Search results

Big data poses as a valuable opportunity to further improve decision making in supply chain management (SCM). However, the understanding and application of big data seem rather elusive and only partially explored. The purpose of this paper is to create further guidance in understanding big data and to explore applications from a business process perspective.

This paper is based on a sequential mixed-method. First, a Delphi study was designed to gain insights regarding the terminology of big data and to identify and rank applications of big data in SCM using an adjusted supply chain operations reference (SCOR) process framework. This was followed by a questionnaire-survey among supply chain executives to elucidate the Delphi study findings and to assess the practical use of big data.

First, big data terminology seems to be more about data collection than of data management and data utilization. Second, the application of big data is most applicable for logistics, service and planning processes than of sourcing, manufacturing and return. Third, supply chain executives seem to have a slow adoption of big data.

The Delphi study is explorative by nature and the questionnaire-survey rather small in scale; therefore, findings have limited generalizability.

The findings can help supply chain managers gain a clearer understanding of the domain of big data and guide them in where to deploy big data initiatives.

This study is the first to assess big data in the SCOR process framework and to rank applications of big data as a mean to guide the SCM community to where big data is most beneficial.

That knowledge acquisition from external sources can play a pivotal role in product design is a well-known fact. However, knowledge acquisition need not play a pivotal role in every context; it is also documented to have a dark side (i.e. negative impacts). Specifically, given that product stewardship, by definition, calls on each party in the product life cycle – including suppliers – to share responsibility for the environmental impact of products, the purpose of this study is to answer the question “whether knowledge acquired from suppliers plays a beneficial role in the context of product stewardship?”

This study focuses on the effect of knowledge acquisition on product stewardship and its subsequent effect on environmental performance. Given that the effect of knowledge acquisition could be moderated by firm-specific and relational factors, this study also considers the moderating role of knowledge exploitation and supplier opportunism. Using primary data, the hypotheses are tested using two-stage hierarchical ordinary least squares regression models involving valid instruments.

Though extant research doubts that knowledge acquisition will always be beneficial, this study adheres to the tenets of knowledge-based view and hypothesize that knowledge acquisition is pivotal to product stewardship and its subsequent impact on environmental performance. But the results suggest an intriguing double-edged effect of knowledge acquisition; while its direct effect on product stewardship is nonsignificant, it seemed to have a significant positive moderating effect on the relationship between product stewardship and environmental performance. But whenever knowledge exploitation and supplier opportunism are maintained at ideal levels, this double-edged effect of knowledge acquisition is successfully negated.

While knowledge acquisition is key for new product design, its specific role in the product design that incorporates environmental considerations is still not clear. By proposing that knowledge acquisition could instead have a double-edged effect within the unique context of product stewardship, the study makes an invaluable contribution to the extant literature on knowledge management within supply chain relationships.

The discussion of rigor vs relevance is an ongoing debate in academic environment. Ambitions to fulfill one of these two objectives might not exclude the other. Instead, they could and should be achieved simultaneously. However, what seems to be missing in supply chain management (SCM) research is the unfolding of symmetrical balance between the two dimensions of relevance – theoretical vs practical relevance. The purpose of this paper is to advance the understanding of this symmetrical balance and to change the conversation to also include the practical relevance dimension.

The paper is based on literature studies as well as the results of a questionnaire survey distributed to the Danish Supply Chain Panel consisting of 113 supply chain executives (as per the beginning of 2017). A short interview about the questionnaire results was also carried out with three panel members.

With an increased focus on journal rankings, there is a risk of pursuing more theoretically relevant SCM research at the expense of practically relevant SCM research. Both types of relevance are important for growing the discipline. But the current development seems to favor theoretical relevance, further widening the gap with respect to practical applications. Practical relevance is important both in the knowledge production and in the knowledge transfer stages.

There is a need to further explore different resources to close the gap between theoretical and practical relevance in SCM research. Researchers ought to follow an ambidextrous research strategy. This paper advises to bring back the core of the profession – the research process. This paper encourages researchers to be more creative and intensify the focus, equally, on both the theoretical and practical relevance in their research.

This research showcases a variety of different approaches for researchers to engage with practice so as to reduce any prejudices from both sides and enhance SCM decision-making processes. This paper recommends adding a new type of paper “practical paper” and including practitioners in the review board to evaluate the practical content of the research paper. This initiative would strengthen the interaction between researchers and practitioners.

This paper provides new insights on the need for symmetrical balance between theoretical and practical relevance being important for both academia and practice.

Rigor and practical relevance are the foundations for logistics and supply chain management (LSCM) as an applied discipline. Whereas there are well-founded criteria for establishing methodological rigor, researchers must provide their own credible logic as to why their papers can influence practice. Accordingly, this paper aims to develop guidelines for establishing practical relevance in research papers.

A literature review of LSCM, marketing, operations management and management journals forms the foundation for these guidelines.

Relevance criteria are identified; research should be problem-driven, timely and important, and findings should be implementable, nonobvious, novel and not too costly. Measures for researchers demonstrating the fulfillment of these criteria are identified as practitioner input, gray literature, funding, practitioner involvement and feedback. Researchers should also clearly articulate both problem relevance and the relevance of their findings.

A lack of practical relevance is among the reasons for the rejection of papers by LSCM journals, but researchers can overcome this obstacle using these guidelines.

At a metalevel, this paper contributes to research with greater practical relevance.

Practical relevance is emphasized in the editorials of LSCM journals but has not yet been fully conceptualized from the authors' perspective.

This paper offers a retrospective on the launch and first volumes of this journal. It describes the history of a unique period in our discipline when founding fathers in the US and UK collaborated with industry and each other to create a new field.

The authors interviewed founding editor Professor Martin Christopher and coeditor in Chief Professor Doug Lambert, conducted a bibliometric review of the first volumes of the journal and informed the analysis by approaches taken in other retrospectives published in the journal. The authors also feature historical artifacts from the journal.

The editorial focus during the early days of the journal demonstrate how the roots of the field are in cost modeling and technical work but quickly moved toward customer orientation and managerial focus. The editorial approach during the early days of the journal was on innovative research and publishing, scholarship engaged with industry, a focus on relevance and industry impact as well as leveraging research in education.

There have been retrospectives on the journals most recent volumes but what the authors aim to do is to reflect upon the launch and the first volumes of the journal. The authors expand and further detail the timeline of the development of the logistics field. In the process, the authors identify several historical roots for topics of greater focus in logistics and supply chain management in later years. The authors also find that many of the essential approaches and lessons learned in the period leading up to the launch and shortly after the launch of the journal do not only capture the early development of the discipline it also offers an approach and model for scholarship worthy of consideration still today. On top of that, several of the lessons learned in that period hold high relevance still today and they imply part of the path forward for the discipline and the journal, the authors develop questions for future research and research and editorial strategies.

The concept of interestingness has been investigated in several management disciplines but studies mobilizing such concept in supply chain management (SCM) to develop strategies for the field's advancement are relatively scarce. This research paper aims to investigate how SCM scholars rank attributes of interestingness and the strategies to harness interestingness in the field of SCM.

The authors adopt a mixed methods research design in which a survey on SCM researchers' ranking of interestingness' attributes and qualitative interviews with selected academics are conducted.

The findings highlight the importance given by SCM scholars to attributes such as rigor, relevance, novelty and communication and how they are interrelated. Also, other interestingness attributes are underlined by scholars during the qualitative interviews including inquisitiveness, engaging the reader, imaginativeness and entertainment. Furthermore, a research agenda to synthesize the propositions to develop interesting research is also proposed.

Interestingness attributes such as rigor, relevance and novelty are discussed. Recommendations for interesting research are suggested which can be useful to scholars and journal editors. The findings of this research are also relevant for practitioners for a better understanding of academic/practice relationships to develop high impact collaboration.

This paper is among the few studies that focus on interestingness in SCM research from the perspective of scholars. In doing so, the authors seek to contribute to the classic debate in SCM field about “relevance-rigour” duality by providing a broader outlook based on interestingness and proposing a research agenda for prospective studies in the field.

Supply chain vulnerability (SCV) analysis is vital for manufacturers globally because it creates a pathway for building resilient supply chains in uncertain environments. This study aims to identify drivers of SCV in the Indian manufacturing sector.

Sixteen drivers were identified from the literature review and followed by expert interviews. Interpretive structural modeling was used to determine the hierarchical structural relationship among identified SCV factors.

It was found that risk is not a board room agenda. Misaligned performance measures with incentives and lack of risk dashboard are the causal factors of SCV. Supply chain security, centralized production and distribution and lack of trust in the supply chain were driven factors.

This provides new insights to assess and prioritize initiatives for supply chain sustainability in terms of continuing business operations. The structural model provides a systemic view of SCV and helps reduce vulnerability.

The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on how perspectives and assumptions embedded in the complexity paradigm contribute to make logistics management research better aligned with real-life logistics. This is necessary, due to increasing supply chain complexity caused by an increasing request for sustainable development (SD).

The research is exploratory and based on a narrative literature review of logistics and supply chain management (SCM) from a complexity science perspective. Qualitative research interviews have been conducted with 12 logistics and supply chain managers in international companies and have focussed on their daily experiences and the underlying assumptions related to their actual work.

Logistics and SCM research is embedded in the functionalistic paradigm with reductionistic assumptions as the dominant logic. These do not sufficiently align with the complexity related, for example, to the daily work of SD in logistics management practice.

It is proposed that the inclusion of complexity-based assumptions in logistics management research can increase realism in the advancement of the discipline. A key result is that the recognition of logistics as complex means inclusion of human and social aspects – which is apparent in any logistics process or phenomenon – in logistics knowledge creation processes.

Increased realism in logistics management research by addressing complexity, instead of merely reducing it, will provide logistics and supply chain managers with increased understanding and appropriate knowledge when they deal with emerging challenges such as SD.

Based on Boulding’s levels of complexity, this paper challenges the underlying assumptions of logistics management in research and practice, and provides reflective frameworks for advancing the discipline and aligning it to the complexity of contemporary challenges in logistics management.