The supply chain field is a complex network of collaborations and coordination's, with a large

number of complex, a large number of stakeholders (producers, suppliers, transporters,

distributors, retailers) highly interconnected to optimize the flow of goods, information and
financial flows along the chain (Mentzer et al., 2001;Coyle et al., 2008). These activities are
surrounded by multifaceted risks that make supply chains more or less supply chains more or
less vulnerable. The sensitivity of these activities and the concern for the sensitivity of these
activities and the concern for the efficient deployment of the activities is fraught with a context
of multifaceted obstacles.

These obstacles are inherent to political instabilities (Debrie and De Guio, 2004), the absence or
obsolescence of obsolescence of the infrastructures, with the internal organization characterized
by the distortions of information of information, "bullwhip effect" around the demand or "double
marginalization" (El Ouardighi, 2008) and even the absence of professionals working in the
field.

The companies develop strategies that allow them to take the measure of these risks, to mitigate
or to mitigate or transfer them .Thousands of activities are carried out and coordinated within a
company, and each company is by nature involved in a supply chain relationship with other
companies. When a relationship is established between two entities, some of their internal
activities will be linked and managed between the two legally separate units.

Since they have internal activities with other members of their respective supply chain, they will
be respective supply chains. A relationship between two companies is therefore a type of linkage
that can be thought of as a supply chain network. For example, the internal activities of a for
example, the internal activities of a manufacturer are linked and may affect the internal activities
of a distributor, which in turn are linked and may affect the internal activities of a retailer.
Ultimately, the ultimately, the retailer's internal activities are linked and can affect the end
customer's activities (Lambert et al.(Lambert et al., 1998). This raises the question of
coordination recent developments in management show that there is a desire to understand
problems not as singular realities but as the result of a sum of result of a sum of interactions
between entities sharing common interests. This orientation is in line with theories on supply
chain management, which themselves draw on several other old disciplines such as the cost
theory of transaction or agency, less old, such as network management or even more recentsuch
as logistics, relationship marketing and industrial marketing.

Thus, Thi Le Hao and Bironneau (2011) use the definition of the Council of Supply Chain
Management Professionals according to which, "supply chain management covers the necessary
planning and management activities related to sourcing and procurement, conversion, and overall
logistics activities". More importantly, it also includes the coordination and collaboration with
chain partners, which can be raw material suppliers, intermediaries, third-party logistics
providers and customers. Third-party logistics service providers and customers. Stevens (1989)
describes the supply chain as a system whose constituent parts include the material supplier, the
production equipment, the distribution department and the customers linked together via the
anticipated them via the anticipated flow of materials and the return flow of information (Van
Der Vorst et al, 1998).

In essence, supply chain management integrates supply and demand management within and
between companies" (CSCMP, 2010). From these approaches, there is a growing desire to to
make the supply chain a node of business relations for a better value creation with a transversal
vision of the value creation with a transversal and integrating vision, where competition is no
longer at the inter-company competition is no longer at the inter-company level but rather an
inter-chain competition (Mohamed et al, 2010).

Based on a review of the literature, Mentzer et al. (2001) propose SCM as a management
philosophy that has the following characteristics:

- The whole supply systems approach and the management of the total flow. The approach to
total supply systems and the management of the total flow of goods from the supplier to the end
customer;

- Strategic focus on cooperative efforts to synchronize and coordinate intra- and inter-enterprise
operational and strategic capabilities into a unified whole;

- Customer focuses to create unique and individualized sources of customer value, leading to
customer value, leading to customer satisfaction.
The results of empirical research by Hakansson and Snehota (1995) emphasize that "the structure
of activities within and between firms is a critical cornerstone of cornerstone in creating unique
and superior supply chain performance. Key internal activities and business processes are linked
and managed at As Lambert et al. (1997) state, "successful supply chain management requires a
change in the management of requires a shift from managing individual functions to integrating
activities into key to the integration of activities into key supply chain processes. To improve
their competitiveness, many companies have embraced supply chain management to increase
efficiency and achieve organizational goals such as improving customer value, reducing costs
andcustomer value, efficient use of resources and increased profitability (Lee, 2000).

At the center of these approaches, the concern of the practitioners and theorists of the firm to the
firm to minimize the zones of uncertainty in the daily management, object of the subsequent
developments. This research thus approaches the supply chain management on the aspect of the
research of the practices of reduction of the risk. It is an approach on the practices that participate
in risk management.

The problem of risk management within companies is the subject of numerous developments
which approach the concept under different aspects. Thus, in a general way the risk of the supply
chain would be the sum of hazards which litter the activities (upstream) and the activities of
distribution (downstream). Kraljic(1983) treats risk in terms of the complexity of markets. In
Kraljic "s perspective risk incorporates scarcity of supply, the pace of technology and/or material
substitution, barriers to barriers to entry, the cost or complexity of logistics, and monopoly or
oligopolistic conditions. Cost or complexity of logistics and monopoly or oligopoly conditions
(Zsidisin, 2003). However, these authors do not address the specific. However, these authors do
not address the specific risks of the downstream part of the supply chain.

According to March and Shapira (1987), "risk is measured both by the non-linearity in the
assumed utility of the gains and losses and by the variance of the probability distribution of
possible gains and losses associated with an alternative and losses associated with a particular
alternative". An essential element of management (Mayrhofer, 2000), risk covers both the
concepts of hazard and uncertainty (Koenig, 2000).
uncertainty (Koenig, 1996; Djuatio, 2004). For Sitkin and Pablo (992), risk is defined as the
extent of the uncertainty linked to the possibility that a potential and significantly disappointing
event disappointing event will occur. However, uncertainty plays an essential role in any
business relationship: according to the transactional current (Williamson, 1979, 1985), it can be
attributable to the opportunistic actions of the agents (behavioral uncertainty) and to the
disturbances in the environment uncertainty) (Ivens and Mayrhofer, 2009). How do we deal with
risk in the supply chain? This question is at the origin of the development of a current of supply
chain research: supply chain risk management. But its different currents focus on the upstream
part of the chain.

Some authors have however addressed the risks coming from the downstream of the chain
mainly the one linked to the disruption of the demand. Thus, demand-side risks result from
disruptions emerging from downstream supply chain operations (Jüttner, 2005). These include,
on the one hand, disruptions in the physical distribution of products to the final customer, usually
in transportation operations (McKinnon and Ge, 2006) and the distribution network (e.g., a delay
at a distribution center).

On the other hand, demand risks can arise from the uncertainty caused by unpredictable
customer orders (Nagurney et al., 2005). Disruptions here a rise mismatch between a firm's
projections and actual demand, as well as supply chain coordination. The consequences of such
disruptions are costly shortages, obsolescence and inefficient use of capacity.

The authors who have dealt with the risk of demand disruption refer to it instead as one of
several as one variable among others that can influence the supplier/producer relationship
without, however, focusing relationship without however dwelling on the relationship between
the producing company and its distribution network.

distribution network. However, it is presented like a phenomenon with whole share with the
plural antecedents(holding of stocks, management of the signal of the order, level of the relations
inside the chain, the procedures, the men, the information system, the machines, ...) and whose
consequences lead to a dysfunction of the whole chain (out of stock, superfluous of stock,
delivery times, fluidity of the physical, informational and financial flows. What constitutes as
many sources of risks that Tapiero (2008) groups in(1998) into five, and Cristopher and Peck
(2004) into two categories,

Fouad El Ouardighi (2008) into three, Ziegenbein and Nienhaus (2004) into five, or
Mayrhofer(2000) into three categories. And which can be broadly classified into two main
groups: operational and strategic risks (Tapiero, 2008).

In addition, the treatment of supply chain risks is considered as a source of value creation and of
value creation and a source of competitive differentiation, it consists above all of reducing the
unfavorable impacts on performance (Delese, 2010).

The performance can be considered as the potential expected from the implementation of future
actions in the order of actions in order to achieve the objectives and targets (Michel, 1995). The
performance has been examined from several perspectives by supply chain researchers (Chow et
al, 1994; 1995; Bowersox et al, 1999 ;)

Nacamulli (1986) proposes to distinguish three levels of performance:

- The performance of the organization that achieves its goals (the organization is considered

The performance of the organization which achieves its goals (the organization is regarded
mainly as a mechanism): one speaks here about rational model;

- The performance of the organization as a capacity of adaptation: it is the

natural model;

- The performance of the organization as a control of the surrounding resources,

The performance of the organization as control of the surrounding resources, in particular the
other organizations: it is the ecological model.

The problematic of this research is leaned on the links supposed between these concepts by
various authors. For some, the realization of certain levels of performance is dependent on the
internal organization of the structure. In reference to the logic of the Balanced Scorecard model
of Kaplan and Norton (1992), according to which excellent customer performance is derived
from processes, decisions and actions that originate from the organization. The managers must
focus on the critical internal operations that enable them to maintain a high level of customer
relationship, but also be aware of any events that may affect them.

Companies seeking competitive advantage must identify their core competencies, their degree of
resilience and their core competencies, their degree of resilience in order to be able to develop a
level of technology that can to ensure their continued leadership in the market. This requires the
full integration of stakeholders within the company. Kaplan and Norton (1992) underline to this
effect that to achieve the goals of time, quality, productivity and cost, managers must detect
measures that are influenced by employee actions. In the same way, the

initiatives of the latter in the execution of their tasks must be taken into account by the top
management, especially when they can impact the global mission of the company "s global
mission. They must feel taken into account in the development of the objectives that are assigned
to them.

Because a process, even if it is characterized by a level of performance(quality, deadlines, costs)

satisfactory, is carrying a strategic risk if the actors do not have of maneuver (Herriau, 1999).
Auh and Menguc (2007) underline them that the organizational structure of a company
(centralized or not, roles clearly defined and formalized or not) can guarantee a certain level of
performance relational performance. The lightening of the procedures in the treatment of the
orders takes part according to according to these authors to the fluidity of the transactions.

For others, the performance results from the capacity of the company to manage the disturbances
emanating from the interactions with the stakeholders of its organization. These disturbances
come mainly from the asymmetry of information. The literature of the supply chain literature
identifies it under the term "bullwip effect", referring to the phenomenon where the fluctuations
of order sequences are more important upstream than downstream of the chain than downstream
of the chain (Lee et al., 1997; Ouyang and Daganzo, 2006). The bullwip effect would thus be an
outcome of the strategic interactions between the rational members of the supply chain.
Williamson (1985) qualified it as an informational asymmetry which constitutes one of the first
causes supporting the expression of opportunistic behaviors within the organizations.

To face the phenomenon, the authors propose beside the usual practices practices based on
contact (customer visit, telephone communication, salesmen reporting,...), several other modern
tools of information management. We note thus the system of exchange of computer data (EDI)
between the retailers and the producers, the system Vendor-Managed-Inventory (VMI), the
efficient cusumer response (ECR) or the continuous(Salmon, 1993; Crawford, 1994; Lee et al.,
1997). Buttheir implementation requires important investments which only the large companies
can claim.This thesis examines their influence on the management of the risks of the supply
chain of the agro-industry.

To optimize resources and guarantee certain levels of performance, the authors propose to rely
on "thepropose to rely on "outsourcing". This concept is central to the cost perspective McCarthy
and Anagnostou (2004) argue that organizations tend to reduce costs (both direct and costs
(direct and associated support costs) by forming alliances or selecting structures and practices
selecting structures and practices that are related to improving efficiency.

Thus, a firm has several means to answer the question of "making" or "doing" and thus to
organize its production or its distribution.

The choice between calling upon the market, subcontracting or choosing to integrate vertically
depends on the degree of specificity of the assets to be produced, the specific investments to be

The choice between using the market, subcontracting or choosing to integrate vertically depends
on the degree of specificity of the assets to be produced, the specific investments to be made, the
transaction costs and the incompleteness of the contracts (Williamson,1985; Grossman and Hart,
1986; cited by Mathieu et al., 2013). Novak and Eppinger (2001),based on transaction cost
theory, establish that the determinants of making versus buying (products or services) are: asset
specificity, uncertainty, frequency of transactions, and the opportunism of actors.

Kakabadse and Kakabadse (2000) justify the use of outsourcing as a way to economies of scale,
to improve quality through access to skills, or as a means of accessing as a way to access
innovation. Bendor-Samuel (1998) also affirms that subcontracting provides a certain power
which is not available within the internal departments to the company. However, subcontracting
is considered by some as a practice that can generate new risks, such as the loss of critical
competences, the loss of transversal the development of false competences, and the loss of
control over the suppliers (Domberger, 1998; Quinn and Hilmer, 1994; El Ouardighi, 2008).
However, many industrial companies practice it in several forms and in different facets of their
activities.

This research aims to determine its impact. This research aims to determine its impact on the
performance of food industries in relation to their distributors.

For Doyle (1994), satisfying customer needs is a central objective for any company. Dibb et al.
(1994) describe customer satisfaction as the essential goal of marketing. Thus, the more attention
a company devotes to researching its customer base to identify their needs and ways to improve
its offer, the more it limits the risk linked to the more it limits the risk linked to the uncertainty of
the demand and the more beneficial will be its transactions within the supply chain.

Stanley and Wisner (2001) have identified a positive and sequential relationship involving

backward integration and service quality. Thus, superior service quality can help to

generate high revenues and achieve high profitability (Rust et al., 1995). For Tan and (1998)
taking advantage of supplier capabilities and taking a long-term view of the supply chain
inperspective in customer relations are both correlated to firm performance.

Carr and Pearson (1999) argue that the cooperative customer-supplier relationshipcustomer-
supplier relationship has a positive impact on the financial performance of companies.
Johnson(1999) demonstrates that strategic integration (upstream) leads to increased firm
performance. However, none of this research has focused on the relationship (producer-
distributor). They also did not scrutinize the possible mediation of the orientation customer
relation between the management of the risks and the performance of the chain.

The agribusiness sector has been chosen as the field of application. The reasons for this choice
stem from its importance in the economies chosen for the investigation: Cameroon and France.

The agro-industrial sector has its own economy, and a precise description of it allows us to
highlight three links: the upstream link, the central link and the downstream link.

The upstream link includes manufacturers of agricultural equipment (tractors combine

harvesters...), the producers of inputs (fertilizers, pesticides ,fungicides...) and seed producers.
The central link groups together farmers and breeders whose production is intended either
directly for the markets, or for the industry of processing of agricultural products. The
downstream link concerns the industries which operate

The downstream link concerns the industries which operate modifications on the products
resulting from the primary sector and which market them. It is a question to condition them, to
refine them, to debacterize them (pasteurization, sterilization...) to extract a part of them (starch
of to extract a part of them (starch of corn, food dyes...) or to transform them (grinding,

roasting ...).In Cameroon, this industry represents 11% of GDP and 6% of exports, 33% of
industrial production and 27% of the value of the industrial production and 27% of the sector's
value added (INS, MINMIDT, 2013).

Despite a slight decline of 0.2% in 2012 compared to the last quarter of 2011, the productionof
the agri-food industries increased by 6.6% compared to the situation in 2011.This good
performance is the result of the good strength of the brewing industries(+14.7%); "Grain
processing and flour production" (+7.4%) and other "agro-processing of agricultural products"
(+1.8%). On the other hand, there was a poor performance in performance of the "bakeries and
pastries" branch, whose production fell by 3.4% year-on-year

year-on-year.In France, the agri-food industries (IAA)are "one of the flagships of the French
economy".

French economy". France "s leading industrial sector in terms of employment, turnover and
added value (first contributor of the manufacturing industry: it represents 17% of itsvalue added
in 2014 and the food, beverage and tobacco products processing industry and tobacco products
accounted for 44.7 billion euros in 2015), they are present on the whole territory. Their activities
are structuring for many regions,

They ensure the stability of their economic and social fabric. They are supported by a strong
agricultural

They are supported by a strong capacity of agricultural production which allows their anchoring
on the territory. The French AFIs also reflect the diversity of the food offer and would ensure, in
front of the attacks of a of globalized junk food, the defense of gastronomy and the French food
model (Zarkaand Laroche, 2015).Because of its importance, the agro-industry occupies a place
of choice in the conomies. Their specificity and variety make it one of the most prolific and
profitable industries. Entire economic systems are based on this industry.

For some emerging countries, agriculture and agro-industry are the foundation on which any
sustainable economic policy must be based. Even if it is supplanted today by other sectors such
as information technology (in terms of added value), the volume of agro-industry activities
throughout the world remains very important. It is also one of the industries

It is also one of the industries of which any country can boast of having a specificity. Strongly
subjected to constraints (technological, human and natural), the sector has undergone a evolution
since the second world war.

This evolution is closely linked to the tandem technological evolution and of the demand for
food consumer goods. The latter is the corollary of the increase in human populations and needs.
More and more, the demand is changing from the simple satisfaction of the needs of subsistence
to developments of irrational sensations which impose to the industrialists to adjust even to
mutate their tools of

production tools to adapt. Moreover, innovation remains the key word in the industrial practices
of the industrial practices of the sector. The margins being made on "small steps", the key of
success in the sector remains the practice of economies of scale. From then on, the search for
cost minimization and mass production of costs and mass production appears as a key factor of
competitiveness for the agro-industrial companies.

Another essential factor remains the distribution of the products on the market, and at this level,
a whole sector developed: the sector of the distribution. The importance of this one goes growing
and today imposes itself as being a parallel sector even a counterweight for the sector, or even a
counterweight to the food production industry.

In the wake of this, industrial practices are giving pride of place to the development of stable and
sustainable relationships with distributors, the main interlocutors of the consumers-customers of
the company. Thus, to know which are the risks

which hinder this relation is an approach aiming at offering to the managers and theorists of tools
of their management. These risks, their occurrence and the strategies set up to mitigate or
eliminate them mitigate or eliminate them would depend on the environment in which they are
apprehended.

And to try to apprehend them is the central problem of this research In view of the theoretical
developments on the new forms of apprehension of the activities, the present research aims at
elaborating a management model that management model that relates risk management practices
to performance through the mediation of theperformance under the mediation of the company's
customer orientation and under the influence of certain factors such as information systems and
sales promotions. It is based on a comparative study between twocomparative study between two
economies of different levels. And it mainly examinesthe impact that risk management practices,
both operational and strategic, can have on the on the performance of distribution chains. In
other words, what is the influence of operational and strategic risks in the downstream supply
chain on the performance of the agro-industrial enterprise? What role do customer relationships
play between risk management and performance? Do information systems and sales promotions

Do information systems and sales promotions modify the level of these links? From these
questions, the following postulate arises: The downstream supply chain risk management
influences the performance of agro-industrial companies.
PART ONE: CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF SUPPLY CHAIN RISK
MANAGEMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN RISK AND PERFORMANCE
PERFORMANCE
Supply chains appear to be increasingly vulnerable and fragile in a context of
marked by a great competitive pressure, a volatile demand, a tendency towards the economies of
scale economies of scale and outsourcing, a short product life cycle (Mohamed et al,
2010). Risk management is thus an essential and unavoidable issue for the
supply chain which has evolved towards a value-based network management using both modern
tools oftransmission and processing of information.
The object of this part isto carry out a state of the art on the concepts of Supply Chain, risk,
management of the risks,and of the performance of the Supply Chain and to justify our
conceptual model thus.
Aterm, the objective will be to initiate a deep reflection on the mechanisms which can lead to
a more resilient supply chain downstream through risk management practices.
To serve this objective, this first part mobilizes several theoretical fields, the
contingency theory, behaviorist theories, agency, transaction costs, network, ...
It is interested in a first time in the analysis of the concept of the supply chain risk
management, through definitions at the same time sequential and grouped of the concepts, their
classification and their measurement as approached by the literature in section one of chapter
one.
first the notion of performance as well as its different characteristics within the organizations
(section two). Then, it approaches in the second chapter, the theoretical links
established between supply chain risk management and performance, in order to justify the
conceptual model at the basis of the hypotheses of this thesis. Finally, it presents theof
investigation of the research in section two of the second chapter.
Section 1: DEFINITIONS OF RISK AND SUPPLY CHAIN RISK
MANAGEMENT: TRANSVERSAL CONCEPTS

Before any definition of the risk within the supply chain, it is necessary to
understand the notion of supply chain itself. Like the notion of logistics at its
the concept of SCM has been the subject of many definitions since its appearance in the
appeared in the literature in 1982, in an article by Keith and Webber (Gibson et al., 2005)
in the field of logistics.
The logistic chain being able to be defined as a whole of people (moral or physical) who take
part directly in the upstream flows
The supply chain can be defined as a set of persons (legal or physical) who participate directly in
the upstream and downstream flows of products, services, information and finances that go from
theinformation and finance from a point to a customer. This definition distinguishes
three levels of complexity. The first involves only three actors (the supplier
The first level involves only three actors (the supplier, the company and its customer) in the
circulation of flows.
The second level takes into account the suppliers of the supplier and the customers of the
customers. It concerns the indirect supply chain. The third level includes all the involved in all
the upstream and downstream flows (including logistics service providers
logistics service providers, market research companies, etc.). It refers to the extended supply
chain or supply chain. These entities carry out common activities that are subject to several
risks.
Ellram (1991) defines the SCM as "a network of companies interacting to deliver a product or
service to the end customer a product or service to the final customer and involving a set of flows
from raw materials to final delivery. ". Christopher (1992) in turn defines supply chain
management as a network of organizations that are interactively engaged in different processes
and activities that produce value in the form of products and services for the
services for the final consumer. Moreover, the concept of value, in its managerial meaning, is
based on the managerial meaning, rests on the estimation of the satisfaction of a need to which
the company seeks to answer as well as possible, and on that of the costs necessary to the
realization of the activities allowing to satisfy this need. Beyond the only existing accounting
data, the value is based on
projection of the firm in the future, by integrating the expected future flows, the expected profit
profit, the anticipation of a profitability, requiring to control a certain number of information
information (Zeroual et al., 2011).
Some authors situate the origin of the SCM in the 1990s through the work of
Christopher (1992, 1994). Thus, as early as 1997, Bechtel and Jayaram counted more than 50
definitions of the SCM, classified into 5 categories. Copper et al (1997) listed
(1997) listed 13 main ones and Mentzer et al. (2001) more than a hundred. More recently
Burgess et al.(2006) described 22 possible definitions of SCM and Stock and Boyer (2009), in a
sort of and Stock and Boyer (2009), in a sort of one-upmanship, have catalogued up to 166
approaches to SCM in their attempt to propose a definition (Thi Le Hoa and Bironneau, 2011).
One of the reasons for the lack of a universal definition of SCM is the multidisciplinary origin
and the multidisciplinary origin and evolution of the concept. Among this multitude of
definitions, Cooper et al. (1997) argue that "SCM is a philosophy that moves toward integrated
management of the distribution channel", while Tan et al. (1998) define it as a managerial
philosophy that (1998) define it as a managerial philosophy that redirects the traditional intra-
organizational activities of trading partners towards a common goal of optimization and
efficiency. Seen from this angle, the management of the supply chain is apprehended in a
context of global management which tends to emphasize, the logic of whole and not of
individual isolation of the economic units in the Cartesian direction: it is about a systemic
process systemic process with a predominance network in the sense of Paché and Paraponaris
(2006). The present research approaches the concept under this angle and scrutinizes the
phenomenon of risk underthe relational aspect based on the trust and the consensus (between
partners having common interests), the relations of power (between dominant firm and
dominated firms with a dimension of equity)the relations of agency and costs of transaction
(between the principals and the providers), all working in the background in the management of
this node of contracts that constitutes the contracts that constitutes the networked firm in the grip
of multiform risks. It is thus about of an approach borrowing at the same time to the neo-
institutional economic theories,
widely studied (Livolsi, 2009) and sociological neo-institutional, less studied to (Mohamed et al.,
2010).
1.1 Definitions and typologies of risk
Risk can be defined as a possible variation in the distribution of supply chain outcomes, their
probability and supply chain, their probability and their subjective values (March and Shapira,
1987) or a flow disruption between the elements constituting the supply chain (Lavastre, and
Spalanzani, 2010). Risk is defined in the literature from several angles depending on the
disciplines and contexts. In 2002, risk is defined as "the combination of the probability of an
event and its consequences".In the supply chain, risks are analyzed along the entire pipeline from
the supplier of the raw material to the raw material supplier to the final consumer/user of the
product. The analysis of the risk envisaged here distinguishes the upstream relation between
producing company and its suppliers from the downstream relation between the producing
company and its market (limited here to the distributors).
Blackhurst et al (2005), Yang and Yang (2010) define supply chain risk as unexpected variations
in the supply chain risk as unexpected variations in capacity constraints or breakdowns, quality
quality problems, fires or other natural disasters at the end supplier.
supplier. This definition highlights the uncertain context in which supply chain activities take
place.. What is supply chain risk? What are its categories, its characteristics?

1.1.1. Definition of risk in the supply chain

The concept of risk is a multidimensional construct (Zsidisin, 2003) and is confusing.
confusion. Its apprehension through several works makes of him one of the problems
the most treated problems in science of management. The risks of the logistic chain are a set of
of obstacles to the initiatives taken within the framework of the routing of the products since
their place of production until the final consumer. They can thus be regarded as
variables of internal or external environmental uncertainties that reduce the predictability of the
of the results (Jüttner et al., 2003). Yates and Stone (1992) insist on three elements to
elements of loss, its significance of loss and its probability of occurrence.
loss) and its probability of occurrence (uncertainty associated of loss). Upstream of the supply
supply chain, Lavastre and Spalanzani (2010), inspired by Harland et al.
(1995), define a risk as the probability of a loss and the importance of this loss
to the organization or individual. Risk can become a crisis when the company has to reorganize
itself to adapt to an event that may have been foreseen but whose consequences are but whose
consequences are not controlled (Evrard et al., 2011).
Mitchell (1995) uses the following formula to evaluate the risk of an event n
from the probability of loss [P(lossn)] and the size of the loss [L(lossn)]:
Risk n = P(lossn ) * L (lossn).
Zsidisin (2003) understands risk in terms of the uncertainty governing the interaction
between partners in the chain and proposes three dimensions: uncertainty, expectation and
potential of the results. For the author, starting from the perspective of the theories of transaction
costs(Williamson, 1975) and agency (Eisenhardt, 1989a), the uncertainty of outcomes is
associated with the variability of associated with the variability of outcomes, the lack of
knowledge about the potential distribution of outcomes and the uncontrollability of outcome
achievement. Similarly, in the (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979), outcome expectancy suggests
that positive benefits, more than positive benefits, more than the expected negative benefits,
facilitate the structuring of the decision and decision-making behavior. Finally, outcome
expectancy argues that, more often than not, individuals tend to overestimate the benefits, even if
theirprobability of realization is suspect (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979; Sitkin and Pablo, 1992).

In a global approach, Davis (1993) suggests that there are three different sources of
sources of uncertainty that plague supply chains: supplier uncertainty, arising from lead time
performance, average delay and degree of inconsistency; producer uncertainty, arising from
from the performance of the procedures, the failures of the machines, the performance of the
supply chain performance, etc.; and customer and demand uncertainty, arising from forecasting
errors customer and demand uncertainty, arising from forecasting errors, order irregularity, etc.
(Chen and Paulraj, 2004).
This approach does not separate the risks impacting the upstream relationship from those
influencing the downstream relationship of the supply chain Addressing the relationship between
the producing company and its suppliers, Mitchell develops a list of twelve
a list of twelve factors that can influence the buyer "s perception of risk. These are
demographics of the buyer, job function, decision-making unit, buyer personality, type of
personality of the buyer, type of purchase, product characteristics, degree of customer/supplier
interaction between customers/suppliers, characteristics of the customer/supplier markets,
the size of the company, the organizational performance and the country of origin of the buyer.
These factors are related to the individual and the internal organization of the focal company and
do not integrate the aspects of the environment in which the supply chain evolves.
According to the network approach, the risks of the supply chain are those relating to the
turbulences and interruptions of the network of flows between goods, information and finances.
But also those of the social and institutional networks which can impact negatively
of the supply chain as a whole, taking into account the advantages of the
supply chain as a whole, taking into account the cost, time or quality advantages of the
the end user (Pfohl et al., 2010). Analyzed from this perspective, supply chain risk tends to be
explained as a commonto be explained as an event common to more than one actor within the
chain.
It is the result of interactions between entities nested in the form of a network. The concept of
network has been of growing interest for a few years now and tends to occupy a
and tends to occupy a place of choice in the field of knowledge that is the management of
organizations (Djuatio, 2004). The term has been at the heart of a number of studies, both
conceptual (Paturel et al., 1999; Joyal, 1997; Bejean et al., 1997; Callon, 1992) and
empirical (Bé-jean et al. 1997; Fulconis, 1999; Monnoyer-Longé, 1994). It would constitute
in the management literature, the major phenomenon of recent years (Szarka, 1990).
For Djuatio (2004), the interdisciplinary of this concept indicates its importance through
various conceptual approaches.
In the engineering sciences, the networks were approached under the angle of
the spatial interconnection of objects whose connection favors the transport of materials or
information from one place to another. The physical organization, the inscription in a space
space, the taking into account of the distance are the fundamental variables of this approach
network. From the economic point of view, the network is detached from the consideration
of interconnection to make emerge the idea of intermediation. The networks are objects
technical-economic objects putting in relation suppliers and consumers of goods and services
(Curien, 1992); they return account of the means by which an economic actor develops
by exploiting a potential of technological development (Pernin, 1994).
The network can be conceived as a whole of relations which connects agents (entities),
individuals or groups of individuals (Béjean and Gadreau, 1997). In the sciences of the company,
the phenomenon network is perceived as a mode of organization having for objective, the
coordination of activities within an environmental framework likely to create externalities and
cumulative competences (Djuatio, 2004). Its development is not formulated in
terms of transaction costs (Guilhon and al., 1990), but of spaces of relations,
of innovation and strategy (Fourcade, 1994).
The concept of network has been of growing interest for a few years now and tends to occupy a
and tends to occupy a place of choice in the field of knowledge that is the management of
organizations (Djuatio, 2004). The term has been at the heart of a number of studies, both
conceptual (Paturel et al., 1999; Joyal, 1997; Bejean et al., 1997; Callon, 1992) and
empirical (Bé-jean et al., 1997; Fulconis, 1999; Monnoyer-Longé, 1994). It would constitute
in the management literature, the major phenomenon of recent years (Szarka, 1990).
For Djuatio (2004), the interdisciplinarity of this concept indicates its importance through
various conceptual approaches.
In the engineering sciences, the networks were approached under the angle of
the spatial interconnection of objects whose connection favors the transport of materials or
information space, the taking into account of the distance are the fundamental variables of this
approach network.
From the economic point of view, the network is detached from the consideration
of interconnection to make emerge the idea of intermediation. The networks are objects
technical-economic objects putting in relation suppliers and consumers of goods and services
(Curien, 1992); they return account of the means by which an economic actor develops
by exploiting a potential of technological development (Pernin, 1994).
The network can be conceived as a whole of relations which connects agents (entities),
individuals or groups of individuals (Béjean and Gadreau, 1997).
In the sciences of the company,
the phenomenon network is perceived as a mode of organization having for objective, the
coordination of activities within an environmental framework likely to create externalities and
cumulative competences (Djuatio, 2004). Its development is not formulated in
terms of transaction costs (Guilhon and al., 1990), but of spaces of relations,
of innovation and strategy (Fourcade, 1994).