Stakeholder Approach. Boston. MA: Pitman

Grant, R. M. 1991. The resource-based theory of

competitive advantage. California Management

Review 33(3): 114.

Gunderson, L., & L. J. Protchard. 2002. Resilience and the

Behavior of Large-Scale Systems. Washington, DC:

Island Press.

Hutchins M J & Sutherland J W. 2008. An exploration of

measures of social sustainability and their application

to supply chain decisions. Journal of cleaner

production 16: 1688.

Holling C S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological

systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics.

4:1.

Islam, M. A., & C. Deegan. 2008. Motivations for an

organisation within a developing country to report

social responsibility information: Evidence from

Bangladesh. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability

Journal 21 (6): 850.

Jin, B. 2004. Apparel industry in East Asian newly

industrialized countries: Competitive advantage,

challenge and implications. Journal of fashion

marketing and management 8 (2): 230.

Kaplan R S & Norton D P. 1996. Using the Balanced

Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. Harvard

Business Review 74: 75.

Kleindorfer, P. R., & G. H. Saad. 2005. Managing

Disruption Risks in Supply Chains. Production and

operations management 14 (1): 53.

Kolk, A. 2006. Sustainability, accountability and corporate

governance: exploring multinationals reporting

practices. Business Strategy and the Environment 17

(1): 1.

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A. C. & Erck, R. P. G. 2005.

Assessing the sustainability performances of

industries. Journal of Cleaner Production 13: 373.

Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management - A Conceptual Framework

171

Ludwig, D., B. Walker, & C S. Holling. 1996.

Sustainability, stability and resilience. Conservation

Ecology 1:1.

Manuj, I. & Mentzer, J. T. 2008. Global supply chain risk

management strategies. International journal of

physical distribution and logistics management, 38,

192.

Martin, S. 2004. The cost of restoration as a way of

defining resilience: a viability approach applied to a

model of lake eutrophication. Ecology and society, 9,

Meredith, J. 1993. Theory building through conceptual

methods. International journal of operations and

production management 13, 3.

Mittelbach, G. G. 1995. Perturbation and resilience: a

long-term, whole-lake study of predator extinction and

reintroduction. Ecology 76, 2347.

Murphy, P. R., Poist, R. F. & Braunschwieg, C. D. 1996.

Green logistics: comparative views of environmental

progressives, moderates, and conservatives. Journal of

Business Logistics 17, 191.

Neubert, M. G. 1997. Alternatives to resilience for

measuring the responses of ecological systems to

perturbations. Ecology 78, 653.

Ortiz, M. 2002. Dynamical simulation of mass-balance

trophic models for benthic communities of north-

central Chile: assessment of resilience time under

alternative management scenarios. Ecological

modelling 148, 277.

Pagell, M. & Wu, Z. 2009. Building a more complete

theory of sustainable supply chain management using

case studies of 10 exemplars. The journal of supply

chain management, 45, 37.

Pettit, T. J., Fiksel, J. & Croxton, K. L. 2010. Ensuring

supply chain resilience: Development of a conceptual

framework. Journal of Business Logistics 31, 1.

Perrini F & Tencati A. 2006. Sustainability and

stakeholder management: the need for new corporate

performance evaluation and reporting systems.

Business Strategy and the Environment 15: 296.

Ponomarov, S. Y. 2009. Understanding the concept of

supply chain resilience. International Journal of

Logistics Management 20 (1): 124.

Priem. R. L., & Butler, J. E. 2001. Is the resource-based

"view" a useful perspective for strategic management

research? Academy of Management Review 26, 22.

Seuring, S. 2008. From a literature review to a conceptual

framework for sustainable supply chain management.

Journal of cleaner production 16, 1699.

Sheffi, Y. 2005. A supply chain view of the resilient

enterprise. MIT Sloan management review 47, 41.

Singh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K. & Dikshit, A. K.

2009. An overview of sustainability assessment

Methodologies. Ecological Indicators. 9. 189.

Schoenherr T, Rao Tummala V. M. & Harrison T. P.

2008. Assessing supply chain risks with the analytic

hierarchy process: Providing decision support for the

offshoring decision by a US manufacturing company.

Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 14:

100.

Svensson, G. 2000. A conceptual framework for the

analysis of vulnerability in supply chains,

International Journal of Physical Distribution and

Logistics Management. 30 (9): 731.

Tang, C. S. 2006. Robust strategies for mitigating supply

chain disruptions. International journal of logistics 9,

33.

Tomlin B. (2006) On the Value of Mitigation and

Contingency Strategies for Managing Supply Chain

Disruption Risks. Management Science 52: 639.

Vugrin, E. D., Camphouse, R. C. & Sunderland, D. 2009.

Quantitative Resilience Analysis Through Control

Design. New Mexico: SandIA REPORT for the

United States Department of Energy.

Veeramani, 2007. Sources of India's Export Growth in

Pre- and Post-Reform Periods. Economic and Political

Weekly 42, 2419.

Weick, K. E. 1999. Conclusion: Theory construction as

disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s. The

Academy of Management review 24, 797.

Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource based view of the firm.

Strategic Management Journal 5, 171

Wheeler, D. 2003. Focusing on value: Reconciling

corporate social responsibility, sustainability and a

stakeholder approach in a network world. Journal of

general management 28 (3): 1.

Wu T, Blackhurst J & Chidambaram V. 2006. A model for

inbound supply risk analysis. Computers in Industry

57: 350-365.

Xu, J. 2008. Managing the Risk of Supply Chain

Disruption: Towards a Resilient Approach of Supply

Chain Management. ISECS International Colloquium

on Computing, Communication, Control, and

Management.

Yin, R. K. 1994. Case Study Research, 2nd ed., Sage,

Thousand Oaks, CA.

Zsidisin, G. A. Melnyk, S. A. & Ragatz, G. L. 2005. An

institutional theory perspective of business continuity

planning for purchasing and supply management.

International journal of production research 43 (16):

3401

ICE-B 2012 - International Conference on e-Business

172

APPENDIX

Table 2: Supply chain disruptions.

Supply chain disruptions

Reference

Natural disasters

Christopher & Peck (2004); Sheffi (2005); Kleindorfer & Saad (2005); Schoenherr

(2008); Wu et al (2006); Blackhurst et al (2008); Xu (2008)

Fluctuations in currencies,

Peck (2005); Blackhurstet et al. (2008); Manuj & Mentzer (2008)

Economic downturn

Xu (2008)

Fluctuation of raw material price

Xu, (2008)

Piracy and theft

Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005); Colicchia (2010); Blackhurst et al. (2008)

Labor disputes, strikes, sabotage

Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005); Kleindorfer & Saad (2005); Wu et al. (2006); Blackhurst et al.

(2008); Xu (2008)

Political and regulatory factors both home and

host country (political instability)

Peck (2005); Kleindorfer & Saad (2005); Wu et al. (2006); Blackhurst et al. (2008)

Product quality (Defection in product, damage,

wrong component or material)

Schoenherr (2008); Wu et al. (2006); Pujawan & Geraldin (2009); Blackhurst et al.

(2008); Manuj & Mentzer (2008)

Competition

Haider (2007; Schoenherr (2008)

Operational failure due to malfunction of

machinery and equipment

Kleindorfer & Saad (2005)

Lack of Raw material availability and

Dependence on offshore sourcing

Blackhurst (2006); Wu et al. (2006); Pujawan & Geraldin (2009) ; Haider (2007),

Nuruzzan (2009), Craighead (2007), Peck (2005)

Interrupted Utility supply

Ahmed (2009)

Skill shortage of human resources

Haider (2007); Wu et al. (2006)

Supplier disruption

Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005); Kleindorfer & Saad (2005); Tomlin (2006); Schoenherr

(2008); Wu et al. (2006); Blackhurst et al. (2008); Xu (2008)

Customer disruption

Gaudenzi & Borghesi (2006)

Infrastructure problem

Peck (2005); Schoenherr (2008); Blackhurst et al (2008)

Non-Comply social & environmental factors

Islam & Deegan (2008)

Delay for disruption in port and customs

Colicchia (2010); Blackhurst et al (2008)

Survival (bankruptcy, lawsuit by customer )

Manuj & Mentzer (2008)

Table 3: Supply chain capabilities.

Supply chain capabilities

Reference

Product customization

Ducols (2003)

Supplier contract flexibility regarding time

Fiksel (2003); Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005); Tang (2006)

Multiple sources of supply

Cranfield (2002, 2003); Fiksel (2003); Peck (2005); Tomlin (2006)

Alternate distribution Channels

Peck (2005); Tang (2006); Blackhurst et al. (2005), Klibi (2010),

Customer orientation & shortage response action

Kilbi et al. (2008); Braunscheidel & Suresh (2009); Ji & Zhu (2008)

Production postponement

Ducols (2003)

Backup capacity (materials, assets, utility, labor,

inventory)

Cranfield (2002, 2003); Fiksel (2003); Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005);

Tomlin (2006), Klibi (2010), Christopher & Peck (2004)

Labor productivity

Ahmed (2009)

Quality control and Checking Defection

Kleindorfer & Saad (2005)

Business intelligence

Cranfield (2002, 2003), Sheffi, 2005; Blackhurst et al (2005);

Product and Process Improvement

Fiksel (2003); Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005), Tang (2006)

Collaboration &Real time information exchange

Peck (2005); Blackhurst et al. (2005)

Supplier relation and improvement

Zsidisin & Ellram (2003); Stevenson & Spring (2009)

Forecasting and predictive analysis

Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005), Blackhurst et al. (2005)

Learning orientation and culture

Tang (2006); Braunscheidel & Suresh (2009), Manuj & Mentzer (2008)

Security, monitoring and early warning signals

Peck (2005); Sheffi (2005), Craighead et al. (2007)

Forward and backward integration

Manuj & Mentzer (2008), Ponomarov & Holcomb (2009)

Market share improvement

Pettit et al. (2010)

Compliance of social and environmental issues

Islam & Deegan (2008)

Resilient Sustainable Supply Chain Management - A Conceptual Framework

173