International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

Supply chain logistics risks: From the back room to the board room
Joseph L. Cavinato,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Joseph L. Cavinato, (2004) "Supply chain logistics risks: From the back room to the board room",
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 Issue: 5, pp.383-387, https://
doi.org/10.1108/09600030410545427
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030410545427
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

Downloaded on: 25 January 2019, At: 12:03 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 2 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 9177 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(1997),"Supply Chain Management: More Than a New Name for Logistics", The International Journal of
Logistics Management, Vol. 8 Iss 1 pp. 1-14 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/09574099710805556">https://
doi.org/10.1108/09574099710805556</a>
(2004),"Mitigating supply chain risk through improved confidence", International Journal of
Physical Distribution &amp; Logistics Management, Vol. 34 Iss 5 pp. 388-396 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/09600030410545436">https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030410545436</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:387340 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm

PERSPECTIVE Supply chain

logistics risks
Supply chain logistics risks
From the back room to the board room
383
Joseph L. Cavinato
Thunderbird – The Garvin School of International Management, Glendale,
Arizona, USA
Keywords Risk management, Supply chain management, Decision making
Abstract Risks and uncertainties are ever more noted and factored into decision making today,
and those stemming from supply chains are prominent in the competitiveness and viability of
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

companies and organizations. The idea that every supply chain is made up of five internal
chain/network constructs is presented, and these are physical, financial, informational, relational,
and innovational. Further, four categorizations of relevant product/supply costs are presented as
are four types of supply risks.

After the supply shortages, urgencies, and inflation of the Second World War, risk and
uncertainty moved into the background of business thinking and decision-making for
several decades. Supply availability grew, if not in a home country it did from abroad.
Domestic and international transportation speeded up, it became more plentiful and
lower in cost. Communications technologies and use increased exponentially thereby
creating the impression that distances were shrinking and attendant problems could
more easily be addressed. Risk was a function handled by insurance specialists who
concentrated on facilities, employees, and export/import shipping losses.

The limen that makes us see the rest

Limen, a psychology term, deals with a threshold in sense. It is defined as the amount
of stimulus required to produce a sensation or that level in which one can be perceived
differently than another. The 2001 World Trade Tower events and the 2004 Madrid
commuter train blasts caused people to see many more risks and uncertainties. The
definitions of risk have change and broadened, forever.
Risk is now factored into all business functions and processes. Regulatory changes
in the USA have even caused risk to be revealed to the investment community when
potential events and situations could cause material impacts on the firm[1]. At a 2003
conference entitled “Rewards of managing risk: identifying and overseeing supply
chain risk”, the following points showed how a business’ limen has recently been more
finely tuned[2]:
.
Less than 100 workers in a longshoremen’s union strike on the US West Coast
caused significant disruption of an entire holiday season of consumer product
sales in North America and Europe (involving land bridge movements from Asia
across North America to Europe). Given the month long round trip cycle of ship International Journal of Physical
movements across the Pacific, some containers took nearly six months to be Distribution & Logistics Management
Vol. 34 No. 5, 2004
delivered and for schedules to return to normal. pp. 383-387
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
.
The 2003 SARS outbreak in Southwest China and Hong Kong has caused many 0960-0035
manufacturers to broaden their risk by also sourcing from other regions and to DOI 10.1108/09600030410545427
 IJPDLM view low cost geographies as a portfolio of sourcing opportunities throughout
34,5 the world.
.
A tree limb falling onto a power line during a local storm caused a regional
electrical outage with impact on manufacturing, transportation, and retailing
lasting over a week directly affecting over 50 million people.
.
It was revealed that 45 per cent of worldwide semi-conductor fabrication
384 capacity is within range of North Korea’s current missile capabilities.
.
A Fortune 25 chief executive officer is worried that he might see his company’s
name on the cover of the New York Times because a small unknown fourth tier
supplier of trucking services in a low cost country is using child labor at no pay.
It does not matter that this hauler is unknown to the firm; the image and impact
on the company’s stock is affected by the minds of the newspaper readers.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

.
Increasingly, major end of supply chain firms, in the form of large retailers and
major manufacturers, have so much buying power that their first and second tier
supply base is continuing to weaken financially. With the trend of supplier
rationalization, this places the buying company at increasing supply risk.
.
The food supply chains of the world are being examined for their porous and
exposed nature with thoughts of increased control and labeling as “secure
supply”.
Every one of these examples involve risk in the logistics of supply chains. Every one of
them is beyond the traditional risks of product being lost or damaged in transportation,
a warehouse burning or being flooded, or a supplier shipping low quality product.
With broader risks, the preparations for and protections against them become more
encompassing than in the past.

Risks and uncertainty in supply chains

A categorization for identifying risks and uncertainties in supply chains is shown as
the five sub-chains/networks to every supply chain:
(1) Physical – the actual movements and flows within and between firms,
transportation, service mobilization, delivery movement, storage, and
inventories.
(2) Financial – the flows of cash between organizations, incurrence of expenses,
and use of investments for the entire chain/network, settlements, A/R and A/P
processes and systems.
(3) Informational – the processes and electronic systems, data movement triggers,
access to key information, capture and use of data, enabling processes, market
intelligence.
(4) Relational – the appropriate linkage between a supplier, the organization and
its customers for maximum benefit; includes internal supply matter
relationships throughout the organization.
(5) Innovational – the processes and linkages across the firm, its customers,
suppliers, and resource parties for the purpose of discovering and bringing to
market product, service, and process opportunities.
 Viewing a company’s supply chains or networks in the contexts of these five Supply chain
sub-chains broadens the realm of supply chain scope and activities. This presupposes logistics risks
that every supply chain is composed of five sub-chains or networks. The first, physical
chains, represent traditionally viewed logistics, in the form of transportation,
warehousing, handling, processing, manufacturing, and other forms of utility
activities. These are the traditional views of the supply chain, often shown in graphical
form of suppliers, material receiving sites, manufacturing, distribution centers, and 385
customers. Risks here encompass transportation disruption, the destruction or
ruination of goods, the inability to access inventories, manufacturing discontinuity,
and more.
Every supply chain maintains a financial sub-chain working in parallel in the form
of which party has investments at particular places and at embedded costs, differing
costs of capital and rates of expense incurrence, and cash movements and settlements
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

from one firm to the next. The risks here are through settlement process disruption,
improper investments, and by not bringing cost transparency to the overall supply
chain. Security in settlement processes involving accounts payable (purchasing) and
accounts payables (distribution) are the first areas of risk concern as are the
management of securitized accounts receivables in between the firms when this
mechanism is in use.
Informational sub-chains parallel the physical and financial chains through the
processes and electronic systems used for creating events and triggered product
movements and service mobilization. The essentials cover efficiency, security, and
access. A longer term risk involves the creation and investment into information
systems that are neither fully capable nor efficient for intended purposes and future
business needs.
Relational sub-chains relate to the chosen linkages between buyers, sellers, and
logistics parties in between them. A spectrum of relationships exist ranging from arm’s
length price ones on the traditional side to closer and more sophisticated ones that
include cooperative, collaborative, innovation focused, joint venture and vertical
integration forms. As was discovered by sales organizations as well as purchasing
departments starting in the late 1980s and early 1990s, each form of relationship in a
buyer-seller relationship can bring different forms of value for one or both. More
recently, supply chain management and purchasing managers have found the growing
need to build stronger internal linkages and relationships across others within the
same firm.
Innovational sub-chains map the discovery, flow, creation, and bring-to-market
processes both within a firm and involving suppliers and other outsiders. The supply
here is the creation and bringing to market a form of innovation for the benefit of the
firm. Physical supply chains have often been noted for anecdotal examples of how they
constrict or prevent innovation, but more recent attention has been directed toward the
more positive aspects of those relationships and information links which support
innovation. This is often a strong facet of new forms of purchasing in firms where new
product revenue is emphasized from year to year.
Agile logistics addresses supply chain risk (Christopher and Towil, 2001). Here, its
scope is generally around customer demand and matching manufacturing and logistics
capacity and capabilities to it. By viewing the supply chain in the contexts of these five
 IJPDLM sub-chains, supply chain activity scope greatly extends to that of the business as a
34,5 whole.

Risk at the product/service level

On a micro-level, the product/service risks and uncertainties are influenced by how
they are positioned by both buyers and/or sellers. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate these using
386 a variant of the Kraljic (1983) model as espoused in his 1983 Harvard Business Review
article, first indicating an expanding role of purchasing toward that of supply. By
applying axes of value/profit potential versus risk/uniqueness, a quadrant
methodology provides insights relevant to supply costs and risk.
The four quadrants range from generics, which are often low value and low brand
impact products such as many office supplies and maintenance items, to bottlenecks,
those over-specified, over-engineered, or specific to one supplier items that pose greater
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

risk of non-availability than value in use or sale. Leverage items represent those high
volume ones usually component parts of the firm’s finished products or services.
Finally, criticals are those high impact, usually new to the product life cycle, items that
provide today’s high margins. The relevant costs and associated risks of products and
services are different dependent on their positioning by both buying firms as well as
selling firms.

A call for supply chain governance?

The topic of supply chain logistics risk and uncertainty uncovers the many new points
of intersection the field has with others throughout the corporation and supply and
distribution systems. Other areas of concern have surfaced that will also involve
supply chain logistics. In recent years the segregation of genetically modified foods
from traditional ones require check, identification, and separation from field through to
store shelf. Also on the horizon is the concern for food supply chains secure from

Figure 1.
Relevant product/service
supply costs
 Supply chain
logistics risks

387
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

Figure 2.
Product/service
supply risks

potential terrorists’ actions. With longer and more complex food supply chains, the
need for control is more challenging in this regard.
Some supply chain/logistics leaders are discussing the concept of applying
governance models across entire supply chains from third- and fourth-tier suppliers
through to ultimate customers and consumers. This requires the identification of each
and every step in the process, some forms of certification and oversight, definitions of
contractural requirements, models of enforcement, and creates yet another point of
intersection by supply chain/logistics through legal arrangements with suppliers and
customers.
Risk and uncertainty are evidence that the field is ever-broadening and the
practices, processes, concepts, theories must expand with it.

Notes
1. H.R. 3763, Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002), Section 401(A), Disclosures in Periodic Reports;
Disclosures Required, Amending the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 United States Code
78m).
2. A conference jointly held by the Institute for Supply Management and Accenture, Inc., St.
Petersburg, FL, June 23-24, 2003.

References
Christopher, M. and Towil, D. (2001), “An integrated model for the design of agile supply chains”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 31 No. 4,
pp. 235-46.
Kraljic, P. (1983), “Purchasing must become supply management”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 61 No. 5, pp. 109-17.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Liliana Avelar-Sosa, Jorge Luis García-Alcaraz, Aidé Aracely Maldonado-Macías. Supply Chain
Performance Factors in the Manufacturing Industry 91-128. [Crossref]
2. Ilias Vlachos, George Malindretos. Managing Uncertainty Through Sustainable Re-engineering of the
Value Chain. An Action-Research Study of the Aquaculture Industry 153-167. [Crossref]
3. Lech Bukowski. Assessment Operational Risk and Dependability of Logistic Networks—Application
Examples 215-253. [Crossref]
4. Michalis Louis, Mark Pagell. Categorizing Supply Chain Risks: Review, Integrated Typology and Future
Research 329-366. [Crossref]
5. R. Rajesh. 2018. Measuring the barriers to resilience in manufacturing supply chains using Grey Clustering
and VIKOR approaches. Measurement 126, 259-273. [Crossref]
6. Arash Shahin, Arezou Kianersi, Azarakhsh Shali. 2018. Prioritizing Key Supply Chain Risks Using the
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

Risk Assessment Matrix and Shannon Fuzzy Entropy — with a Case Study in the Home Appliance
Industry. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems 17:03, 333-351. [Crossref]
7. Aysu Göçer, Stanley Fawcett, Okan Tuna. 2018. What Does the Sustainability-Risk Interaction Look
Like? Exploring Nuanced Relationships in Emerging Economy Sustainability Initiatives. Sustainability
10:8, 2716. [Crossref]
8. Abroon Qazi, Pervaiz Akhtar. 2018. Risk matrix driven supply chain risk management: Adapting risk
matrix based tools to modelling interdependent risks and risk appetite. Computers & Industrial Engineering
. [Crossref]
9. Ravi Shankar, Divya Choudhary, Sanjay Jharkharia. 2018. An integrated risk assessment model: A case of
sustainable freight transportation systems. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
63, 662-676. [Crossref]
10. Daniel Ritterskamp, Güven Demirel, Bart L. MacCarthy, Lars Rudolf, Alan R. Champneys, Thilo Gross.
2018. Revealing instabilities in a generalized triadic supply network: A bifurcation analysis. Chaos: An
Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 28:7, 073103. [Crossref]
11. Jaco Nel, Evert de Goede, Wesley Niemann. 2018. Supply chain disruptions: Insights from South African
third-party logistics service providers and clients. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management
12. . [Crossref]
12. WangMichael, Michael Wang. 2018. Impacts of supply chain uncertainty and risk on the logistics
performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 30:3, 689-704. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. RudolfChristian A., Christian A. Rudolf, SpinlerStefan, Stefan Spinler. 2018. Key risks in the supply
chain of large scale engineering and construction projects. Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal 23:4, 336-350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
14. BakOzlem, Ozlem Bak. 2018. Supply chain risk management research agenda. Business Process Management
Journal 24:2, 567-588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Shabnam Rezapour, Ramakrishnan S. Srinivasan, Jeffrey Tew, Janet K. Allen, Farrokh Mistree. 2018.
Correlation between strategic and operational risk mitigation strategies in supply networks. International
Journal of Production Economics . [Crossref]
16. Kunal Ganguly, Debabrata Das. Modelling the Enablers of Supply Risk Management Using Interpretive
Structural Methodology 286-304. [Crossref]
 17. Imran Ali, Sev Nagalingam, Bruce Gurd. 2017. Building resilience in SMEs of perishable product supply
chains: enablers, barriers and risks. Production Planning & Control 28:15, 1236-1250. [Crossref]
18. MinHokey, Hokey Min, ParkHeekeon, Heekeon Park, AhnSeung Bum, Seung Bum Ahn. 2017.
Measuring the supply chain risk in offshoring countries using data envelopment analysis and the analytic
hierarchy process. Benchmarking: An International Journal 24:7, 1977-1994. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Fatemeh Ghasemzadeh, Mahsa Pishdar, Jurgita Antuchevičienė. 2017. Prioritization of petroleum supply
chains’ disruption management strategies using combined framework of BSC approach, fuzzy AHP and
fuzzy Choquet integral operator. Journal of Business Economics and Management 18:5, 897-919. [Crossref]
20. R. Rajesh, V. Ravi. 2017. Analyzing drivers of risks in electronic supply chains: a grey–DEMATEL
approach. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 92:1-4, 1127-1145. [Crossref]
21. Anirban Ganguly, Debdeep Chatterjee, Harish V. Rao. 2017. Evaluating the Risks Associated with Supply
Chain Agility of an Enterprise. International Journal of Business Analytics 4:3, 15-34. [Crossref]
22. Huan Fan, Gang Li, Hongyi Sun, T.C.E. Cheng. 2017. An information processing perspective on supply
chain risk management: Antecedents, mechanism, and consequences. International Journal of Production
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

Economics 185, 63-75. [Crossref]

23. Yulia Lapko, Paolo Trucco, Cali Nuur. 2016. The business perspective on materials criticality: Evidence
from manufacturers. Resources Policy 50, 93-107. [Crossref]
24. SwierczekArtur, Artur Swierczek. 2016. The “snowball effect” in the transmission of disruptions in supply
chains. The International Journal of Logistics Management 27:3, 1002-1038. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
25. Irène Kilubi. 2016. The strategies of supply chain risk management – a synthesis and classification.
International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 19:6, 604-629. [Crossref]
26. PournaderMehrdokht, Mehrdokht Pournader, RotaruKristian, Kristian Rotaru, KachAndrew Philip,
Andrew Philip Kach, Razavi HajiaghaSeyed Hossein, Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha. 2016. An analytical
model for system-wide and tier-specific assessment of resilience to supply chain risks. Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal 21:5, 589-609. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
27. Jintao Cao, Wenyan Song. 2016. Risk assessment of co-creating value with customers: A rough group
analytic network process approach. Expert Systems with Applications 55, 145-156. [Crossref]
28. Hakan Yildiz, Jiho Yoon, Srinivas Talluri, William Ho. 2016. Reliable Supply Chain Network Design.
Decision Sciences 47:4, 661-698. [Crossref]
29. Irene Kilubi. 2016. Investigating current paradigms in supply chain risk management – a bibliometric
study. Business Process Management Journal 22:4, 662-692. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Helen Rogers, Mohit Srivastava, Kulwant S Pawar, Janat Shah. 2016. Supply chain risk management
in India – practical insights. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 19:4, 278-299.
[Crossref]
31. L. Bukowski. 2016. System of systems dependability – Theoretical models and applications examples.
Reliability Engineering & System Safety 151, 76-92. [Crossref]
32. Kannan Govindan, Atanu Chaudhuri. 2016. Interrelationships of risks faced by third party logistics service
providers: A DEMATEL based approach. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation
Review 90, 177-195. [Crossref]
33. Xueping Zhen, Yongjian Li, Gangshu (George) Cai, Dan Shi. 2016. Transportation disruption risk
management: business interruption insurance and backup transportation. Transportation Research Part E:
Logistics and Transportation Review 90, 51-68. [Crossref]
 34. ChaudhuriAtanu, Atanu Chaudhuri, SrivastavaSamir K., Samir K. Srivastava, SrivastavaRajiv K., Rajiv K.
Srivastava, ParveenZeenat, Zeenat Parveen. 2016. Risk propagation and its impact on performance in food
processing supply chain. Journal of Modelling in Management 11:2, 660-693. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
35. Kannan Govindan, Martin Brandt Jepsen. 2016. Supplier risk assessment based on trapezoidal
intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and ELECTRE TRI-C: a case illustration involving service suppliers. Journal
of the Operational Research Society 67:2, 339-376. [Crossref]
36. Sónia R. Cardoso, Ana Paula Barbosa-Póvoa, Susana Relvas. 2016. Integrating financial risk measures into
the design and planning of closed-loop supply chains. Computers & Chemical Engineering 85, 105-123.
[Crossref]
37. Djalma Araújo Rangel, Taiane Kamel de Oliveira, Maria Silene Alexandre Leite. 2015. Supply chain
risk classification: discussion and proposal. International Journal of Production Research 53:22, 6868-6887.
[Crossref]
38. Samir K Srivastava, Atanu Chaudhuri, Rajiv K. Srivastava. 2015. Propagation of risks and their impact
on performance in fresh food retail. The International Journal of Logistics Management 26:3, 568-602.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

39. Shalini Kurapati, Heide Lukosch, Alexander Verbraeck, Frances M. T. Brazier. 2015. Improving resilience
in intermodal transport operations in seaports: a gaming approach. EURO Journal on Decision Processes
3:3-4, 375-396. [Crossref]
40. William Ho, Tian Zheng, Hakan Yildiz, Srinivas Talluri. 2015. Supply chain risk management: a literature
review. International Journal of Production Research 53:16, 5031-5069. [Crossref]
41. Nachiappan Subramanian, Shams Rahman, Muhammad D. Abdulrahman. 2015. Sourcing complexity
in the Chinese manufacturing sector: An assessment of intangible factors and contractual relationship
strategies. International Journal of Production Economics 166, 269-284. [Crossref]
42. Gang Li, Huan Fan, Peter K.C. Lee, T.C.E. Cheng. 2015. Joint supply chain risk management: An agency
and collaboration perspective. International Journal of Production Economics 164, 83-94. [Crossref]
43. Iris Heckmann, Tina Comes, Stefan Nickel. 2015. A critical review on supply chain risk – Definition,
measure and modeling. Omega 52, 119-132. [Crossref]
44. Abroon Qazi, John Quigley, Alex Dickson. Supply Chain Risk Management: Systematic literature review
and a conceptual framework for capturing interdependencies between risks 1-13. [Crossref]
45. Benjamin Guertler, Stefan Spinler. 2015. Supply risk interrelationships and the derivation of key supply
risk indicators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 92, 224-236. [Crossref]
46. Paul Sparrow, Martin Hird, Cary L. Cooper. Managing Beyond the Organization 111-147. [Crossref]
47. Mohd. Nishat Faisal. Managing Risk in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Supply Chains' Using
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Approach 1469-1489. [Crossref]
48. Artur Świerczek. 2014. The impact of supply chain integration on the “snowball effect” in the transmission
of disruptions: An empirical evaluation of the model. International Journal of Production Economics 157,
89-104. [Crossref]
49. Kunal K. Ganguly, Prabir Bandyopdhyay. 2014. Supply Risk Management Process. International Journal
of Risk and Contingency Management 3:4, 17-31. [Crossref]
50. Maria Fischl, Maike Scherrer-Rathje, Thomas Friedli. 2014. Digging deeper into supply risk: a systematic
literature review on price risks. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 19:5/6, 480-503.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
 51. Fu Jia, George A. Zsidisin. 2014. Supply Relational Risk: What Role Does Guanxi Play?. Journal of
Business Logistics 35:3, 259-267. [Crossref]
52. Kumar Pradhan Sudeep, Routroy Srikanta. 2014. Analyzing the supply chain risk issues for an Indian
manufacturing company. Journal of Advances in Management Research 11:2, 144-162. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
53. Stephan M. Wagner, Sidhartha S. Padhi, Ingmar Zanger. 2014. A real option-based supply chain
project evaluation and scheduling method. International Journal of Production Research 52:12, 3725-3743.
[Crossref]
54. Dong Li, Xiaojun Wang, Hing Kai Chan, Riccardo Manzini. 2014. Sustainable food supply chain
management. International Journal of Production Economics 152, 1-8. [Crossref]
55. Steven A. Melnyk, Christopher W. Zobel, John R. Macdonald, Stanley E. Griffis. 2014. Making sense
of transient responses in simulation studies. International Journal of Production Research 52:3, 617-632.
[Crossref]
56. Tong Shu, Shou Chen, Shouyang Wang, Kin Keung Lai. 2014. GBOM-oriented management of
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

production disruption risk and optimization of supply chain construction. Expert Systems with Applications
41:1, 59-68. [Crossref]
57. Doreen Diehl, Stefan Spinler. 2013. Defining a common ground for supply chain risk management –
a case study in the fast-moving consumer goods industry. International Journal of Logistics Research and
Applications 16:4, 311-327. [Crossref]
58. Xiao-Feng Shao. 2013. Supply chain characteristics and disruption mitigation capability: an empirical
investigation in China. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 16:4, 277-295. [Crossref]
59. Santanu Mandal. 2013. Towards a New Framework for Sustainable Supply Chain Management.
International Journal of Manufacturing, Materials, and Mechanical Engineering 3:3, 1-12. [Crossref]
60. Atefeh Baghalian, Shabnam Rezapour, Reza Zanjirani Farahani. 2013. Robust supply chain network design
with service level against disruptions and demand uncertainties: A real-life case. European Journal of
Operational Research 227:1, 199-215. [Crossref]
61. Santanu Mandal, Sourabh Bhattacharya. 2013. Supply Risk Structural Equation Model of Trust,
Dependence, Concentration, and Information Sharing Strategies. International Journal of Risk and
Contingency Management 2:2, 58-79. [Crossref]
62. Robson Nogueira Tomas, Rosane Lúcia Chicarelli Alcantara. 2013. Modelos para gestão de riscos em
cadeias de suprimentos: revisão, análise e diretrizes para futuras pesquisas. Gestão & Produção 20:3,
695-712. [Crossref]
63. 2013. Risk Management in Global Sourcing:. Transportation Journal 52:1, 80-107. [Crossref]
64. Mohd. Nishat Faisal. 2013. Managing Risk in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) Supply Chains’
Using Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Approach. International Journal of Operations Research and
Information Systems 4:1, 64-83. [Crossref]
65. Abhijeet Ghadge, Samir Dani, Roy Kalawsky. 2012. Supply chain risk management: present and future
scope. The International Journal of Logistics Management 23:3, 313-339. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
66. Muqi Wulan, Dobrila Petrovic. 2012. A fuzzy logic based system for risk analysis and evaluation within
enterprise collaborations. Computers in Industry 63:8, 739-748. [Crossref]
67. G.J. Hahn, H. Kuhn. 2012. Value-based performance and risk management in supply chains: A robust
optimization approach. International Journal of Production Economics 139:1, 135-144. [Crossref]
 68. John E. Bell, Chad W. Autry, Diane A. Mollenkopf, LaDonna M. Thornton. 2012. A Natural Resource
Scarcity Typology: Theoretical Foundations and Strategic Implications for Supply Chain Management.
Journal of Business Logistics 33:2, 158-166. [Crossref]
69. Xiao-Feng Shao, Ming Dong. 2012. Supply Disruption and Reactive Strategies in an Assemble-to-
Order Supply Chain With Time-Sensitive Demand. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 59:2,
201-212. [Crossref]
70. Alessandro Ancarani, Carmela Di Mauro. The Human Side of Supply Chains 290-314. [Crossref]
71. Chiara Verbano, Karen Venturini. 2011. Development paths of risk management: approaches, methods
and fields of application. Journal of Risk Research 14:5, 519-550. [Crossref]
72. Erik Hofmann. 2011. Natural hedging as a risk prophylaxis and supplier financing instrument in
automotive supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 16:2, 128-141. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
73. Yong Lin, Li Zhou. 2011. The impacts of product design changes on supply chain risk: a case study.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 41:2, 162-186. [Abstract] [Full Text]
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

[PDF] [Supplemental Material]

74. Julie E. Gould, Cathy Macharis, Hans-Dietrich Haasis. 2010. Emergence of security in supply chain
management literature. Journal of Transportation Security 3:4, 287-302. [Crossref]
75. Qi Cheng, Lei Yu. Early Warning Index System for Natural Disasters Emergency Logistics Risks 1-4.
[Crossref]
76. Zhao Qing. Knowledge-based enterprise logistics risk early warning system 342-347. [Crossref]
77. KUNTAL BHATTACHARYYA, PRATIM DATTA, O. FELIX OFFODILE. 2010. THE
CONTRIBUTION OF THIRD-PARTY INDICES IN ASSESSING GLOBAL OPERATIONAL
RISKS;*. Journal of Supply Chain Management 46:4, 25-43. [Crossref]
78. C. Clifford Defee, Brent Williams, Wesley S. Randall, Rodney Thomas. 2010. An inventory of theory in
logistics and SCM research. The International Journal of Logistics Management 21:3, 404-489. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
79. Lu Shan. Study on Evaluation Index System for the Whole Risk Assessment of Supply Chains 508-511.
[Crossref]
80. Vasco Sanchez‐Rodrigues, Andrew Potter, Mohamed M. Naim. 2010. The impact of logistics uncertainty
on sustainable transport operations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
40:1/2, 61-83. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
81. Chris I. Enyinda, Chris H. N. Mbah, Alphonso Ogbuehi. 2010. An empirical analysis of risk mitigation in
the pharmaceutical industry supply chain: A developing-country perspective. Thunderbird International
Business Review 52:1, 45-54. [Crossref]
82. Putu Dana Karningsih, Berman Kayis, Sami Kara. Development of SCRIS: A Knowledge Based System
Tool for Assisting Organizations in Managing Supply Chain Risks 55-60. [Crossref]
83. Malini Natarajarathinam, Ismail Capar, Arunachalam Narayanan. 2009. Managing supply chains in times
of crisis: a review of literature and insights. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 39:7, 535-573. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
84. Kefan Xie, Jieming Liu, Huatao Peng, Gang Chen, Yun Chen. 2009. Early-warning management of
inner logistics risk in SMEs based on label-card system. Production Planning & Control 20:4, 306-319.
[Crossref]
 85. Shashank Rao, Thomas J. Goldsby. 2009. Supply chain risks: a review and typology. The International
Journal of Logistics Management 20:1, 97-123. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
86. Ashutosh Sarkar, Pratap K.J. Mohapatra. 2009. Determining the optimal size of supply base with the
consideration of risks of supply disruptions. International Journal of Production Economics 119:1, 122-135.
[Crossref]
87. Anna Fredriksson, Patrik Jonsson. 2009. Assessing consequences of low‐cost sourcing in China.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 39:3, 227-249. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
88. Adegoke Oke, Mohan Gopalakrishnan. 2009. Managing disruptions in supply chains: A case study of a
retail supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics 118:1, 168-174. [Crossref]
89. Sabine Matook, Rainer Lasch, Rick Tamaschke. 2009. Supplier development with benchmarking as part
of a comprehensive supplier risk management framework. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management 29:3, 241-267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
90. Shen Wen, Wang Guoxian. Operational Risk Control Mechanism and Decision-Making Model for Third
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)

Party Logistics 950-953. [Crossref]

91. Joe Miemczyk. 2008. An exploration of institutional constraints on developing end-of-life product
recovery capabilities. International Journal of Production Economics 115:2, 272-282. [Crossref]
92. Vasco Sanchez Rodrigues, Damian Stantchev, Andrew Potter, Mohamed Naim, Anthony Whiteing. 2008.
Establishing a transport operation focused uncertainty model for the supply chain. International Journal
of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 38:5, 388-411. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
93. Ila Manuj, John T. Mentzer. 2008. Global supply chain risk management strategies. International Journal
of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 38:3, 192-223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
94. Jennifer V. Blackhurst, Kevin P. Scheibe, Danny J. Johnson. 2008. Supplier risk assessment and monitoring
for the automotive industry. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 38:2,
143-165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
95. B Ritchie, C Brindley. 2007. An emergent framework for supply chain risk management and performance
measurement. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58:11, 1398-1411. [Crossref]
96. Maria Holmlund. 2007. Suggesting and Comparing Different Scopes on Quality Management:
Production, Service, Relationship, and Network. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 18:8,
847-859. [Crossref]
97. Christopher W. Craighead, Jennifer Blackhurst, M. Johnny Rungtusanatham, Robert B. Handfield. 2007.
The Severity of Supply Chain Disruptions: Design Characteristics and Mitigation Capabilities. Decision
Sciences 38:1, 131-156. [Crossref]
98. Cecilia Haskins. 2007. A Systems Engineering Framework for Eco–Industrial Park Formation. Systems
Engineering 10:1, 83-97. [Crossref]
99. Stephan M. Wagner, Christoph Bode. 2006. An empirical investigation into supply chain vulnerability.
Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 12:6, 301-312. [Crossref]
100. Mohd Nishat Faisal, D.K. Banwet, Ravi Shankar. 2006. Supply chain risk mitigation: modeling the
enablers. Business Process Management Journal 12:4, 535-552. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
101. Barbara Gaudenzi, Antonio Borghesi. 2006. Managing risks in the supply chain using the AHP method.
The International Journal of Logistics Management 17:1, 114-136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
102. Iwan Vanany, Suhaiza Zailani, Nyoman Pujawan. Supply Chain Risk Management 15-32. [Crossref]
 103. Brian Squire. Managing Supply Chain Risks 28-48. [Crossref]
104. Samir Dani. Managing Risk in Virtual Enterprise Networks 72-91. [Crossref]
105. María Jesús Sáenz, Maria Pilar Lambán, Eva Navarro. Flexible Supply Chains 211-238. [Crossref]
106. Martina Vitteková, Peter Vittek, Ondřej Stejskal, Slobodan Stojić, Tomáš Pezl. Beyond the Horizon of
Supply Chain Security Performance Measurement 46-75. [Crossref]
107. Kunal K. Ganguly, Prabir Bandyopdhyay. Supply Risk Management Process 1160-1175. [Crossref]
108. Rob Handfield. Preparing for the Worst 1-15. [Crossref]
109. Rob Handfield. Preparing for the Worst 1164-1178. [Crossref]
110. Alessandro Ancarani, Carmela Di Mauro. The Human Side of Supply Chains 1453-1476. [Crossref]
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 12:03 25 January 2019 (PT)