It is not the planning authorities or the central government who decides infrastructure development in Norway, but the local politicians. To put it simple, what in the US is known as “pork barrel spending” is what rules many of Norway’s infrastructure development projects. Why?
How does a traditional supply chain compare to a vendor managed inventory supply chain when it comes to performance during disruptions?
The article claims to have found four approaches in the literature on how organizations approach supply chain security.
The primary purpose of this book is to collect and share various streams of research and trends in supply chain risk, predominantly from the ISCRIM (International Supply Chain Risk Management) network.
When Manuj and Mentzer (2008) wrote their article titled Global Supply Chain Risk Management, they used Ghoshal (1987) Global Strategy: An Organizing Framework for developing sources of risk and Jüttner, Peck and Christopher (2003) Supply Chain Risk Management: Outlining an Agenda for Future Research for developing risk mitigation strategies.
In my post two days ago, reviewing the article by Manuj and Mentzer (2008) titled Global Supply Chain Risk Management, I mentioned that they cited a paper by Ghoshal (1987) titled Global Strategy: An Organizing Framework as one of their references for listing risk management strategies. Today, I will take a closer look at that paper.
In Chopra and Sodhi (2004) ‘Managing Risk to Avoid Supply-Chain Breakdown’ the first key message is that some mitigation strategies may actually increase risk in some business areas, rather than reduce it.The second key message is that the cost of mitigating or building up a reserve must be balanced against the level of risk.
When faced with a supply chain disruption, proactive and reactive supply chain risk management can in fact make or break a company’s existence.
In ‘A conceptual framework of vulnerability in firms’ inbound and outbound logistics flows.’, Göran Svensson separates inbound and outbound flows, adds 2 categories of disturbance (quantitative and qualitative), and also adds 2 sources of disturbance (atomistic and holistic) create 4 vulnerability scenarios.
Separating the chaff from the wheat and diving straight into the essence of the paper, Svensson aligns his framework along two dimensions, categories of disturbance and sources of disturbance. He then divides the categories into either quantitative or qualitative disturbances. Sources of disturbance are either atomistic (direct) or holistic (indirect).
In her article Drivers of supply chain vulnerability: an integrated framework, Helen Peck identifies four drivers of supply chain vulnerability:Value stream, product or processes,Assets and infrastructure dependencies,Organizations and inter-organizational networks,The Environment.
Classical facility location models assume that once optimally located and set up, facilities will operate as planned, smoothly, and without interruption. In reality, though, operations seldom go as planned; interruptions, unscheduled downtime and failures occur every once in a while, with unplanned and unbudgeted disruption costs as a consequence.
Supply chain management used to be relegated to the logistics department of businesses and hardly thought of as matters concerning the top-level management. In his 2004 paper, Joseph L. Cavinato points out five sub-networs within the supply chain that need special attention:Physical – the actual movement of goods, shipping and warehousing
Finance, Information, Relations, Innovation.
The starting point for this paper is the question of how to define and find critical locations in a transport network. A network node is vulnerable if loss or degradation of a small number of links diminishes the accessibility of the node. A network link is critical if loss or degradation of the links diminishes the accessibility of the network or of particular nodes
The severity of supply chain disruptions stems from supply chain design characteristics and supply chain mitigation capabilities: Supply Chain Design: supply chain density,supply chain complexity, node criticality. Supply Chain Mitigation Capability: recovery capability, warning capability.
Daniel Ekwall’s thesis combines theories from criminology with theories from logistics and supply chain management to examine cross-over points or antagonistic gateways between the legal and illegal logistics system from a supply chain perspective.
Drivers of supply chain vulnerability are 1) supply-side risk 2) demand-side risk, 3) catastrophic risk. Sources of risk are a) customer dependence and b) supplier dependence, d) supplier concentration and d) single sourcing and e) global sourcing.
This paper presents a review of road network vulnerability, seeking to synthesize different terminologies and metrics, among which: reliability, vulnerability, resilience, flexibility, robustness, and adaptive capacity.
Why is the reliability, or conversely, the vulnerability, of the transportation network not a matter of evaluation in traditional cost-benefit analyses? Few will question that the sender, the recipient, the freight hauler or society in general, experience additional costs when goods or persons cannot reach their destinations in time or space.
