Manufacturing Companies Strategies to Mitigate Supply Chain Disr

Nature of the Study

The three research methods that I used in this study were (a) qualitative, (b)

quantitative, and (c) mixed methods (Yin, 2018). Qualitative researchers explore the

phenomenon from the perspective of participants and interact with the participants in

their natural setting to understand participants’ experiences associated with the

phenomenon (Bristowe, Selma, & Murtagh, 2015). I selected the qualitative method.

Quantitative researchers use hypothesis, numerical data, and variables to test

relationships and group differences in controlled conditions (Park & Park, 2016). The

quantitative method was not appropriate for this study because I did not measure

variables nor test hypotheses about variables, relationships, or group differences. Mixed

methods is the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches in the same study

to integrate, converge, and replicate research findings when a single method is not

sufficient to address the research problem (Park & Park, 2016). As a consequence of the

quantitative component, mixed methods was inappropriate for this study.

The qualitative research designs that I considered were (a) case study, (b)

phenomenological, and (c) ethnography. Case study includes one or more bounded cases

by time and place in a real-life context (Yin, 2018). I chose the multiple case study design

to allow a wider exploration of the how, why, and what of the phenomenon being studied.

The phenomenological design is the study of individual lived and shared experiences

(Hannon, Woodside, Pollard, & Roman, 2016). Phenomenological design was not

suitable for this study as I did not explore individual lives or shared lived experiences.

The ethnographic design involves studying the patterns of a culturally defined population

(Dodgson, 2017) and was inappropriate for this study because I did not study a cultural

group during an extended period.

Research Question

What strategies do manufacturing firm managers use to mitigate supply chain

disruptions to remain profitable?

Interview Questions

1. What strategies do you use to mitigate supply chain disruptions to remain

profitable?

2. What key barriers have you overcome in the development of strategies to mitigate

supply chain disruptions?

3. What type of resources, if any, were used to implement strategies to mitigate

supply chain disruptions?

4. What challenges have you overcome to implement strategies to mitigate supply

chain disruptions to remain profitable?

5. How did implementing the strategies help to mitigate the supply disruptions?

6. How did you measure the effectiveness of selected strategies to mitigate supply

disruptions?

7. Do you have any additional information that you would like to add about

strategies you use to mitigate supply disruptions?

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework was the contingency theory of fit (CTF), which was

introduced by van de Ven and Drazin (1985). A disruption in the supply chain means

there is a lack of fit. Researchers use a variety of approaches that focus on the

effectiveness of ﬁt and the adaptation processes by which manufacturing firm managers

can achieve ﬁt in their environments (Jiang, Guo, Wei, & Wang, 2018). Built on the key

tenets of (a) agility, (b) flexibility, (c) leanness, (d) operational efficiency, and (e)

operational responsiveness, an outcome is a fit and is a result of multiple factors

(Hallavo, 2015). van de Ven and Drazin (1985) examined three approaches to test and

define fit as (a) selection, (b) interaction, and (c) systems approaches. A one-size-fits-all

strategy is not applicable as an appropriate strategy depends on events occurring inside

and outside of the firm’s control (Fusch & Ness, 2015). CTF was the appropriate

conceptual framework for explaining how manufacturing company managers can achieve

fit to mitigate supply chain disruptions to remain profitable.

Operational Definitions

Contingency theory of fit (CTF): Organizational outcome is a consequence of a fit

or match between two or more factors (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985).

Risk management: A proactive approach business managers use to identify,

analyze, and manage risks and uncertainties (Cagnin, Oliveira, Simon, Helleno, &

Vendramini, 2016).

Supply chain collaboration: A close long-term partnership where two or

more partners work together to align supply chain operations, share information, and

build a value-added process (Prasanna & Haavisto, 2018).

Supply chain disruption: An unexpected event that interrupts the flow of goods

and services and has negative consequences in supply chain operations (Tse, Matthews,

Tan, Sato, & Pongpanich, 2016).

Supply chain management: Activities essential for designing, planning, and

executing supply chain operations to deliver value to the customer and improve business

performance (Aggarwal & Srivastava, 2016).

Supply chain relationships: Collaborative information sharing between

stakeholders that lead to supply chain agility and responsiveness (Teller, Kotzab, Grant,

& Holweg, 2016).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

Assumptions

Assumptions are statements accepted by the researcher as true without

verification (Schoenung & Dikova, 2016). My first assumption for this study was that

participants were knowledgeable of the aspects of mitigating disruptions within the

supply chain. My second assumption was that participants were honest and forthcoming

in responding to interview questions. My third assumption was that I would have access

to company records. My fourth assumption was that company records were current

regarding the management of supply chain disruptions. My assumption was that the

analysis of data collected from interviews and company documents would lead to themes

for strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions.

Limitations

Limitations are potential weaknesses affecting the study outside of the

researcher’s control (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). I identified two limitations for this

study. The first limitation was that selected participates would reply to the invitation to

participate in the study. A second limitation was that selected participants might

misrepresent or provide biased responses to influence study findings for self-interest.

Delimitations

Delimitations are a set of boundaries on what the researcher intends to do or not

do in a study (Snelson, 2016). A delimitation of the study was (a) sample population, (b)

sample size, and (c) geographical location. Selected participants for this study included

four supply chain managers, because they had the requisite experience for the scope of

this study. Operation and production managers were excluded as their experiences are

outside the scope of the study. I restricted findings to interviews of four manufacturing

firm supply chain managers in two manufacturing firms in the southern region of eastern

Virginia might not apply to other manufacturing firms within and outside the

geographical location.

Significance of the Study

Contribution to Business Practice

The findings from this study might be of value to manufacturing firms and supply

chain managers by providing information on strategies to mitigate supply chain

disruptions. By managing disruption risks, manufacturing firm managers can make their

firm more resilient and competitive (Ambulkar, Blackhurst, & Grawe, 2015).

Successfully managing supply chain disruptions can lead to improved business

performance (Behzad, O’Sullivan, Olsen, Scrimgeour, & Zhang, 2017). The information

provided in the findings of this study could contribute to improving business practices of

manufacturing firms and increase manufacturing firm managers’ understanding of

strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions.

Implications for Social Change

Managers can contribute to the improvement of human and social conditions by

creating jobs, investing in the community, and catalyzing economic growth (Polonsky,

Grau, & McDonald, 2016). Implications for social change might include the potential for

manufacturing firm managers to increase profitability thus attracting investment capital

for business expansion and creating employment opportunities by investing in social

service projects that facilitate improvements in housing for low-income families and

child nutrition programs. Positive social change for community residents include the

potential for an increase in employment opportunities, higher salaries, and the offer of

quality goods and services to consumers at affordable prices. An increase in employment

opportunities and higher salaries can lead to an increase in consumer spending in the

local community, thereby raising the standard of living and social well-being of

community residents.

A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature

The degree of interconnectedness and interdependency among businesses has

significantly increased. Many companies have embraced the philosophy of lean

production, which means reduced inventories and an increase in efficiency (Kroes,

Manikas, & Gattiker, 2018). The implication of these changes is that manufacturers have

become vulnerable to disruptions in the supply chain and a failure by any party in the

supply chain or a natural disaster affects the entire network (Siba & Omwegna, 2015).

For example, if a flood destroys the warehouse of a supplier that provides critical parts,

those depending on the parts are affected and production slowed or stopped until a new

supplier is located, or the previous supplier's operations are restored. To reduce or

mitigate risk in the supply chain, van de Ven and Drazin (1985) suggested CTF as a

useful framework managers can use to address the problems of disruptions within the

supply chain.

My purpose in this qualitative exploratory case study was to explore strategies

that manufacturing firm managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in the supply

chain to remain profitable. The research question was: What strategies do manufacturing

firm managers use to mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain profitable? Through a

review of the literature, I provided a comprehensive approach to explore the strategies

manufacturing firm managers are using to mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain

profitable. The topics in the literature review include studies on (a) CTF, (b) supply chain

disruptions, (c) supply chain risk management, (d) supply chain design and fit, (e) firm

performance, (f) supply chain resilience, and (g) profitability and the application of the

theory to mitigate disruptions in the supply chain, and contrasting theories.

Academic databases that I used included ABI/INFORM Global, EBSCOhost,

ERIC, and ProQuest Central to search for articles related to this study. Academic journals

used for this study included Decision Science, Emerald Management Journals,

International Journal of Production Research, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of

Educational Administration, Journal of Logistics Management, Journal of Operations

Management, Management Decision, Organization Science, and Supply Chain

Management: An International Journal. Keyword search included contingency theory,

contingency theory of fit, supply chain, supply chain collaboration, supply chain risk

management, supply chain disruptions, mitigating supply chain disruptions, minimizing

supply chain disruptions, preventing supply chain disruptions, and reduce disruptions.

The 254 references that I included in the study were 238 scholarly peer-reviewed articles

representing 97% of the total, one dissertation representing .003%, five books

representing .02%, four government websites representing .02%, two papers presented at

conferences representing .08%, and one BCI corporate supply chain resiliency report

representing .003%. The total scholarly peer-reviewed references published from 2015 to

2019 are 220. The literature analysis begins with an overview of CTF, which I used as a

lens to review the research question to support the conceptual framework.

Contingency Theory of Fit

Background. van de Ven and Drazin (1985) introduced CTF to gain an

understanding of strategies used to mitigate the effects of supply chain disruptions. A

disruption in the supply chain means a lack of fit exists (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985). van

de Ven and Drazin defined fit as aligning or matching the firm’s operations to the internal

and external environmental factors. CTF was used as the conceptual framework for this

study. van de Ven and Drazin stated CTF originated from the structural contingency

theory developed by Lawrence and Lorsch (1967). Lawrence and Lorsch (1967)

developed structural contingency theory to understand organizational subsystems, their

environments, and how the environment could affect organizational performance (van de

Ven & Drazin, 1985).

Optimal integration and differentiation depend on obtaining equilibrium between

the internal and external environments (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985). A firm’s internal

environment consists of factors that the organization controls such as personnel,

equipment, and operational strategies (Sayilar, 2016). External factors include political,

regulatory, and economic changes, which firms cannot control (Gaudenzi, Zsidisin,

Hartley, & Kaufmann, 2018). Political, economic, social, technological, legal, and

environmental (PESTLE) uncertainties can reduce an organization’s capability for

devising and seeking strategic choices (Gaudenzi et al., 2018). A decline in the economy

can be a source for uncertainty in employment, reduction in customer shopping habits

and a reduction in manufacturing and distribution.

Stonebraker and Afifi (2004) provided a comprehensive background of CTF by

focusing on the overall supply chain emergence history. Stonebraker and Afifi reviewed

four phases of historical evolution of management practices as (a) traditional, (b)

integrated just-in-time (JIT), (c) expanded JIT, (d) agile, and (e) theoretical contingencies

of the supply chain. The traditional management practices that began after World War II

consisted of a rigid, systematic, hierarchical management structure where antagonistic

relationships between internal functions, suppliers, and customers could develop

(Stonebraker & Afifi, 2004). Control processes required large transitional staffs and

large-lot production performed by untrained employees (Stonebraker & Afifi, 2004).

Stonebraker and Afifi postulated integrated JIT/phase II was used in the rebuilding of

Japanese, German, Asian, and European manufacturing and distribution systems. JIT,

developed by Ford in 1926, was implemented in rebuilding manufacturing and

distribution systems in resource-poor and space restricted environments (Stonebraker &

Afifi, 2004). Stonebraker and Afifi explained managers using JIT could regulate product

flow using visual controls that expanded to suppliers.

Stonebraker and Afifi (2004) found that expanded JIT/phase III applications

contained broader processes and facilities to include extensive external collaboration and

flexibility improvements in lean manufacturing, which minimize resources and

accentuates customer value. Theoretical contingencies or phase IV supply chains were

integrated to lower delivery times by fine-tuning technologies in business processes,

which allowed total cost based focusing on stock and scheduling tradeoffs (Halley &

Nollet, 2002; Stonebraker & Afifi, 2004). Stonebraker and Afifi indicated that

management efforts in supply chain risk management (SCRM) must be multifaceted,

differentiated, and fully integrated into the varying nature of supply chains. Stading and

Kauffman (2007) postulated CTF was used to establish the foundation in developing

long-term responses to disruptive events in the supply chain. Synergy between the

internal and external environments in which a company operates is an important factor of

CTF (Stonebraker & Afifi, 2004).

Tarter and Hoy (1998) considered CTF to be narrow with weak empirical support,

whereas Tosi and Slocum (1984) recommended further research on three factors of the

theory: (a) effectiveness, (b) environment, and (c) congruency. Pfeffer and Salancik

(1978) described effectiveness as a firm’s activities for the production, warehousing, and

transportation of goods needed to meet customer demands. Production effectiveness is

achieved when a firm does not experience idle time or work stoppage (equipment and

process failures) on the production line (Hooi & Leong, 2017). Environment consists of

the internal and external structure or conditions (facilities, economic, market, and

geographic location) in which a firm operates or conducts business (van de Ven &

Drazin, 1985). For example, an increase in interest rates (external environment) can lead

to a reduction in customer spending, which could lead to a decrease in business revenues.

However, lower interest rates could attract business investments and increase production.

Organizations interrelate in different environments, and certain environmental

characteristics affect all organizations (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985). van de Ven and

Drazin (1985) described congruency as environmental niches and organizational designs

joined or fitted together to achieve completeness.

Contingency theory studies were first introduced to the field of organizational

management (OM) in studies by Skinner (1969), which led to the contingency model of

manufacturing strategy. Skinner posited a firm will increase organizational performance

if the external and internal consistency of manufacturing strategy decisions exists. The

Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018) characterized manufacturing as the use of power-driven

machines and material handling equipment to transform available resources (raw

materials) to produce new goods. Contingency theory was a factor in organizational

practice in the 1970s (Omoluabi, 2016). Skinner (1969) connected organizational

structure and operating conditions using empirical comparative analysis.

CTF could be considered a valuable framework for organizational design. Hallavo

(2015) noted that CTF serves as the basis to prepare for, prevent, and mitigate the effects

of supply chain disruptions. Mitigating risk in the supply chain is critical to an

organization’s risk management strategy (Talluri et al., 2013). Understanding the

application of CTF can prevent or reduce risks in the supply chain to increase business

performance (Talluri et al., 2013). Supply chain managers striving to enhance resource

efficiency in the supply chains should develop a set of resource indicators, implement

flexible production systems, and implement supply chain management practices

(Matopoulos, Barros, & Van Der Vorst, 2015).

Contingency Theory of Fit Tenets

CTF is useful in the development of long-term responses to disruptions to achieve

stability in the supply chain (Grotsch, Blome, & Schepler, 2013). Supply chain

disruptions are minimized when supply chain managers develop effective responses

(Grotsch et al., 2013). Supply chain managers use key tenets and factors of CTF to

develop effective supply chain responses, which include (a) agility, (b) flexibility, (c)

leanness, (d) operational efficiency, and (e) operational responsiveness.

Agility. Gligor (2016) investigated how the role of agility helped firms achieve

supply chain fit (SCF). Gligor referred to agility as a firm’s capacity to promptly adjust

tactics and operations in the supply chain to respond to changes in the operating

environment. Agility is an enabler of responsiveness by facilitating quick responses, and

is an essential strategic element (Gligor, 2016; Tse et al., 2016). Like leanness, agility

was introduced to be applied to manufacturing as part of a production system; however,

agility is now applied to the whole supply chain as a way of doing business (Eltawy &

Gallear, 2017).

Gligor (2016) discussed five dimensions to supply chain agility: (a) quick

detection of changes, opportunities and threats, (b) immediate access to data, (c) ability to

make a decision using available data, (d) quick implementation of decisions, and (e)

flexibility to modify tactics and operations to implement strategies. Walker (2015)

indicated that an agile supply chain could help firms mitigate disruptions and achieve fit

in an uncertain environment. Walker noted that supply chain agility created a competitive

advantage for firms, which can indirectly increase a firm’s financial performance. Agility

reduces the likelihood of supply chain disruptions (Eltawy & Gallear, 2017) and enables

a firm to obtain superior firm performance (Hallavo, 2015).

Flexibility. Rojos, Stevenson, Montes, and Perez-Arostequi (2018) described

flexibility as a firm’s ability to rapidly redesign key supply chain resources to maintain

competitiveness. With the possibility of natural disasters, union strikes, fluctuating

demands, and regulatory changes, managing flexibility is critical. Behzad et al. (2017)

advised that manufacturing managers should ensure a firm’s supply chain is properly

aligned and integrated with other business units and suppliers. Proper alignment and

integration enable a firm to adapt to changes in the operating environment and recover

from disruptions in the supply chain to maintain a competitive advantage (Behzad et al.,

2017). Supply chain managers who implement flexibility into their supply chain risk

management (SCRM) strategies can quickly respond to fluctuations within the supply

chain, effectively work with suppliers and other business units, and provide efficient JIT

services to customers.

Leanness. Leanness involves measures taken in the supply chain value stream to

reduce waste, minimize lead time, and reduce costs (Lotfi & Saghiri, 2018). The lean

concept was first introduced as a production system to help reduce waste in the

manufacturing industry; however, the term is now applied to the entire supply chain as a

holistic way of doing business and a way of improving supply chain performance (Eltawy

& Gallear, 2017). Birkie (2016) posited that lean practices could be used to leverage

agility to mitigate supply chain disruptions. Leanness helps reduce waste, enhances

information sharing, and standardizes work (Eltawy & Gallear, 2017; Lotfi & Saghiri,

2018).

Operational efficiency. Masson, Jain, Ganesh, and George (2016) defined

operational efficiency as the utilization of capital (e.g., property, money) to deliver

quality service. Operational efficiency can be achieved by using the latest technologies to

streamline communications with suppliers and customers, simplify a firm's supply chain

processes, lower costs, and increase growth and profitability (Walker, 2015). Masson et

al. (2016) suggested higher quality service and lower cost assets equate to increased

operational efficiency.

Operational responsiveness. Like agility, operational responsiveness is

described as management’s immediate adaptability to changing environmental events and

customer requirements with the least possible steps and minimal disruptions to business

(Shin, Lee, Kim, & Rhim, 2015). Ivanov, Dolgui, Sokolov, and Ivanova (2016) found

that in most situations, firms require analysis tools to assess the effects of recovery

measures, which is subject to various performance indicators and disruptions. Managers

who incorporate recovery elements into proactive models need synchronized attention to

execution dynamics and static structural characteristics of supply chain disruption

(Ivanov et al., 2016). Implementing key tenets of CTF is essential in reducing the effects

of disruptions in the supply chain.

Contingency Theory of Fit Factors

Supply chain disruption. Supply chain disruptions can be singular or a

combination of unforeseen events such as fire, flood, accidents, and supplier bankruptcy,

any of which jeopardize the flow of material and interfere with normal business activities

(Bugert & Lasch, 2018). Supply chain disruptions can be costly in terms of interrupted

production, operational processes, and loss in sales. A supply resilience survey report

conducted by BCI found 65% of the 400 companies participating in the survey had

experienced at least one supply chain disruption in 2017 (Alcantara, Riglietti, & Aguada,

2017).

Konig and Spinler (2016) explained that supply chain disruptions could be a result

of supply chain management activities including (a) outsourcing, (b) technological

innovations, (b) fluctuations in demand, and (c) reduction in inventory. Outsourcing of

global business and inventory management methods, such as JIT, may make firms

vulnerable to unpredictable disruptions (Tse et al., 2016). Manufacturing managers could

conduct a strategic review of outsource options and assess whether vendors use the right

people, processes, and technology to support the firm’s business functions (Tse et al.,

2016). Implementing CTF tenets of flexibility and agility to the supply chain helps

organizational managers adapt to and recover from various disruptions in the supply

chain (Behzad et al., 2017).

Manufacturing companies rely on suppliers in the logistics industry for

distribution of their services and products to the customers (Zhu et al., 2016). However,

not all suppliers can guarantee disruption-free services. Poor management of a single

supplier or lack of financial support could have a disruptive effect on an organization

(Dellana & West, 2016). For example, in 2018, the distributor of dual sensor smoke

alarms recalled approximately 500,000 units of product in the United States and Canada

(CPSC, 2018). During manufacturing, a cap covering one of the two sensors was left on,

which compromised the alarm's ability to detect smoke, posing a risk to consumers of not

being alerted in the event of a fire (CPSC, 2018). Recalling the product cost

approximately $9 million to replace nearly a half million devices. In 2001, the exclusive

supplier of the chassis frame for an automotive company declared bankruptcy and cost

the automobile company $35 million to manage the disruption (Dellana & West, 2016).

Decisions to manage uncertainties, risk, and the firm’s performance are contingent on

internal and external issues and how well organizational resources match the specific

business environment (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985).

Clemons and Slotnick (2016) found recovery from a disruption affects

shareholder wealth, stock performance, and equity risk; such disruptions are associated

with collateral damages that result from weakened stock performance and reduced equity.

Zhang, Xiong, and Xiong (2015) posited manufacturers marketing their products through

traditional and direct online retail channels (dual-channel supply chain business) have

increased risks of disruption in the supply chain. For example, an external disruption

(global financial crisis, warehouse flood) or internal disruption (personnel shortage,

damaged equipment) can simultaneously compromise both distribution channels resulting

in a doubled loss of profits. Disruptions such as a decrease in demand or increase in

production cost require adjustments of coordination contract to be implemented, which

implies the manufacturer must have different strategies (growth, stability, retrenchment)

developed and ready for implementation (Zhang et al., 2015). Projected revenues and the

success of strategies aimed at increasing or maintaining profits may be compromised due

to a disruption in the supply chain (Ho, Zheng, Yildiz, & Talluri, 2015).

Lee and Rha (2016) applied dynamic capabilities, and organizational

ambidexterity to supply chain management (SCM) to examine mitigation strategies for

supply chain disruptions. Rojos, Llorens-Montes, and Perez-Arostequi (2016) used a

structural equation model methodology to determine whether organizational supply chain

ambidexterity enhanced supply chain flexibility (SCF) and the effect on supply chain

competence and firm performance. Rojos et al. and Tuan (2016) defined organizational

ambidexterity as the firm’s capability to simultaneously refine current knowledge and

competencies while exploring for more knowledge and new market opportunities. In

developing the proposed model, Rojos et al. made allowances for the requirements of the

environment and the relationship with supply chain flexibility. Organizations can achieve

adaptation, fit, and ambidextrous competence with the environment through shared

learning attained via exploration and exploitation (Rojos et al., 2016; Tuan, 2016).

Lee and Rha (2016) indicated that supply chain ambidexterity is essential to

manufacturing firms as an aid in mitigating the negative effects of supply chain

disruptions and enhancing firm performance. To minimize the effects of supply chain

disruptions and maximize firm performance, firms consistently seek creative means to

satisfy new market needs and adapt to the fast-changing business environment (Lee &

Rha, 2016). According to Rojos et al. (2016) adapting to the environment requires

flexibility. Ambidexterity reinforces flexibility and permits implementation of operations

based on efficacy (exploitation) and innovation (exploration).

High levels of exploitation and exploration in the operating process help

manufacturing firms to achieve the optimal level of SCF in the operating environment

(Rojos et al., 2016). Rojos et al. (2016) posited that developing exploration and

exploitation practices in the supply chain improve general efficacy in achieving

flexibility, while improving competence and increasing the firm’s performance index and

survivability prospects. Ambidexterity has a positive effect on firm's performance and

contributes to the implementation of strategies that facilitates the firm’s survival (Rojos et

al., 2016). Lee and Rha (2016) noted organizational ambidexterity is needed to

successfully combine exploitation and exploration to meet the challenges of

environmental uncertainty and technological advancements. Ambidexterity within a

firm’s supply chain could also be developed using a dynamic capability building process

which can mitigate the negative effects of supply chain disruptions and improve firm

performance (Lee & Rha, 2016). Lee and Rha’s findings are useful in the decision-

making process to improve the competence of the supply chain. Supply chain managers

may perform practices of refinement, reuse of routines, and practices of experimentation

and innovation to achieve optimal SCF (Rojos et al., 2016). Although survival may be at

different levels, mangers who accept their environments are effective and enhance

organizational survival (Rashidirad, Salimian, & Soltani, 2018).

Supply chain risk management. Supply chains are inherently risky, and

organizations cannot avoid all supply chain disruptions (Pournader, Rotaru, Kach,

Hossein, & Hajiagha, 2016). SCRM is a key element to the successful implementation of

optimal strategies in dealing with unexpected disruptions, catastrophes and uncertainties

associated with risk. SCRM strategies include agility, flexibility, and leanness to reduce

the likelihood of supply chain disruptions, and minimize the effects of the disruptions

(Birkie, 2016; Eltawy & Gallear, 2017; Mohammaddust, Rezapour, Farahani, Mofidfar,

& Hill, 2017). Bugert and Lasch (2018) found designers of supply chain disruption risk

models focused on assessing disruption risks, studying interdependencies between risks

and exploring the dynamic behavior of risks circulating through the network.

van de Ven and Drazin (1985) argued that alignment, which is an element of

contingency theory, is crucial in a contingency theory-based model. Skipworth, Godsell,

Wong, Saghiri, and Julien (2015) defined alignment as a consistent connection of

strategic goals, methods, and activities that result in the fitness of objectives, structures,

and processes between functions and supply chain members. Organizations should

develop strategies that align operational choices with environmental needs (Hallavo,

2015). Considering the competitive business environment, it is critical for supply chain

managers to align supply chain activities with the competitive strategy and strategic

objectives of the organization (Stevens & Johnson, 2016).

Chowdhury and Quaddus (2016) reviewed supply chain disruptions in the domain

of supply chain readiness, response, recovery, and resilience and analyzed the aspects of

SCRM that are activated during different stages of crises. Chowdhury and Quaddus

developed and identified various fundamental phases of supply chain resilience and

capabilities. Phases and capabilities included (a) proactively and reactively detecting the

crisis and repairing the after-effects; (b) pre-crisis recovery; and (c) post-crises or stages

preventing the crisis, recovering from a crisis, and learning from the crisis (Chowdhury &

Quaddus, 2016). Chowdhury and Quaddus designed a programming model for integrated

decisions in pre- and post-disaster processes. Manopiniwes and Irohara (2016) focused on

key emergency logistics concepts (facility and stock prepositioning, evacuation, and

relief vehicle planning) when developing a model for responding to disasters while

maintaining cost and equity.

Considering supply chain risk can be generated by multiple sources or contexts,

Chang, Ellinger, and Blackhurst (2015) proposed a firm’s supply chain risk mitigation

strategies could be tailored to accommodate the specific characteristics of risk contexts.

Analyzing risk context (i.e., risk probability and severity) is important for assessing

appropriate supply chain risk mitigation strategy and as per contingency theory, risk

contexts can determine appropriate approaches for mitigation (Chang et al., 2015). Chang

et al. (2015) posited supply chain managers are responsible for discerning when risk

situations exist and when the risk necessitates action. Due to internal and external

environmental uncertainties, supply chain managers need to analyze and understand risks

before selecting an appropriate risk mitigation strategy. The framework developed by

Chang et al. is useful to supply chain managers because the framework illustrates how

managers can choose relevant risk mitigation strategies based on the context and structure

of the risk.

Sawik (2016) introduced a portfolio approach to supply chain risk management

that focused on the optimal selection of primary and recovery suppliers and combined

decisions made before, during, and after the disruption. Supply chains demand response

and recovery strategies to reduce the effect and overcome a disruptive state (Sawik,

2016). Sawik suggested cost minimization should not always be the priority; instead, the

selection of primary and recovery supply and demand portfolios can drive the decision-

making process under disruption risks. Contingency theory can be used in the construct

of distribution flexibility. Distribution flexibility is characterized as a capability inserted

in the supply chain to modify distribution processes (physical, demand) to align with the

needs of customers (Tosun & Uysal, 2016). In accordance with CTF, organizational

managers can select a distribution flexibility strategy that is compatible to the supply

chain conditions and context, thereby achieving a fit in the supply chain resulting in the

logic of gestalts (Srivastava, 2018; Tosun & Uysal, 2016). Advertisers use gestalts (logos,

slogans, themes, jingles, colors, product placement) when marketing a product to gain the

attention of potential consumers (Srivastava, 2018).

Paul, Sarker, and Essam (2017) studied disruption mitigation; however, the

researchers targeted a three-stage supply chain network rather than a linear buyer-

supplier chain. Paul et al. generated a predictive and reactive mitigation plan for a three-

stage supply chain and proposed an inclusive and flexible plan, which had the potential of

being utilized for supply chain risk mitigation and could be quickly revised. Managers

can select different sets of strategies at different times to minimize disruptive risk in the

supply chain.

Gualandris and Kalchschmidt (2015) developed a model to address the

incongruence between the level of preparedness and the level of risk for supply chain

disruptions. Gualandris and Kalchschmidt’s goal was to show managers how to improve

supply risk management (SRM) practice by increasing preparedness for supply chain

disruptions and improve firm performance. The model serves as a control tool for

evaluating external risks and resources in order to design SCRM practices that could

improve the firm’s performance, increase customer satisfaction, and reduce the

probability of supply risk (Gualandris & Kalchschmidt, 2015).

Kumar, Liu, and Scutella (2015) took a culturally-specific approach to examine

and compare the effects of supply chain disruptions on the United States and India.

Kumar et al. found supply chain management practices in developing countries remain

underdeveloped, while developed economies enjoy more efficient and reliable supply

chains. Developing countries like India suffer greater economic consequences from

supply chain disruptions, whereas Western supply chain responsiveness and efficiency is

a result of competitive pressure and sufficient economic resources for the development of

optimal SCRM strategies (Kumar et al., 2015).

Durach, Glasen, and Straube (2017) also took a culturally-specific approach by

examining the supplier factor of disruption management between Western buyers and

Chinese suppliers. Durach et al. (2017) identified 22 possible disruption causes for

Western firms and 43 relationship-specific mitigation strategies. Durach et al. (2017) paid

considerable attention to the cultural characteristics of supply chain risk management

practices. Durach et al. found that guanxi, a network of close business relationships that

facilitates for differential treatment, is the cornerstone of business operations in China. A

Western buyer who engages in a buyer-supplier relationship with a Chinese supplier must

be aware that mutual obligations and information sharing will help ensure success

(Durach et al., 2017). Durach et al. found guanxi has many complexities and Western

buyers should be prepared to distinguish between the traditionally impersonal Western

business relationships and highly personal business relationships in China. Western

buyers' willingness to commit to the model of business relationships cultivated in China

would warrant better risk management-related outcomes.

Kim, Han, and Kim (2016) reviewed the internal fit perspective of CTF. Kim et

al. (2016) analyzed data collected from South Korean manufacturing organizations to

establish how involvement oriented and equity oriented practices effect and improve

performance. The choice between involvement and equity oriented organizational

practices s be based on the careful analysis of labor and the working environment, as

labor and working environment have a direct effect on beneficial participation from

employees and improved financial performance (Kim et al., 2016; Ordriozola, Martin, &

Luna, 2018; Walker, 2015). Firm managers who passively accept risk allow themselves

to be exposed to substantial financial and market losses (Kim et al., 2016).

Supply chain fit and design. Supply chain design is the definitive foundation of

an organization and supply chain managers could design and redesign their supply chains

to achieve competitive advantage (Kraegpoth, Stentoft, & Jensen, 2017). Hallavo (2015)

noted supply chain managers can design or redesign their supply chains to be (a) agile,

(b) flexible, (c) lean, and (d) responsive. Supply chain design is characterized as a

strategic management action aimed to procure, develop, and configure supply chain

resources (i.e., funds, raw materials, facilities, transportation) that allows a firm to

successfully compete in the market (Kraegpoth et al., 2017). Matching or fitting the

external environment with internal operational procedures is imperative to ensure supply

chain characteristics are congruent with customer preferences and demands (Luo & Yu,

2016). To better accommodate customer expectations, product characteristics can be

fitted to an appropriate supply chain design (Luo & Yu, 2016).

Researchers have examined the concepts of fit and misfit including the effect on

performance and the identification, analysis, and management of contingency theory;

other variations of fit and misfit exist. The variations include factors that affect how

pursued strategies fit contextual and structural characteristics of the organization

(Ambulkar et al., 2015; van de Ven & Drazin, 1985). van de Ven and Drazin (1985)

posited the focal point of CTF is the situational influence on the management of

organizations. CTF theorists challenge the existence of a single, best approach to manage

or organize a corporation (van de Ven & Drazin, 1985). Chang et al. (2015) utilized CTF

to examine alternative supply chain risk mitigation strategies with specific risk contexts.

In accordance with Fisher’s (1997) work for matching fit between product type and

supply chain configuration, the goal of Chang et al. (2015) was to align well-established

aspects of supply chain risk management to develop and introduce a heuristic method for

adopting the appropriate supply chain risk mitigation strategy for specific risk contexts.

Eriksson (2015) asserted supply chains are multi-dimensional constructs

consisting of strength, scope, duration, and relational aspects, which include physical

activities and behavioral dimensions. Avoiding the traditional contingency fit model,

Gresov (1989) attempted to reevaluate the complexity of operational design and focused

the research on different aspects of the multiple-contingencies model. Gresov focused on

general aspects of multiple contingencies and identified task uncertainty and dependence

as two key problematic situations under which work units operate. Gresov argued

multiple-contingency models were better tools than the traditional contingency model

because the aforementioned presented more patterns of the relationship between context

and work unit performance.

Chavez, Yu, Jacobs, and Feng (2017) explored the benefits of supply chain

contingency fit on the Chinese manufacturing industry by studying entrepreneurial

orientation as the moderating variable of such capabilities as flexibility and

organizational performance. Chavez et al. (2017) noted entrepreneurial orientation is

positively associated with flexibility and cost capabilities, which are positively associated

with improved organizational performance. Entrepreneurial orientation moderates the

link between understanding changing and catering to market needs. The resulting

flexibility allows producers to fit product to customer needs, while cost capabilities allow

producers to maintain competitive prices and win a larger share of the market (Chavez et

al., 2017).

Supply chains are not static and vary in size, shape, and configuration due to

factors such as technological changes, emergence of new products, new market niches,

and geographical markets; therefore, supply chain managers should recognize how

globalization, technology, and changing markets affect the performance of the

organization and supply chain (MacCarthy, Blome, Olhager, Srai, & Zhao, 2016). Walker

(2015) reflected on the importance of supply chain fit in the manufacturing sector,

emphasizing the idea of following and operating the most recent technological

advancements and innovations to retain a competitive advantage. Zhang (2015) described

technological innovations as advancements and improvements in current technology to

enhance supply chain performance and competitiveness. Sundram, Chandran, and Bhatti

(2016) defined supply chain performance as a systematic process supply chain managers

use to measure the effectiveness of supply chain operations.

Proactive and creative approaches to supply chain operations, as well as a high

level of supply chain fit, ensured a firm would not miss out on numerous opportunities

presented by technological advancement (Walker, 2015). Tripathy, Aich, Chakraborty,

and Lee (2016) analyzed the structural relations between information technology (IT),

logistic effectiveness, operational efficiency, customer relationship, supplier relationship,

and competitive advantage of small and medium enterprises in India. Tripathy et al.

found that IT is essential to achieving a competitive advantage in SCM practices and

recommended companies update the technology throughout the supply chain and make

IT-based ordering systems part of the suppliers’ IT strategy.

Magutua, Adudab, and Nyaogac (2015) established the relationship between

supply chain technology, supply chain strategies, and performance. Magutua et al. (2015)

discovered over 88% of positive changes in an organization’s performance was

associated with supply chain technology and supply chain strategies. Supply chain

managers can use IT applications to improve customer service and reduce inventory cost,

to help achieve competitive advantage (Sook-Ling, Ismail, & Yee-Yen, 2015). Walker

(2015) claimed CTF is recognized as favorable and desirable for a firm’s performance

and growth.

Kach, Busse, Azadegan, and Wagner (2016) studied the external factors of CTF.

Kach et al. (2016) focused on hostile environments and examined the environmental

effects on product and process innovativeness. Kach et al. analyzed data collected from

manufacturing plants and categorized the hostile environments into four groups: (a)

market declination of annual industry revenue, (b) restriction or prevention of new

business from entering the market, (c) competition of new entities vying for customers,

and (d) lack of necessary funds, raw material, facilities to operate. Managers can analyze

the hostility of the external environment to help suppress the detrimental effects (Kach et

al., 2016). The implications of these findings are that managers using the methods

mentioned above can investigate the strategic fitness of manufacturing firms.

Manufacturing managers could pursue tailored supply chain practices to improve supply

chain performance.

Firm performance. CTF is considered valuable in the assessment of firm

performance, supply chain integration, innovation, and improving competitive

capabilities (Hallavo, 2015). Hallavo (2015) noted that a firm operating in a high

uncertainty business environment can obtain superior firm performance if the supply

chain is designed and managed with a focus on the key CTF tenets of operational

responsiveness, agility, and flexibility. However, a firm operating in a low uncertainty

business environment could obtain superior firm performance by focusing on operational

efficiency and leanness.

Yuen and Thai (2017) proposed a contingency model specifying and contrasting

the correlation between (a) internal integration (II), (b) external integration (EI), and (c)

operational performance (OP) in product supply chains and service supply chains.

Graham (2018) defined II as the level of interaction and collaboration among various

functional groups within an organization. Individuals evaluate II on how a firm structures

organizational strategies and practices to facilitate collaborative processes to fulfill

customer demands (Graham, 2018). Graham characterized EI as an extension of

interaction and collaboration efforts of a firm with key supply chain members (customers

and suppliers) to structure inter-organizational strategies and practices into attainable

processes that comply with end-user requirements. OP was described as the alignment of

a firm’s operation management procedures (Yu, Luo, Feng, & Liu, 2018), and

productivity as the ability to supply products and services to meet customer expectations

and achieve business goals (Shobayo, 2017).

Using multi-sampling, Yuen and Thai (2017) analyzed data collected from

product firms and services companies in Singapore to test the contingency model. Yuen

and Thai discovered a greater operational fit occurs when implementing EI in service

supply chains than product supply chains, whereas a greater operational fit occurs when

implementing II in product supply chains than service supply chains. Managers from

firms with product and service supply chains should accrue sufficient internal integrative

capabilities prior to integrating external supply chains (Yuen & Thai, 2017). Yuen and

Thai suggested adopting a contingency approach rather than a universalistic approach in

the management of the firm’s internal and external integrative capabilities to maximize

OP. Yuen and Thai recommended managers should adjust their II and EI efforts to

achieve fit to the type of supply chains being used.

Prajogo (2016) viewed contingency theory as the cornerstone of achieving a

strategic fit between business environments and various strategies of innovation.

However, Eckstein, Goellner, Blome, and Henke (2015) viewed CTF as the cornerstone

of understanding the environment and recommended applying the understanding to the

development of supply chain agility and adaptability strategies. Prajogo collected and

analyzed data to determine how external contingency factors (dynamism and

competitiveness) influenced internal innovation strategies regarding product and process.

Prajogo indicated dynamic environments prompted managers to emphasize product and

process innovations. Prajogo suggested concentrating on process rather than product

innovation in a competitive environment.

Lii and Kuo (2016) focused on firm performance and examined the potential of

innovation orientation, supply chain integration, and how to improve competitive

capabilities. Lii and Kuo concluded that innovation orientation is positively linked with

supply integration and customer integration, indicating that innovation-oriented firms are

more likely to achieve favorable performance levels as responding to customer demands

creates a competitive advantage (Lii & Kuo, 2016). The combination of a firm’s

competitive capabilities enables a firm to attain sustainable management, translating into

a productive coordination with supply chain partners.

Ng, Rungtusanatham, Zhao, and Ivanova (2015) discussed the structural

contingency theory and the concept of fit between a firm’s total quality management

(TQM) and external environment. Sayilar (2016) posited that structural contingency

theory is focused on how a firm’s performance depends on the degree of alignment

between the firm’s competitive strategy and design. Structural fit equates to success,

whereas lack of structural fit equates to failure (Sayilar, 2016). Structural contingency

theory was emulated in van de Ven and Drazin’s (1985) concept of fit in cases where

internal fit indicated congruency of the structural characteristics and the external fit

indicated congruency between the firm’s structural characteristics and competitive

strategy in connection with the external environment. Ng et al. (2015) proposed

manufacturing organizations could implement TQM in accordance with the external

environment, a crucial element to long-term success and sustainability. Ng et al. (2015)

indicated manufacturers must incorporate consideration of environmental trends and

benchmark best performers to develop a normative TQM profile and pursue TQM to

prevent deviations from normative profit when operating in a volatile environment.

Implementing an information and material flow system can help reduce

uncertainty and improve the performance of the supply chain (Riley, Klein, Miller, &

Sridharan, 2016). Talluri et al. (2013) explained that CTF is the foundation for building a

collaborative communications network to manage and mitigate the disruptive effect on

business performance efficiently. Riley et al. (2016) collected data from 231 supply chain

managers and found managing information flow can bolster risk management capabilities

of firms. Managers could build collaborative communication networks to manage and

mitigate risk in the supply chain (Riley et al., 2016).

Referencing drivers and patterns of supply chain collaboration in China's

pharmaceutical industry, Huang, Lin, Ieromonachou, Zhou, and Lou (2015) found

business managers engage in collaborative activities to save costs, pool and spread risk,

and maintain flexibility to respond to market requirements. Supply chain collaboration is

an important tool, which can reduce uncertainty, lead to superior performance in

companies based on the capitalization of resources, capabilities, and processes of supply

chain partners (Aggarwal & Srivastava, 2016). Supply chain collaboration refers to an

inter-organizational relationship where two or more supply chain partners are working

together to align supply chain operations, share information, build a value-added process,

and create sustainability (Chen et al., 2017).

The basis of collaboration is mutual trust, shared rewards, and risks resulting in

greater profitability and better performance (Soosay & Hyland, 2015). In a collaborative

inter-firm relationship, trust and communication are significant factors for supply chain

agility (Durach et al., 2015), and the level of trust buyers develop towards suppliers is a

result of effective communication, positive past collaboration, and the existence of

personal bonds (Revilla & Knoppen, 2015). Arora, Arora, and Sivakumar (2016)

examined the relationship between supply chain strategies and the operational and

relational outcomes of organizational performance. Arora et al. (2016) concluded the

supply chain mix affects the internal environment of the focal firm and the external

environment of customers, competitors, suppliers, and supply chain partners. Results of

the supply chain mix can lead to enhanced chain management effectiveness,

organizational performance, and sustainable competitive advantage (Arora et al., 2016).

Fawcett, McCarter, Fawcett, Webb, and Magnan (2015) conducted a study of 15

companies to explore why collaborative strategies fail. Fawcett et al. (2015) found

conflicts between supply chain partners, misalignments, information hoarding, distrust,

and resistance to change can lead to poor collaboration between supply chain members.

Supply chain collaboration and integration practices based on relational ties can result in

trust and better coordination among supply chain partners (Arora et al., 2016).

By using supply chain performance measurements, supply chain managers can

promote collaborative integration among supply chain partners and ensure continuous

improvement of the supply chain. Supply chain partners collaborate to maximize learning

opportunities, enhance shared values, develop new competencies, create better position in

the market, and improve the agility and performance of the supply chain (Li, Wu, Zong,

& Li, 2017). Odongo, Dora, Molnar, Ongeng, and Gellynck (2016) posited mutual

relationships, and information sharing among supply chain members is essential in

achieving a fully integrated supply chain. No optimal collaboration strategy exists that

has methods to tackle various types of disruptions at once; therefore, risk managers must

be flexible in decision-making processes and select strategies to ensure timely delivery of

products (Zhu et al., 2016).

Eckstein et al. (2015) indicated product complexity positively facilitates the link

between supply chain agility, adaptability, cost, operational performance strategies, and

helps control internal and external threats. Although supply chain adaptability is less

effective under low product complexity, supply chain agility resulted in enhanced cost

and operational performance under high and low product complexity creating more

overall benefits (Eckstein et al., 2015). Eckstein et al. strengthened the idea that

manufacturing managers who develop capabilities at the supply chain level can expect

improved firm-level performance. A better understanding of performance implications of

supply chain agility and adaptability contributes to building and refining theories of

supply chain agility and adaptability (Eckstein et al., 2015). Studies by Eckstein et al. and

Prajogo (2015), served as a platform for empirically tested managerial implications.

Eckstein et al. and Prajogo placed considerable focus on internal and external factors and

fit or misfit on firm performance.

Netland (2015) obtained data from manufacturing firms and analyzed the

influence of contingency variables regarding the implementation of lean production. Lean

production is a product improvement strategy that encompasses various factors and

serves to improve timely production, quality management, product maintenance, and

resource management practices (Netland, 2015). Netland viewed contingency theory as

superior than interdependent fit when explaining internal and external factors of

production to the extent in which managers strive to achieve organizational and

operational alignment. Netland argued contingency variables defined what managers

considered to be success factors for the implementation of lean production instead of why

managers considered lean production to be desirable. Any organization interested in

supply chain development would consider achieving a strategic fit between external and

internal environments vital, but the degree to which an organizational manager should

engage would vary based on multiple factors (Netland, 2015).

Like Netland (2015), Karim, Carroll, and Long (2016), extended contingency

theory beyond the idea of why contingent alignment is necessary. Karim et al. analyzed

data collected from pharmaceutical companies in the United States and reviewed theories

of decision avoidance and delay in pursuing structural realignment. Karim et al. focused

on different contingencies that helped moderate the progress of structural change and

postponed or avoided decisions if industry turbulence occurred. Environmental

uncertainty is not always an external factor that moderates the implementation of

structural change for improving contingency fit, but at times it is indicative of the need to

delay or avoid making structural change decisions (Karim et al., 2016).

Supply chain resilience. Birkie (2016) postulated CTF tenets of leanness,

flexibility, and operational responsiveness enhances resilience. Hohenstein, Feisel,

Hartman, and Giunipero (2015) referred to supply chain resiliency as a flexible capability

of managers to prepare for, respond to, and recover from supply chain disruptions.

Thomas, Pham, Francis, and Fisher (2015) evaluated data from manufacturing companies

in the United Kingdom to establish business resiliency techniques that would withstand

increasing turbulence in business performance. Based on the findings, Thomas et al.

developed a fit operational model (FOM) to integrate the main business improvement

paradigms into an approach for achieving manufacturing resilience. FOM is similar to

CTF as the goal is to synthesize the firm’s operational (internal) and strategic (external)

capabilities.

Hallavo (2015) tested CTF in the context of supply chain uncertainty by aligning

firm operations with the internal and external environment. Using a hierarchical

regression model, Hallavo analyzed data collected from Russian manufacturing firms and

found matching the level of operational effectiveness with the external and internal

environment leads to superior company performance. Although Thomas et al. (2015)

argued that the model applies to all sizes and types of industries, Hallavo, hypothesized

national culture is a weaker driver of typical operational performance than organizational

culture. The results of studies by Thomas et al. and Hallavo do not discredit the universal

applicability of CTF.

Profitability. A variety of uncertainties presented in a firm’s internal and external

operating environment prompts supply chain managers to invest a considerable amount

of money and effort into supply chain risk management (Ho et al., 2015). The topic of

how supply chain disruptions affect a firm’s profitability and related strategies are not

abundantly covered in literature as compared to demand and supply chain risk

management (Ho et al., 2015). Bidhandi and Valmohammadi (2016) explored how theory

tenets of agility, flexibility, and operational responsiveness affected a firm’s profitability.

Although agility and responsiveness positively affected a firm’s profitability, flexibility

had the greatest effect on improving a firm’s profits (Bidhandi & Valmohammadi, 2016).

Han, Wu, Yang, and Shang (2016) suggested by reconfiguring the supply chain, a

firm can improve economic benefits. Han et al. (2016) indicated remanufacturing or

refurbishment is one of the reconfiguring strategies for improving a firm’s profitability.

Collecting and purchasing used products (reverse channels) such as cellular phones and

computers from customers to remanufacture, refurbish, and later resell to consumers can

help minimize supply demands, financial risk, and improve profitability (Han et al.,

2016). Reverse channels have risks of uncertainty and strategies to increase or maintain

profits are subjected to the same disruption risk as in a regular supply chain flow (Han et

al., 2016).

The effects of supply chain disruptions on profitability go beyond direct financial

losses and may be associated with supply and demand risk mitigation strategies. Effects

of supply chain disruptions on profitability and strategies used to maintain or increase

profits occur on various levels (Rezapour, Farahani, & Pourakbar, 2017). For example,

experiencing a supply chain disruption on a macroeconomic level lessens the firm’s

ability to remain competitive (Rezapour et al., 2017). A disruption that occurred in the

upstream level of the supply chain can result in the inability to meet expectations

downstream leading to lost market shares (Rezapour et al., 2017).

Zahran, Jaber, and Zanoni (2017) considered a three-level (supplier–vendor–

buyer) supply chain system with a consignment stock (CS) agreement to determine

whether CS was beneficial in increasing business profits. In a CS contract, goods are

owned by the vendor, stored by the buyer and buyer pays for goods removed from the

inventory when purchased by the consumer (Zahran et al., 2017). Zahran et al. defined

CS as a coordination mechanism (ordering and shipping) used to increase customer level

performance, reduce supply chain costs, and increase the profitability of each supply

chain member.

CS and traditional coordination policies were combined, and a sensitivity analysis

was performed to examine four coordination models each having nine cases representing

storage costs (Zahran et al., 2017). Sensitivity analysis was implemented to show the

effects of different cost factors on the developed models. Zahran et al. suggested the best

scenario for the system might be different from those preferred by a supply chain member

as the situation depends on the storage-holding cost. Coordination may shift savings and

profits to some but not all supply chain members (Zahran et al., 2017). Zahran et al. did

not recommend consignment agreement between the vendor and the buyer when the

storage-holding cost of the latter is higher.

Sensitivity analysis was also performed to determine the parameters that had the

most positive effect on the system’s profitability. Although adopting a traditional

coordination policy among supply chain members produced profits, a combined policy

followed by a consignment agreement among all supply chain members resulted in

higher profits (Zahran et al., 2017). Changes in the demand rate, interest rate, vendor’s

set-up, and buyer’s ordering costs can affect profits and ordering policies demonstrating

the importance of having all information regarding the values for input parameters of

supply chain members (Zahran et al., 2017).

Zahran et al. (2017) posited adopting a CS agreement will help ensure better

management and services, enhance collaboration, and assure product availability,

particularly when demand fluctuates. Jabbarzadeh, Fahimnia, and Sheu (2017), defined

fluctuation as variations (increase and decrease) in purchasing goods and services subject

to factors such as seasonal, cyclical, and product availability. As payments are delayed,

downstream members can invest sales revenue whereas upstream members benefit from

adopting the CS agreement if they have insufficient space to store products and want to

reduce storage-holding costs (Zahran et al., 2017). Collaborating and coordinating orders

and shipments among members in the supply chain can substantially reduce supply chain

costs and increase the profitability of supply chain members.

Collaboration for recovery is an important strategy manager’s use for responding

quickly to supply chain disruptions and mitigating harmful effects (Zhu et al., 2016).

Singh, Garg, and Sachdeva (2018) conducted a systematic literature review of the drivers

of retailer-supplier collaboration and the effect on supplier and retailer. Singh et al.

(2018) explained customer orientation and more supplier-specific relationships lead to

greater retailer-supplier collaboration. Singh et al. found the greatest benefit of retailer-

supplier collaboration is cost savings, which is shared by all supply chain members.

Manufacturing managers can strategically use supply chain collaboration to create new

revenue opportunities. CTF is useful for managers in the development of long-term

responses to disruptions to achieve stability in the supply chain (Grotsch et al., 2013).

Supply chain disruptions are minimized when supply chain managers develop effective

responses (Grotsch et al., 2013).

Contrasting Theories

Normal accident theory. Nunan and Di Domenico (2017) postulated

organizational and strategic practices that stem from aligned relations between internal

and external environments under which businesses operate is the primary focus of CTF.

Nunan and Di Domenico noted that theorists of supply chain risk management focus on

accidents and failures resulting from big data in data-centric organizations. One opposing

theory to understanding and implementing strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions

is normal accident theory (NAT). Normal accident theorists view accidents as inevitable

due to interactive complexity in organizational systems that are complex and tightly

coupled (Nunan & Di Domenico, 2017).

Developed by Perrow (1984), described NAT as conditions which contribute to

risk situations. The key concept of NAT is accidents are normal (Perrow, 1984). Most

accidents, including complex accidents involving multiple failures, are preventable;

however, accidents are inescapable in systems that are complicated and tightly connected

(Perrow, 1984). To prevent malfunctions, managers need to reduce the complexity of the

system (Perrow, 1984). Conditions of interactive complexity and tight coupling are

antecedents to supply chain disruptions (Grant, Salmon, Stevens, Goode, & Read, 2018;

Scheibe & Blackhurst, 2018).

Le Coze (2015) suggested a greater number of accidents are creations of

organizational failures identified as DEPOSE (design, equipment, procedures, operators,

supplies, and equipment). However, an organizational failure is not considered a system

accident, but a breakdown of components related to improper organizational management

that includes taking calculated risks (Le Coze, 2015). Recognizing the precursors and

understanding how interactive complexity and tight coupling influence disruption

occurrence is useful to supply chain managers in choosing alternative mitigation

strategies.

Scheibe and Blackhurst (2018) focused on the supply chain triad, which include

the manufacturer, supplier, and customer. Scheibe and Blackhurst argued greater

integration and connectivity within the triad could help recognize the effects of and

prevent disruptions. Scheibe and Blackhurst noted NAT highlights issues and risks that

persist along the supply chain but found that the lack of internal focus on supply chain

mechanisms and propagation could be disastrous. SCRM demands a more hands-on

approach to mitigating supply chain disruptions rather than simply understanding that

accidents are inevitable. Applicability of NAT is limited as the theory applies to a small

category of accidents, has not been tested on how to reduce accidents in complex and

tightly coupled systems, is unclear as to what concepts the theory covers, and addresses

safety in the context of organizational structure of complex industrial systems (Nunan &

Di Domenico, 2017).

Resource dependence theory. A second theory to mitigating supply chain

disruptions is the resource dependence theory (RDT) developed by Pfeffer and Salancik

(1978). Klein and Pereira (2016) noted RDT theorists surmise a firm’s strategic options

are determined by the external environment. RDT theorists suggested that organizations

are dependent on the environment as a source of survival (Kalaitzi, Matopoulos,

Bourlakis, & Tate, 2018). Early studies of resource dependence led to the concept that an

organization is an open system dependent on contingencies in the external environment

(Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978).

Three factors that influence the organizations’ level of

dependence on certain resources are overall importance of the needed resource; scarcity

of the resource, the scarce the resource the greater the firm’s dependence; and

competition for control of the resource-rivalry for dominance (Kalaitzi et al., 2018).

Bell, Mollenkopf, and Stolze (2013) noted the lack of resources in organization

and industry supply chains significantly affect risk management strategies. Kalaitzi et al.

(2018), indicated other factors that present problems with RDT as pertaining to the effect

of resource scarcity on supply chain strategies. The factors included absence of

discrimination involving an imbalance of power and mutual dependence, uncertainties

surrounding its boundary conditions, and factual work that focuses on dependence of one

participant on another versus reciprocal interdependence (Kalaitzi et al., 2018). Theorists

conducted studies on how supply chain managers can collaborate with external

organizations and build relationships with suppliers to increase performance (Klein &

Pereira, 2016; Schiele, Ellis, Ebig, Henke, & Kull, 2015; Soosay & Hyland, 2015). From

the RDT perspective, the challenge in building relationships with suppliers is dealing

with the uncertainty of whether suppliers will follow the firm’s sustainability agenda

(Schnittfeld & Busch, 2016).

Transition

In the study, I explored manufacturing companies’ strategies to mitigate supply

chain disruptions and remain profitable. In Section 1, I provided a background of the

problem of supply chain disruption to include the definition of a disruption,

vulnerabilities of the supply chain, and how disruptions can negatively affect the flow of

products, services, and revenue. The literature review contains information from studies

pertaining to relevant and contrasting theories to mitigating supply chain disruptions and

studies providing different perspectives of disruptive events and possible disruption risk

strategies. Section 2 contains (a) role of the researcher, (b) data collection techniques, (c)

interview and ethical protocol, and (d) research methods and design, (e) data analysis, (f)

data organization techniques, and (g) population and sampling. Section 2 contains criteria

used in selecting and gaining access to participants and establishing a relationship with

the selected participants. Section 2 also contains a discussion on reliability and validity

including (a) dependability, (b) credibility, (c) transferability, (d) confirmability, and (e)

data saturation. In Section 3, I presented the findings and results of the study, discussed

the implications for positive social change, and provided recommendations of topics

requiring further research. Section 3 also included applicability of the study, reflections,

and the conclusion.

Section 2: The Project

Purpose Statement

My purpose in this qualitative exploratory multiple case study was to explore

strategies that manufacturing that firm managers use to mitigate supply chain disruptions

to remain profitable. The target population for this study consisted of four manufacturing

firm managers at two manufacturing companies located in the southern region of eastern

Virginia who have successfully implemented strategies to reduce the effects of supply

disruptions on profitability. The implications for positive social change might include

manufacturing firm managers increasing profits that attract investment capital for

business expansion creating employment opportunities, investment in community

projects, and enhance consumer spending in the local community.

Role of the Researcher

In qualitative research, the researcher’s primary role is the instrument for

collecting, organizing, and analyzing data (Clark & Veale, 2018). For this study, I was

the instrument for collecting data by interviewing participants and gathering company

information, such as activity reports of work disruptions and solutions. I also assembled

and analyzed data to present findings. Qualitative researchers have the responsibility to

disclose their experiences, values, assumptions, and biases regarding the research topic,

participants, and location (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Although I work in the logistical

field of property management, requisitioning, shipping and receiving, and storage, I did

not have a relationship with the manufacturing firms or participants used in this study.

Researchers should adhere to the ethical guidelines and fundamental principles of

respect, beneficence, and justice per the Belmont Report to protect research participants

(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [USDHHS], 1979). I adhered to the

fundamental principles by treating participants autonomously and with respect, protecting

their privacy while enhancing their well-being, obtained informed consent, and assessed

risks and benefits when selecting subjects for data collection. Prior to conducting the

study, I completed the web-based National Institute of Health (NIH) training. Celestina

(2018) and Franks (2017) claimed participants are more agreeable to disclose information

if they feel their privacy and confidentiality will not be breached. To ensure privacy and

confidentiality, I conveyed to all participants that their privacy and confidentiality would

be protected, and the information provided would only be used for research purposes.

Bias is a significant issue that can distort study results and can influence the

quality of research findings (Raza, 2016). To guard against bias, researchers should

remain objective, recognize that personal bias exists, journal perceptions, and be mindful

and self-reflective of one’s bias (Chamberlain, 2016; Poos, van den Bosch, & Janssen,

2017; Raza, 2016). To mitigate bias, I remained objective, allowing participants to freely

express their views and beliefs without interrupting and imposing or focusing on my

ideas and beliefs. I self-reflected and journaled thoughts I had about my interactions with

participants. I adhered to the interview protocol, carefully constructed interview

questions, and reviewed transcripts to mitigate my personal biases. Qualitative

researchers employ interview protocol, transcript review, and member checking to

separate their perspectives, experiences, and beliefs from the collected data (Sorsa,

Kiikkala, & Astedt-Kurki, 2015).

Researchers use interview protocol to collect data to address the overarching

research question, increase the reliability of the case study, and minimize the

inconsistencies in the research interview process (Jansen, 2015; Yin, 2018). Interview

protocol extends to the procedural level of interviewing and includes a script of what the

researcher will say before and at the end of the interview, prompts for the collection of

consent forms, and standardizes data collection which makes the process more organized

and consistent (Castillo-Montoya, 2016). As the researcher, I followed the interview

protocol to increase the reliability of the study, minimize inconsistencies in the interview

process, and achieve consistency and organization. I adhered to the ethical guidelines for

conducting credible research and treated each participant in accordance with the Belmont

Report.

Participants

I used purposive sampling to recruit participants. Researchers should recruit

participants with relevant experience, knowledge, and insight into the research question

(Palinkas et al., 2015). Selection of participants and collection of data depends on

whether participants are willing to give consent to participate in the research (Celestina,

2018). Researchers should exhibit a variety of interpersonal skills and capabilities (e.g.,

trust, rapport, knowledge, and experience) to gain access to participants (Celestina, 2018;

Ibrahim & Edgley, 2015).

I gained access to participants by using LinkedIn found at

https://www.linkedin.com and using the Trustoria National Professionals Directory

database found at http://trustoria.com. LinkedIn is a business and employment-oriented

service used by business professionals to network and recruit potential employees.

Trustoria National Professionals Directory contains a list of names, email addresses,

professions, and telephone numbers of prospective participants. I contacted participants

via email and LinkedIn messaging. I explained my goal in this study, the intended use of

data being collected, and how the findings of the study might provide additional insights

related to the firm's overall supply chain and firm performance. I answered all questions

participants had and provided a brief overview of my experience in the logistical field.

The second strategy that I used was snowball sampling. Rao et al. (2017) and

Penn (2016) suggested researchers ask participants for recommendations of those inside

and outside the firm who might meet the selection criteria as well as gain access to

participants who are difficult to reach. I asked participants for referrals of potential

candidates who met the selection criteria. I received a few referrals for potential

candidates; however, the referred candidates did not reply or declined the invitation.

According to Saunders and Townsend (2016), sample selections should represent

the characteristics of the targeted population, as eligibility requirements apply to all

empirical studies to ensure selected participants meet the criteria to help the researcher

answer the overarching research question for a study. Morgan, Occa, Potter, Mouton, and

Peter (2017) and Saunders and Townsend (2016) recommended selecting a percentage of

the targeted population having the most experience and knowledge of the phenomenon

under investigation. For example, if 20% of a sample has two years or more experience,

and 40% have two years or less experience, the researcher can select 20% of the more

experienced group.

My sample consisted of four supply chain managers from two manufacturing

firms located in the southern region of eastern Virginia. The eligibility criteria for

prospective participants were as follows: (a) served as middle-to-senior level supply

chain managers; (b) ability to provide detailed information pertaining to supply chain

disruptions; (c) have at least 2 years of experience successfully implementing strategies

to mitigate supply chain disruptions; and (d) conducted business operations located in the

southern region of eastern Virginia. Yin (2018) indicated that participant criterion should

result in the selection of participants having characteristics that align with the overarching

research question. Cruz, Sabourin, and Cavalcanti (2018) and Hagaman and Wutich

(2017) posited that researchers should recruit participants endowed with the competence,

experience, and knowledge of the phenomenon. The rationale for the eligibility criteria

supporting the study was to align with the research question: What strategies do

manufacturing firm managers use to mitigate supply chain disruptions to remain

profitable? By using purposive and snowball sampling, I selected supply chain managers

who had the competence, knowledge, and experience in implementing strategies to

mitigate supply chain disruptions. The selected participants had 3 to 5 years’ experience

in the supply chain management field.

The qualitative researcher should establish a trusting relationship with participants

(Yin, 2018), but establishment of trust is not a straightforward process (Celestina, 2018).

Celestina posited that trust depends on direct interaction; that is, people’s actions with

others influence their trustworthiness and reputation. I contacted each participant via

LinkedIn messaging and email, inviting individuals to participate in the study. I built a

working relationship by explaining the importance and value of the participant's

contribution. I created a sense of trust by responding to all questions and concerns

politely and honestly. I was flexible in scheduling initial interviews and follow-up

appointments. I respected and gave each participant my undivided attention ensuring

there were no distractions such as turning off my cell phone. Morgan et al. (2017)

postulated that researchers could build a trusting, work relationship with participants by

(a) being truthful, (b) showing respect and politeness, (c) paying attention to what was

being said, (d) being flexible in scheduling interviews and follow-up appointments, and

(e) acknowledging the value of the participants' contributions to the research.

Research Method and Design

Research Method

The research method that I selected was the qualitative method. Yates and Leggett

(2016) and Barnham (2015) professed that qualitative research allows the researcher to

attain the how, why, and what questions about the phenomenon. Anderson (2017) and

Park and Park (2016) posited that qualitative research is identified by the comprehensive,

naturalistic, and interpretative inquiry into the phenomenon being studied. Researchers

choose the qualitative method and collect data via historical records, interviews, and

direct observations (Anderson, 2017; Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Researchers used

collected data to investigate and understand the observed behaviors, attitudes, and

opinions of the targeted population linked to studies conducted in natural settings to

discover new trends and patterns of the phenomenon (Anderson, 2017; Barnham, 2015;

Bristowe et al., 2015; Marshall & Rossman, 2016; Park & Park, 2016). The qualitative

method was optimal for this study, because I explored and gained an understanding of the

phenomenon from the participants’ perspective and explored the strategies supply chain

managers use to mitigate disruptions to remain profitable.

Researchers use quantitative research to test hypotheses, measure variables, and

analyze statistical data (Barnham, 2015; McCusker & Gunaydin, 2015; Park & Park,

2016). The quantitative method was not appropriate for my study, because I did not

examine the relationship between variables nor test hypotheses. Bolton (2015) and

Molina-Azorin (2016) explained that mixed methods research combines qualitative and

quantitative methods. Researchers use mixed method research to measure, evaluate,

integrate, converge, and replicate research findings when a single research method is not

sufficient to fully understand the research problem (Park & Park, 2016). Mixed methods

research was not suitable for my study, because I did not require the integration of

quantitative data.

Research Design

I considered (a) case study, (b) ethnography, and (c) phenomenological research

designs for my study. Aczel (2015), Larrinaga (2017), and Yates and Leggett (2016)

described case study design as an empirical inquiry, which researchers use to investigate,

describe, or explain one or more bounded cases within their real-life context. Case study

design is beneficial when answering what, how, and why questions about events the

researcher has little to no control (Dasgupta, 2015; Yates & Leggett, 2016; Yin, 2018).

Case study research is not limited to a single source of data. Ridder (2017) and

Dasgupta (2015) posited researchers triangulate data obtained through a combination of

(a) open-ended questions; (b) direct observation of participants in their work

environment; (c) archived records; (d) physical artifacts; and (e) documentation. Ridder

(2017) and Dasgupta (2015) contended collected data should result in a detailed case

description that enhances the understanding of the phenomena. I selected the case study

design, as I investigated and analyzed multiple cases within real-life contexts regarding

strategies used to mitigate supply chain disruptions to remain profitable.

Gammelgaard (2017) and Pluye, Hong, Bush, and Vedel (2016) described

ethnographic design as the exploration of interpreting human behavior within a cultural

group. The researcher becomes immersed in the community and culture while observing

the lives of community members (Pluye et al., 2016). Ethnographic design was not

appropriate for my study because I did not study cultural groups.

Researchers using phenomenological studies focus on individual lives or lived

experiences (Hannon et al., 2016). Phenomenological researchers investigate the essence

of the participants' lived experiences through individual stories, interviews, and

observations (Yin, 2018). Phenomenological research design was not appropriate for this

study because my objective did not encompass the collection of information concerning

individuals’ lives or shared lived experiences.

Data saturation is a component of rigor used in qualitative research to ensure

highly descriptive quality data is collected (Fusch & Ness, 2015; Morse, 2015; Saunders

et al., 2018). No one-size-fits-all method is feasible for obtaining data saturation as

saturation is dependent on the sample size (Fusch & Ness, 2015). Data saturation occurs

when data collected from different cases, archives, observations, and interviews results in

gathering repeated information and additional coding is no longer feasible (Dasgupta,

2015; Fusch & Ness, 2015; Morse, 2015).

Failure to obtain saturation affects the quality of the research and compromises

the validity of the content (Fusch & Ness, 2015). I collected data via interviews, publicly

available historical archives, and business reports referencing supply chain disruptions. I

continued collecting data through follow-up interviews, reviewing additional cases, and

historical archives until no new relevant ideas or patterns emerged, gathered information

was replicated, and additional coding was no longer beneficial.

Population and Sampling

The targeted population of this study consisted of four supply chain managers

selected from two manufacturing companies located in the southern region of eastern

Virginia. The selection of four middle-to-senior level participants from each company

enabled me to obtain detailed, rich information representing the opinions and

perspectives of each participant, as relating to supply chain disruptions and mitigation

strategies. Hagaman and Wutich (2017) and Nilsson et al. (2016) posited qualitative

researchers should define sample size by considering the purpose of the study and the

assessment of the diverse opinions and perspectives offered by the participants.

Researchers should ensure selected participants representing the targeted population have

the competence, experience, and knowledge of the phenomenon to address the research

topic (Cruz et al., 2018; Saunders & Townsend, 2016).

I chose purposive sampling as my method to select potential participants.

Purposive sampling is a nonprobability sampling technique which is suitable for case

study research and may be useful when resources, time, and workforce are limited

(Etikan, Musa, & Alkassim, 2016). Palinkas et al. (2015) suggested purposeful sampling

is used in qualitative research to facilitate the selection of participants who can provide

information about the phenomenon while ensuring efficient use of limited resources.

Purposive sampling enables researchers to identify the population sample having

knowledge and experience of the research topic (Hagaman & Wutich, 2017; Palinkas et

al., 2015). Benoot, Hannes, and Bilsen (2016) and Etikan et al. (2016) indicated that

purposeful sampling has been used in qualitative research to ensure in-depth information

is collected from information-rich participants who can provide insight and

comprehensive knowledge regarding the research topic. Purposive sampling aligns with

the stated intent of the case study design and ensures the selection of participants have in-

depth knowledge and experiences who can provide detailed descriptions about the

phenomenon (Elman, Gerring, & Mahoney, 2016). Benoot et al. (2016) posited the

objective of the researcher is not to realize a single correct answer to a study question, but

rather to facilitate the synthesis of adequate evidence necessary to explore emerging

patterns.

A second sampling method I used to select participants was snowball sampling.

Snowball sampling is a recruitment technique in which the researcher asks selected

participants for recommendations of other potential participants internal and external to

the firm who meet the selection criteria, and to help gain access to potential participants

difficult to reach (Holloway, Toye, McConigley, Tieman, Currow, & Hegarty, 2015;

Penn, 2016; Rao et al., 2017). Blaikie (2018) and Roy, Zvonkovic, Goldberg, Sharp, and

LaRossa (2015) argued that in qualitative research, there are no set rules in determining

sample size as the size depends on (a) what the researcher wants to know; (b) credibility

of the participants and collected data; and (c) what information is useful to answer the

research question.

Boddy (2016) and Fusch and Ness (2015) contended data saturation is critical in

considering the selection of a qualitative sample and at least two participants are required

to obtain data saturation. Obtaining data saturation from a single interview or case study

cannot produce adequate findings to address the research problem (Boddy, 2016).

Researchers should address the scope of data saturation, which encompasses the

comprehensiveness, depth, and unique aspects of the study (Morse, 2015; O’Connor,

2015). Replication is an essential aspect of data saturation (Yin, 2018). Morse (2015)

described the concept of replication as the condition where data from several cases have

the same or similar essential features (Morse, 2015). Although the details may be

different, participants may give common responses to situations with shared

characteristics (Morse, 2015).

Boddy (2016) noted that given the nature of the study a sample size of four to 10

might be sufficient in sampling a homogenous population, such as the same type of

employment; whereas van Rijnsoever (2017) noted that some scholars have indicated a

sample size of 15 to 30 is adequate to obtain data saturation in case studies. A sample size

of four participants from two manufacturing firms would be considered adequate in

obtaining extensive information necessary for data saturation, enhancing replicability,

and arrive at conclusions and recommendations linked to supply chain disruptions in the

manufacturing sector due to the homogeneity of the population (Boddy, 2016; Penn,

2016). Gile, Johnston, and Salganik (2015) posited that researchers choose participants

based on the study criteria. The objective of facilitating the collection of relevant and

comprehensive information, and selection of participants depends on specific inclusion

criteria. Selected participants should represent the targeted population and have the

competence, experience, and knowledge of the phenomenon to address the research topic

(Cruz et al., 2018; Saunders & Townsend, 2016).

To participate in the study, individuals should (a) be middle-to-senior level supply

chain managers, (b) have at least two years’ experience implementing strategies to

mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain profitable, and (c) have the knowledge to

provide detailed information pertaining to supply chain disruptions. The expertise and

competence of the participants can provide breadth and in-depth knowledge of the case

under study, and ensures respondents are aware of the organizational culture and of

influences on supply chain disruptions (Hagaman & Wutich, 2017; Yin, 2018). Said,

Amir, and Maelah (2017) indicated individuals possessing middle-to-senior level supply

chain management experience in the manufacturing industry for at least one year are

aware of their organizational culture and its influence on supply chain operations. The

selection criteria enabled me to obtain comprehensive information and reliable insights

into the study topic.

I selected middle-to-senior level supply chain managers who had three to five

years’ experience in supply chain management. Middle-to-senior level managers

participate in the decision-making process to address issues affecting their companies and

might have access to data relating to organizational issues (Rojos et al., 2016). Palinkas et

al. (2015) noted that participants should be selected according to their role within the firm

in the implementation process. Middle and senior level managers were likely to provide

relevant information about the research topic. By adhering to the criteria, I was able to

identify experienced participants, obtain credible and detailed information to address the

research question, and generate overall findings to address the study phenomenon.

Researchers should select interviewing sites that are accessible, convenient,

comfortable, quiet, private, and free from distractions to allow participants to share

information freely (Fusch & Ness, 2015). Drabble, Trocki, Salcedo, Walker, and Korcha

(2016) indicated that conducting telephonic interviews is convenient and protects the

privacy of the participants. Morgan et al. (2017) noted that using a flexible strategy to

schedule interviews demonstrates professionalism. Marshall and Rossman (2016)

suggested that the comfort level of interviewees could influence how they respond. I

interviewed each participant separately via Skype voice and was flexible in scheduling

interviews so not to interfere with participants' work and family schedules. To avoid

distraction, I turned off my cellular telephone and asked participants to do the same.

Ethical Research

Informed consent is a principled, lawful prerequisite in conducting research

involving human participants and is crucial to ethical research and study credibility (Lie

& Witteveen, 2017; Wallace & Sheldon, 2015). The informed consent form outlines the

requirements of the IRB to comply with ethical standards in research and fulfillment of

the guidelines of The Belmont Report (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

[USDHHS], 1979). Informed consent encompasses procedures used to provide

participants with risks, benefits, right to confidentiality related to the study, which will

enable participants to make an informed decision to voluntarily confirm their willingness

to engage in the research (Kaye et al., 2015).

Prior to engaging participants in a research project, researchers have the legal and

ethical responsibility to obtain participants’ informed consent (Largent, 2016). Miller

(2015) and National Institutes of Health [NIH] (2011) explained that informed consent

forms should contain a statement that (a) subjects’ participation is voluntary, (b)

participant can withdraw at any time, (c) refusal to participate or withdrawal will not

result in penalties or loss of benefits, and (d) a confidentiality pledge. Protecting research

participants is an essential element of ethical research, and the researcher has a

responsibility to protect the welfare and rights of research participants throughout the

study (Donges, 2015; Miller, 2015; Wallace & Sheldon, 2015).

After explaining all aspects of the study and receiving an acknowledgment from

each participant, I obtained their signatures on the informed consent form prior to

conducting interviews. Participation in the study was voluntary, and participants were

free to leave the process at any point. Participants have the right to withdraw from the

study at any time with or without written notification, without providing a reason, and

without negative recourse (Holm & Ploug, 2017). Participants could have submitted their

written withdrawal notices to my Walden University email account. To mitigate

withdrawal, I explained to selected participants the aspects of the study including their

right to confidentiality, risks and benefits related to the research project. The same

information was included in the consent form. I did not have any participants withdraw

from the study.

Although compensation to research participants is ethically sound and serves as

an incentive to gain access, offers of incentives to participate can contribute to concerns

of coercion or undue influence on participants and affect research credibility (Largent &

Lynch, 2017; Lie & Witteveen, 2017). Researchers should be cautious to avoid crossing

ethical boundaries as payments could negatively affect the role of the informed consent

process (Devine et al., 2015). I did not offer any compensation. Tokens of gratitude for

participation are generally not controversial and are offered in a way that would not

influence decisions to participate (Largent & Lynch, 2017; Lie & Witteveen, 2017). In

return for participating, I provided a copy of the summary to the participants after

publication. Copies of the findings were disseminated via email or postal service.

Kirilova and Karcher (2017) indicated that researchers have a primary duty to

protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants. Confidentiality is a professional

duty that the researcher should maintain throughout the study process (Lancaster, 2017;

Winkler, Villarroel, & Pasmanik, 2018). Ross, Iguchi, and Panicker (2018) and Kirilova

and Karcher (2017) explored the anonymization strategy to protect human participants.

Anonymization strategy is the use of pseudonyms to identify respondents, thereby

removing any information that may serve as direct or indirect identifiers (Kirilova &

Karcher, 2017; Ross et al., 2018). Based on the need to maintain the privacy of the

subject’s identity, participants in the study were not identified by name, location, or the

organizations for which they worked.

Researchers must uphold confidentiality is an essential principle, which is a major

component of participant protection (Jeanes, 2017). In order to maintain participant

confidentiality, I undertook several measures. After completing the transcript review, I

transferred voice recordings from the folder on my computer to a flash drive, deleted the

folder containing the recordings, and deleted the folder from the trash. I have stored all

data in a fireproof safe requiring a combination only accessible to me. The data includes

the transferred voice recordings to the flash drive and all paper documents, including

transcripts, notes, and documents signed by participants.

Jeanes (2017) recommended storing collected data in a secure location and

destroying data after the project is completed. Penn (2016) secured recorded data in a

fireproof safe and deleted all electronic materials five years after completing the study.

Five years after the completion of my study, I will destroy all paper documents via

shredder and will destroy the data saved to a flash drive via Killdisk destruction software.

I obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and requested permission to

interview participants before collecting data. The IRB approval number for this study is

04-08-019-0660949.

Data Collection Instruments

Researchers are the primary data collection instrument in qualitative research

(Clark & Veale, 2018). Houghton, Murphy, Shaw, and Casey (2015) and Yin (2018) noted

case study evidence comes from sources such as (a) documentation, (b) archival records,

physical artifacts. The data collection instrument is an active participant in the

interviewing process and influences the conversational context that can be used to

contribute to the clarification of participant responses and can determine the type of

information gathered for the study (Clark & Veale, 2018; Yates & Leggett, 2016). Serving

as the data collection instrument, researchers collect information using structured,

unstructured or semistructured interviews to obtain data related to the participants’ real-

life experiences with the phenomenon under investigation (Saunders & Townsend, 2016).

Rule and John (2015) found the type of interview likely to generate data that will

answer the research question will depend upon the research design. As the data collection

instrument, I conducted semistructured interviews to facilitate extensive data collection,

asking participants open-ended questions related to strategies to mitigate supply chain

disruptions. I also gathered company documents such as operational procedures,

company reports, risk management plans, meeting minutes and procurement policies.

Yazan (2015) and Yin (2018) asserted company records, reports, and artifacts provide

contextual and facilitative evidence that can link data to the study.

Macdonald and Corsi (2013) used semistructured interviews to determine the

internal and external factors that influence the overall disruption of management process

in supply chains. Yin (2018) noted that semistructured interviews are valid data collection

methods and are useful in gaining insights on the research topic. Researchers use open-

ended questions to obtain detailed descriptions of the phenomenon to answer the research

question (Dikko, 2016).

Semistructured interviews are part of an interview protocol where respondents

answer preset questions associated with the research problem (Castillo-Montoya, 2016;

Yin, 2018). Qualitative researchers use an interview protocol to (a) ensure reliable and

valid data, (b) mitigate bias, (c) ensure transferability, and (d) maintain the focus of the

inquiry (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). Elswick, Casey, Zanskas, Black, and Schnell

(2016) and Yin (2018) noted that an interview protocol for a qualitative research case

study comprises (a) an overview of the research study, (b) procedures for data collection,

this study is in Appendix A and interview questions in Appendix B.

As the data collection instrument, I conducted semistructured interviews via

Skype voice. The use of Skype and telephonic platforms is cost-effective, saves time for

the researcher and participants, captures data with greater accuracy, and enables the

researcher to review recordings as needed (Shawver et al., 2016). To ensure the accuracy

of the interviews, I audio recorded the interviews using MP3 Skype recorder.

Before starting the interview, I verbally notified the participants that the interview

would be recorded, explained why I was recording, and confirmed their consent to be

recorded. Post-interview protocols include writing contextual notes, clarifying responses,

editing the transcripts, and entering the information in a general purpose software tool

(LaPelle, 2004). Researchers use general purpose software tools such as Microsoft (MS)

word and Excel to aid in the coding of the collected data. These protocols are essential to

standardize data collection and ensure effective interview and data analysis processes

(Elswick et al., 2016).

I used transcript review to enhance the reliability and validity of the data

collection process. Jordan (2018) posited validity and reliability are the central tenets of

quality research. Krotov (2016) described reliability as a measurement tool in data

collection to mitigate errors that lead to consistent results. Noble and Smith (2015)

referred to validity as study findings accurately representing the data collected pertaining

to the phenomenon. Morse (2015) described transcript review as a process whereby the

researcher provides the participants with a copy of the interview transcript to verify

accuracy, correct errors, or inaccuracies in the transcript, and clarify participant

responses. Transcript review allows respondents to ascertain the researcher has developed

an accurate report of the narratives and ensures the credibility and consistency of the

researcher’s interpretation (Yin, 2018).

After transcribing and analyzing the recorded interviews, I provided each

participant with a copy of their transcripts via email and asked them to review the

transcripts to verify correctness, validate responses, and provide clarification of the

collected data. Participants made changes and corrections as appropriate to accurately

represent their views and responses. After receiving the corrected transcripts, I re-

analyzed the interview transcripts, company documents, and peer-reviewed literature to

ensure data analysis supported research reliability, validity and credibility. Morse (2015)

postulated that transcript review improves rigor in qualitative research and researches can

enhance research data integrity by applying a structured instrumentation process to

collect and analyze data. Morse (2015) and Noble and Smith (2015) suggested

researchers invite respondents to comment on and validate transcripts to ensure final

themes and concepts accurately reflect participant responses to interview questions

pertaining to the phenomena being studied. Researchers verify interview information

with respondents to enhance the quality and credibility of data as well as establish

construct validity (Moon, 2015; Yin, 2018).

Data Collection Technique

Dikko (2016) explained the interview technique allows the researcher to use

open-ended questions to obtain data rich descriptions about the phenomenon. AlKhateeb

(2018) indicated that interviews might contribute to effective data collection by allowing

the researcher to engage respondents via face-to-face or telephone. One of the data

collection techniques I used to address my research topic was semistructured interviews.

Dikko (2016) and Brooks and Normore (2015) noted that semistructured

interviews are a favorable data collection technique and are used to capture and gain an

understanding of participant experiences, opinions, and attitudes about the phenomenon

being studied. Semistructured interviews are a prevalent data collection instrument used

in different studies to acquire rich, experiential narratives of the participants’ experiences

and perspectives, enabling the researcher to give direction and structure to the dialogue

while allowing a free and open discussion to develop (Yin, 2018). Although face-to-face

interviews are the most common data collection tools, I conducted semistructured

interviews via Skype voice. AlKhateeb (2018) and Kasprzak (2015) noted that Skype is a

cost-effective means of contacting participants outside the researcher’s geographical

location. The use of Skype voice was cost-effective and enabled me to contact

participants outside of my geographical location. Skype voice versus Skype video was

used to protect the participants’ privacy and confidentiality.

Upon receiving IRB approval, I contacted prospective participants via LinkedIn

messaging or email addresses and requested their participation. I explained to each

participant the goal and intended use of the project; reiterated their right to privacy,

confidentiality, and withdrawal; provided a copy of the consent form; and explained how

the study might benefit their firm. I told each participant that because of our different

geographic locations, the interviews would be conducted via Skype voice and would be

audio recorded using MP3 Skype recorder. Lord, Bolton, Fleming, and Anderson (2016)

and Shawver et al. (2016) indicated telephonic, or Skype platforms are cost-effective, and

qualitative researchers collect data via telephonic or Skype interviews to obtain data from

participants in distant geographical areas.

After receiving the signed informed consent forms from each participant, I

contacted selected participants via email to schedule the interviews. To mitigate intruding

upon participants, work, and personal time, I was flexible in scheduling and rescheduling

interviews. Arsel (2017) recommended taking time between interviews to enter data

collected from participants, journal preliminary findings, and journal self-reflecting

thoughts such as biases that could affect study findings. I allowed myself 45 minutes

between interviews, which provided me enough time to interpret and enter information

such as voice intonations and hesitations in my journal. Based on the need to obtain rich

data through extensive participant involvement and consultations, the semistructured

interview was used for my study. Interview protocol is in Appendix A.

Another data collection technique I used was reviewing company meeting

minutes and policy manuals provided by participants as well as publicly available

company documents. Dasgupta (2015), Yazan (2015), and Yin (2018) recommended

researchers conduct case studies using (a) organization’s strategic documents, (b)

administrative documents, (c) archived organizational reports, and (d) company policies

as forms of the study documentation. Ridder (2017) and Yazan (2015) gathered internal

communications and data from audits to understand the process of implementing new

best practice guidelines. I gathered publicly available information and documents about

strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions by searching the company website.

Company websites contain business history, press releases, company policies and

procedures, and contact information. I also searched newspaper articles and industry

magazines such as The Manufacturer and Industry Supply and reviewed documents

provided by participants. Company records and artifacts provide additional evidence that

can link data to the study (Yazan, 2015; Yin, 2018).

According to Cridland, Jones, Caputi, and Magee (2015) and Yin (2018),

advantages of open-ended semistructured interviews include providing insight about

human affairs and allows the focus to remain on the case study topic. Semistructured

interviews enable the researcher to develop rapport, listen carefully, address complex

questions; and promote the further clarification of the participants’ responses (Wolgemuth

et al., 2015). The third advantage of semistructured interviews are the direct, insightful,

and highly efficient means by which researchers collect rich, empirical data when the

phenomenon of interest has no single set of outcomes (Dikko, 2016). The advantage of

conducting interviews via telephone or Skype is the researcher has wide geographical

access to participants (AlKhateeb, 2018; Kasprzak, 2015; Lord et al., 2016). Yazan

(2015) and Yin (2018) described the advantages of document and artifact review as

follows: (a) inexpensive, (b) a source of background information that covers a long span

of time and events, (c) provides the researcher with information that may not be directly

observable, (d) may reveal issues not noted via interviews, and (e) can be unobtrusive and

non-reactive because, unlike human participants, documents do not become upset or have

other obligations.

The interview process has five disadvantages. First, as a result of extensive

arrangements in planning and scheduling interviews, developing questions, and executing

transcription and analysis, interviews can be time-consuming (Brooks & Normore, 2015).

Interviews can be time-consuming because of scheduling and rescheduling, setting up the

site and placing calls, and having abrupt interruptions. Second, interviews can be

intrusive to participants because of their personal or work time (Brooks & Normore,

2015).

Third, Yin (2018) postulated that the disadvantages of semistructured interviews

include bias due to poorly articulated questions, researcher interpretation bias, and

interviewees may have difficulty recalling the phenomenon. For instance, the researcher

may intentionally or unintentionally bias the study by asking leading interview questions

or using interviewees’ responses to confirm researchers’ beliefs. Depending on the

amount of time that has passed between the interview and the phenomenon being studied,

respondents may have difficulty recalling the event.

Fourth, AlKhateeb (2018) noted in conducting telephonic interviews researcher

miss social cues such as eye contact and body language of the interviewee. However,

researchers can use participant voice and intonation social cues, such as pauses and rise

and fall in pitch (AlKhateeb, 2018). For example, the rise in a participant’s pitch may be

an indicator of stress or being upset, or a pause could mean the participant is thinking.

Using telephonic or Skype interviews means the participant may be visible to other

employees and managers of the organization or family members, which means the

interview can be abruptly interrupted (AlKhateeb, 2018). AlKhateeb warned the use of

Skype video can be a breach of privacy and confidentiality. I utilized Skype voice versus

Skype video to protect the participants’ privacy and confidentiality.

The disadvantages to document and artifact review include (a) incomplete,

inaccurate or insufficient details, (b) unavailable, missing or outdated, (c) review process

can be time-consuming, and (d) difficult to retrieve (Yazan, 2015). Transcript review

enables participants to verify the correctness of the transcribed data (Leung, 2015).

Transcript review during data interpretation is an integral component of effective data

analysis. Yin (2018) noted that transcript review enables research participants to

determine whether the researcher prepared an accurate report of the narratives and

ensures the credibility and consistency of the researcher’s interpretation.

Researchers use transcript reviews to examine the rigor of the responses obtained

during the interviews (Moon, 2015). I provided each participant with a copy of their

transcript and asked for clarification of their responses, to verify the transcript for

accuracy, and to correct errors. By examining the transcripts, participants provide

clarification of their responses and verify the transcript for correctness and accuracy,

which is necessary for valid and reliable conclusions (Moon, 2015; Morse, 2015). Upon

receipt, I reviewed the returned transcripts. Participants made corrections and changes

regarding spelling, missing words, and explanation of technical language. The corrections

and changes did not change the results of the data analysis. Transcript review is an

effective approach to determining the credibility, validity, and reliability of research

findings (Jordan, 2018; Noble & Smith, 2015).

Data Organization Technique

Woods, Macklin, and Lewis (2016) suggested developing a data tracking system

is an important approach in qualitative data organization. Al-Rawahi and Al-Balushi

(2015) and Morse (2015) indicated an appropriate data organization system such as logs

or journals could be used to track research activities, promote reflective thinking on the

research process, and manage key information supporting data retrieval and analysis to

enhance credibility. I tracked research data including interviews, company documents,

audio recordings, and journals. I maintained a handwritten journal using a standard

journaling notebook to capture vital information collected during recording

semistructured interviews, and the review of company records.

Woods et al. (2016) maintained data tracking should include relevant contexts,

and sources and should continue through data compilation and analysis. Tracking

techniques are necessary to ensure consistency and coordination in data flow, which leads

to minimal complications in compilation, storage, and reporting (Woods et al., 2016). I

kept a reflective journal to track my learning process and any biases I had about the

research and data collected. Al-Rawahi and Al-Balushi (2015) posited that a reflective

journal allows the researcher to observe their learning processes and goals, leading to a

better understanding of themselves and their biases. Chamberlain (2016) and Raza (2016)

noted that a reflective journal should address (a) reflections on the situation to develop

information linked to the actual research experience, (b) learning skills to improve the

knowledge of the emotions and feelings developed in the study, and (c) event

interpretation to indicate the specific knowledge and insights acquired in the study.

Soares, Bastos, Rodrigues, Pereira, and Baptista (2015) described data

organization as classifying and assigning file names for stored research data with

identifiable content related references. The first step in data organization is selecting and

establishing a system for naming files (Woods et al., 2016). Andreica (2016) indicated

that a file-naming system might contain the data collection method and the collector’s

initials. I used a file-naming system entitled SSI-VB (Semistructured Interview-Vanessa

Benton) as the standard approach for identifying the entire qualitative data files. I also

used an alphanumeric labeling system (e.g., P1_092518_1700 -participant-1; interview

date; interview time) to protect participant identity. The use of special characters removes

any information that may serve as direct or indirect identifiers of respondents and their

place of employment (Kirilova & Karcher, 2017; Ross et al., 2018).

I am storing all collected data for 5 years in a fireproof safe with a combination

lock accessible only to me. Jeanes (2017) suggested storing collected data in a secure

location and destroying data after the project is completed. At the end of 5 years, I will

shred all paper documents and destroy data saved to a flash drive using Killdisk

destruction software.

Data Analysis

To gain a broader understanding of the research topic, I used methodological

triangulation for the study. Mayer (2015) found methodological triangulation is the most

commonly used form of triangulation in case studies. Fusch and Ness (2015) and Joslin

and Muller (2016) described methodological triangulation as using more than one source

(e.g., interviews, observations, questionnaires, and documents) to collect data to obtain

multiple perspectives of the phenomenon and validation of data. Yin (2018)

recommended collecting data from multiple sources to ensure the reliability and validity

of data. I reviewed company records, meeting minutes, policy manuals, procurement

policies, and analyzed data collected from semistructured interview transcripts to

corroborate findings and ensure validity and reliability. Methodological triangulation

might enable researchers to (a) obtain more insight into the research problem, (b)

minimize inadequacies and inconsistencies, (c) determine the validity and credibility of

the study by using multiple sources, and (d) analyze the data and draw more accurate

conclusions and outcomes of the research findings (Fusch & Ness, 2015; Mayer, 2015).

Sousa and Figueiredo (2014) discussed five steps to data analysis (a) cleaning and

organizing, (b) coding, (c) identifying emerging patterns and themes, (d) interpreting, and

(e) evaluating results and developing conclusions. Soares et al. (2015) indicated data

organization requires data cleansing or data scrubbing. After completing the data

collection process, I transcribed the data collected from audio recorded semistructured

interviews and data collected from company documents using MS word. LaPelle (2004)

used MS word to analyze informant interviews, case studies, focus groups, and open-

ended survey questions. MS word contains built-in functions that do not require

programming skills and has served ideally for qualitative research projects (LaPelle,

2004).

Once I completed the data transcription, I organized and cleaned the interview

data by grouping the responses to each question by grouping responses together with

question one, then grouping responses together with question two, and so on. Grouping

data having the same characteristics as other data can facilitate identifying emerging

themes and patterns (Awangga, Pane, Tunnisa, & Suwardi, 2018). I cleaned and manually

inspected the data to identify (a) inaccuracies, (b) administrative errors, (c) data entry or

coding mistakes, and (d) ensure responses to questions made sense. Azeroual, Saake, and

Schallehn (2018) posited that organizing and cleaning data would ensure the researcher

identifies and corrects errors.

Researchers should generate specific coding rules, including the use of thematic

approaches, to facilitate data categorization and analysis (Saldana, 2016; Soares et al.,

2015). By using coding rules, researchers can organize data into categories to identify

emerging themes, trends, and patterns from interviews (Saldana, 2016; Soares et al.,

2015). I used MS Excel to store, code, organize, analyze data, and identify emerging

themes. Ose (2016) suggested that researchers use MS Word and Excel spreadsheets to

record, organize, track codes, and identify themes. Although no standard structures for

data coding have been established, the researcher can adopt a coding system that will

generate relevant data based on the research and interview questions (Saldana, 2016).

Marshall and Rossman (2016) postulated qualitative researchers use coding to

facilitate identification of core concepts or themes prominent to the collected data.

Saldana (2016) and Zamawe (2015) suggested qualitative researchers design a descriptive

construct or code to translate data that attribute meaning to each datum when categorizing

and identifying patterns and themes. Saldana (2016) described coding as a process

whereby the researcher establishes the meaning of the collected data. Chen, Drouhard,

Kocielnik, Suh, and Aragon (2018) and Saldana (2016) stated that labeling, coding, and

organizing data are necessary and essential parts of qualitative research. Researchers

should label data according to the identified themes, using keywords and color coding

(Saldana, 2016; Zhang & Atallah, 2017). In my study, I focused on the strategies used to

mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain profitable, and the coding system I used

contained keywords such as supply chain management strategies, supply chain

disruptions, and profitability.

Saldana (2016) suggested researchers begin the coding process using a

combination of (a) attribute coding, which is used as a management technique; (b)

structural or holistic coding, an overview of all data; (c) descriptive coding, a detailed

content inventory of notes, document and artifacts; and (d) general-purpose software

program such as MS Word used for interview transcripts to familiarize researcher with

participants’ perspective. The coding process is described as the first cycle coding

method (Saldana, 2016). Low, Tong, and Low (2016) indicated that researchers use

manual coding procedures as a process to identify themes. For researchers unfamiliar

with computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS), Saldana (2016)

recommended researchers perform manual coding and qualitative data analysis using

pencil and paper on hard copy data that had been transcribed, entered, and formatted

using a basic word-processing software.

After organizing and cleaning the data, I implemented coding and data analysis

using pencil and paper and identified emerging patterns and key themes and drew

meaning from data collected for the study. Ose and Saldana postulated that CAQDAS

does not actually code data. The responsibility of coding is with the researcher (Ose,

2016; Saldana, 2016). I used a combination of first cycle coding methods of attributes

and descriptive coding to identify patterns and themes. After transcribing, organizing and

cleaning the data, I began the coding process by reading and reflecting on the data

transcripts. I highlighted and color-coded relevant phrases and keywords that supported

answering the research question. Data coding in qualitative studies is the basis for

developing and synthesizing data to identify and categorize themes and patterns (Fusch &

Ness, 2015). Attributes coding might enable researchers to provide participant

information for future reference and context for analysis and interpretation, whereas

descriptive coding may allow for the assigning of labels and provide an inventory of

topics for indexing and categorizing (Saldana, 2016). Saldana noted researchers should

remain open to change in case selected methods do not generate applicable data.

Saldana (2016) and LaPelle (2004) suggested researchers might use basic word-

processing software such as MS Word and Excel for data organization and qualitative

data analysis (QDA). Saldana indicated that the use of a basic word-processing software

is suitable for small-scale data collection. Ose also claimed that MS Word and Excel is

efficient when coding and analyzing four or more interviews. Using MS word and Excel

to organize and analyze the research data, I inserted text boxes and typed codes to

summarize the highlighted text to describe the data. Percy, Kostere, and Kostere (2015)

proposed reading and inserting codes in the margins or inside transcript documents might

stimulate the researcher's understanding and highlight relevant facts from the evidence

supporting the research question. I conducted a second and third iteration of the coding

process to detect additional codes to further synthesize the data. I focused on related

themes and patterns of information collected from participant interviews and publicly

available company records and documents.

After completing the coding iterations, I created a word table to collate, organize,

and summarize the main concepts to connect common themes based on participants

responses to the interview questions and input the results into an MS Excel spreadsheet to

continue my analysis. Percy et al. (2015) recommended connecting key themes and

patterns based on commonalities of participant experiences to the phenomenon. I grouped

the common themes and created a master list that supported the research question using

the trinity strategy. Clark and Veale (2018) defined trinity strategy as the discussion of the

three main patterns or themes that stand out from the data. To ensure alignment, I

reviewed and compared the data to information derived from the literature review and

conceptual framework for the study. Qualitative researchers map the relationship between

evidence and conceptual framework tenets to bridge the knowledge gap between theory

and practice (Vaughn & Turner, 2016).

Reliability and Validity

Reliability

Yin (2018) indicated the convergence of multiple sources of information such as

(a) interviews, (b) artifacts and documents, (c) questionnaires, and (d) review of the

literature enhances the reliability and validity of a study. To ensure reliability, I used data

collected from semistructured interviews, the literature review, and company documents

as sources of evidence for the study. Qualitative researchers can ensure the reliability and

trustworthiness of their study by triangulating different data sources (Fusch & Ness,

2015). I used methodological triangulation, which is described as the use of multiple data

sources such as interviews, observations, archives, and questionnaires (Joslin & Muller,

2016) to obtain multiple perspectives of the phenomenon, corroborate findings, and

ensure reliability.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) noted qualitative researchers validate rigor and

trustworthiness of the study findings using the four criteria strategy of (a) credibility, (b)

transferability, (c) dependability, and (d) confirmability. Henry (2015) postulated

dependability is a technique to establish rigor and trustworthiness in qualitative research.

Marshall and Rossman (2016) recommended transcript review, member checking, and

documentation of the research procedure to ensure research credibility and

trustworthiness.

Transcript review is described as verifying and confirming data accuracy with

participants to ensure credible and reliable account of the research findings (Morse,

2015). Moon (2015) postulated the use of transcript review to address the validity and

reliability in qualitative research encompasses (a) correction of errors and or omissions,

(b) add details participant could not recall during the interview, (c) change or rephrase a

statement, and (d) removal of statements. I had participants review their transcripts to

check for errors, verify accuracy, and clarify participants’ responses.

Validity

Kihn and Ihantola (2015), Leung (2015), and Noble and Smith (2015) referred to

validity as the rigor in which data is accurately reflected in the research process, tools

used, and findings of the research study. In qualitative research, validity involves the

researcher legitimizing and confirming data accuracy (Morse, 2015). Transcript review

and verifying data collected from multiple sources are validation strategies used by

qualitative researchers (Fusch & Ness, 2015). Validity in qualitative research ensures that

the collected data is plausible, credible, trustworthy, and defensible (Roulston & Shelton,

2015).

Credibility. Hussein (2015) and Stewart, Gapp, and Harwood (2017) referred to

credibility as the researcher establishing quality, credible, and accurate data interpretation

of research findings. Researchers use various strategies such as transcript review,

triangulation, and maintaining field notes to ensure credibility (Henry, 2015; Stewart et

al., 2017). I conducted a transcript review with each research participant to clarify and

verify the accuracy of their responses and my interpretation of the interview data.

Transcript review allows the researcher to address the issue of research validity by

inviting interviewees to examine transcripts with the objective of correcting identified

inaccuracies and errors. I confirmed data collected from semistructured interviews and

company documents with the research findings to establish credibility.

Researchers use interviews, observations, and archival information in a

methodological triangulation to attain research credibility (Henry, 2015; Stewart et al.,

2017). I established credibility by employing the methodological triangulation technique

of various data instruments, e.g., semistructured interviews, and document analysis.

Fusch and Ness (2015) described triangulation as the use of multiple data sources and

methods to support research credibility. Researchers use triangulation strategy to enhance

diverse perspectives and sources of evidence to support quality research and enhance

understanding (Fusch & Ness, 2015).

Transferability. Noble and Smith (2015) and Sund (2015) referred to

transferability as the applicability of the research findings to transfer or generalize to

other contexts and studies. To ensure transferability of the study, I provided a thorough

description of the research process, study contexts such as data collection, sampling, and

analysis techniques, and covered relevant data in the study to ensure a better

understanding of the research phenomenon. Morse (2015) and Soares et al., (2015),

recommended researchers provide rich explanations of all the research procedures, the

context of the study, and finalization of the report to ensure data is transferrable. Cope

(2014) indicated that transferability is essential if the study results are to have meaning

for individuals and readers not participating in the study. The transferability of the

findings and results of the study might apply to other studies pertaining to strategies

manufacturing firms use to mitigate supply chain disruption to remain profitable.

Confirmability. Alonso-Diaz and Yuste-Tosine (2015) and Rapport, Clement,

Doel, and Hutchings (2015) described confirmability as the researcher confirming with

other researchers that the interpretation of the data collected supports the research

findings and not personal biases. Rapport et al. (2015) posited that maintaining accurate

records, and interpretation of data are ways to limit data bias and improve research data

confirmability. Achieving confirmability of the study includes using validation

procedures, transcript review, and triangulation methods (Moon, 2015). Wamba, Akter,

Edwards, Chopin, and Gnanzou (2015) postulated maintaining an audit trail of the data

collection and analysis process demonstrates accurate confirmability and comprehensive

records of the research.

I ensured confirmability of the study by maintaining accurate records (e.g.,

handwritten notes, journals and audio recorded interviews) and careful interpretation of

the data to support the research themes. Maintaining an accurate account of audio

recorded interviews, handwritten notes, and journals can help in facilitating an objective

account of the participants’ views. Morse (2015) noted that objectivity in data

interpretation is the preferred criteria for assessing data confirmability.

Data Saturation. Data saturation is an essential component of rigor as it ensures

rich data to address the research question (Fusch & Ness, 2015; Morse, 2015; Saunders et

al., 2018). Data saturation occurs when data collected from multiple sources (e.g.,

interviews, archival review, multiple cases, archives, and observations) result in the

gathering of repeated information and additional coding is no longer feasible (Dasgupta,

2015; Fusch & Ness, 2015; Morse, 2015). Marshall and Rossman (2016) maintained that

using multiple interviews assists researchers in achieving data saturation.

Boddy (2016) indicated that depending upon the nature of the study, a sample size

of four participants might be sufficient in sampling a population having the same type of

employment. I interviewed four supply chain managers from two manufacturing firms to

obtain extensive information necessary for data saturation, enhance replicability, and

arrive at confirmable conclusions and recommendations linked to supply chain

disruptions in the manufacturing sector. Marshall and Rossman (2016) noted using

multiple interviews help researchers achieve data saturation. Researchers may ask

participants follow-up questions, which could yield additional information to accurately

understand the phenomenon (O'Connor, 2015). To ensure data saturation and support

research credibility and dependability for this study, I asked participants follow-up

questions to obtain any new perspectives or supplementary information to fully

understand the research topic. Addressing the concepts of reliability, validity,

transferability, confirmability, and data saturation in qualitative research is critical to

obtaining credible, dependable, and trustworthy study findings.

Transition and Summary

In Section 2 of the study, I discussed the purpose of the study and detailed

information on (a) my role as the researcher, (b) participants, (c) research methodology

and design, (d) population and sampling, and (e) ethical research. I discussed the data

collection process and data analysis techniques. The section contains in-depth discussions

and justifications that support decisions to ensure validity and reliability of the findings.

Section 3 contains the findings and results, applicability of the study, discussion on the

implications for social change, recommendations for future research, reflections, and the

conclusion.

Section 3: Application to Professional Practice and Implications for Change

Introduction

My purpose in this qualitative exploratory multiple case study was to explore

strategies that manufacturing firm managers use to mitigate supply chain disruptions to

remain profitable. My research findings indicated that participants had developed

strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions and build a more resilient and profitable

firm through (a) collaboration and information sharing, (b) use of multiple supplies, and

supply chain managers used a variety of mitigation strategies to achieve fit and reduce the

risk of supply chain disruptions. Data analysis, themes, and supporting documentation

provided by the participants confirmed and linked peer reviewed studies to the conceptual

framework. Macdonald and Corsi (2013) and Polonsky et al. (2016) postulated business

leaders can raise the standard of living and improve the social well-being of local

residents by catalyzing economic growth, creating jobs, and investing in the community.

The participants' shared experiences could inform other supply chain managers of

possible strategies to lessen the effects of or prevent supply chain disruptions and

maintain company profits.

Presentation of the Findings

The overarching research question for this study was: What strategies do

manufacturing firm managers use to mitigate supply chain disruptions to remain

profitable? From the overarching question, I presented seven predetermined open-ended

interview questions (see Appendix B) to participants in reference to supply chain

disruptions involving (a) strategies used, (b) barriers and challenges, (c) resources used,

(d) implementation, and (e) effectiveness. Participants consisted of four middle-to-senior

level supply chain managers from two manufacturing firms who have experience in

developing and implementing strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions. Participants

were identified with a code, such as P1, P2, etc. to protect participant and firm identities.

The identification code allowed me to present evident from participant responses while

protecting their identity. From the data collection and analysis, four themes emerged:

 Collaboration and information sharing.

 Multiple suppliers.

 Information Technology and supply chain risk.

 IT collaboration and trust.

Theme 1: Collaboration and Information Sharing

Collaboration and information sharing with supply chain partners to mitigate

disruptions in the supply chain was a reoccurring theme among the participants. Supply

chain collaboration is two or more partners in the supply chain working together to align

supply chain operations, share information, and build value-add processes and

sustainability (Chen et al., 2017). Odongo et al. (2016) and Zhu et al. (2016) posited that

information sharing and collaboration is an effective strategy that business leaders use to

mitigate the effect of disruptions in the supply chain. Researchers used CTF to build a

collaborative communications network to effectively manage and mitigate the negative

effect of a disruption on business performance (Sheffi, 2015). Evidence presented from

the collected data indicated that collaboration and information sharing is supported by the

literature review and CTF in answering the overarching research question. However, in

researching the literature, I did not find articles that addressed the alignment of

collaboration and information sharing using CTF. In reviewing, coding, and analyzing the

collected data, I concluded that all four participants indicated that collaboration,

information sharing along with trust is an important strategy to mitigate the effect of

disruptions in the supply chain.

P3 stated, “We received an unexpectedly large order from one of our customers,

but our main supplier was a small business and did not have enough of the part on hand

to fill the order.” Ho et al. (2015) maintained the success of strategies used to increase or

maintain profits may be compromised due to a disruption in the supply chain. P3 added,

“Failure to fill the order would cost the firm a huge loss in revenue.” P2 indicated that

they had ordered equipment from a supplier located overseas. P2 stated:

Although the equipment had arrived in the United States, due to the government

shutdown, the equipment sat at the port because there were no customs agents

available to clear the delivery, and we were not sure how long the shipment would

sit at the port. We resolved the issue by contacting our partners and explaining the

situation. Due to having a trusting working relationship and being in constant

communication with our supply chain partners, we were able to fill the demand.

Immediate dissemination of information enabled us to respond and resolve the

disruption quickly and prevented the firm from losing millions of dollars in

profits.

Grotsch et al. (2013) posited that supply chain disruptions are minimal when a firm can

organize quick efficient responses. Zhu et al. (2016) suggested the more collaborative

relationships managers develop with suppliers, distributors, and customers the better they

can manage and minimize the effects of a disruption in the supply chain. Odongo et al.

(2016) posited that a firm can build a well-integrated supply chain through information

sharing and having a strong and trusting mutual relationship with their partners.

P3 said, “Having to purchase the part from their partners as well as pay for the

original order had a slight effect on profits; however, had the order not been filled, we

could have lost more than a few thousand dollars in profits.” P3 also stated, “The

disruption could have cost the firm millions, possibly billions of dollars in profits and

loss of its customer base.” P2 stated, “Failure in filling the demands was not an option as

doing so would have had a negative impact on the firm’s profits.” Aggarwal and

Srivastava, (2016) posited that supply chain collaboration could reduce uncertainty

leading to superior business performance due to capitalizing on resources, capabilities,

and process of supply chain partners.

In a follow-up question, each participant was asked what type of information was

shared between the firm and their partners. Per the responses, each shared some of the

same type of information, e.g., long- and short-term forecasting, demands, delivery

schedules, and historical data. P1 stated, “Sharing this type of information enables the

firm to maintain what is needed to meet customer demands yet avoid excess inventory.”

P2 said, “Production schedules, order status, reorder points, and any delays in shipments

are shared internally and externally”. P3 stated, “Information sharing enables us to be

proactive versus reactive to changing demands, and internal sharing allows us to manage

the risk collectively versus separately, which allows us to maintain our profits.” P2 also

remarked that, “Information pertaining to order status and delays in shipment are shared

with our customers.” A review of the planning meeting minutes confirmed the responses

of P2 and P3. P1 stated, “Sharing information internally and externally allows everyone

to monitor the movement of the product, fill demands quickly, collectively resolve

problems, and implement best practices to mitigate supply chain risks, saves cost, and

maintain profits.” Participants indicated that integrating all aspects of the supply chain

helps to build stronger relationships. They also shared that collaborative efforts among all

supply chain partners can reduce the effects of a supply chain disruption. Through

information sharing, managers can maintain a tighter vertical integration of the supply

chain and minimize the effect of disruptions (Teller et al., 2016).

When asked about the barriers and strategies used to address the barriers, each

participant indicated that having a trusting collaborative relationship and culture with

their partners, suppliers, distributors, and customers is crucial. P3 stated, “Collaborating

with and having mutual trust in our partners and suppliers enables us to fill orders in a

timely manner and everyone benefits when a collaborative culture exists.” Each

participant indicated that it was important to have trust and maintain an active line of

communication with their supply chain partners and also important to have that same

relationship with their customers. P2 stated, “We contacted our customers via email to

notify them of the possible delay in delivery due to the government shutdown.” P2

continued, “We wanted to let our customers know that we were working with our supply

chain partners to ensure they [customers] received their deliveries on time.” P2 said, “It is

company policy to maintain an open line of communication with their customers and

supply chain partners.” A review of the policies and procedures documents supports P2's

statement. P2 said, “Communicating with our customers lets them know we care, and it

builds a trusting relationship, which enables us to maintain and build our customer base.”

P1 articulated, “Sharing information with our customers helps us to improve the quality

of customer service, reduce payment cycles and maintain customer trust.” Mutual trust,

effective communication, the existence of personal bonds, shared rewards and risks that

result in greater profitability and better business performance is the basis of collaboration

(Durach et al., 2015; Soosay & Hyland, 2015).

Fawcett et al. (2015) indicated that conflicts between cross-functional partners,

strategic misalignment, information hoarding, and distrust could lead to a lack of

collaboration among supply chain partners. Soosay and Hyland (2015) postulated that the

high cost of sharing information, low level of trust among supply chain partners, a

disparity in technological capability among supply chain partners, and a lack of top

management support could be major obstacles to effective supply chain collaboration.

Therefore, managers should foster inter-organizational relationships and manage

conflicting interests for effective collaboration. Teller et al. (2016) found that firms

having a collaborative relationship with supply chain partners have access to essential

resources and critical information that can minimize supply chain disruptions, which can

improve responsiveness to disruptions in the supply chain.

Riley et al. (2016) found that managing information can bolster a firm's risk

management capabilities. Having an interrelationship enables supply chain managers and

partners to share information and collaborate to mitigate supply chain risks and provide

quality customer service. Talluri et al. (2013) posited that to efficiently manage

disruptions in the supply, managers should design response efforts that focuses on

managing the flow of information (Talluri et al., 2013).

Manufacturing firm managers can achieve fit in internal and external

environments by using a variety of approaches with the focus on the effectiveness of fit

(Jiang et al., 2018). As confirmed by the findings, CTF served as the basis for firm and

supply chain partners to share information, build a mutually trusting relationship, and

have an effective collaborative communication network to mitigate disruptions in the

supply chain (Talluri et al., (2013). Talluri et al. (2013) explained that the implementation

of CTF could increase business performance and reduce the risk of disruptions in the

supply chain.

Theme 2: Multiple Suppliers

The second theme that emerged from the analyzed data was the use of multiple

suppliers. Each participant noted that having a multiple supplier base is an important

strategy they used to minimize the effects of supply-side disruptions. P2 noted that they

source from different suppliers to protect the company against supply failure by some of

their vendors. P2 stated, “Using multiple suppliers mean that we have a more agile, lean,

and flexible supply chain as well as vendors compete for our business.” P3 mentioned

that sourcing from different suppliers made the firm more agile and flexible to respond to

unexpected supply chain disruptions and enabled the firm to switch from the primary

supplier to other vendors who already supply the company.

P3 added, “Sourcing from multiple suppliers gives the firm a variety of options as

well as helps maintain a level of competition among suppliers, maintain profits, and

improves the firms’ supply chain performance.” An agile and flexible supply chain

reduces the chances of a disruption and enables the firm to gain exceptional firm

performance (Eltawy & Gallear, 2017; Hallavo, 2015). Managers can use lean practices

to leverage agility to mitigate disruptions in the supply chain (Birkie, 2016). P3

explained, “The need to have multiple suppliers was a lesson learned when our sole

source vendor was unable to provide the part we needed.” Sawik (2016) posited that

managers should develop supply chain risk management strategies that focuses on the

optimal selection of primary and recovery suppliers combined with decisions made

before, during and after the disruption.

P1 and P4s responses resonated the views of P2 and P3. P4 remarked that:

Using multiple sources enabled the company to better manage demand

fluctuations, made the company more agile and flexible, lessens the risk of being

exposed to a disruption in the supply chain, prevents the company from having to

rely on one source, improves firm performance and profits, and promotes

competition among the suppliers.

CTF is considered favorable for a firm’s overall performance and growth

(Walker, 2015). P2, P3 and P4 indicated that having multiple suppliers meant timely

deliveries and receiving quality products and services at competitive prices. P1 stated,

“Whenever possible, we purchase from a diverse group of suppliers, such as women-

owned, minority-owned, veteran-owned, disabled-owned, small business vendors etc.”

Having diverse suppliers not only promotes competition, but also benefits the community

by creating jobs, and increases salaries and spending. The participants were asked

whether they experienced barriers with having multiple suppliers. P1 stated, “Managing

multiple suppliers can be very complex, and there can be issues with selecting suppliers,

negotiating and managing contracts, and quality control issues.” To avoid disruptions in

the supply chain, managers should identify potential supplier risks (Cagnin et al., 2016).

Each participant confirmed that they had established a selection criterion. P1, P2,

and P3 indicated their selection criteria were based on the reputation and performance of

the supplier, pricing, quality of the product, and lead times. Excerpt of the procurement

policy provided by P2, indicated that:

Selection of a supplier will be coordinated by members of the Tender Committee.

Selection criteria shall address cost, quality assurance, reputation, supplier

performance, customer service, lead and delivery times, financial stability, and

past performance. The committee will score proposals using a separate scorecard

for each bid submitted. The committee chairman shall identify qualifying

suppliers based on the overall score received. A final selection will be made after

the committee has conducted a site visit and assessed the business operations of

each selectee.

Each participant indicated that the Tender Committee holds a face-to-face meeting with

the supplier(s) during contract negotiations. P2 and P3 agreed that they discuss topics

such as how the firm and vendor can benefit, timely deliveries, quality control issues,

shared risk, and information sharing. P1 indicated that the company also conducts

monthly meetings to discuss issues and areas where firm and supplier can improve. P1

stated, “Conducting monthly meetings helps to avert any potential problems, builds a

trusting relationship, and helps to improve the bottom line for the company and the

supplier.” Each participant indicated that mutual trust, collaboration and information

sharing is critical when developing a buyer-supplier relationship. Durach et al. (2015)

noted that trust and information sharing is essential to have a good buyer-supplier

working relationship. Revilla and Knoppen (2015) indicated that effective

communication, trust and information sharing can result in a more transparent buyer-

supplier relationship.

The reviewed literature and conceptual framework supports the study results that

implementing a multiple supplier base strategy not only minimizes the effect of supply

chain disruptions, but also creates a more agile, flexible, lean and profitable supply chain.

Agility, flexibility and leanness are three of the five tenets of CTF (Hallavo, 2015). An

agile and flexible supply chain can help a firm reduce the likelihood of disruptions,

quickly respond to fluctuations in customer demands, and achieve fit in an uncertain

environment (Walker, 2015). Agility in the supply chain also enables a firm to be more

competitive, which increases financial performance (Walker, 2015). A lean supply chain

is a holistic way of doing business that (a) reduces waste, (b) minimizes lead times, (c)

reduces cost, (d) enhances information sharing, and (e) improves supply chain

performance (Eltawy & Gallear, 2017; Lotfi & Saghiri, 2018). Behzad et al. (2017)

suggested that implementing CTF tenets of agility and flexibility aids a firm in adapting

to and quickly recover from supply chain disruptions.

Jensen (2017) and Tsai (2016) found that using multiple suppliers ensures timely

product delivery and functions as a barrier against disruptions in the supply chain.

Rajesh, Ravi, and Rao (2015) noted managers use multiple suppliers to guard against the

possible failure of a single source supplier. Improper management of a single supplier or

lack of financial support can harm an organization's performance (Dellana & West,

2016). The use of multiple supply sources can mitigate disruptions in the supply chain,

improve firm performance and maintain profitability. van de Ven and Drazin (1985)

speculated that optimal incorporation of strategies is dependent on how well the firm

aligns resources with the internal and external environments. Cagnin et al. (2016)

suggested that because of an increase in demands, competition and risks in the

environment, business leaders should focus more on supplier selection and sustaining

their supply chain. Manufacturing managers should ensure their supply chain is aligned

and integrated with other business units and suppliers (Behzad et al., 2017). Proper

alignment and integration of suppliers enables a firm to respond quickly to changes in the

operating environment, recover from disruptions in the supply chain, and maintain profits

(Behzad et al., 2017). Jiang et al. (2018) argued for using a variety of approaches that

focus on the effectiveness of ﬁt and the adaptation processes by which manufacturing

firm managers can achieve ﬁt in their environments. Regarding CTF, managers can

mitigate the effect of disruptions in the supply chain by adjusting order allocations

between their suppliers (Zahran et al., 2017). Managers can also maximize the firm's

business performance by selecting suppliers who can perform within the firm's internal

and external environments.

Theme 3: Information Technology and Supply Chain Risk

The third theme that emerged from the data was information technology (IT) and

supply chain risk. In conducting the interviews, all participants noted that the use of

innovative IT not only reduces disruptions in the supply chain but improves their firm’s

business performance. P3 stated, “IT enabled us to operate more efficiently, gave the

company a competitive advantage, maximized business performance, reduced supply

chain disruptions, and increased our profits.” Drnevich and Croson (2013) posited that IT

is an essential supply chain management tool as IT is effective in improving

organizational performance and increases profits. Leveraging innovative technology in

the supply chain can strengthen the supply chain against disruptions (Huang, Wu, Lu, &

Lin, 2016). P2 remarked, “IT improved our internal and external communications as well

as lowered our labor and production costs.” Using CTF, Khazanch (2005) discovered that

implementing new and innovative IT would result in positive business performance if IT

appropriateness factors matched the business and technology contexts and the internal

business environment.

P3 mentioned, “We utilize an ordering system that is compatible to our suppliers,

which reduces the risk of a disruption in their supply operations.” Sook-Ling et al. (2015)

argued that a competitive advantage, improvement in customer service and a reduction in

inventory cost can be achieved by utilizing IT applications. Tripathy et al. (2016)

recommended that as part of the firm’s IT strategy, managers should maintain an up-to-

date technology infrastructure and have an IT-based ordering system that is compatible to

the suppliers' systems.

When asked about a supply chain disruption caused by an IT failure, P1 stated,

“Our material requirements planning (MRP) and demand planning was affected by

software issues between our customized System Analysis Program (SAP) and official

SAP version updates. P1 continued, “Glitches in the customized SAP software caused

orders to disappear and had to be reordered, which created a sales backlog”. P1 added

that, “The IT department made customized SAP updates to the system before the official

SAP version was upgraded”. P1 said, “We use three supply management systems and

each time one system undergoes a change, the other systems are affected, which causes

part of our supply chain operations to fail.” P1 explained, “This happens because

everything from supply, finance, maintenance, etc. is intertwined within the Enterprise

Resource Planning System (ERP), plus the systems are not coordinated.”

I asked P1 two follow up questions: (1) “Would it not make sense to wait until the

official SAP software has been updated before running the customized version?”, and (2)

“Do IT or the other department managers not work together to let everyone know when

there’s going to be an update so everyone can monitor their individual systems?” P1

responded that, “We do not control when the official SAP software is updated, as the

vendor releases those updates, nor can we avoid applying the official updates.” As for

advanced notification or working together, P1 indicated that sometimes they (department

managers) are notified of the updates. P1 said, “It makes sense for everyone to work

together and some of us do; however, some managers seem only to be concerned about

what happens in their individual department.”

When asked what strategies can be implemented to minimize this type of

disruption, P1 suggested, “The three systems should be treated as one and when a change

or upgrade to the customized SAP is performed, conduct a regression test to ensure that

no supply chain function has been affected.” P1 explained, “The barrier to implementing

the strategy is that SAP is an expensive product and leadership would have to approve the

resources needed such as money, and additional people to make the required changes.”

Manufacturing managers should conduct a strategic review to assess whether their

vendors have the right people, processes, and technology to support the firm’s business

functions (Tse et al., 2016). P1 stated, “The firm employs IT personnel that are versed in

customizing SAP; however, due to proprietary issues it is policy that the firm have SAP

experts come in to fix system failures caused by software updates.” Based on the

extremely high salary cost, the firm does not employ SAP experts on a full-time basis. P1

indicated that the initial cost of making the needed changes would have a short-term

negative impact on profits. P1 admitted not making the changes could negatively affect

earnings in the long run as failures would cause delays in production and delivery.

P1 stated, “Senior management must change the silo culture and compel system

administrators to work together to solve the problems.” P1 continued, “The problems of

software updates and the silo mentality would eventually be addressed once the

integration of systems is achieved; however, this would take much effort in terms of

changing people and software. Doing so would lead to a more effective and efficient

supply operating system with fewer disruptions.” Having a collaborative computer-based

information system is critical because business managers strive to reduce uncertainty,

increase business performance, and achieve a competitive advantage (Aggarwal &

Srivastava, 2016).

P4 described a similar disruption that occurred due to software failure; however,

the disruption was due to a defect that was introduced by the software vendor (SW

vendor). P4 stated, “Basically, we submitted orders and assumed everything was fine

because we didn’t receive an error message; however, we did not receive confirmation

that the requests were received by the supplier. Suppliers were contacted, and we were

told they (supplier) had not received any orders.” P4 continued, “We, as well as the

supplier, doubled checked all order submissions to ensure the issue was not due to human

error. Per company policy, the IT department checked the system and discovered the

problem was a failure with the software.”

P4 stated, “The SW vendor was contacted, and we were told the SW vendor is

aware there was a problem with the updated software; however, the vendor failed to

notify us about the issue, which was a shortcoming on the part of the SW vendor.” P4

remarked, “We had two options (strategies) to resolve the issue: (1) reload the previous

version of the software to remove the newer version’s defect and resubmit the orders, or

(2) revert to using manual procedures, e.g., call suppliers and place orders until the issue

was resolved.” P4 stated, “The decision was to combine the strategies.” The firm reverted

to manual procedures while the previous version of the software was being reloaded and

tested to ensure it would work. P4 explained that, “In the event the reload did not work,

manual procedures would enable us to fill customer demands while waiting for the SW

vendor to resolve the issue.” I asked P4 how often a system back-up was conducted? P4

replied, “System back-ups were conducted monthly; however, after the disruptive event,

the firm increased the frequency of system back-ups to bi-weekly in the event recovery

was needed." An extract from the company policy and procedures manual provided by P4

confirmed that the IT department would perform a system back-up on a bi-weekly basis.

Implementing a system back-up strategy makes system recovery easier, lessens

downtime, and gives the firm a competitive advantage (Akhtar, Buchholtz, Ryan, &

Setty, 2012).

Theme 4: IT Collaboration and Trust

Collaboration is an important strategy that business leaders use to recover from

disruptions in the supply chain (Zhu et al., 2016). Arora et al. (2016) posited that supply

chain transformation occurs when firms are integrated and collaborative. P1 and P4

mentioned the issue of collaboration and trust. P1 indicated not only should the firm’s

three systems be coordinated and treated as one, but organizational behavior should

change. P1 stated, “Having independent systems has become virtual silos and project

managers and administrators’ personalities do not lend to collaborative efforts.” P1

remarked that, “Not sharing when one of the systems is being updated appears as if some

managers don’t care if or how the other departments are affected, which causes trust

issues within the organization.” P4 said, “Glitches in software happens; however, the

behavior of the vendor who should have been concerned with the integrity of its product,

and maintaining a trusting relationship was unacceptable.” P4 continued, “As soon as the

SW vendor realized there was an issue, vendor management should have ensured that

everyone using that version of the software was contacted and provided a copy of the

previous version so operations could continue with minimal to no disruptions.”

Information hoarding and distrust can be a barrier to an efficient supply chain (Fawcett et

al., 2015). P1 stated, “Not only should there be internal collaboration of the updates, but

there should also be a level of trust between managers and administrators.” P1 indicated

the need for collaboration is highlighted because expertise had become localized for each

system. P1 said, “Specific fixes in the system can only be done by the individual

departments’ experts while other repairs are outsourced to the SAP vendor.” P1

continued, “All systems experts should be notified when customized changes are taking

place so we can monitor our systems and be prepared for possible disruptions.” P4 noted

that software vendors should be mindful that knowingly providing customers with

software containing virus’ or faults is unethical and can cause harm to the firms’ IT

infrastructure and business.

Supply chain disruptions can be a result of changes in government regulatory

guidance, labor strikes, poor communications among suppliers and manufacturers, IT

issues, and operational problems (Macdonald & Corsi, 2013). Supply chains are not static

and vary in size, shape, and configuration due to technology changes, emergence of new

products and market niches (MacCarthy et al., 2016). Supply chain managers can

recognize how technology and market changes affect the firm's organizational and supply

chain performance.

Tripathy et al. (2016) studied the structural relationship between IT, logistic

effectiveness, operational efficiency, customer relations, supplier relations and

competitive advantage. Tripathy et al. (2016) found IT is critical in achieving a

competitive advantage. For example, if a terrorist attack or hurricane caused a disruption

in several manufacturing firms IT infrastructure, the first company that comes back

online and resumes operations would have the competitive advantage. Failure in a firm's

IT infrastructure, the cost of innovative technology, and compatibility of IT solutions to

partners can affect a firm's performance and profitability. Operational efficiency, which is

the fourth tenet of CTF can be obtained by using the latest technology to streamline

communications with suppliers and customers, simplify supply chain processes, lower

costs, and increase growth and profitability (Walker, 2015).

Applications to Professional Practice

I conducted a qualitative exploratory multiple case study to explore strategies

manufacturing firm managers used to mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain

profitable. Based on the data collected, four themes emerged from the data analysis. My

study findings might aid manufacturing firm managers in the improvement of business

practices using CTF, and providing the required information needed to mitigate the

effects of disruptions in the supply chain. The use of CTF has been referred to as being

suitable and beneficial for the overall performance and growth of the firm (Walker,

2015). Talluri et al. (2013) indicated mitigating supply chain disruptions is a crucial

element in a supply chain manager’s risk management strategy. Ambulkar et al. (2015)

posited that manufacturing firm managers could make their firm more resilient and

100

competitive by managing disruption risks. Disruptions in the supply chain can cause a

loss in sales and a loss of the firm’s customer base, which can negatively affect the firm’s

profits; therefore, it is crucial that the firm have various mitigation strategies to reduce

the effect of supply chain disruptions (Sawik, 2019).

Based on participant responses to semistructured interview questions, and review

of company policies and procedure documents, my findings indicated that having a

strong collaborative relationship and information sharing policy between the firm,

suppliers, and supply chain partners is a crucial business practice and strategy used to

mitigate disruptions in the supply chain. Supply chain managers can foster collaborative

relationships to prevent and mitigate the negative affect of disruptions in the supply

chain. For example, if a warehouse fire or flood delays a shipment from the primary

supplier, the information can be shared among supply chain managers, partners and other

suppliers to locate the needed product to fill customer demands in a timely manner.

Swanson, Jin, Fawcett, and Fawcett (2017) argued that managers seek integrative and

collaborative efforts to cope with uncertainties, share costs, and minimize risks. Huang et

al. (2015) and Riley et al. (2016) found that supply chain managers who control

information flow and engage in collaborative activities can (a) save on costs, (b) spread

risk between the firm and supply chain partners, (c) allow more flexibility to market

changes, and (d) reduce the effect of disruptions on business performance. From this

study, managers might learn the use of best practices to find and implement a better way

to communicate and collaborate with suppliers and supply chain partners to effectively

reduce disruptions.

101

Managers who have a multiple supplier-base strategy and implement innovative

IT compatible with suppliers, can mitigate supply-side disruptions. Based on my findings,

purchasing from one supplier is not always a wise decision as the supplier might be

unable to fulfill the order or go out of business. Having a multiple and diverse supplier

base ensures lower production cost, quality products at affordable prices, and a stable

source of supply. The use of multiple suppliers protects against the possible failure of a

single supplier and ensures timely delivery of products (Jensen, 2017; Rajesh et al., 2015;

Tsai, 2016). I found the selection of a supplier should be based on more factors than

price. Other considerations for supplier selection are (a) reliability, (b) financial stability,

selection criteria enables the firm to identify potential supplier risks and mitigate

disruptions.

Implementing a multiple supplier base makes a firm more agile and flexible, and

reduces the possibility of a disruption; thereby improving the firm’s business

performance (Eltawy & Gallear, 2017; Hallavo, 2015). I ascertained that having a good

multiple supplier base, and up-to-date IT that is compatible with the supplier improves

performance, enhances growth and profitabily, and promotes competition among

suppliers by providing the firm with a variety of options. Huang et al. (2016) suggested

that capitalizing on innovative IT strengthens the supply chain against disruptions.

Magutua et al., (2015) postulated that innotative IT improves a firm's performance by

88%. Implementing strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions can aid companies in

lowering production costs, providing quality products and services, and maintaining

102

profits (Chakravarty, 2013). A reduction in production costs and risks translates to firms

being more competitive and profitable, with the ability to offer quality goods and services

to consumers at affordable prices. Profitable firms can empower consumers buying power

by producing affordable products, which leads to an increase in spending in the local

community. The more empowered society becomes, the higher the return on investment

(ROI) is for the firm. The ROI for the firm can lead to increased profits that attract

investment capital for business expansion.

The information provided in the findings of this study may contribute to the

improvement of a manufacturing firm's business practices and can increase supply chain

managers' knowledge and awareness of strategies to reduce the effect of supply chain

disruptions. The findings and recommendations of my study might contribute to existing

and future research and fill the knowledge gap in employing collaborative processes for

minimizing the effect of disruptions in the supply chain. Furthermore, my study might be

used to explore the causes of and precursors to disruptions in the supply chain and

develop standards for maintaining a sustainable supply chain.

Implications for Social Change

Successful business leaders can contribute to the improvement of social

conditions and human life by creating more jobs, improving economic growth, and

sustaining the environment (Polonsky et al., 2016). Disruptions in a manufacturing firm's

supply chain might result in product recalls, which can have a negative effect on business

performance (Chaudhuri, Mohanty, & Singh, 2013). Supply chain managers can improve

SCRM by implementing mitigation strategies that can lead to (a) an efficient supply

103

chain, (b) production of quality goods, (b) reduction in recalls, (c) increased revenues,

and (d) investing in the local community. By utilizing innovative mitigation strategies,

information technology, and proper execution of cost associated with risk, manufacturing

firms can have a more efficient and effective supply chain.

This study might contribute to positive social change by providing managers

knowledge of tactics to help reduce production costs, mitigate risk in the supply chain,

and investment in the community. A reduction in production cost might lead to offering

quality goods and services to consumers at affordable prices. Business leaders could use

surplus profits from the sale of goods and services for business expansion. Business

expansion could lead to employment opportunities, investments in social service projects

such as job training, and nutrition and housing programs for low-income families. An

increase in employment and salaries could lead to increased consumer spending. Job

training and nutrition and housing programs could lead to the employment of unskilled

workers, the feeding and housing of the homeless and low-income families; thereby

raising the standard of living and social well-being of local community residents.

Recommendations for Action

van de Ven and Drazin, (1985) found a disruption in the supply chain indicates a

lack of fit between the internal and external operating environment. Disruptions in a

manufacturing firm’s supply chain can be costly; therefore, management needs to

evaluate risks in the supply chain and develop efficient mitigation strategies (Chaudhuri

et al., 2013). Jiang et al. (2018) recommended using a variety of approaches that focus on

the effectiveness of ﬁt and the adaptation processes by which manufacturing firm

104

managers can achieve ﬁt in their environments. The business problem addressed in this

study was that some manufacturing firm managers lack strategies to mitigate supply

chain disruptions to remain profitable. In this study, I found participants used a variety of

strategies to mitigate disruptions in the supply chain. Based on the findings of this study,

I propose the following strategies manufacturing firm and supply chain managers could

implement to mitigate disruptions, maintain profits, and improve business performance:

• Adopt a systematic strategic approach to mitigating supply chain

disruptions by identifying risks and causes of the risks, the impact, and

drivers. Track risk drivers and select the best strategy to reduce the

disruption risk as per the level of risk and uncertainty.

• Establish a trusting, collaborative information sharing and

communications relationship internally and externally through quarterly

meetings and conference calls. Discussions should include ways to

improve the buyer-supplier relationship, performance and risk-sharing.

• Use e-collaborative tools such as web-based conferencing or chat tools to

improve communication and information sharing within the supply chain.

• Integrate and treat separate supply chain systems as one structure to

prevent failures when software updates occur.

• Change organizational behavior and the silo culture to ensure project

managers and administrators work together to solve system errors.

• Initiate and invest in supplier development and reward programs to

improve buyer-supplier relationships that aid in motivating the supplier to

105

improve performance in terms of pricing, product quality, delivery

commitments, and loyalty.

This study could be useful to manufacturing industry leaders and managers in

developing and managing SCRM strategies that can lessen the effect of supply chain

disruptions. The scholarly community and supply chain managers could also use the

findings in this study toward research and the advancement of knowledge in supply chain

risk management. After publication, a summary of the research results will be shared

with participants. I will also disseminate research results at professional development

workshops and logistics conferences. I will make this study available to other scholars,

practitioners, and researchers via publication through ProQuest and supply chain

management journals.

Recommendations for Further Research

Tse et al. (2016) defined supply chain disruption as an unintended, unexpected

event that occurs within the internal or external supply chain interrupting the flow of

goods and services, which threaten normal supply chain operations. Managing disruption

risk has become a vital part of SCRM strategy. The low-probability and high-impact flow

disruptions as well as possible loss in revenue threatens the financial state of firms (Zhu

et al., 2016). For example, the disruptive events of 2011 in the automotive and electronics

supply chains resulted in profit losses for major automakers and electronics

manufacturers (Haraguchi & Lall, 2015).

Mitigating risk in the supply chain is a critical component of a firm's overall risk

management strategy and performance. Using CTF, Talluri et al. (2013) posited that

106

appropriateness and effectiveness of risk mitigation strategies are contingent on the

internal and external environments and no one strategy works for every supply chain. The

literature on risk management proposed a variety of strategies and techniques for

effectively evaluating, managing, and mitigating supply chain risks. However, in

conducting the study, I discovered risk mitigation strategies that had not been addressed

or sufficiently addressed. I recommend further research on strategies manufacturing firm

managers can use to mitigate supply chain disruptions and remain profitable by:

• Assessing the efficiencies of alternative risk management strategies. Such

assessments could help in the selection of the appropriate mitigation

strategy in an operating environment.

• Investigating how supply chain disruptions affects a firm’s profitability as

this topic is not adequately covered in the literature.

• Researching how CTF aligns with collaboration and information sharing

and how CTF improves a firm’s business performance and profitability.

• Exploring the reciprocity and collective outcomes of collaboration

between the manufacturing firm, suppliers, and supply chain partners.

• Querying managers as to what mitigation strategies did or did not work in

the past and why. By doing so, researchers could discover ways to

improve upon current strategies.

• Examining the implementation and adoption of technology versus the use

of technology to mitigate supply chain disruptions.

107

One limitation for my study was that the supply chain managers were located in

the southern region of eastern Virginia. Other researchers could widen the research scope

to other geographical areas. A second limitation was the sample size. Depending on the

study a sample size of four to 10 participants of a homogenous population might be

sufficient to obtain data saturation (Boddy, 2016). Increasing the participant sample size

could help with in-depth explorations regarding useful and practical risk management

strategies across the manufacturing industry. A larger sample can be used by other

researchers in determining whether the results are similar. However, in qualitative

research, no set rules exist for determining sample size as the size will depend on what

the researcher wants to know, the credibility of the participants and collected data, and

whether the information collected is useful in answering the research question (Blaikie,

2018; Roy et al., 2015). Other researchers may consider using mixed methods or the

quantitative method. The quantitative method could be used to examine the rate of

performance for each strategy in minimizing and preventing the effect of disruptions in

the supply chain.

Reflections

In pursuit of my doctoral degree, I not only acquired skills on an academic level,

but learned and reaffirmed several things about myself. During this pursuit, I knew time

management was the key to completing this journey. I had to prioritize and balance

multiple responsibilities such as school, work, personal organizational activities, friends,

and personal time.

108

Going through the DBA process improved my critical thinking skills. I learned

how to write in a scholarly manner, how to synthesize, and to be more observant of what

I read. This journey gave me a new perspective on how to be patient and never give up on

my goals. The continued pursuit of one's goals is not only the key to achieving academic

success but is also the key to achieving overall success in life. I currently work in the

logistical field for the U.S. military and worked as a logistician while serving in the

military. I had preconceived ideas or biases about supply chain disruptions and strategies

to mitigate risk in the supply chain. My preconceived ideas were about forecasting,

information sharing, and purchasing equipment. For example, item managers forecast

demands 12 to 24 months out, and set a reorder point to ensure shelves are well stocked.

This avoids having long customer wait times. Items managers are also notified at least 36

months in advance when a part or piece of equipment will be upgraded or replaced. This

information enables the item manager to work with research and development to forecast

stock levels and set reorder points. However, while conducting my research I realized

that I was looking at this from the military side versus the manufacturers’ side as most

manufacturing companies do not have customers the size of or have equipment similar to

the military. This epiphany reaffirmed that I am able to place objectivity over my

personal bias and that my outcomes must be based on facts and evidence versus my own

ideas, beliefs, and opinions. This discovery is not only true for academic research but also

accurate for life and the judgment of individuals. I enjoy conducting research and was

fascinated by the literature review, data collection process, and my discoveries on supply

chain disruptions. The literature and data I collected provided me with a better

109

understanding of why an organization should have more than one source of suppliers, and

the importance of ensuring the organization has strategies in place to mitigate supply

chain disruptions. Interviewing participants also provided me with a better understanding

of what supply chain managers face as it pertains to organizational decisions that affect

the implementation and execution of supply chain risk management strategies.

Finally, the doctoral journey was not an easy road to travel; if it were, everyone

would take the journey. However, without my chair's excellent feedback, encouragement,

and long talks as well as support from family, friends, and classmates, I would have given

up a long time ago. Thanks again for all the support. I expect the findings of this study

may contribute to an increased understanding of supply chain risk management and

mitigating supply chain disruptions. My experiences during the process were frightening,

enlightening, exciting, and thought-provoking and I am happy I chose to take the journey.

Conclusion

Wieland, Handfield, and Durach (2016) posited that effective SCRM strategies

have become one of the most crucial topics in supply chain research. The emergence of

complex supply networks in conjunction with a turbulent business environment has

significantly increased the vulnerability of supply chains (Durach et. al., 2017). Changes

in an uncertain business environment contribute to destabilize supply chains (Tiwari,

Tiwari, & Samuel, 2015). Supply chain disruptions are not entirely preventable.

However, supply chain managers can take measures to ensure products continually move

through the supply chain to fill customer demands.

110

My research for this study led to an extensive investigation of supply chain

disruptions that affect business performance and improve profits. I focused on examining

the underlying factors of supply chain disruptions in the manufacturing sector and

developing and implementing strategies necessary to mitigate the disruptions. Based on

findings in the study, disruptions in the supply chain could have significant detrimental

effects such as loss of products, services, profits and consumers, and increased

production costs. Supply chain disruptions could increase business costs and negatively

affect a firm’s profitability (Tang, Yang, Cao, & Lai, 2018).

The findings also indicated that to manage supply chain risks supply chain and

manufacturing managers need to have a better understanding of (a) their internal and

external operating environments, (b) finance, (c) personnel, and (d) supply chain partners

to implement and execute risk management strategies. Using CTF as the conceptual

framework, I explored strategies supply chain managers could use to achieve the desired

level of fit within the supply chain. Analyzing data from semistructured interviews and

reviewing company documents led to four themes as collaboration and information

sharing, multiple suppliers, IT and supply chain risks, and collaboration and trust as

crucial elements used in mitigating supply chain disruptions.

Based on the findings, supply chain managers need to understand the sources of

disruption risk, assess the effect of the risk, and select an appropriate strategy based on

the level of uncertainty and risk. Supply chain managers could reduce and mitigate the

effects of disruptions in the supply chain by collaborating and sharing information with

partners and suppliers, using a multiple supplier base, and using up-to-date IT. Each of

111

the aforementioned can aid the firm in improving (a) growth, (b) performance and profits,

research findings have the potential for economic and social change as manufacturing

firm leaders can use surplus profits for business expansion. Business expansion can lead

to job creation for the local community, increased salaries for community residents,

investing in community development such as nutrition and housing programs, and

economic growth.

112

References

Aczel, P. (2015). Case study method. International Journal of Sales, Retailing and

Marketing, 4(9), 15-22. Retrieved from http://www.ijsrm.com/IJSRM/home.html

Aggarwal, S., & Srivastava, M. K. (2016). Towards a grounded view of collaboration in

Indian agro-food supply chains: A qualitative investigation. British Food Journal,

118, 1085-1106. doi:10.1108/BFJ-08-2015-0274

Akhtar, A. N., Buchholtz, J., Ryan, M., & Setty, K. (2012). Database backup and

recovery best practices. ISACA Journal, 1, 1-6. Retrieved from

https://www.isaca.org

Alcantara, P., Riglietti, G., & Aguada, L. (2017). BCI supply chain resilience report

2017. Retrieved from https://www.thebci.org

AlKhateeb, M. (2018). Using Skype as a qualitative interview medium within the context

of Saudi Arabia. The Qualitative Report, 23, 2253-2260. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu

Alonso-Diaz, L., & Yuste-Tosine, R. (2015). Constructing a grounded theory of e-

learning assessment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53, 315-344.

doi:10.1177/0735633115597868

Al-Rawahi, N. W., & Al-Balushi, S. M. (2015). The effective reflective science journal

writing on students’ self-regulated learning strategies. International Journal of

Environmental & Science Education, 10, 367-379. doi:10.1293/ijese.2015.250a

Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. (2015). Firm’s resilience to supply chain

113

disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations

Management, 33-34, 111-122. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2014.11.002

Anderson, V. (2017). Criteria for evaluating qualitative research. Human Resource

Development Quarterly, 28, 125-133. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21282

Andreica, A. (2016). Applying equivalence algorithms in solving pattern matching

problems. Case study for expert system design. International Journal on

Computer Science & Information Systems, 11, 255-259. Retrieved from

http://www.iadisportal.org/

Arora, A., Arora, A. S., & Sivakumar, K. (2016). Relationships among supply chain

strategies, organizational performance, and technological and market turbulences.

International Journal of Logistics Management, 27, 206-232.

doi:10.1108/IJLM-09-2013-0103

Arsel, Z. (2017). Asking questions with reflexive focus: A tutorial on designing and

conducting interviews. Journal of Consumer Research, 44, 939-948.

doi:10.1093/jcr/ucx096

Awangga, R. M., Pane, S. F., Tunnisa, K., & Suwardi, I. S. (2018). K means clustering

and meanshift analysis for grouping the data for coal term in Puslitbang

tekMIRA. Telkomnika, 16, 1351-1357. doi:10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v16i3.8910

Azeroual, O., Saake, G., & Schallehn, E. (2018). Analyzing data quality issues in

research information systems via data profiling. International Journal of

Information Management, 41, 50-56. doi:10.1016/j.ijifomgt.2018.02.007

Barnham, C. (2015). Quantitative and qualitative research: Perceptual foundations.

114

International Journal of Market Research, 57, 837-854. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2015-

070

Behzad, G., O’Sullivan, M. J., Olsen, T. L., Scrimgeour, F., & Zhang, A. (2017). Robust

and resilient strategies for managing supply disruptions in an agribusiness supply

chain. International Journal of Production, 191, 207-220.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.06.018

Bell, J. E., Mollenkopf, D. A., & Stolze, H. J. (2013). Natural resource scarcity and the

closed-loop supply chain: A resource-advantage view. International Journal of

Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43, 351-379.

doi:10.1108/IJPDLM0320120092

Benoot, C., Hannes, K., & Bilsen, J. (2016). The use of purposeful sampling in a

qualitative evidence synthesis: A worked example on sexual adjustment to a

cancer trajectory. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16(1), 21-32.

doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0114-6

Bidhandi, R. A., & Valmohammadi, C. (2016). Effects of supply chain agility on

profitability. Business Process Management Journal, 23, 1064-1082.

doi:10.1108/BPMJ-052016-0089

Birkie, S. E. (2016). Operational resilience and lean: In search of synergies and trade-

offs. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 27, 185-207.

doi:10.1108/JMTM-07-2015-0054

115

Blaikie, N. (2018). Confounding issues related to determining sample size in qualitative

research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25, 635-641.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2018.1454644

Boddy, C. R. (2016). Sample size for qualitative research. Qualitative Market Research:

An International Journal, 19, 426-432. doi:10.1108/QMR-06-2016-0053

Bolton, R. (2015). Qualitative research methods for community development. Journal of

Regional Science, 55, 682-684. doi:10.1111/jors.12216

Bristowe, K., Selma, L., & Murtagh, F. E. M. (2015). Qualitative research methods in

renal medicine: A introduction. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 30, 1424-

1431. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfu410

Brooks, J. S., & Normore, A. H. (2015). Qualitative research and educational leadership:

Essential dynamics to consider when designing and conducting

studies. International Journal of Educational Management, 29, 798-806.

doi:10.1108/IJEM-06-2015-0083

Bugert, N., & Lasch, R. (2018). Supply chain disruption models: A critical review.

Logistics Research, 11(5), 1-35. doi:10.23773/2018_5

Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018). Manufacturing: NAICS 31-33. Retrieved from

https://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag31-33.htm

Cagnin, F., Oliveira, M. C., Simon, A. T., Helleno, A. L., & Vendramini, M. P. (2016).

Proposal of a method for selecting suppliers considering risk management.

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 33, 488-498.

doi:10.1108/IJQRM-11-2014-0172

116

Castillo–Montoya, M. (2016). Preparing for interview research: The interview protocol

refinement framework. The Qualitative Report, 21, 811-830. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu

Celestina, M. (2018). Between trust and distrust in research with participants in conflict

context. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21, 373-383.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2018.1427603

Chakravarty, V. (2013). Managing a supply chain’s web of risk. Strategy & Leadership,

41, 39-45. doi:10.1108/10878571311318231

Chamberlain, R. P. (2016). Five steps toward recognizing and mitigating bias in the

interviewing and hiring process. Strategic HR Review, 15, 199-203.

doi:10.1108/SHR-07-2016-0064

Chang, W., Ellinger, A. E., & Blackhurst, J. (2015). A contextual approach to supply

chain risk mitigation. International Journal of Logistics Management, 26, 642-

656. doi:10.1108/IJLM-02-2014-0026

Chaudhuri, A., Mohanty, B. K., & Singh, K. N. (2013). Supply chain risk assessment

during new product development: A group decision making approach using

numeric and linguistic data. International Journal of Production Research, 51,

2790-2804. doi:10.1080/00207543.2012.654922

Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jacobs, M., & Feng, M. (2017). Manufacturing capability and

organizational performance: The role of entrepreneurial orientation. International

Journal of Production Economics, 184, 33-46. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.10.028

Chen, L., Zhao, X., Tang, O., Price, L., Zhang, S., & Zhu, W. (2017). Supply chain

117

collaboration for sustainability: A literature review and future research agenda.

International Journal of Production Economics, 194, 72-87.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.04.005

Chen, N. C., Drouhard, M., Kocielnik, R., Suh, J., & Aragon, C. R. (2018). Using

machine learning to support qualitative coding in social sciences: Shifting the

focus to ambiguity. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 8(2), 1-

20. doi:10.1145/3185515

Chowdhury, M., & Quaddus, M. (2016). Supply chain readiness, response and recovery

for resilience. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 21, 709-731.

doi:10.1108/scm-12-2015-0463

Chowdhury, P., Lau, C., & Pittayachawan, S. (2016). Supply risk mitigation of small and

medium enterprises: A social capital approach. Paper presented at the 21

ISL

conference, Kaohsiung, Tawian. doi:10.13140/RG2.2.23117.03045

Clark, K. R., & Veale, B. L. (2018). Strategies to enhance data collection and analysis in

qualitative research. Radiologic Technology, 89, 482CT-485CT. Retrieved from

http://www.radiologictechnology.org

Clemons, R., & Slotnick, S. (2016). The effect of supply-chain disruption, quality and

knowledge transfer on firm strategy. International Journal of Production

Economics, 178, 169-186. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.05.012

Cope, D. G. (2014). Methods and meanings: Credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative

research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41, 89-91. doi:10.1188/14.ONF.89-91

Cridland, E. K., Jones, S. C., Caputi, P., & Magee, C. A. (2015). Qualitative research

118

with families living with autism spectrum disorder: Recommendations for

conducting semistructured interviews. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental

Disability, 40, 78-91. doi:10.3109/13668250.2014.964191

Cruz, R. M. O., Sabourin, R., & Cavalcanti, G. D. C. (2018). Dynamic classifier

selection: Recent advances and perspectives. Information Fusion, 41, 195-216.

doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2017.09.010

Dasgupta, M. (2015). Exploring the relevance of case study research. Vision, 19, 147-160.

doi:10.1177/0972262915575661

Dellana, S., & West, D. (2016). Survival analysis of supply chain financial risk. Journal

of Risk Finance, 17, 130-151. doi:10.1108/JRF-11-2015-0112

Department of Health and Human Services. (1979). The Belmont Report. Ethical

principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. The

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and

Behavioral Research. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov

Devine, E. G., Knapp, C. M., Sarid-Segal, O., O'Keefe, S. M., Wardell, C., Baskett, M.,

& Ciraulo, D. A. (2015). Payment expectations for research participation among

subjects who tell the truth, subjects who conceal information, and subjects who

fabricate information. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 41, 55-61.

doi:10.1016/j.cct.2014.12.004

Dikko, M. (2016). Establishing construct validity and reliability: Pilot testing of a

qualitative interview for research in Takaful (Islamic Insurance). The Qualitative

Report, 21, 521-528. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu

119

Dodgson, J. E. (2017). About research: Qualitative methodologies. Journal of Human

Lactation, 33, 356-358. doi:10.1177/0890334417698693

Donges, W. (2015). A qualitative case study: The lived educational experiences of former

juvenile delinquents. Qualitative Report, 20, 1009-1028. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu

Drabble, L., Trocki, K. F., Salcedo, B., Walker, P. C., & Korcha, R. A. (2016).

Conducting qualitative interviews by telephone: Lessons learned from a study of

alcohol use among sexual minority and heterosexual women. Qualitative Social

Work, 15, 118-133. doi:10.1177/1473325015585613

Drnevich, P. L., & Croson, D. C. (2013). Information technology and business-level

strategy: Toward an integrated theoretical perspective. MIS Quarterly, 37, 483-

509. Retrieved from http://www.misq.org

Durach, C., Glasen, P., & Straube, F. (2017). Disruption causes and disruption

management in supply chains with Chinese suppliers. International Journal of

FPhysical Distribution & Logistics Management, 47, 843-863.

doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-07-2017-0228

Durach, C. F., Wieland, A., Jose, A. D., & Machuca, J. A. (2015). Antecedents and

dimensions of supply chain robustness: A systematic literature review.

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 45, 118-

137. doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2013-0133

Eckstein, D., Goellner, M., Blome, C., & Henke, M. (2015). The performance impact of

120

supply chain agility and supply chain adaptability: The moderating effect of

product complexity. International Journal of Product Research, 53, 3028-3046.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.970707

Elman, C., Gerring, J., & Mahoney, J. (2016). Case study research: Putting the quant into

the qual. Sociological Methods & Research, 45, 375-391.

doi:10.1177/0049124116644273

Elswick, S., Casey, L. B., Zanskas, S., Black, T., & Schnell, R. (2016). Effective data

collection modalities utilized in monitoring the good behavior game: Technology-

based data collection versus hand collected data. Computers in Human

Behavior, 54, 158-169. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.059

Eltawy, N., & Gallear, D. (2017). Leanness and agility: A comparative theoretical view.

Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117, 149-165. doi:10.1108/IMDS-01-

2016-0032

Eriksson, P. E. (2015). Partnering in engineering projects: Four dimensions of supply

chain integration. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Chain Management, 27, 38-

50. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2014.08

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling

and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.

doi:10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Fawcett, S. E., McCarter, M. W., Fawcett, A. A., Webb, G. S., & Magnan, G. M. (2015).

Why supply chain collaboration fails: The socio-structural view of resistance to

relational strategies. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 20,

121

648-663. doi:10.1108/SCM-08-2015-0331

Fisher, M. L. (1997). What is the right supply chain for your product? Harvard Business

Review, 75, 105-116. Retrieved from https://hbr.org

Franks, T. M. (2017). Breaching ethics for the sake of a “good” interview. Journal of

Applied Communication Research, 45, 352-357.

doi:10.1080/00909882.2017.132570

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative

research. Qualitative Report, 20, 1408-1416. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu

Gammelgaard, B. (2017).

Editorial: The qualitative case study. The International Journal

of Logistics Management, 28, 910-913. doi:10.1108/IJLM-09-2017-0231

Gaudenzi, B., Zsidisin, G. A., Hartley, J. L., & Kaufmann, L. (2018). An exploration of

factors influencing the choice of commodity price risk mitigation strategies.

Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 24, 218-257.

doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2017.01.004

Gile, K. J., Johnston, L. G., & Salganik, M. J. (2015). Diagnostics for respondent‐driven

sampling. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society),

178, 241-269. doi:10.1111/rssa.12059

Gligor, D. (2016). The role of supply chain agility in achieving supply chain fit. Decision

Sciences, 47, 524-547. doi:10.1111/deci.12205

Graham, S. (2018). Antecedents to environmental supply chain strategies: The role of

122

internal integration and environmental learning. International Journal of

Production Economics, 197, 283-296. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.01.005

Grant, E., Salmon, P. M., Stevens, H. J., Goode, N., & Read, G. J. (2018). Back to the

future: What do accident causation models tell us about accident prediction?

Safety Science, 104, 99-109. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.12.018

Gresov, C. (1989). Exploring Fit and Misfit with Multiple Contingencies. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 34, 431-453. doi:10.2307/2393152

Grotsch, V. M., Blome, C., & Schepler, M. C. (2013). Antecedents of proactive supply

risk management: A contingency theory perspective. International Journal of

Production Research, 15, 2842-2867. doi:10.1080/00207543.2012.746796

Gualandris, J., & Kalchschmidt, M. (2015). Supply risk management and competitive

advantage: A misfit model. International Journal of Logistics Management, 26,

459-478. doi:10.1108/IJLM-05-2013-0062

Hagaman, A. K., & Wutich, A. (2017). How many interviews are enough to identify

metathemes in multisited and cross–cultural research? Another perspective on

Guest, Bunce, and Johnson’s (2006) Landmark Study. Field Methods, 29(1), 23-

41. doi:10.1177/1525822X16640447

Hallavo, V. (2015). Superior performance through supply chain fit: A synthesis. Supply

Chain Management: An International Journal, 20, 71-82. doi:10.1108/SCM-05-

2014-0167

Halley, A., & Nollet, J. (2002). The supply chain: The weak link for some preferred

123

suppliers? Journal of Supply Chain Management, 38, 39-47. doi:10.1111/j.1745-

493x.2002.tb00134x

Han, X., Wu, H., Yang, Q., & Shang, J. (2016). Reverse channel selection under

remanufacturing risks: Balancing profitability and robustness. International

Journal of Production Economics, 182, 63-72. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.08.013

Hannon, C. R., Woodside, M., Pollard, B. L., & Roman, J. (2016). The meaning of

African American college women’s experiences attending a predominately white

institution: A phenomenological study. Journal of College Student Development,

57, 652-666. doi:10.13531/csd.2016.0036

Haraguchi, M., & Lall, U. (2015). Flood risks and impacts: A case study of Thailand’s

floods 2011 and research questions for supply chain decision making.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 256-272.

doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.09.005

Henry, P. (2015). Rigor in qualitative research: Promoting quality in social science

research. Research Journal of Recent Sciences, 4, 25-28. Retrieved from

https://www.isca.in/rjrs/

Holloway, K., Toye, C., McConigley, R., Tieman, J., Currow, D., & Hegarty, M. (2015).

National consultation informing development of guidelines for a palliative

approach for aged care in the community setting. Australasian Journal on Ageing,

34(1), 21-26. doi:10.1111/ajag.12083

Hohenstein, N., Feisel, E., Hartman, E., & Giunipero, L. (2015). Research on the

phenomenon of supply chain resilience. International Journal of Physical

124

Distribution & Logistics Management, 45, 90-117.

doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2013-0128

Holm, S., & Ploug, T. (2017). Do not forget the right to withdraw!. The American

Journal of Bioethics, 17(12), 14-15. doi:10.1080/15265161.2017.1388872

Ho, W., Zheng, T., Yildiz, H., & Talluri, S. (2015). Supply chain risk management: A

literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 53(16), 5031-

5069. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1030467

Hooi, L. W., & Leong, T. Y. (2017). Total productive maintenance and manufacturing

performance improvement. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,

23(1), 2-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-07-2015-0033

Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Shaw, D., & Casey, D. (2015). Qualitative case study data

analysis: An example from practice. Nurse Researcher, 22, 8-12.

doi:10.7748/nr.22.5.8.e1307

Huang, K., Wu, J., Lu, S., & Lin, Y. (2016). Innovation and technology creation effects

on organizational performance. Journal of Business Research, 69, 2187-2192.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.028

Huang, L., Lin, Y., Ieromonachou, P., Zhou, L., & Lou, J. (2015). Drivers and patterns of

supply chain collaboration in the pharmaceutical industry: A case study on SMEs

in China. Open Journal of Social Science, 3, 23-29. doi:10.4236/jss.2015.37004

Hussein, A. (2015). The use of triangulation in social sciences research: Can qualitative

and quantitative methods be combined? Journal of Comparative Social Work,

4(1), 1-12. Retrieved from https://doaj.org

125

Ibrahim, N., & Edgley, A. (2015). Embedding researcher's reflexive accounts within the

analysis of a semi-structured qualitative interview. Qualitative Report, 20, 1671-

1681. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu

Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., Sokolov, B., & Ivanova, M. (2016). Disruptions in supply chains

and recovery policies: State-of-the-art review. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49, 1436-

1441. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.07.773

Jabbarzadeh, A., Fahimnia, B., & Sheu, J. B. (2017). An enhanced robustness approach

for managing supply and demand uncertainties. International Journal Production

Economics, 183, 620-631. doi:10.106/j.ijpe.2015.06.009

Jansen, A. (2015). Positioning and subjectivation in research interviews: Why bother

talking to a researcher? International Journal of Social Research

Methodology, 18, 27-39. doi:10.1080/13645579.2013.845711

Jeanes, E. (2017). Are we ethical? Approaches to ethics in management and organization

research. Organization, 24, 174-197. doi:10.1177/1350508416656930

Jensen, P. A. (2017). Strategic sourcing and procurement of facilities management

services. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 10, 138-158.

doi:10.1108/JGOSS-10-2016-0029

Jiang, F., Guo, H., Wei, Z., & Wang, D. (2018). The fit between managerial ties and

resource bundling capabilities: Implications for performance in manufacturing

firms. IEEE Transactions on engineering Management, 65, 216-226.

doi:10.1109/TEM.2017.278.5387

Jordan, K. (2018). Validity, reliability, and the case for participant-centered research:

126

Reflections on a multi-platform social media study. International Journal of

Human-Computer Interaction, 34, 913-921. doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1471570

Joslin, R., & Muller, R. (2016). Identifying interesting project phenomena using

philosophical and methodological triangulation. International Journal of Project

Management, 34, 1043-1056. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.05.005

Kach, A., Busse, C., Azadegan, A., & Wagner, S. (2016). Maneuvering through hostile

environments: How firms leverage product and process innovativeness. Decision

Sciences, 47, 907-956. doi:10.1111/deci.12196

Kalaitzi, D., Matopoulos, A., Bourlakis, M., & Tate, W. (2018). Supply chain strategies in

an era of natural resource scarcity. International Journal of Operations &

Production, 38, 784-809. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-05-2017-0309

Karim, S., Carroll, T., & Long, C. (2016). Delaying change: Examining how industry and

managerial turbulence impact structural realignment. Academy of Management

Journal, 59, 791-817. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0409

Kasprzak, L. (2015). Ace your Skype or phone interview. Chemical Engineering

Progress, 111, 15. Retrieved from https://www.cheric.org

Kaye, J., Whitley, E. A., Lund, D., Morrison, M., Teare, H., & Melham, K. (2015).

Dynamic consent: A patient interface for twenty-first century research networks.

European Journal of Human Genetics, 23, 141-146. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.71

Khazanchi, D. (2005). Information technology (IT) appropriateness: The contingency

theory of it and IT implementation in small and medium enterprises. Journal of

Computer Information Systems, 45, 88-95. doi:10.1080/08874417.2005.11645846

127

Kihn, L. A., & Ihantola, E. M. (2015). Approaches to validation and evaluation in

qualitative studies of management accounting. Qualitative Research in

Accounting & Management, 12, 230-255. doi:10.1108/QRAM-03

2013-0012

Kim, A., Han, K., & Kim, Y. (2016). The relationships among participatory management

practices for improving firm profitability: Evidence from the South Korean

manufacturing industry. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 28, 1712-1738. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1239218

Kirilova, D., & Karcher, S. (2017). Rethinking data sharing and human participant

protection in social science research: Applications from the qualitative

realm. Data Science Journal, 16(43), 1-7. doi:10.5334/dsj-2017-043

Klein, L. L., & Pereira, B. A. D. (2016). The survival of interorganizational networks: A

proposal based on resource dependence theory. In RAM. Revista de

Administracao Mackenzie, 17, 15-175. doi:10.1590/1678-

69712016/administracao.v17n4

Konig, A., & Spinler, S. (2016). The effect of logistics outsourcing on the supply chain

vulnerability of shippers. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 27,

122-141. doi:10.1108/IJLM-03-2014-0043

Kraegpoth, T., Stentoft, J., & Jensen, J. K. (2017). Dynamic supply chain design: A

Delphi study of drivers and barriers. International Journal of Production

Research, 55, 6846-6856. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1355122

Kroes, J. R., Manikas, A. S., & Gattiker, T. F. (2018). Operational leaness and retail firm

128

performance since 1980. International Journal of Production Economics, 197,

262-274. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.01.006

Krotov, V. (2016). Reliability and validity issues in analysis of IT spending using IT

managerial control ratios. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 23, 1463-

5771. doi:10.1108/BIJ-01-2015-0008

Kumar, S., Liu, J., & Scutella, J. (2015). The impact of supply chain disruptions on

stockholder wealth in India. International Journal of Physical Distribution &

Logistics Management, 45, 938-958. doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-09-2013-0247

Lancaster, K. (2017). Confidentiality, anonymity, and power relations in elite

interviewing: Conducting qualitative policy research in a politicized

domain. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20, 93-103.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1123555

LaPelle, N. R. (2004). Simplifying qualitative data analysis using general purpose

software tools. Preventive and Behavioral Medicine Publications, 84-102.

doi:10.1177/1525822x03259227

Largent, E. A. (2016). Recently proposed changes to legal and ethical guidelines

governing human subjects research. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 3, 206-

216. doi:10.1093/jlb/lsw001

Largent, E. A., & Lynch, H. F. (2017). Paying research participants: Regulatory

uncertainty, conceptual confusion, and a path forward. Yale Journal of Health

Public Law Ethics, 17, 61-141. Retrieved from

https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu

129

Larrinaga, O. V. (2017). Is it desirable, necessary, and possible to perform research using

case studies?

Cuadernos de Gestión, 17, 147-172. doi:10.5295/edg.140516ov

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and Environment. Boston, MA.

Harvard Business School Press

Le Coze, J. C. (2015). 1984-2014. Normal accidents: Was Charles Perrow right for the

wrong reasons? Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23, 275-286.

doi:10.1111/1468-5973.12090

Lee, S. M., & Rha, J. S. (2016). Ambidextrous supply chain as a dynamic capability:

Building a resilient supply chain. Management Decision, 54(1), 2-23.

doi:10.1108/MD-12-2014-0674

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research.

Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4, 324-327. doi:10.4103/2249-

4863-161306

Li, Y., Wu, F., Zong, W., & Li, B. (2017). Supply chain collaboration for ERP

implementation: An interorganizational knowledge sharing perspective.

International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37, 1327-1347.

doi:10.1108/IJOPM-12-2015-0732

Lie, R., & Witteveen, L. (2017). Visual informed consent: Informed consent without

forms. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory &

Practice, 20, 63-75. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1116835

Lii, P., & Kuo, F. I. (2016). Innovation-oriented supply chain integration for combined

competitiveness and firm performance. International Journal of Production

130

Economics, 174, 142-155. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.01.018

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Publications

Lord, R., Bolton, N., Fleming, S., & Anderson, M. (2016). Researching a segmented

market: Reflections on telephone interviewing. Management Research

Review, 39, 786-802. doi:10.1108/MMR-01-2015-0020

Lotfi, M., & Saghiri, S. (2018). Disentangling resilience, agility and leanness: Conceptual

development and empirical analysis. Journal of Manufacturing Technology

Management, 29, 168-197. doi:10.1108/JMTM-04-2017-0014

Low, L. L., Tong, S. F., & Low, W. Y. (2016). Selection of treatment strategies among

patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Malaysia: A grounded theory

approach. PLoS One, 11(1), 1-15. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147127

Luo, B. N., & Yu, K. (2016). Fits and misfits of supply chain flexibility to environmental

uncertainty: Two types of asymmetric effects on performance. International

Journal of Logistics Management, 27, 862-885. doi:10.1108/IJLM-01-2015-0004

MacCarthy, B. L., Blome, C., Olhager, J., Srai, J. S., & Zhao, X. (2016). Supply chain

evolution: Theory, concepts and science. International Journal of Operations &

Production Management, 36, 1696-1718. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-02-2016-0080

Macdonald, J. R., & Corsi, T. M. (2013). Supply chain disruption management: Severe

events, recovery, and performance. Journal of Business Logistics, 34, 270-288.

doi:10.1111/jbl.12026

Magutua, P. O., Adudab, J., & Nyaogac, R. B. (2015). Does supply chain technology

Manufacturing Companies Strategies to Mitigate Supply Chain Disr

Students also viewed