Strategies to Mitigate Supply Chain Disruptions in Grocery Busines

Section 1: Foundation of the Study

Supply chains have a significant role in the performance and success of any

business. Supply chain disruptions could adversely affect the performance of an

organization (Ali, Rahman, Tumpa, Moghul Rifat, & Paul, 2018). Disruption in the

supply chain could also negatively affect the stock market returns of an organization (Liu,

Sarkar, Kumar, & Jin, 2018). In this study, I worked to identify supply chain strategies

that could mitigate the effect of disruptions in grocery stores’ supply chains. The

complexity of supply chains makes supply chain disruption inevitable, and supply chain

managers must proactively identify strategies to minimize the risks of disruption

(Srivastava, Chaudhuri, & Srivastava, 2015). Supply chain managers can use simulation,

optimization tools, and statistics to identify and understand the characteristics and nature

of the supply chains to create appropriate strategies to mitigate supply chain disruptions

(Blackhurst, Rungtusanatham, Scheibe, & Ambulkar, 2018). The results of this study

could provide essential insights and information for supply chain managers in the grocery

store industry on how to mitigate the effects of disruption in their supply chains.

Background of the Problem

Globalization has resulted in an increase in the international trade because the

relationships between countries have significantly improved (Xiaosong & Lijun, 2017).

Organizational leaders can source and access resources overseas at low prices to have a

competitive advantage over their competition (Tate & Bals, 2017). However, as the

goods move from the source to the consumer, that movement is prone to disruption. The

causes of supply chain disruptions may include natural disasters, labor strikes, shortage of

resources, and supplier incapability that can lead to the decline of sales, increase in

operational costs, and delivery of poor customer service in an organization (Park, Min, &

Min, 2016). Moderate to severe disruption in the supply chain can lead to as much as a

107% drop in the operating income in an organization (Alcantara, 2015). The 9.0

magnitude earthquake that hit Japan in 2011 disrupted the supply chains of Sony and

Toshiba, companies whose recovery and reconstructions cost 12 trillion Japanese Yen

(Youyu et al., 2017). The disruption in the supply chain may be a result of poor planning

and management of resources, which could potentially reduce the profitability of the

company (Liu et al., 2018).

Disruptions in supply chains could provide rich experiences that could help

company managers develop disruption mitigation strategies (Revilla & Saenz, 2017).

Some of the strategies that organizational leaders could use to minimize disruptions in the

supply chain include supplier selection, demand allocation, and capability development

(Kamalahmadi & Parast, 2017). Rezapour, Farahani, and Pourakbar (2017) postulated

that supply chain managers could also mitigate disruption by storing emergency stocks at

the retailer, multiple sourcing, and reserving the backup capacity at the supplier.

Problem Statement

A significant problem for supply chain managers is disruptions in the supply

chain (Sarkar & Kumar, 2016; Ye, Xiao, & Zhu, 2015). Disruption in the supply chain

can cause, on average, a 2.88% and 1.13% loss of shareholder’s wealth in companies in

India and the United States, respectively (Kumar, Liu, & Scutella, 2015). The general

business problem is that some supply chain managers lack business strategies to mitigate

disruptions in the supply chain. The specific business problem is that some supply chain

managers in the grocery store industry lack strategies to mitigate the effects of

disruptions in their companies’ supply chains.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore strategies that

grocery store supply chain managers used to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their

companies’ supply chains. The research population consisted of four supply chain

managers from grocery stores in Northwest Arkansas with successful experience in

mitigating the effects of disruptions in their companies’ supply chains. The positive

social change implication pertains to the uninterrupted flow of food to the community at

the right price for customers’ consumption and nourishment. Increased efficiency by

grocery store supply chain managers may attract new grocery store investments that

could create job opportunities for the Northwest Arkansas community. The potential new

jobs could improve the standard of living of the people in Northwest Arkansas.

Nature of the Study

The qualitative method relates to applied and theoretical discoveries that center on

research questions developed to address an underlying research problem (Park & Park,

2016). The qualitative method was appropriate for this study. I used qualitative

methodology because I sought to explore strategies that grocery store supply chain

managers used to mitigate effects of disruptions in their companies’ supply chains. The

quantitative method involves the use of statistical analysis to examine relationships or

differences among variables (Nunez Ramirez, Wendlandt Amezaga, & Alvarez Medina,

2016). The quantitative research method was not appropriate for this study because I did

not need to examine variables’ relationships or differences. Researchers use mixed-

methods to integrate qualitative and the quantitative methodology in the same study to

understand complex phenomena (Molina-Azorin, Bergh, Corley, & Ketchen, 2017).

Mixed-methods research was not appropriate for my study because I did not need to

employ the quantitative method to study the subject phenomenon. Furthermore, Tunarosa

and Glynn (2017) postulated that mixed-methods research is ideal for researchers

interested in identifying a connection among or within phenomena. I did not seek the

connection between the phenomena but rather sought to find strategies that grocery store

supply chain managers used to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their companies’

supply chains.

De Vos, De Hauw, and Willemse (2015) postulated that the use of multiple case

studies allows the researcher to collect different perspectives from different organizations

regarding the phenomenon under study. A multiple case study design was appropriate for

this study, and I used it to help garner in-depth knowledge of the strategies through which

different grocery store supply chain managers mitigate disruptions in the supply chain.

Cappellaro (2017) posited that the ethnographic design is a robust tool to methodically

observe a group’s cultural patterns where interviews and other data gathering methods are

not appropriate. Ethnography was not suitable for this study because the objective was

not to observe and study people’s cultures in their social settings. Researchers use

phenomenological research design to understand a phenomenon through exploring the

meanings of individuals’ lived experiences of a specific incident (Harrison, Burress,

Velasquez, & Schreiner, 2017). I did not use the phenomenological research design

because my focus was not on exploring the meanings of individuals’ lived experiences.

Research Question

What strategies do grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects

of disruptions in their companies’ supply chains?

Interview Questions

1. What strategies does your organization have in place to mitigate the effects of

disruptions in the supply chain?

2. How did your employees respond to those strategies?

3. How were strategies to mitigate the effects of disruptions in the supply chain

communicated throughout the organizational ranks and among stakeholders?

4. What modifications did you apply to any strategy to improve its effectiveness

in mitigating the effects of disruptions in the supply chain?

5. What policies and processes have you used to mitigate the effects of

disruptions in your organization’s supply chain?

6. What were the principal barriers to implementing your strategies for

mitigating disruptions in the supply chain?

7. How did you address key barriers to implementing your organization’s

strategies for mitigating disruptions in the supply chain?

8. How did you assess the effectiveness of your strategies for mitigating

disruption in the supply chain?

9. What other information would you like to share concerning the strategies you

developed and implemented to mitigate the effects of supply chain disruption

in your organization?

Conceptual Framework

The resource dependency theory (RDT) served as the conceptual framework for

this multiple case study. Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) developed the RDT in 1978.

According to the RDT, leaders of firms rely on other businesses in the external

environment for critical resources to create a competitive edge (Wu & Zhao, 2015).

Another key tenet of the RDT is that the staff of an organization must take control of

critical resources and secure the resources of companies in the external environment

(Wolf, 2014).

Schnittfeld and Busch (2016) concluded that the RDT has its foundation in three

concepts: organizational effectiveness, interdependence, and external control. The RDT

was suitable for understanding the results from my study because as goods and services

pass through the supply chain from the source to the consumer, the interdependence of

companies’ resources has a significant role in facilitating the delivery of those goods and

services. Pfeffer and Salancik (2003) posited that establishing relationships with other

organizations in the supply chain could help company managers acquire the needed

resources to minimize uncertainty and dependency. In addition, the interdependence of

companies promotes collaboration in the supply chain, and managers can share and

utilize information to mitigate the effects of disruptions in the supply chain.

Operational Definitions

Bullwhip effect: Bullwhip effect is the variability of demand in the supply chain

caused by unreliable forecast resulting in the reduction of inventory planning efficiency,

and logistic systems (Vokhmyanina, Zhuravskaya, & Osmolski, 2018).

Global supply chain: The global supply chain includes the supply network

opportunity that span across the borders of a country to allow managers of companies’

source best goods and services in foreign markets at best prices (Kim, Park, Jung, &

Park, 2018).

Information sharing: Information sharing is the process by which firms that are

partners in the supply chain share vital information about the goods and services in the

supply chain to ensure business continuity (Zhang & Cao, 2018).

Supply chain collaboration: Supply chain collaboration is the inter-organizational

relationship whereby two or more supply chain partners that form a long-term

relationship to share resources, information, and best practices to create synergy and

competitive edge over their competition (Ralston, Richey, & Grawe, 2017).

Supply chain disruption: Supply chain disruption is an unexpected event that

disrupts the movement of goods and services from source to the consumer and negatively

impact the supply chain companies and consumers (Chavez, Castillo-Villar, Herrera, &

Bustos, 2017).

Supply chain management: Supply chain management is the management of the

movement of goods and services from the source to the consumer, facilitated by

producers, transporters, wholesalers, processors, retailers, customers and information

exchange (Fatemi et al., 2018).

Supply chain resilience: Supply chain resilience is the company leader’s ability to

formulate strategies that enable an organization to respond and survive unexpected

changes and disruptions in the supply chain (Jain, Kumar, Soni, & Chandra, 2017).

Supply chain risk management: Supply chain risk management is a proactive

approach that business managers use to identify, monitor, and mitigate risk to ensure

business continuity (Qazi, Quigley, Dickson, & Ekici, 2017).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

Assumptions

Assumptions are ideas that researchers deem true to explain a phenomenon but do

not have empirical proof to support such ideas (Schoenung & Dikova, 2016). In addition,

assumptions are uncertain and subjective (Yang, Liang, & Avgeriou, 2018). An

assumption for my study was that the information provided by the grocery store supply

chain managers during interviews was honest and accurate. The second assumption was

that the participants had adequate knowledge of strategies to mitigate disruption in the

grocery stores’ supply chains. The third assumption was that the grocery store supply

chain managers provided accurate documents that showed the management of disruptions

in their companies. To ensure the validity of these assumptions, I triangulated data from

interviews and document reviews.

Limitations

Limitations are weaknesses of a study that negatively affect the study’s

generalizability, reliability, and validity (Marshall & Rossman, 2016). The primary

limitation of this study was that the grocery store supply chain managers were from

Northwest Arkansas and not the entire United States. The second limitation was that the

grocery stores' supply chain managers had busy schedules that limited their attention to

the details of the questions asked in the interviews. The third limitation was that the

sample included just four supply chain managers from four different grocery stores. A

larger sample may have provided different results. According to Meyvis and Van

Osselaer (2018), increasing the sample size of a study increases the power of the

research. The fourth limitation was that even though the participants were willing to grant

interviews, they may have been cautious about providing extensive information that

could benefit the competition.

Delimitations

Delimitations are the boundaries of a study that a researcher sets to limit the scope

of the research project (Marshall & Rossman, 2016; Putan, Ivan, & Tamas, 2017). I

delimited the study to the perceptions of the grocery store supply chain managers who

have had experiences in implementing strategies for mitigating the effects of disruptions

in grocery store supply chains. Another delimitation was that I used four participants who

worked as supply chain managers in the grocery store businesses in Northwest Arkansas.

The grocery store supply chain managers who worked in the grocery store businesses

outside Northwest Arkansas were not eligible for my study.

Significance of the Study

Disruption of supply chains is a global problem that could negatively affect

companies’ performance and financial standing (Clemons & Slotnick, 2016). Therefore,

my research was significant because I explored strategies and processes that could

mitigate the effects of disruptions in grocery stores’ supply chains. The mitigation of

disruptions in the supply chain could reduce costs and improve business performance

(Vahid Nooraie & Parast, 2016). Supply chain managers in Northwest Arkansas and the

grocery store industry more generally could benefit from the implementation of the

mitigation strategies identified in this study because these strategies could help improve

businesses’ performance. Additionally, the reduction of supply chain costs resulting from

effective mitigation strategies could result in lower prices and improved services to the

customer in the community, therefore effecting a positive social change.

Contribution to Business Practice

The knowledge I gained about disruptions and results of post-disruption analyses

and the strategies managers implemented could assist others in efficiently managing

future disruptions (Birkie, Trucco, & Fernandez Campos, 2017). Business managers in

Northwest Arkansas and beyond could use this study to learn how to mitigate the effects

of disruptions in the supply chain and ensure business efficiency and continuity. Grocery

store supply chain managers could use the strategies outlined in this study to develop

operational business plans that would mitigate the effects of disruption in the supply

chain. According to Durach, Glasen, and Straube (2017), lack of trust and sharing of

information between suppliers and buyers significantly contributes to disruptions in the

supply chain. Therefore, robust planning, collaboration with suppliers, and efficient

management of information between the upstream and downstream partners in the supply

chain could reduce operational costs and increase profits.

Implications for Social Change

The uninterrupted flow of goods from the source to the consumer could improve

the lives of the people in communities. Managers could use strategies and processes

identified in this study to ensure business continuity and more promptly fulfill customers’

needs. The uninterrupted flow of grocery merchandise to the community could result in a

positive social change by helping to ensure that community members have timely access

to food. Kauppi, Longoni, Caniato, and Kuula (2016) postulated that the risk mitigation

strategies could improve the operational performance of companies. The higher

efficiencies could lead to reduced costs for the consumers. Furthermore, the improved

performance could yield profits for the grocery store businesses, which could entice the

owners to open more businesses, creating employment for people in communities.

A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore strategies that

grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in the

grocery stores’ supply chains. The research question was: What strategies do grocery

store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their companies’

supply chains? The purpose of the literature review was to garner information and

knowledge about the overall research topic and build a logical foundation for the study.

Researchers review the literature to identify the characteristics and key tenets of the

phenomenon under study (Somapa, Cools, & Dullaert, 2018).

In the literature review, I focused on understanding the causes and effects of the

supply chain disruptions and the effective strategies for preventing and mitigating the

effects of disruptions in the supply chain. The key subjects of the literature review

include the RDT, supply chain disruptions, supply chain management, and prevention

and mitigation strategies including (a) supply chain collaboration, (b) supply chain

design, (c) supply chain sustainability, (d) supply chain technology, (e) supply chain risk

management, (e) supplier relationship management, and (f) resilient supply chains. I used

Google Scholar and the Walden University library to search the following academic d

databases including Business Source Complete, ABI/INFORM Complete, ProQuest,

SAGE Premier, Emerald Management Journals, Taylor and Francis, and Science Direct.

The key search words included supply chain management, risk mitigation strategies,

preventing disruptions, supply chain disruptions, business continuity, supply chain

collaboration, global supply chains, technology, and supply chains. The study includes

361 peer-reviewed references and nine books, with 347 references published within 5

years of the completion of the study (2015 – 2019), and 23 references published in 2014

or earlier. That is, 94% of peer-reviewed articles were published within 5 years of my

study’s completion.

Resource Dependency Theory

Pfeffer and Salancik’s (1978) RDT served as the underlying framework for this

study. I used the RDT because managers of an organization must understand that their

organization’s ability to acquire critical resources in the supply chain could help mitigate

disruptions in it. Supply chain managers’ goal is to ensure that goods and services move

from source to the consumer with zero or minimal disruption in the supply chain.

Unforeseeable circumstances such as resource scarcity, demand fluctuations, natural

disasters, and labor strikes could disrupt the flow of goods and services (Das, 2018). The

supply chain partners would need to work together to mitigate or minimize such

disruptions. The RDT can play a vital role in identifying the interdependences of

organizations in the supply chain.

The RDT’s central focus is that the leaders of an organization must work with

supply chain trading partners by interchanging resources to manage the uncertainty in the

supply chain (Zhou, Chong, Zhen, & Bao, 2018). Zhou et al. (2018) empirically explored

the adoption of the electronic supply chain by suppliers in the electronics industry. Zhou

et al. used the RDT to understand the relationship between buyers and suppliers in the

supply chain. The researchers collected and analyzed data from 122 companies in the

electronics industry in Malaysia. Using the regression model for data analysis, the found

that a robust buyer-supplier relationship could facilitate the adoption of the electronic

supply chain by the buyers. Suppliers and buyers must trust each other and form a

partnership to share resources and information to ensure smooth adoption of the

electronic supply chain and business continuity (Zhou et al. 2018). Laihonen and Pekkola

(2016) postulated that inter-organization knowledge transfer and shared learning

improves the performance of partners in the supply chain, concurring with Zhou et al.

regarding resource sharing. Coupet and McWilliams (2017) posited that the scarcity of

resources in the environment causes uncertainty in organizations. Company leaders could

mitigate resource scarcity in two ways, which include creating diverse interlinkages with

the organization’s environment to minimize the dependence on one source, and

strengthening the relationship with the current environment and facilitating mutual

dependence (Pfeffer & Salancik, 2003).

The RDT could promote the sharing of resources between organizations.

Companies strive to mitigate disruptions, create sustainable solutions, and make profits to

remain competitive. O’Keeffe (2016) postulated that companies could acquire and

integrate with other companies to share resources and mitigate disruptions in the supply

chain. Some firms could acquire their suppliers to ensure minimal disruption to their

businesses. Schnittfeld and Busch’s (2016) study also solidify the RDT. Schnittfeld and

Busch postulated that companies must share sustainability strategies with their suppliers

to ensure business continuity. They also marked the importance of collaboration in the

supply chain and the importance of businesses relationships to remain competitive in the

market. Jajja, Kannan, Brah, and Hassan (2017) concurred with O’Keeffe and Schnittfeld

and Busch, and they indicated that RDT theorists that companies lack resources on their

own to achieve goals and need other firms to supplement the resources to attain the

desired outcome. A robust relationship between a supplier and a buyer could promote

robust communication, encourage sharing of resources, and help in mitigating disruptions

in the supply chain.

In a study on innovation based on RDT, Lii and Kuo (2016) stated that when a

firm cannot fend resources for itself, it must search for resources in the external

environment and create relationships with other businesses. Supply chain integration is

vital to the survival of firms because sharing of resources and financial burden may create

a competitive advantage. The findings of the study indicated that innovation positively

affects supply chain integration. Innovation facilitates supply chain integration and

improves a company’s performance. Lii and Kuo’s study may be useful to supply chain

managers because the authors explained the importance of innovation and supply chain

integration with the members of the value chain to sustain a company competitiveness.

Innovations could help supply chain companies reduce waste in the supply chain and

minimize disruption. Innovation and supply chain integration could help companies

respond to customer needs faster than the competition.

Xia, Wang, Lin, Yang, and Li (2018) postulated that the market logic of RDT is

that if a company is deeply dependent on a particular market, the market constraints

could negatively impact the company’s success. Xia et al. indicated that companies must

form alliances in the supply chain and share resources to mitigate unforeseeable

circumstances and improve performance in the market. The researchers posited that a

firm's resource dependence determines its market behavior and that the company leaders

must focus on the firm's dependent market to create alliances that could mitigate

uncertainties in business. Malik, Ngo, and Kingshott (2018) studied the influence of

organizational resources on quality and company performance. They found that resource

dependence and vendor resources and capabilities fortifies the quality of a relationship

and improves company performance, concurring with Xia et al. Malik et al. indicated that

RDT is critical to any organization because a firm cannot survive on its resources alone

but must depend on internal and external resources to ensure business continuity.

Kalaitzi, Matopoulos, Bourlakis, and Tate (2018) posited that the increased demand for

resources leads to a shortage of resources and companies must work to share resources to

survive and ensure business continuity, concurring with Malik et al.’s and Xia et al.’s

studies. Additionally, Kalaitzi et al. (2018) established that a firm’s ability to work

closely with the vendors and share necessary resources could mitigate disruption in the

supply chain.

AbouAssi and Tschirhart (2018) studied organizational responses to volatile

demand. According to AbouAssi and Tschirhart, RDT facilitates a link between a

company and its providers, and the greater the dependence of the organization on the

provider, the more influential the provider can become. The criticality of the provider

resources dictates the resource dependency of the firm (AbouAssi & Tschirhart, 2018).

To succeed in a volatile market and to avoid unnecessary disruption in the supply chain,

firms must share resources. As for the case of nonprofit organizations (NPO), they

depend highly on donors who may have interest in ensuring the NPO carters to the

stakeholders or customers (AbouAssi & Tschirhart, 2018). According to Dong, Gao, Sun,

and Liu (2018), RDT can facilitate international trade. Countries could partner with other

countries to move resources such as copper from source to consumer by sharing the

supply chain network infrastructure (Dong et al., 2018). Dong et al. (2018) postulated

that the countries’ dependence on each other’s key resources can minimize disruption in

the supply chain, concurring with AbouAssi and Tschirhart. In addition, Xia et al. (2018)

postulated that companies form alliances to overcome resource challenges and stabilize

the flow of resources between partners to ensure business continuity, concurring with

Dong et al. and AbouAssi and Tschirhart.

Qiu (2018) conducted a study of 92 suppliers in the food industry to understand

how the supplier manages relationships with multiple buyers. The RDT anchored Qui’s

study, with results indicating that the robust dependence relationships and the fair

business policies and procedures between partners in the supply chain could foster a

strong relationship. The robust relationship between buyers and suppliers builds trust and

makes it easy for partners to share resources and risk in the supply chain. Pfeffer and

Salancik (1978) postulated that any firm’s survival on the market depends on the robust

relationship between the partners in the supply chain, concurring with Qui’s study.

Additionally, Kanyoma, Agbola, and Oloruntoba (2018) utilized RDT to find the internal

and external linkages within a three-tier supply chain in Malawi that included the

supplier, manufacturer, and retailer. Kanyoma et al. found that the firms with robust

intra-firm resources did not show interest in supply chain integration with the external

firms. According to Kanyoma et al., lack of trust and corrupt sourcing strategies hindered

the progress of Malawian firms in utilizing supply chain integration and improving

business performance. Kanyoma et al. showed the critical need for relationships and

independence of firms to succeed in the market, concurring with Qui, and Pfeffer and

Salancik.

To understand the factors that affect the performance of cloud service providers

and the relationship of small and medium-sized enterprises and cloud service providers,

Gupta, Misra, Kock, and Roubaud (2018) used RDT. Gupta et al. surveyed 208

companies and found that the RDT contributed to the success of electronic resource

planning (ERP) implementation because the small and medium-sized enterprises utilized

the extrinsic factors such as compliance, network, and information security. The ERP

implementation required the firm to work with the partners in the supply chain to resolve

any compliance issues with the cloud vendor (Gupta et al., 2018). Additionally, the ERP

implementation requires network configuration that needs partners in the supply chain to

share resources and to maintain information security, and a security vendor would need to

share resources with the firm (Gupta et al., 2018).

Cho, Ryoo, and Kim (2017) studied interorganizational dependence, transparency

of information, and supply chain performance. Their findings indicated that sharing of

resources such as information between supply chain firms is critical to the success of the

firms in the supply chain, concurring with Gupta et al. Collaborative planning and

forecasting activities between partners are important in the supply chain. According to

Krolikowski and Yuan (2017), supply chain partners in the resource dependency

relationship sometimes may have customers with high bargaining power that could

influence demand and create the inequitable business. The partners in the resource

dependency relationship must ensure fair trade to be competitive in the market.

Petersen, Brockhaus, Fawcett, and Knemeyer (2017) conducted a study to

understand the joint development of sustainable products. Petersen et al. posited that the

lack of collaboration between trading partners regarding the necessary resources needed

by the firm could cause companies to mismanage the resources. Further, they postulated

that companies depend on each other’s resources to succeed, and managers must pay

attention to the management of the resource dependency phenomenon. Company leaders

must collaborate with partners in the supply chain to reduce the threat of resource

dependency (Petersen et al., 2017). The company leaders must engage the partners to

successfully accommodate the right amount of resources needed to mitigate the

disruption of services to the consumer and ensure business continuity.

Wang, Wang, Jiang, Yang, and Cui (2016) conducted a study of buyer and

supplier relationship using the RDT. Wang et al. posited that the long-term buyer and

supplier collaboration and connection depends on resource dependency because partners

in the relationship exchange resources to succeed. The researchers noted that the

imbalance of power in the relationship between the buyer and supplier could cause the

relationship to fail. Additionally, the sharing of information between partners is critical to

the success of the relationship (Wang et al., 2016). According to Jones, Edwards,

Bocarro, Bunds, and Smith (2017), RDT has a critical role in inter-organizational

partnerships and relationships because company leaders could acquire resources that

independently could have eluded them. For example, business partners could share larger

production costs that could be difficult for each partner to finance alone. Jones et al.

concurred with Wang et al. and Petersen et al. that robust relationships and partnerships

can increase the pool of resources and minimize disruption to the businesses.

According to Pfeffer and Salancik (1978), one of the RDT’s tenet is that managers

of firms strive to acquire external resources owned by others to gain control in the market

and minimize their dependences on other firms’ resources. Andrews and Beynon (2017)

posited that company managers have control over external resources in the market to

ensure that their companies are immune from the external attacks, concurring with

Pfeffer and Salancik. According to Andrews and Beynon, company managers must

network with the stakeholders within the business environment to ensure a smooth

resource acquisition. The networking involves the company managers networking with

other managers in the external environment to attract talent to work together on a project

or service in their company. Booth-Bell (2018) also posited that RDT facilitates the

corporate board desire in acquiring critical resources for the firm in its environment.

According to Booth-Bell, company managers seek to acquire critical resources from the

environment to ensure business continuity and control over the environment resources,

concurring with Andrews and Beynon. To facilitate the resource acquisition in the

environment, the company leaders assemble corporate board members that would be a

valuable strategic resource and link the firm to the external resources in the environment

(Booth-Bell, 2018). Reimann and Ketchen (2017) postulated that RDT promotes firms to

be competitive in the market, and the managers of the firm must acquire resources on that

market that they do not have direct control, concurring with Booth-Bell. The acquisition

of the critical resources could prevent the business from experiencing unnecessary

disruption. Additionally, Reimann and Ketchen said that managers of companies must

maintain good relationships in the supply chain to ease the exchange of resources

whenever necessary.

Contrasting Theories

The contrasting theories researchers explored in studies relating to mitigation of

supply chain disruptions included the normal accident theory (NAT), and contingency

theory of fit (CTF). According to Yang and Yang (2010), the key tenet of the NAT is that

organizations and their complex systems are susceptible to unexpected and inevitable

normal accidents. The focus of CTF is that there must be a fit between organization

resources and the environment to improve the organization's performance (Mann, Byun,

& Li, 2015).

Normal accident theory. The supporters of NAT stipulate that accidents are

unavoidable when systems become more complex and tightly coupled (Perrow, 1999).

Perrow (1999) posited that the failure of one part of the system could have a ripple effect

and spread to other systems causing disruptions to the other parts of the system. Scheibe

and Blackhurst (2018) postulated that NAT is another line of understanding the

disruptions in the supply chain. The supply chain consists of three significant members

that include the supplier, manufacturer, and the customer; and the disruption at the

supplier base could disrupt the entire supply chain (Scheibe & Blackhurst, 2018).

According to NAT, the theorists postulated that decreasing the level of interactive

complexity could minimize disruption in the supply chain (Marley, Ward, & Hill, 2014).

The low operational levels managed by supply chain managers could make the disruptive

problems more visible resulting in less disruption in the supply chain (Marley et al.,

2014). According to Nunan and Di Domenico (2017), one could mitigate the disruption

by not only addressing another disruption but also addressing the fundamental

organizational context in which normal accidents occur.

Contingency theory of fit. Van de Ven and Drazin introduced the CTF in 1985.

The fundamental tenet of the CTF is the fit of organizational resources and the

organization performance (Hallavo, 2015). According to Hallavo (2015), the perfect fit

between the operational effectiveness of the external and internal environment leads to

improved performance. Supply chain managers could use the CTF by examining

alternative supply chain mitigation risk strategies and applying them according to the

structure or type of risk (Chang, Ellinger, & Blackhurst, 2015). Matching the resources to

the risk encountered could minimize disruption in the supply chain and ensure business

continuity.

Supply Chain and Supply Chain Management

Supply chain management is the phenomenon that includes planning and

management of the movement of goods and services from the upstream to the

downstream. The supply chain management involves the entities in the supply chain such

as suppliers, manufacturers, warehouses, retailers, transporters, and customers (Azimian

& Aouni, 2017). The supply chain management team of any company aims to ensure that

the company makes a profit by efficiently managing the movement of goods from source

to customer (Azimian & Aouni, 2017). The supply chain management has evolved

because managers of companies are now not only ensuring that products and services

reach the customer but also ensuring that the supply chains are efficient to create a

competitive advantage over their competition (Nguyen, Nguyen, & Bosch, 2017).

Companies in the supply chain must share performance information to improve supply

chain managers’ awareness of the shared targets and operations of the supply chain

networks (Laihonen & Pekkola, 2016). The phenomenon would help supply chain

managers improve the supply chain overall performance and mitigate any challenges that

may occur in the supply chain.

Supply chain management involves supply chain managers devising supply chain

practices to ensure the efficient movement of goods from supplier to the consumer

(Kumar & Kushwaha, 2018). The practices may include (a) customer relationship, (b)

information sharing, (c) information technology, (d) quality of information sharing and

(e) supply chain integration. According to Kumar and Kushwaha (2018), supply chain

management practices could improve the financial and operational performance of an

organization. Odongo, Dora, Molnar, Ongeng, and Gellynck (2016) concurred with

Kumar and Kushwaha regarding the effect of supply chain management practices on the

operational performance of an organization. Odongo et al., using a quantitative survey,

collected data from 150 agribusiness companies in the maize supply chain in Uganda and

found out that supply chain management practices have a positive impact on the

operational performance of an organization. Supply chain managers must implement the

supply chain management practices to ensure they have a competitive edge over the

competition. Olah, Zeman, Balogh, and Popp (2018) concurred with Kumar and

Kushwaha regarding information sharing. Olah et al. posited that information sharing of

quality information improves supply chain managers’ ability to make the informed

decision and improves the efficiency of the supply chains. In addition, supply chain

managers must develop resource indicators, devise agile production systems and supply

chain management practices to improve resource efficiency and remain competitive in

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

In contrast, Shobayo (2017) examined the effect of supply chain management on

the organization’s operational performance and found out that supply chain management

does not have a significant impact on the organization operational performance. Shobayo

posited that managers of the organization must focus on the financial and overall

performance of their organizations and devise strategies that are effective in managing

their company’s supply chains.

According to Gawankar, Kamble, and Raut (2017), the supply chain management

is the foundation of the retail industry’s success. The retail businesses provide a

mechanism of interaction between the customers and the manufacturers by allowing

customers to have access to the manufacturers’ products at a price. The complexity of the

retail supply chain due to a large number of stock keeping units could have retail supply

chain managers involved in managing multiple supply chains to ensure that products are

available to the consumer at the right time and place (Gawankar et al., 2017). The

complexity of the supply chains requires supply chain managers to devise supply chain

management practices to ensure smooth operation of the businesses. Gawankar et al.

conducted a study of 213 operations and supply chain heads of Indian retail firms to find

the relationship between supply chain management practices and supply chain

performance measures. The results indicated that supply chain management practices

have a positive effect on the supply chain performance measures and can lead to overall

improvement of an organization. Sundram, Chandran, and Bhatti (2016) also studied the

relationship between the various components of the supply chain management practices

and the performance of the supply chain. Sundram et al. conducted a study of 156

electronic firms in Malaysia by using the survey. The results of the study indicated that

supply chain practices such as supplier strategic partnership, information sharing, agreed

on vision and goals, risk and rewards sharing are vital practices employed to improve

supply chain management performance, concurring with Gawankar et al.

Globalization has made the supply chain complex because business managers

must develop international supply chain networks to facilitate the movement of goods

from source to the consumer (Kavilal, Prasanna Venkatesan, & Harsh Kumar, 2017).

According to Kavilal et al. (2017), the supply chain complexities can result in adverse

consequences on customer service, reputation, and cost. After studying manufacturing

companies in the India, Kavilal et al. indicated that the supply base and internal

manufacturing complexities are the major complexities in the supply chain management

of the manufacturing industry. Supply chain managers must ensure that the supply base

is thoroughly vetted to minimize the complexities. Gerschberger, Manuj, and Freinberger

(2017) postulated that supplier-induced complexity could be devastating to the

company’s supply chain, concurring with Kavilal et al. Supply chain management

involves the selection and the management of suppliers which is a critical part of the

supply chain management. Managers must identify critical suppliers in the supply chain

and monitor them to minimize disruption to the supply chains. In addition, supply chain

managers must devise robust supplier selection and sustainable supplier management

methodologies to ensure business continuity.

The supply chain management also involves the management of variation of

demand in the supply chain. The variation of demand in the supply chain could lead to a

bullwhip effect that could cause unnecessary disruption in the supply chain. According to

Klug (2016), the bullwhip effect is a variation in demand as the order information passes

through the value chain. Jin, DeHoratius, and Schmidt (2017) postulated that the

bullwhip effect is the small variation in the demand at the downstream of the supply

chain that causes significant demand variations in the upper stream as supply chain

managers place orders to upstream suppliers. In addition, Li, Yu, Wang, and Yan (2017)

stated that the bullwhip effect is a demand distortion whereby orders to the vendor tend to

have a more substantial variance than sales to the buyer. The bullwhip effect is a

phenomenon in the supply chain that must be mitigated. The authors of the three articles

concurred that bullwhip effect can cause additional commitment of resources in the value

chain that creates waste. Li et al. posited that the bullwhip could be categorized twofold,

bullwhip and anti-bullwhip. The two phenomena can occur concurrently, and supply

chain managers can mitigate them by using an integrated model whose components

include demand, forecasting, time delay and ordering policy to explain the phenomena.

The model encompasses consumer demand process, constant lead time, order up to plan,

and a minimum mean squared error forecast approach. Klug posited that bullwhip occurs

because of the availability of capacity in the supply chain, and the new technique could

analyze the behaviors in the supply chain.

Jin et al. (2017) postulated that to mitigate bullwhip effect in the supply chain,

supply chain managers must categorize the bullwhip into three intra-firm bullwhips

which include shipment bullwhip, manufacturing bullwhip and order bullwhip. Jin et al.

elaborated that supply chain managers can mitigate the bullwhip in four ways. First, the

supply chain managers must measure the three components of the bullwhip in their study

to minimize the phenomenon. Second, supply managers must track the intra-flow of

specific goods. Third, supply managers must understand the drivers of shipment,

manufacturing, and order bullwhip. Fourth, the supply managers must choose an

appropriate time to measure the bullwhip to yield robust results that can help in decision

making.

Supply Chain Collaboration

Salam (2017) defined the supply chain collaboration as the process where two or

more members work together by sharing information, jointly making decisions, and

sharing benefits to remain competitive in the market. Salam explored the relationship

between trust, technology, and supply chain collaboration how the phenomena affects the

firm’s performance. Salam conducted research in Thailand. The research findings

included information about technology and the priority of implementation when creating

collaborative relationships. The results of the study also indicated the analytical

association of trust and technological capabilities with improved levels of collaboration.

The electronic data interchange technology (EDI) will help facilitate information sharing

and eventually build trust (Salam, 2017). In addition, Banchuen, Sadler, and Shee (2017)

examined the appropriate choice of collaboration that will ensure companies in the supply

chain have a competitive edge. Banchuen et al. suggested that the manufacturing choice

strategies and supplier collaboration could enhance the business outcomes. Banchuen et

al. posited that manufacturers must also purposely invite external suppliers to collaborate

to win in the current market. The collaboration benefits might include (a) achievement of

low distribution cost, (b) meeting schedules with speed and accuracy, (c) manufacturing

of reliable and durable products, and (d) quick reaction to the customer changing needs

(Banchuen et al., 2017).

To explore the problem solving and joint planning roles that could establish the

collaborative culture between the organization, Kumar, Banerjee, Meena, and Ganguly

(2017) collected data through a questionnaire from 812 organizations in India. The

findings indicated that that joint planning for executing schedule (JPES) and the joint

planning for increasing market share (JPIMS) are significant antecedents for creating a

collaborative environment. Viewing interorganizational collaboration under the social

network theory lens, Ekanayake, Childerhouse, and Sun (2017) found out that individual

boundary spanners are critical to ensuring collaboration objectives gets achieved. The

social relationship at a personal level brings synergy to the collaboration of firms

(Ekanayake et al., 2017). Wu and Chiu (2018) postulated that leaders of companies must

invest in social resources, appropriate information technology and understand the justice

issues when dealing with network resources to have effective collaboration in the supply

chain, concurring with Ekanayake et al.

Collaboration is a phenomenon that most leaders of organization use to reduce

uncertainty and ensure business success (Aggarwal & Srivastava, 2016). Globalization

and the turbulent business environment have made organization leaders collaborate with

partners in the supply chain to provide the consumer with a variety of products with the

shorter life cycle (Zhang & Cao 2018). Collaboration in the supply chain allows

managers of the firms in the supply chain to share vital information, resources, retain

what the company possesses, and gain what is needed by the company to provide the

goods and services with minimal disruption (Kumar et al., 2017). According to Kumar et

al. (2017), collaboration has advantages that include (a) reduction in inventory, (b)

improved lead time, (c), increased profits and market share, and (d) customer satisfaction.

Collaboration in the supply chain is vital to the success of the businesses.

Collaboration can include the sharing of resources between supply chain partners or

internal business partners. According to Zhu, Krikke, Caniels, and Wang (2017),

collaboration could help mitigate disruption in the supply chain caused by the disaster,

legal changes, sociotechnical accidents, or natural disasters. Additionally, collaboration

in the supply chain could assist supply chain managers to operate their businesses

efficiently when they share resources and information. Zhu et al. concurred with Lier,

Caris, and Macharis (2016) regarding the collaboration of organization’s internal supply

chain processes. Lier et al. studied the collaboration effort between distribution centers in

the form of cross-docking and found out that cross-docking could help companies reduce

both internal and external transportation costs to ensure business continuity. High supply

chain costs can cause a company to fold and disrupt the flow of goods to the customers in

the communities. Kumar et al. (2017) concurred with Zhu et al. and Lier et al. about the

collaboration phenomenon. Kumar et al. established that companies’ functions must not

work in isolation but collaborate with other functions to have a competitive edge over

their competitors. In addition, Kumar et al. established that joint planning and problem

solving with supply chain partners will reduce costs and foster business continuity.

Supply chain collaboration is beneficial to any business that embraces the

phenomenon if managed well. Saban, Mawhinney, and Drake (2017) postulated that

human collaboration between companies in the supply chain could ensure achievement of

strategic supply chain goals. Saban et al. indicated that the collaborative companies could

share resources that may include people, technology, and processes. Pradabwong,

Braziotis, Tannock, and Pawar (2017) concurred with Saban et al. that interorganizational

collaboration could improve business performance. In addition, the business process

management which ensures continuous process improvement in firms has a positive

impact on supply chain collaboration (Pradabwong et al., 2017). Fawcett, McCarter,

Fawcett, Webb, and Magnan (2015) posited that every business in the supply chain has

complementary capabilities that could be beneficial to every member of the supply chain.

All three articles indicated that collaboration could reduce costs and ensure business

continuity. Additionally, Fawcett et al. indicated that there are resistors that prevent

collaboration to take effect. The resistors include (a) territoriality-conflicting goals, (b)

strategic misalignment, (c) lack of leadership, (d) resistance to change, (e) low level of

trust, (f) poor systems connectivity, (g) information hoarding, (h) relationship intensity-

lack of buying power, (i) complexity management, and (j) lack of collaboration skill set.

Supply chain managers must be cognizant of the listed resistors and address them to

ensure business continuity.

Supply chain collaboration is a critical business tactic in the current business

environment because collaboration could reduce unnecessary inefficiencies in the supply

chain. Lehoux, LeBel, and Elleuch (2016) postulated that higher collaboration and

coordination of supply chain operations between the five sawmill companies in their

study resulted in reduced costs that translated into the profitability of the companies.

The supply chain managers of the companies under study used the collaborative planning

forecasting and replenishment technique to improve the accuracy of the forecast and

planning of materials in the supply chain. Lack of collaboration and information sharing

could lead to bullwhip effect, which is the variability of orders in the supply chain

(Cannella, Framinan, Bruccoleri, Barbosa-Povoa, & Relvas, 2015). Cannella et al. (2015)

aimed to understand the impact of the inventory record inaccuracy (IRI) in a

collaborative supply chain. Cannela et al. used the mathematical model known as

replenishment order quantity to understand the phenomenon. The findings indicated that

the errors in the inventory records hinder the bullwhip prevention efforts in the supply

chain. Additionally, the supply chain performance at each level of the supply chain

dwindles when the IRI increases. The IRI can erode the benefits of the supply chain

information sharing and the connectivity. Cannela et al. posited that the costly audits

would help to reduce the IRI. The conjoint approach of prevention and integration could

also reduce the IRI.

Mirkovski, Lowry and Feng (2016) posited that enhanced collaboration in the

supply chain that is facilitated by the information and communications technology (ICT)

could reduce the coordination costs in the supply chain. Xu, Dong, and Xia (2015)

concurred with Mirkovski et al. about communication in the collaboration environment.

Xu et al. postulated that the supply chain planners could benefit from inter-organizational

collaboration because of the vital information that could be used to plan for the customer

demand. Xu et al. said that information technology facilitates the use of the collaborative

planning, forecasting, and replenishment by companies. Xu et al. aimed at exploring the

two mechanisms that include collaborating too early with limited information and

collaborating late with more information. Xu et al. used a demand collaboration model to

study the collaborative planning, forecasting, and replenishment of a manufacturer and a

supplier. The findings indicated that a too early collaboration led to stable production

schedule with no adjustments when more information was available. The late

collaboration allowed the flexibility in the production when the company experiences

high demand.

In the current market environment, customers continue to demand high quality,

lower cost and fast to market products. Organizational leaders must create agile supply

chain network to meet the customer demand. Organization leaders must collaborate in

new product development, and innovation to ensure reduced cost, reduced lead time and

high-quality products (Soosay & Hyland, 2015). The ability of managers to initiate

innovative ways of doing business with partners like suppliers in the supply chain could

improve the agility of the supply chain. Supplier involvement is vital to the process of

innovation in the supply chain because suppliers have substantial knowledge and

capabilities about their products in the supply chain (Kim & Chai, 2017).

Collaboration, when managed correctly, could yield positive results in new

product development. The mixture of different suppliers could bring synergy in devising

robust product in the supply chain. Ates, Van den Ende, and Ianniello (2015) investigated

the inter-organizational patterns between the buying firm, design firm and a component

supplier in new product development (NPD). The case study methodology involved five

design agencies, two buying firms, and two suppliers in Italy and Netherlands. Ates et al.

observed seven new product development projects in this study. The findings indicated

that multiple suppliers with distinct roles in new product development could effectively

work together and deliver robust results. In addition, Ates et al. discovered that the NPD

team could adopt four inter-organizational coordination approaches could to succeed. The

approaches include (a) buyer as a mediator, (b) buyer-designer partnership, (c) designer

as an integrator, and (d) team design approach. Ates et al.’s study also showed the

significance of having one party to lead the collaborative efforts among the organizations.

Collaboration in the NPD can include multiple part suppliers that are experts in their field

of research. The experts could contribute ideas to create a robust product with minimal

recalls, which would avoid disruption to the customer. Bao, Li, Pang, Bao, and Yi (2017)

postulated that product innovation is an important phenomenon in the supply chain as

manufacturers find the right suppliers to collaborate in new product development. The

successful collaboration requires the providers and manufacturers to share resources.

According to Bao et al., the manufacturers must first ensure that the supplier whom they

enter into a contract possess an intermediate level of resource difference to avoid

innovation failures. Secondly, manufacturers must leverage the high trust with its

suppliers to integrate the complementary resources into the new product development.

Additionally, the manufacturer should carefully draft contracts to avoid any

misunderstanding with the supplier’s tasks and roles. Any misunderstanding between

partners of collaboration could cause a product disruption in the supply chain.

Despite all the studies that discuss the benefits of collaboration in the supply

chain, collaboration does not always bring efficiency or performance improvement (Yan

& Kull, 2015). According to Yan and Kull, the supplier opportunism could damage the

product development process because of the uncertainties in the buyer-supplier

collaboration. Supply chain managers must be cognizant of the existence of supplier

opportunism that may hinder the benefits of the collaborative efforts of partners in the

supply chain.

Supply Chain Innovation and Information Technology

Information technology provides leaders and managers of supply chain

organizations with ways to efficiently transfer goods from the supplier to the consumer

(Fuchs, Beck, Lienland, & Kellner, 2018). Fuchs et al. (2018) collected data from 343

managers of automotive first tier companies to find the relationship between the

information technology (IT) capabilities, supply chain capabilities, and supply chain

performance in the automotive industry. The findings indicated that there is a strong

relationship between the three phenomena. The IT enhances the firms’ data capabilities

and supply chain performance resulting in information being transferred quickly from

consumer to the supplier. The IT could enable the supply chain partners to receive

information and act on it faster, the phenomenon that could minimize disruption in the

supply chain. The information technology is a vital tool in the supply chain as it can also

aid in reducing production costs, improve the quality of the products and services, and

create a competitive edge over the competition (Iveroth, 2016). Additionally, IT can

assist in providing delivery lead time flexibility, volume management, inventory

management and capacity management in the supply chain (Obayi, Koh, Oglethorpe, &

Ebrahimi, 2017). Managers of companies must invest in (a) absorptive capacity, (b)

transactive memory systems, and (c) organizational interoperability to improve on

supplier-buyer relationship flexibility in the supply chain (Obayi et al., 2017). The three

phenomena could assist retail managers to plan and control inventory by establishing

robust long-term contracts with suppliers. In addition, the absorptive capacity, transactive

memory systems, and organizational interoperability could provide the flexibility of

switching suppliers to provide business continuity.

Innovation and the supply chain management are critical phenomena in business.

Innovation can improve the movement of goods from source to the consumer.

Brunswicker and Vanhaverbeke (2015) and Roldan Bravo, Ruiz Moreno and Llorens-

Montes (2016) discussed the advantages of open innovation. Open innovation allows

companies to freely utilize internal and external knowledge and ideas to advance the

company goals. In addition, Lii and Kuo (2016) posited that open innovation facilitates

the supply chain integration and improves the company performance. Supply chain

integration of customers and suppliers enhanced by innovation can help company

managers to devise solutions to problems encountered in the supply chain. All the authors

of the three-studies support the notion that knowledge sharing can increase innovation

and collaboration in the value chain, which eventually could minimize disruption in the

supply chain. Additionally, Yunis, El-Kassar, and Tarhini (2017) posited that ICTs are

essential for companies to have a competitive edge over their competition. Yunis et al.

studied the relationship between the use of ICT and organizational performance in the

Lebanese market while considering the entrepreneur involvement. The findings indicated

that the ICT alone could not improve the organization’s performance, but the

combination with robust entrepreneur capabilities could improve the organizational

performance. Entrepreneurs must know the best ICT that could create the competitive

advantage for their company.

To remain competitive in the market, supply chain managers must quickly

respond to customer demands. The company’s supply chain must be agile to meet the

ever-changing customer needs (Tarafdar & Qrunfleh, 2017). Tarafdar and Qrunfleh

(2017) investigated the mediation effect of supply chain practices on the relationship

between the supply chain agility and supply chain performance; and effect of information

systems on the agility and performance of the supply chain. Tarafdar and Qrunfleh

surveyed executives and senior managers from 205 logistics and supply chain firms in the

United States of America. The findings indicated that the supply chain practices and

procedures plus information technology could effect a positive relationship between the

agile supply chain and supply chain performance. Tarafdar and Qrunfleh posited that the

company’s ability to quickly adjust the tactics and operation helps the firm to

manufacture high-quality products during sudden changes in customer needs.

In the modern supply chain, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems

facilitate the communication and information sharing in companies. Enterprise Resource

Planning is an information technology platform that enables managers in an organization

to manage and integrate critical components of an organization to help improve the

organization performance and innovation (Badewi, Shehab, Zeng, & Mohamad, 2018).

ERP system has a vital role in supply chain management. Basaez, Aranda, Djundubaev,

and Montesinos (2014) posited that adding extensions such as customer service

management (CRM) and supplier relationship management modules to the ERP would

improve the flow of goods and services in the supply chain and eliminate waste. Hwang

and Min (2015) concurred with Basaez et al. that ERP could enhance company’s internal

capabilities and supplier relationship that could minimize disruption in the supply chain.

According to Hwang and Min, ERP ensures that every company in the supply chain gets

the reliable order information, which improves on-time delivery time and reduces

pipeline inventory. In addition, the ERP system could ensure the reliability and stability

of the buying firm’s supply base because of the buying firm’s access to supplier

information and process improvement of the suppliers (Hwang & Min, 2015).

Additionally, Saade and Nijher (2016) postulated that companies must ensure that the

ERP package would be compatible with the suppliers’ and other supply chain partners’

systems before implementation. Saade and Nijher indicated that a thorough study of

company’s needs before implementation would ensure full utilization of the ERP system.

In contrast, Babaian, Xu, and Lucas (2018) postulated that even though ERP provides

unique benefits in the supply chain, its complexity could hinder worker productivity.

Babaian et al. indicated that the intricacies of the ERP task pages pose a challenge to

most ERP users, which may result in reduced productivity.

To further illustrate the importance of ERP technology in managing the supply

chain, Bejger (2016) analyzed the supply chain of disposable medical kits (DMK) that are

important in the health sector. Bejger posited that the DMK products are manufactured

and designed for a specific type of surgery, and the supply chain of the product must be

nimble to ensure customer satisfaction. The purpose of the study was to understand

manufacturer’s ways of managing DMK product and the supply chain. Bejger

interviewed the personnel of DMK manufacturers in the polish market. The findings

indicated that the use of ERP II systems that link the internal processes and the external

environment processes could minimize the disruption of DMK products in the medical

industry. Bejger stipulated that ERP systems would help managers instantly communicate

demand data to all departments in the company and the suppliers of the manufacturer.

The manufacturers could use the materials resource planning module in the ERP system

to ensure optimal materials are available.

Information technology improves the way people in the supply chain

communicate within and outside the organization. An employee can email or text another

employee within or outside the organization and disseminate critical information such as

changes in the customer demand within a short period and prevent unnecessary disruption

costs. Information technology could enable efficiency in the supply chain (Thoni & Tjoa,

2017). In addition, information technology facilitates the flexibility of operations in the

supply chain to ensure the robust management of resources and company performance

improvement. According Arnold, Benford, Canada, and Sutton (2015), enterprise risk

management (ERM) had become a significant part of business operations in many

companies due to the volatility and uncertainty of the marketplace. Arnold et al.

interviewed 155 chief executives that understood the risk management processes and had

at least 10 years of experience indicated that information technology such as ERM

enhances flexibility and solidifies the relationship between flexibility and performance.

The information technology (IT) enhancements allow other systems to integrate with the

company’s ERM providing flexibility in the organization processes. The ERM helps to

monitor the internal and external activities of the business to ensure quick response to the

market needs. Chi, Zhao, George, Li, and Zhai (2017) concurred with Arnold et al. that

firms are leveraging information technology (IT) to provide flexibility of processes in the

multi-firm environment. Chi et al. postulated that IT could promote flexibility and

standardization of processes to ensure operational efficiency and effectiveness in a multi-

firm environment. Evans and Bosua (2017) also concurred with Arnold et al. and Chi et

al. regarding the importance of IT. Evans and Bosua explored the ways that the small and

medium enterprises could use to survive and innovate in the current business

environment. The findings indicated that the business owners of small and medium-sized

enterprises must acquire talent that could innovate their current business processes.

Additionally, the business owners must invest in information technology that could

provide flexibility in the business operation and attain a competitive edge in the market.

Technology is a phenomenon that is continuously changing as developers

continue to improve the status quo of conducting business. Technological trends such as

vendor managed inventory, the cloud, biometrics, electronic data interchange, and other

technologies advances are used by company managers to have a competitive edge in the

market (Caputo, Marzi, & Pellegrini, 2016). Supply chain leaders could use radio

frequency identification (RFID) tag system to reduce production lead time and order

processing time to improve their company’s supply chain performance in garment

manufacturing (Choi, Yeung, Edwin Cheng, & Yue, 2018). The reduction of lead time

and order processing time could result in increased profitability of the company (Choi et

al., 2018). Supply chain leaders use RFID to manage inventory in the stores and

warehouses (Choy, Ho, & Lee, 2017). The use of RFID technology helps supply chain

managers to place the inventory at the appropriate designed location. The RFID also

helps managers easily locate and pick the inventory from that designated area. The RFID

also improves the order fill rate because when the inventory gets pulled out of the

warehouse or store and sold, the inventory system automatically creates an order to

replenishment such inventory (Tao, Fan, Lai, & Li, 2017). In addition, the RFID tag

system helps to minimize the shrinkage and misplacements in the retail stores (Tao et al.,

2017).

Additionally, Rathore, Thakkar, and Jha (2017) posited that the food supply chain

is vulnerable to many severe environmental and social issues. The authors suggested that

the Indian food supply chain has a significant number of nodes in the supply chain, which

could lead to food shortages. To study and develop a risk assessment for the food supply

chain in India, Rathore et al. used a grey analytical hierarchy process and grey technique

to analyze the collected data. The findings indicated that supply chain managers must

first use RFID tags to monitor goods in real time. Second, the supply chain managers

must have advanced warehouse capabilities to keep some buffer stocks in their

companies. Green, Zelbst, Sower, and Bellah (2017) posited that the primary benefit of

RFID system is its ability to capture accurate data that can provide real-time information

to the supply chain managers, concurring with Rathore et al. In addition, Green et al.

postulated that managers could trace products as they move through the supply chain

when supply chain managers embed the RFID tags in the products or pallets. Supply

chain managers can locate and remove tainted products from the supply chain by using

RFID technology and save lives (Wowak, Craighead, & Ketchen, 2016). To examine

how RFID-enabled visibility could improve store execution, Goyal, Hardgrave, Aloysius,

and DeHoratius (2016) conducted three field experiments in collaboration with

executives from two Fortune 500 companies. The findings indicated that the

implementation of RFID tag systems reduced stockouts of inventory in the backroom as

well as on the sales floor and inventory record inaccuracy. Gaukler, Ketzenberg, and

Salin, (2017) also indicated that RFID and related sensors could help manage perishable

goods in stores as they could provide detailed information about the life and the

temperature of the product. The RFID technology could help managers set correct

expiration dates of products as they arrive at the store (Gaukler et al., 2017).

Cloud computing refers to the web-based technology through which leaders and

managers of organization can store information in servers and access it on demand by a

software as a service (SaaS) (Raut, Gardas, Jha, & Priyadarshinee, 2017). Innovation and

information technology in the recent years has been used to improve supply chain

collaboration (Gonul Kochan, Nowicki, Sauser, & Randall, 2018). Gonul Kochan et al.

(2018) in their study explored electronic supply chain management system that improve

collaborative information sharing in a multi-echelon supply chain of the hospital. The

findings indicated that cloud-based sharing of information increases visibility in the

hospital supply chain, which improves hospital’s personnel responsiveness to fluctuations

of in-patient demand and supply lead times. To understand the effect of adopting cloud-

based services on organizational flexibility, Lal and Bharadwaj (2016) studied 21 Indian

firms by interviewing company information technology executives. The results of the

study indicated that all cloud-computing platforms affect organizations’ flexibility. The

cloud-computing platforms include (a) software-as-a-service (SaaS), (b) platform-as-a-

service (PaaS), or (c) infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS). Comparing traditional IT to cloud

computing, cloud computing has special topographies that include (a) pay per use, (b)

resource sharing, (c) elasticity, (d) low cost, and (e) data concentration (Liu, Yang, Qu, &

Liu, 2016). Supply chain managers must implement cloud computing in their

organizations to ensure agility to market changes.

The continuous market changes and globalization phenomena caused the rise of

electronic business (e-business) (Milovanovic, Milovanovic & Spasic, 2016).

Milovanovic et al. (2016) postulated that e-business entails all transactions and

information sharing between companies that use information and communication

technology. The information and communication technologies include the internet,

extranet, and electronic data interface. Another form of e-business that supply chain

managers use in the modern economy is the e-procurement tool. The e-procurement tool

improves the inter-organizational process efficiency and involves managers of companies

to collaborate by establishing closer links between customers and suppliers, and

companies (Power & Gruner, 2015). Yu, Mishra, Gopal, Slaughter, and Mukhopadhyay

(2015) conducted a study to investigate e-procurement systems benefits in regard to the

procurement of maintenance, repair, and operating (MRO) goods. Yu et al. surveyed 193

service organizations and found out that e-procurement use within the procurement

function improved the MRO procurement process, concurring with Power and Gruner

(2015). In addition, Ibem, Aduwo, Tunji-Olayeni, Ayo-Vaughan, and Uwakonye (2016)

in quest of finding the factors that influence companies to adopt e-procurement tools in

their organizations, conducted a study of 213 building companies in the building industry

in Nigeria. The findings indicated that companies adopt the e-procurement technology

tools because the technology (a) enhances efficiency in project delivery, (b) removes

geographical barriers, and (c) promotes effective communication between project team

members. Supply chain managers must critically evaluate their company’s procurement

tools and implement the e-procurement functions to ensure business continuity.

Additionally, e-collaboration is a phenomenon that supply chain managers could

also use to improve communication and improve performance in the supply chain. E-

collaboration can reduce uncertainty in the supply chain as supply chain managers can

share critical information virtually (Aggarwal & Srivastava, 2016). The supply chain

managers could use collaborative tools such as Google drives and box notes to

communicate with the counterparts in the supply chain quickly. To understand how e-

alignment impacts e-collaboration capabilities and improves firm performance, Chi,

Zhao, and George (2015) surveyed 145 Chinese corporations. The results indicated that

there is a positive relationship between e-alignment and e-collaboration. In addition, there

is a positive relationship between e-collaboration capabilities and performance. Supply

chain managers must be strategic in aligning e-business with e-collaboration capabilities

to ensure business performance improvements.

Supply chain technology risks. The security of information is critical to all

partners in the supply chain. According to Haddud, DeSouza, Khare, and Lee, (2017)

information technology provides substantial benefits in the supply chain, which include

(a) reduction of operational costs, (b) improved flow of goods from source to the

consumer, (c) supply chain flexibility, (d) transparency and visibility, and (e) the

availability of real-time information. Although the benefits of information technology

exist, there are also risks associated with the phenomenon. The information technology

risks include data and information breaches, software attacks, and technical failures

(Huong Tran, Childerhouse, & Deakins, 2016; Vincent, Higgs, & Pinsker, 2017).

Radio frequency identification tag technology is beneficial to many companies in

the supply chain. Walmart Corporation loses $3 billion every year due to theft and RFID

tag technology could mitigate such a problem by providing visibility to the goods at any

point in time in the supply chain (Liu et al., 2017). According to Liu et al., the RFID tag

technology also has challenges that include first, low bandwidth which can cause a severe

signal collision and yield to small throughput in information transfer. Second, the RFID

tag system lifetime gets limited by a small battery embedded in the tag. In addition,

Jannati and Bahrak (2016) postulated that RFID tag search protocol has been used to

locate a tag in large warehouses but the tag search protocol can breach the tag’s privacy

as an attacker can trace the tag and replace it with another bogus tag.

Technological risks can cause companies to lose a substantial amount of money.

Each year cyber-attacks cost the global economy about $445 billion (Samtani, Chinn,

Chen, & Nunamaker, 2017). The IT risk can cause the loss of market share, shareholder’s

wealth, profitability and credibility (Huong Tran et al., 2016). Most company managers

realize aftermath that their company was cyber-attacked, a phenomenon that has made

executives and managers of companies devise cyber threat intelligence to circumvent the

attacks (Samtani et al., 2017). According to Munkhdorj and Sekiya (2017), the cyber-

attacks have become a social problem, and company managers are employing resources

to predict cyber-attacks using the social data analysis. The security experts in companies

continue to monitor the cyber threats and devise the countermeasures to minimize the

disruption caused by them (Munkhdorj & Sekiya, 2017). Company leaders must continue

to employ resources to prevent the cyber-attacks to avoid disruption and ensure business

continuity.

Supplier Relationship Management

Supply chain managers’ challenge in the current economy is the uncertainty of the

business environment (Wieteska, 2016). Suppliers in the supply chain play a vital role in

the success of every business. According to Wieteska (2016), suppliers in the supply

chain must be flexible and adaptive to market changes to minimize disruption in the

supply chain. Supply chain managers must ensure that their company suppliers are well

vetted to avoid unnecessary disruption in the supply chain. Supplier relationship

management is vital for all firms in the supply chain. The robust buyer-supplier

relationship could help mitigate disruption in the supply chain. The buyer-supplier

relationships allow the parties to share robust strategies of how to manage supply chain

portfolios efficiently. According to Saghiri and Hill (2014), supplier relationship could

ensure buyer’s competitive edge over its competition. The collaboration between the

buyer and supplier in delaying the design initiatives to ensure supply chain managers

obtain correct information about the demand is a phenomenon that could satisfy customer

needs. In addition, Mizgier, Pasia, and Talluri (2017) posited that buyers must develop

suppliers to ensure the supply base is capable and efficient of handling the buyer’s

demand, which could mitigate disruption in the supply chain. Wieteska concurred with

Mizgier et al. because Wieteska stipulated that buyer-supplier partnership could help

mitigate disruption in the supply chain in the volatile market. The buyer-supplier

relationships could facilitate robust information sharing between companies and mitigate

disruption in the supply chain.

In addition, integration between local and global suppliers is an important

phenomenon that companies must always consider when creating sourcing strategies. The

integration of local and global integration suppliers can lower the supply costs (Straube,

Durach, & Phung, 2016). Straube et al. (2016) posited that compay managers must

conduct total cost ownership (TCO) to compare costs of doing business between local

and global suppliers. Companies must select low-cost suppliers without compromising on

quality. Straube et al. explored and developed a model that would analyze the impact of

supplier selection decisions on the total procurement costs. Straube et al. postulated that

supplier selection is vital to the success of the business. Straube et al. also postulated that

knowing the total landed cost (TLC) of any materials helps supply chain managers to

make an informed decision on the selection of suppliers. Straube et al. studied the

supplier selection of four Chinese companies in the steel industry. Straube et al.

conducted face-to-face and telephone interviews with procurement managers to collect

data. The analysis includes the separation of three costs of quality, material, and delivery.

The study findings indicated that Chinese companies that replaced global companies with

local suppliers showed 30% lower purchasing costs. One can conclude that establishing

local suppliers can reduce the risk of business disruption.

Straube et al. (2016) concurred with De Castro Moura Duart, De Souza, Romero

Macau, and De Souza (2017) that adding a secondary supplier to the supply chain could

reduce costs and increase the competition. Khan, Sinkovics, and Lew (2015) postulated

that when companies acquire suppliers, the global suppliers expect the technological

advancements and knowledge transferred to them so that they can be competitive in the

market. Khan et al. concurred with Leguizamon, Selva, and Santos (2016) about

knowledge transfer. Leguizamon et al. posited that Walmart Corporation transferred

necessary technology and knowledge to support the local farmers (suppliers) to cultivate

crops according to the Walmart’s standards. Rugraff and Sass (2016) postulated that

when the crisis hits a country, local and global supplier react differently. For example,

local suppliers might work with other local suppliers to remain competitive in the market

while global suppliers may invest in the research and development (Rugraff & Sass,

2016). The integration between local and global suppliers is successful when information

and technology are transferred and shared in the value chain.

Supplier relationship management involves selection of suppliers that would

minimize disruption in the supply chain and provide business continuity. Zhao and Cao

(2015) posited that power asymmetry between supplier and manufacturer would affect

the risk occurrence in the joint product development efforts because of the complexity of

fulfilling tasks independently. Supply chain managers should consider power asymmetry

when selecting suppliers. According to Hou, Wei, Li, Huang, and Ashley (2017),

coordination in the supply chain is vital to the success of any business. The companies

that have robust relationships in their supply chain coordinate the movement of goods

from source to the consumer with minimal disruption problems. Hou et al. focused on the

three echelons, the manufacturer, the distributor, and the retailer plus the effect of the

revenue sharing contracts on their relationship and performance. The study also revealed

that a leader-follower game decentralized three-echelon supply chain could be

coordinated through revenue contracts and yield optimal supply chain performance.

According to Hou et al., the revenue sharing contracts are the agreements between the

retailer and the manufactures whereby the manufacturer agrees to sell to the retailer

merchandise at a lower price than the market price. In this scenario, the retailer agrees to

share some agreed revenue of the merchandise with the manufacturer.

To investigate the relationship between sustainable supplier management

methodologies and buyer-supplier performance, Yang and Zhang (2017) collected and

analyzed data from 256 manufacturers in China. Yang and Zhang found that sustainable

selection of suppliers, monitoring of suppliers and sustainable supplier collaboration have

positive relationships with buyer-supplier performance. Successful supplier or

partnership selection minimizes the risk of selecting a supplier with an opportunistic

behavior but instead creates a potential collaboration synergy (Mitrega, Forkmann,

Zaefarian, & Henneberg, 2017). Mitrega et al. (2017) postulated that supply chain

managers must use various information sources to find and vet suppliers to be successful

in business. Once the right suppliers are identified, supply chain managers can create a

robust relationship with the key suppliers to ensure business continuity by collaborating

and sharing of vital information in the supply chain (Teller, Kotzab, Grant, and Holweg,

2016). Xiaoming, Olorunniwo, Chunxing, and Jolayemi (2016) concurred with Teller et

al. (2016) that supplier relationship management with the supplier of the suppliers could

improve the firm’s performance. If the supply chain managers of a firm engender lower

tier visibility in the supply chain, the lower-tier suppliers will ensure to comply with the

procurement standards of the buying firm and mitigate business disruptions (Xiaoming et

al., 2016). Additionally, the firm’s ability to have visibility to the lower tiers would

improve product quality and ensure customer satisfaction. Forkmann, Henneberg, Naudé,

and Mitrega (2016) posited that supplier relationship management has a positive impact

on the supply base. Oghazi, Rad, Zaefarian, Beheshti, & Mortazavi (2016) also

postulated that the supply chain managers’ access to many suppliers could provide them

with leverage to choose the best suppliers that could perform well for the company.

Yang, Lai, Wang, Rauniar, and Xie (2015) posited that strategic alliances with

supply chain partners could improve performance in the supply chain. The Yang et al.

investigated the antecedents of strategic alliances and the alliance effect on innovation

capabilities in the manufacturing firms of China. The findings indicated that

communication is vital antecedents before companies form strategic alliances. The

effective communication can create a robust relationship between supply chain partners

and improve innovative capabilities and performances in the supply chain.

Supplier selection is critical to the success of any supply chain. Supply chain

managers must devise a supplier selection process that is robust to ensure the

improvement of quality, delivery performance, responsiveness, and reduction of costs in

the supply chain (Famiyeh & Kwarteng, 2018). Asadabadi (2017) studied supplier

selection process and postulated that supply chain managers must consider customer

needs as a deciding factor in selecting a supplier. Asadabadi said that suppliers that can

fulfill the changing-priorities of customer needs in the volatile market would be the best

supplier for any company as they would improve customer satisfaction. Yadav, Sharma,

and Singh (2018) concurred with Famiyeh and Kwarteng (2018), and Asadabadi that

robust supplier selection is vital to the success of the purchasing firms in the supply

chain. Yadav et al. posited that the fuzzy Technique for Order Performance by Similarity

to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method could be used to solve supplier selection

opportunities. Yadav et al. postulated that criteria that could be used to rate suppliers

when using TOPSIS method might include (a) quality, (b) service, (c) delivery, (d) price,

and (e) environmental responsibilities.

Supply Chain Risk Management

Supply chain risk management (SCRM) is a process that supply chain managers

of organizations use to proactively devise strategies that would help identify and manage

any form of disruption (Cagnin, Oliveira, Simon, Helleno, & Vendramini, 2016). In their

study to understand the proactive approach to risk management, Kırılmaz and Erol (2017)

stipulated that even though popular trends like just in time, lean manufacturing, short

product life cycle, and transportation networks reduce lead times, they increase the

supply chain risk. Supply chain managers must devise robust procurement strategies to

ensure business continuity. Kırılmaz and Erol stated that proactive assessment of

suppliers helps eliminate risky suppliers. In addition, Kırılmaz and Erol postulated that

the world economic forum classified risk into economic risk, environmental risk,

geopolitical, societal risk, and technological risk. Kırılmaz and Erol performed risk

analysis in different stages that included (a) risk identification, (b) risk measurement, (c)

risk evaluation, (d) risk mitigation, and (e) risk monitoring, and control. Kırılmaz and

Erol then used linear programming to minimize the cost and identify the correct number

of suppliers to support the business. Kırılmaz and Erol revealed that risk mitigation

strategies include (a) avoidance, (b) control, (d) cooperation, and (e) flexibility.

Li, Fan, Sun, and Cheng (2017) posited that SCRM had attracted much attention

because of the severe consequences of the supply chain risks to businesses. Li et al.

postulated that supply chain risks could include natural disasters, disruptive technologies,

and exchange rates fluctuations, which could adversely affect the business operations of

firms. Li et al. indicated that information sharing, risk analysis and assessment, and risk

sharing could help a firm create a robust information system process to minimize supply

chain risk. Li et al. used information processing theory to understand how companies

process their information. Truong Quang, and Hara (2018) said that the supply chain has

several risks that include financial risks, time risks, demand risk, supply risks, operations

risks, information risks, and external risks which can negatively affect supply chain

performance, concurring with Li et al. (2017). The collaborative risk management

phenomenon could help mitigate supply chain risks when supply chain partners share risk

information, make the decision jointly, and integrate processes (Friday, Ryan, Sridharan,

& Collins, 2018). The advantages of collaborative risk management include (a) increased

visibility in the supply chain, (b) creates a well-designed risk mitigation culture, and (c)

the effective use of information technology (Friday et al., 2018).

Revilla and Saenz (2017) explored SCRM regarding internal operations and the

external collaboration with other companies. The robust SCRM strategies would

minimize the disruption in the supply chain (Revilla & Saenz, 2017). Revilla and Saenz

gave an example of Apple Inc. that launched Ipad2 just two hours after the Tsunami of

2011. The Tsunami disrupted many companies’ supply chain and caused companies to

shut down. If there was robust communication with the external partners about the

Tsunami, Apple could have postponed the launch. Revilla and Saenz’s study findings

indicate that companies that collaborate with their suppliers by sharing information are

less prone to disruptions. In addition, if the internal processes of the company are too

lean, the company may fail to minimize risk effectively. Revilla and Saenz surveyed

managers of 908 firms representing 69 countries. Chaudhuri, Boer, and Taran (2018)

concurred with Revilla and Saenz in regards the effect of internal and external

collaboration on supply chain risk management. Chaudhuri et al.’s study revealed that

internal integration has a positive effect on the flexibility performance in an organization,

while external integration did not have a positive effect on the flexibility performance.

Supply chain managers must devise different SCRM tactics to ensure that external

integration does not negatively affect the performance of the supply chains (Chaudhuri et

al., 2018). According to Zeng and Yen (2017) collaborative risk management initiatives

could also create resilient supply chains.

Wang, Tiwari, and Chen (2017) postulated that globalization and complex

interrelationships between entities makes it harder for the supply chains to run efficiently.

To understand an integrated model that incorporates multiple risks and helps in making a

robust mitigation decision Wang et al. used a case study to evaluate alternative risk

management strategies. Wang et al. interviewed various managers of the company

including the general manager to understand the strategies used to mitigate supply chain

risks. The findings indicated that the fuzzy Delphi method, a flexible technique to explore

new concepts could be valuable in finding mitigation strategies. The TOPSIS method is a

multi-criteria decision analysis method that would also be useful to finding and analyzing

mitigation strategies. Supply chain managers could also use Petri net and

Triangularization Clustering Algorithm that can identify supply chain weaknesses, which

can help the managers identify appropriate SCRM strategies (Blackhurst et al., 2018). In

addition, supply chain managers could use the top-down approach of Fault Tree Analysis

(FTA) that identifies performance indicators first and then connect them to risks (Qazi,

Dickson, Quigley, & Gaudenzi, 2018). The approach provides supply chain managers an

opportunity to prioritize the risk behaviors mitigate them to ensure business continuity.

Supply chain managers must continue to stay engaged in the supply chain community to

learn different ways of managing risks. Knowledge is a critical resource in the supply

chain. To examine the factors that affect supply chain manager’s risk mitigation

competency Ambulkar, Blackhurst, and Cantor (2016) surveyed 203 supply chain

managers. The findings indicated that supply chain managers with vast knowledge of

mitigation risks have higher absorption capacity that enhances the supply chain risk

mitigation competency.

The SCRM is an essential phenomenon in supply chain management. Risk

management in the supply chain ensures business continuity; supply chain managers

must ensure that robust strategies and tools are in place to ensure supply chain resilience.

Riley, Klein, Miller, and Sridharan (2016) posited that information sharing, internal

integration, and training could minimize disruption in the supply chain. Additionally,

Rathore, Thakkar, and Jha (2017) postulated that the use of RFID tag technology,

collaboration with supply chain partners and warehouse capabilities could minimize the

risk of supply chain disruption in the supply, concurring with Riley et al. To further stress

the importance of SCRM in the supply chain, Andjelkovic (2017) collected data from

executives in Serbian companies to understand their level of proactive SCRM initiatives.

The results indicated that companies with proactive supply chain risk management

initiatives could increase their resilience in the supply chain. Andjelkovic noticed that

executives in Serbian companies were not familiar with the importance of supply chain

risk management initiatives. The disruptions in the supply chain significantly affected the

Serbian companies.

Supply Chain Resilience

Supply chain resilience is the endurance of unforeseeable changes and disruption

in the supply chain through preparedness that ensures a robust response to such changes

and disruptions (Li, Wu, Holsapple, & Goldsby, 2017). A resilient supply chain can

withstand disruption and ensure business continuity. Li et al. (2017) postulated that

companies must invest in resources, risk prevention, and innovative response practices to

ensure a competitive advantage over their competition. The fewer the customers that are

inconvenienced by disruption, the more goodwill attained in the community. In addition,

Li et al. posited that the three-supply chain resilience dimensions that include supply

chain preparedness, supply chain alertness and supply chain agility could significantly

impact the company’s financial well-being. Supply chain managers must be proactive in

ensuring the existence of supply chain resilience techniques in the supply chain. Golgeci

and Ponomarov (2015) concurred with Li et al. that to have a resilient supply chain

companies must invest in innovation because it positively affects the supply chain

resilience. Additionally, Botes, Niemann, and Kotze (2017) postulated that collaboration

between supply chain partners could help minimize risk and disruption in the supply

chain. However, the collaboration between buyers and suppliers does not directly lead to

supply chain resilience but drives visibility, velocity, and flexibility, that enable supply

chain resilience (Botes et al., 2017). Collaboration could indirectly enable supply chain

resilience (Botes et al., 2017).

Supply chain resilience is an integral part of supply chain management. Supply

chain managers must devise robust plans to prevent disruptions in the supply chain. Das

(2018) established that the fundamental ways to contain disruption include (a) supplier

flexibility, (b) supply location flexibility, and (c) reliability of the supplier. Supplier

flexibility strategy must include an increase of suppliers; supplier location strategy

involves procuring materials from multiple networks; and supplier reliability entails

supply chain managers replacing underperforming suppliers to ensure business continuity

(Das, 2018). Lucker and Seifert (2017) posited that there are three crucial operational

risk measures, which include (a) risk mitigation inventory (RMI), (b) dual sourcing and

Seifer found out that when dual-sourcing is not available, RMI and agility capacity could

act as substitutes. In addition, whenever dual-sourcing is available the agility capacity

and dual-sourcing act as the substitutes. Lucker and Seifert concurred with Das (2018)

that having multiple suppliers provides the needed flexibility should one supplier fold. In

addition, to find intra and inter-organizational factors that could assist in building

resilience in the perishable product supply chains. Ali, Nagalingam, and Gurd (2017)

conducted a semistructured interview of 30 managers of perishable product supply chain

companies in Australia. Ali et al. found out that globalization, proper business

certifications, multi-sourcing, vertical integration, training and development, quality

management, and responsiveness to customer needs could help businesses build a

resilient supply chain.

Using nonlinear control theory Spiegler, Potter, Naim, and Towill (2016)

investigated the resilient dynamics in the grocery supply chain. Spiegler et al. tested the

distribution center systems of a large retailer using the shock and filter lenses. The results

indicated that inventory drift under demand uncertainty could minimize resilience

performance. Spiegler et al. suggested that inventory and goods in transit (GIT) should be

a variable that is a function of demand and lead time. Another finding is that supply chain

managers must always revisit trade off priorities of production, inventory, and

transportation costs to increase resilience in the supply chain. In addition, supply chain

managers must group inventories with similar demands to ensure right quantities are

ordered and boost supply chain resilience. Trading partners in the supply chain can

achieve supply chain resilience when they share information, which could build trust

between companies (Jain et al., 2017).

Globalization allows companies to trade or buy materials all over the world and

supply chain complexities are inevitable. To understand the supply chain resilience

phenomenon in developing countries, Tukamuhabwa, Stevenson, and Busby (2017)

researched supply network of 20 manufacturing firms in Uganda by conducting

interviews with 45 company executives. The findings indicated the interconnectedness of

disruption threats, strategies, and the outcomes. Some of the threats are the side effects of

the created strategies. Tukamuhabwa et al. posited that when building resilience supply

chain managers must understand the consequences of each strategy to avoid a more

severe disruption in another area of the supply chain network.

Cheng and Lu (2017) studied 297 senior managers of Taiwanese manufacturing

firms to understand the influence of frontier, trajectory, and absorptive capacity on

reactive and proactive effects of supply chain resilience of the supply chain. The findings

included leaders of companies in the supply chain that stayed engaged and assisted when

disruption occurred (Cheng & Lu, 2017). Second, the trajectory has a positive effect on

inter-organizational supply chain resilience because the phenomenon helps supply chain

partners to accommodate facilitation of supplier integration (Cheng & Lu, 2017). Third,

the absorptive capacity has a positive influence on inter-organizational supply chain

resilience as leaders of manufacturing firms could acquire and exploit supply chain

partner’s knowledge to improve organizational capabilities. Cheng and Lu study

indicated the importance of partnerships and collaboration in the supply chain to ensure

supply chain resiliency. Concurring with Cheng and Lu (2017), Zeng and Yen (2017)

postulated that due to significant risks in the global supply chain managers of companies

are incentivized to work together to form a more resilient supply chain network and

minimize disruption. The supply chain managers must ensure that the partnership

relationships in the supply chain are robust to ensure business continuity as partners

could devise excellent strategies that would promote supply chain resilience. Namdar,

Xueping, Sawhney, and Pradhan (2018) posited that single sourcing has its benefits in the

supply chain but can increase disruption risks. Managers must consider multiple sourcing

to reduce supply chain risk and make the supply chain resilient (Namdar et al., 2018).

Supply Sustainability

Leaders of organizations continue to strive for excellence in the field of

environmental and social sustainability as the phenomena play a significant role in the

way managers conduct business in the current market (Sodhi & Tang, 2018). To survive

in the current business environment for a long-term, managers must ensure that

sustainability is a top priority of their companies (Katiyar, Meena, Barua, Tibrewala, &

Kumar, 2018). Katiyar et al. (2018) postulated that supply chain managers must be

compliant with the stakeholder requirements to see improvement in sustainability

performance as well as supply chain performance. Gold and Schleper (2017) concurred

with Kativar et al.’s assertion about the importance of stakeholders in sustainability

improvement. Gold and Schleper posited that stakeholder pressures drive most

sustainability initiatives in companies and to avoid stakeholder pressures supply

managers must devise true sustainability initiative plans. Gold and Schleper also stated

that a significant way to integrate sustainability into the business is by taking on a risk-

based perspective and monitoring the stakeholder pressure. Additionally, Silvestre (2016)

postulated that risks and opportunities that companies face could influence supply chain

managers’ sustainability initiatives, concurring with Gold and Schleper statement about

risk-based perspective. To understand the sustainability efforts of companies, managers

could use an exergy analysis tool that can identify and measure inefficiencies in the

industrial processes (Jawad, Jaber, & Nuwayhid, 2018). Using the tool, managers can

improve the sustainable efforts and ensure all processes in a company are sustainable.

Another tool used to measure sustainability efforts is known as multiobjective mixed

integer linear programming model (Mota, Gomes, Carvalho, & Barbosa-Povoa, 2018).

The model integrates all strategic decisions such supplier selection, capacity and location

(Mota et al., 2018).

Sustainable supply chain management has been a topic that has gained grounds in

this century because the industrial development of the past two centuries that caused

unintended ecological deterioration (Paulraj, Chen, & Blome, 2017). Company leaders

are continually finding ways of improving sourcing processes to ensure products are

sourced most sustainably in the supply chain (Akhavan & Beckmann, 2017). To

understand how managers of multinational corporations manage sustainability issues in a

multi-tier supply base, Gong, Jia, Brown, and Koh (2018) conducted 43 semistructured

interviews with managers of focal companies in China. The findings indicated that

managers of multinational corporations devise internal and external to work with first tier

and subsequent tier suppliers on sustainable programs. Managers for focal companies

train the first-tier suppliers on sustainable ways that in turn train and educate the lower

tier suppliers. The focal company managers also use the third-party organizations to

assist in training the lower tier suppliers the sustainable ways of managing products and

services in the supply chain. Mani, Gunasekaran, and Delgado (2018) in their study

explored the relationship between social sustainability and supply chain performance.

The results showed a positive correlation between supplier social sustainability and

supply chain performance. Supply chain managers must ensure that the sustainability

initiatives are in place to ensure excellent supply chain performance.

Wilhelm, Blome, Wieck, and Xiao (2016) postulated that managers in

procurement firms must ensure that sustainability initiatives in their companies are

monitored because the stakeholder might hold them accountable. Wilhelm et al. posited

that the sustainability issues occur at the supplier level henceforth procurement managers

must engender lower tier supplier visibility. The lower-tier suppliers often have

unsustainable activities that could negatively affect the brand. Wilhem et al. explored the

sustainability management strategies that procurement firms use to mitigate sustainability

issues in lower-tier suppliers. Wilhem et al. analyzed seven large multinational

companies and utilized semi-interview structure to collect data. The findings indicated

that procurement firms have varied strategies for managing the sustainability issues. First,

managers of businesses employ horizontal complexity whereby tier one supplier

facilitates the delegation of sub-supplier sustainability management responsibilities

whenever the institutional distance is low. Second, the buying firms exercise control to

the second-tier suppliers and ensure that the sustainability efforts are observed by

allowing the collaborative environment between the parties. Similarly, the government

can also put pressure on suppliers by imposing tariffs on goods from unregulated

countries to ensure that supply chain sustainability initiatives get followed (Zhou, Huang,

Gong, & Peters, 2017). In addition, major retailers play a vital role in ensuring suppliers

comply with the sustainability initiatives. For example, Walmart, a dominant retailer

mandated its suppliers such as Clorox, Mattel, and Kimberly-Clark to reduce their

packaging material, chemicals, and conserve water to have a sustainable supply chain

(Gielens, Geyskens, Deleersnyder, & Nohe, 2018). The suppliers comply with the

requests to stay in business.

Procurement managers in the current market ensure their suppliers are continually

devising global supply chain initiatives that can sustain the environment and the

communities. Company managers realize that sustainability can provide a competitive

edge in the market. Busse, Schleper, Niu, and Wagner (2016) postulated there are

sometimes slow implementations of sustainability efforts in the global supply chains.

Busse et al. identified five barriers to supplier development for sustainability. The

barriers include (a) complexity of sustainability concept, (b) social and economic

differences that make it difficult for suppliers to set challenging goals, (c) spatial

distance, (d) linguistic distance, and (e) cultural differences. In addition, Kim and Davis

(2016) postulated after section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 was enforced,

companies failed to identify whether or not their company’s products came from conflict

minerals. Lack of company managers’ interest in the lower tier suppliers can also derail

the sustainable initiatives in the supply chain. Kashmanian (2017) concurred with Kim

and Davis that spatial distance could slow the sustainability efforts. Kashmanian posited

that stakeholders require more transparency in dispersed supply chains to ensure that

distant companies follow the needed sustainability methods and processes. Kashmanian

stated that companies could build transparency in the supply chain by ensuring that the

companies publish their sustainability efforts for accountability purposes and

stakeholders to see. In addition, the collaboration of companies in the supply chain could

help advance sustainability efforts (Kashmanian, 2017).

According to Choi, Min, Joo, and Choi (2017), green supply chain management

presents some benefits that include (a) reduction in greenhouse gases, (b) greater use of

innovative technology that help production of environmentally friendly products, (c)

reduction in costs as companies may use fewer materials, (d) reduced violation penalties,

and (e) creation of a positive corporate image. According to Madani and Rasti-Barzoki

(2017), the increase of government subsidy rates on green products increases profits for

companies creating an opportunity for company leaders to invest more money in

environmentally friendly products, concurring with Choi et al. Xia, Zu, and Shi (2015)

stipulated that proactive social responsibility and sustainable supply chain initiatives

could bring competitive advantage and economic benefits to a company, agreeing with

Madani and Rasti-Barzoki, and Choi et al.

Supply Chain Disruptions

Disruptions in the supply chain are inevitable, and supply chain managers must

ensure that they have strategies in place to mitigate the disruptions. Disruptions could

include natural disasters, and supplier inability to fulfill orders, which could be a result of

low supplier capacity and capabilities (Wang, Craighead, & Li, 2014). Wang et al.’s

study indicated that supplier-buyer trust is vital in the supply chain. The study also

revealed that most disruptions in the supply chain were caused by (a), supplier delay in

delivering the product, (b), supplier’s failure to deliver sufficient quantities, and (c) the

supplier’s product defects. Wang et al. (2014) also noticed that the trust between buyer

and supplier damaged by supplier induced disruption could be salvaged by supplier’s

genuine commitment to fulfill the disrupted products as well as willingness to improve its

supply processes. Sarkar and Kumar (2015) postulated that sharing of disruption

information by the upstream partners such as manufacturers could reduce unnecessary

disruption in the downstream supply chain. Sharing of information could also reduce the

bullwhip effect in the supply chain. In addition, Kumar, Liu, and Scutella (2015) posited

that disruption in the supply chain could be devastating to companies but the proper

planning of the mitigation strategies could reduce disruption effect on the company’s

financial standing and shareholder’s wealth. Kumar et al. indicated that disruption in the

supply chain could yield a 2.88% loss of shareholder’s wealth in Indian firms.

To investigate causes of disruption in the supply chain for western buying firms in

the Chinese market, Durach et al. (2017) interviewed 42 executives from Western buying

firms. The findings indicated that there are several causes of disruptions in the supply

chain that include first, cultural differences between western and Chinese companies. The

miscommunication due to cultural differences could result in (a), missed deadline and

extended lead-times, (b), the legal and law enforcement because of the different

understanding of the supply chain laws, and (c) the lack of transportation infrastructures

that pertains to routes and transportation equipment. Fourth, the poor supplier selection;

the western firms fail to identify suppliers that could provide robust product and capacity.

Durach et al. also identified mitigation strategies that include fostering supplier

relationships. In addition, Durach et al. indicated that encouraging supplier relationships

tactics such as joint product design, supplier plant visits, developing suppliers, offering

long-term relationships, conducting supplier training could help mitigate disruption in the

supply chain.

The relationship between supply chain partners has a significant role in mitigating

disruption in the supply chain. Loh, Thai, Wong, Yuen, and Zhou (2017) indicated lack

of port-centric supply chain disruptions threats plan may cause delays at the ports and

disrupt the supply chain. Loh et al. postulated that robust relationships between the

managers of the buying firms and the operators of the port could mitigate disruption in

the supply chain, concurring with Durach et al. (2017). Sawik (2017) posited that robust

relationship with suppliers and supply chain partners could help minimize disruption in

the supply chain, concurring with Durach et al. and Loh et al. Sawik also postulated that

to minimize the effect of disruptions to companies, firms must keep buffer inventory;

have alternative suppliers, and help the main suppliers recover more quickly. Helping the

supplier recover from a disruption, the company reduces the recovery time and ensures

continuity of business (Sawik, 2017). Additionally, supply chain process becomes

inefficient when the leaders of retailers and manufacturers maximize profits separately

instead of building relationships and working together to ensure the primary and the

backup suppliers gets utilized effectively during a disruption (Giri & Bardhan, 2015).

According to Giri and Bardhan (2015), robust relationships of supply chain partners are

critical to the success of any supply chain, concurring with Sawik, Durach et al., and Loh

et al.

Schmitt, Kumar, Stecke, Glover, and Ehlen (2017) discussed the severity of

disruptions in the supply chain. Schmitt et al. stated that the Tsunami that occurred in

Japan in 2011 was the most expensive natural disaster disruption in history. The

disruption cost was $350 billion. Schmitt et al. based their study on multi-echelon

inventory systems. Schmitt et al. believe that base-stock policies are optimal in different

supply chains. The companies that implement robust stock ordering policies might

experience minimal disruptions in the supply chain. In addition, Schmitt et al.

investigated the system performance with a disruption, system performance under

expediting, dynamic order policy applicability, and the global search versus the line

search. Some supply chain managers may think that when a disruption occurs companies

must expedite the orders to ensure continuity of business, but Schmitt et al. claims that

systems inventory increases due to expedited orders and cause variability in order

quantity levels that can be costly.

Supply chain disruption can negatively affect the global economy as well as a

company’s financial standing. The explosion at a BASF facility on 17 October 2016 in

Ludwigshafen in Germany caused the disruption of raw materials such as methanol and

naphtha to the entire supply chain (Dolgui, Ivanov & Sokolov, 2018). BASF lost 10-15%

in revenue compared to the previous year (Dolgui et al., 2018). In addition, the strike at

the Hyundai plants affected the 130,000-car production (Dolgui et al., 2018). The volcano

that erupted in Iceland in 2010 caused a global loss of $5 billion in the air travel sales

(Konig & Spinler, 2016). In addition, Konig and Spinler (2016) postulated that the

volcano disrupted the shipments to companies in Iceland. The 2011 Tsunami earthquake

in Japan caused the production of Japanese transportation equipment industry (TEI) to

drop by 50% between February 2011 and April 2011 (Arto, Andreoni, & Rueda

Cantuche, 2015). In addition, a deep-water oil well explosion in New Mexico in 2010

disrupted the supply of oil to the region causing a financial impact of $40 billion

(Chakravarty, 2013). Multisourcing, backup sourcing could mitigate these disruptions in

the supply chain, and emergency purchases to ensure business continuity (Tang, Gurnani,

& Gupta, 2014). He, Huang, and Yuan (2016) posited that supply chain managers could

manage supply risks by using emergency procurement strategies, concurring with Tang et

al. (2014). Disruption is an unforeseeable event that occurs in the supply chain and

negatively affects the business continuity (Pariazar & Sir, 2018). According to Pariazar

and Sir (2018), issues such as (a) natural disasters, (b) production problems, (c) accidents,

(d) labor availability, (e) terrorist attacks, (f) unexpected and sudden shocks, (g)

economic crises, and (h) war can cause a disruption. Han and Shin (2016) also postulated

different events that include terrorism or political volatility, natural disasters, and

unexpected equipment failures could cause supply chain risk, and disruption, concurring

with Pariazar and Sir. Food recalls can cause a disruption in the supply chain. Food

recalls are costly and deprive the consumers the ability to buy products from the retailers.

In 2009 Peanut butter recall cost Kellog $70 million in lost sales (MacKenzie & Apte,

2017).

Akkermans and Van Wassenhove (2018) posited that poor management decisions

could disrupt the supply chain. Managers must be vigilant and quickly address any grey

swan events to ensure business continuity. According to Akkermans and Van

Wassenhove, grey swan events are those events that are managers know would

eventually cause disruption but neglects to address them promptly. To find the

relationship between major sources of risks and the disruption impact on the agri-food

supply chain performance, Nyamah, Jiang, Feng, and Enchill (2017) collected data

through a questionnaire from supply chain executives in Ghana. The findings indicated

that performance of the agri-food supply chain negatively correlates with disruption such

as interest/exchange rate policies and volatility in customer demand. In addition, Nyamah

et al. posited that supply chain managers must continuously assess risk effectively and

make right decisions to mitigate disruption in the agri-food supply chain, concurring with

Akkermans and Van Wassenhove (2018) that poor decision making can cause

disruptions. In addition, managers must be proactive and have a pre-programmed

response to any supply chain risks to ensure business continuity, failing to do so could

have a negative effect on the company’s supply chain (Srinivasan & Tew, 2017).

Transition

In Section 1, I introduced a general scope and background of the study. Section 1

includes the background of the problem; problem and purpose statements; nature of the

study; research and interview questions; description of the conceptual framework;

definition of key terms; assumptions, limitations, delimitations; and significance of the

study. Additionally, I included a review of the literature related to the research study.

Section 2 consists of my documentation of the reasons for using the multiple qualitative

case studies to explore the strategies that supply chain managers use to prevent and

minimize disruptions in Northwest Arkansas. Section 2 also includes the purpose of the

study, my role as a researcher, participants, research method and design, population and

sampling, ethical research, data collection instruments, data collection technique, data

organization technique, data analysis, reliability and validity, and transition and

summary. In Section 3, I present study findings; discuss the study’s application to

professional practice; and provide the implication for social change, recommendation for

actions, recommendations for future research, reflections, and conclusion.

Section 2: The Project

Section 2 of this study includes the purpose statement, and discussions of my role

as a researcher, participants, research method and design, population and sampling,

ethical research, data collection instruments, data collection technique, data organization

technique, data analysis, and reliability and validity. Section 3 includes the presentation

of study findings, discussion of the study’s application to professional practice,

implication for social change, recommendation for actions, recommendations for future

research, reflections, and conclusion.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore strategies that

grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their

companies’ supply chains. The research population consisted of four supply chain

managers from four grocery stores in Northwest Arkansas with successful experience in

mitigating the effects of disruptions in their companies’ supply chains. The positive

social change implication pertain to the uninterrupted flow of food to the community at

the right price for customers’ consumption and nourishment. Increased efficiency by

grocery store supply chain managers may attract new grocery store investments that

could create job opportunities for the Northwest Arkansas community. The potential new

jobs would improve the standard of living of the people in Northwest Arkansas.

Role of the Researcher

A qualitative researcher strives to provide an in-depth understanding of the issues

that are related to people, organizations, and the environment (Barnham, 2015).

According to Rich and Misener (2017), researchers are typically the primary data

collection instrument. In this study, I served as a primary instrument for collecting data.

In my role as researcher, I collected data through face-to-face semistructured interviews

and company documentation, analyzed the data, and presented it objectively. In

qualitative research, a researcher must have integrity and avoid biases when researching

to achieve truthful and robust research results (Shaw & Satalkar, 2018). According to

Anderson (2017), a researcher must understand the importance of reflexivity, correct

methodology, member checking, and situational ethics to have rigorous research. To

obtain non-biased and objective results, I used open-ended interview questions during the

interview process (see Appendix A). I also avoided indicating that there was a correct

answer when asking questions. Additionally, I maintained a neutral stance in the data

collection process, and I allowed the participants to review their answers to my interview

questions before including their responses in my report to ensure accurate capture of their

views. After completing my final report, I asked a colleague to review it and identify any

bias that may have existed.

According to Marshall and Rossman (2016), a researcher should disclose the

experiences, biases, and any assumptions that may affect the study negatively. The

researcher must ensure that such issues get addressed to have reliable and valid research.

I have had practical experience in managing grocery store businesses for over 10 years.

In addition, working for a major retailer for the past 8 years in the supply chain field

granted me the opportunity to manage the company’s suppliers and service providers,

making decisions regarding the retailer’s supply chain to ensure business continuity. My

experiences did not impede my research when I interviewed the participants, as I did not

reflect my own experiences but only listened to the interviewees provide their

experiences and strategies they used in their companies to mitigate supply chain

disruptions. To further mitigate against biases and integrity issues, I recruited only

participants who I did not know prior to my study. Ross, Iguchi, and Panicker (2018)

stated that a researcher must hold paramount the protection of the human research

participants’ rights. As a researcher, I protected the rights of participants by respecting

their values. In addition, I followed The Belmont Report’s ethical guidelines stipulating

that a researcher must treat participants with respect, fairness, and beneficence (National

Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical & Behavioral Research,

1979). I asked each participant the same set of interview questions to ensure consistency.

I upheld the participants’ confidentiality agreement to the highest standards, allowing the

participants to take part in the research freely without fear of retribution from anyone. I

used alphanumeric codes P1, P2, P3, and P4 to identify my four participants.

Before collecting data, I sought approval from Walden’s Institutional Review

Board (IRB). The approval number is 01-29-19-0657276. Once I was approved, I

collected data through face-to-face semistructured interviews. Arsel (2017) posited that a

qualitative researcher must have an outline of the interview listing essential points and

planned probes and transitions. I used an interview protocol document (see Appendix B)

to ensure that I asked the necessary questions that would bring value to the study. The

interview protocol also helped me to be consistent with all the participants in regard to

the questions that I asked. Sorsa, Kiikkala, and Astedt-Kurki (2015) noted that qualitative

researchers use the bracketing method to mitigate preconceived ideas that could

negatively affect a research study. I used the bracketing method by maintaining reflective

research journals and memos when collecting and analyzing data to avoid biases.

Participants

Effective participant selection is critical to getting robust results in any qualitative

study (Yin, 2018). I used purposive sampling to select four participants. Purposive

sampling helps the researcher select participants who have experience, knowledge, and

understanding of the research question (Imani-Nasab, Seyedin, Yazdizadeh, &

Majdzadeh, 2017; Megheirkouni & Roomi, 2017). Peloquin, Doering, Alley, and Rebar

(2017) conducted a study about disparities in health perspectives between indigenous and

non-indigenous population and recruited participants who were interested in the topic

under study. Similarly, I selected participants who showed interest in my study to ensure

that they could provide robust information and knowledge about the study topic. The

criteria for selecting participants for my study were that they (a) must have served as a

senior supply chain manager, (b) must have had extensive information about disruptions,

and (c) must have had experience in implementing successful strategies for preventing

disruptions in the grocery store supply chain.

The process of gaining access to the participants started with the IRB approval.

Gaining access to the participants can be challenging given that executives and managers

may be busy managing their businesses, leaving little time to sit down with the researcher

(Maramwidze-Merrison, 2016). According to Goldman and Swayze (2012), the process

of gaining access to the participants starts with the researcher first contacting the

prospective senior leaders at the prospective organizations, then contacting the

participants and gaining commitment (Maramwidze-Merrison, 2016). Once I obtained

IRB approval, I reached out to the businesses’ leaders and the participants to introduce

myself and gain their commitment by obtaining a signed letter of cooperation. To build a

relationship with the owners of the organization and the participants, a researcher can

meet those leaders and the participants face-to-face for an introduction and establish

rapport and trust before conducting the research (Grothe-Hammer, 2017; Newington &

Metcalfe, 2014).

To succeed in research, a researcher must build robust relationships with the

participants (Yin, 2018). I built the trust and relationship with the participants by

maintaining consistently respectful communication with them. Additionally, a researcher

must ensure that the information provided by the participants gets used appropriately and

not against them and that the participants’ names remain anonymous (Celestina, 2018).

Researchers tend to use email, telephone, and face-to-face as a means of communication

with the participants to encourage two-way communication and build a working

relationship (Yang, Kang, & Cha, 2015). I used email, telephone, and face-to-face

communication in my study to build a good working relationship with the study

participants.

Research Method and Design

Research Method

The qualitative method was appropriate for my study. Using qualitative

methodology, a researcher can garner a deep understanding of a phenomenon by utilizing

open-ended discovery methods and contextualizing description from each source of

information (Levitt et al., 2018). Qualitative research involves interpretive, naturalistic,

and holistic inquiry into a phenomenon in a natural setting (Anderson, 2017; Boardman

& McCormick, 2018). Additionally, a researcher can gain a deeper understanding of

individual experiences and real-life experiences of the phenomenon by using qualitative

methodology (Barnham, 2015; Roberts & Struckmeyer, 2018). My use of qualitative

methodology was appropriate because I explored and gained an in-depth understanding

of how grocery store supply chain managers mitigated the effects of disruptions in their

companies’ supply chains.

Quantitative research is the empirical study of a phenomenon that involves the

accumulation of facts and causes of behavior by using numerical data and variables to

predict the behavior over time (Park & Park, 2016). Zapkau, Schwens, and Kabst (2017)

indicated that a researcher could use the quantitative method to understand whether one

variable has a significant influence on the outcome of the phenomenon or incident.

Additionally, McCusker and Gunaydin (2015) postulated that a researcher uses the

quantitative method to test hypotheses, study variables, and analyze numerical data to

understand the phenomenon. A quantitative methodology was not appropriate for this

study because I did not test hypothesis or examine variable relationships; instead, I

explored strategies to mitigate the effects of disruptions in the grocery supply chain.

Mixed-methods research involves integrating qualitative and quantitative

methodologies in a study to address the research question (Feldon & Tofel-Grehl, 2018;

Plano Clark & Ivankova, 2016). According to Schoonenboom (2018), mixed-methods

involve the combination of two or more strands of other methodologies such as

quantitative and qualitative in one study. Researchers mixed-methods to capture the

breadth and depth of phenomena under investigation by integrating different data sources

and types into a study (Archibald & Gerber, 2018). The mixed-methods approach was not

appropriate for this study because my research question did not include variables to

compare. Additionally, this research did not require a combination of qualitative and

quantitative methodology for any data collection techniques because qualitative

techniques such as semistructured interviews were sufficient to explore the strategies

used by grocery store supply chain managers to mitigate disruption in their companies’

supply chains.

Research Design

In my study, I considered three qualitative research designs: ethnographic, case

study, and phenomenological. I chose a multiple case study research design for this study.

The case study design was appropriate for an in-depth understanding of a real-life

phenomenon in its environmental setting (Ridder, 2017; Yin, 2018). A case study design

is appropriate when a researcher has some control of the events and seeks answers to

why, what, and how questions in a real-life context of the phenomenon (Villarreal

Larrinaga, 2017). According to Udekwe and La Harpe (2017) and Yin (2018), a

researcher can use multiple case study to compare different cases and develop a deep

understanding of the phenomenon. The qualitative multiple case study was appropriate

for my study because it enabled me to identify strategies that grocery store supply chain

managers used to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their companies’ supply chains.

Researchers use ethnographic research design to collect valid, deep, rich, and

reliable psychological data by entering into participants’ setting for a sustained period

(Mhizha, Tandire, Muromo, & Matika, 2016). Additionally, researchers use the

ethnographic research design to explore culture characteristics of a selected community

over time (Jemielniak, 2016). To understand the culture or subculture of a particular

group of people the researcher uses ethnographic research design by immersing oneself in

the society and have an active involvement in the culture while researching with the

participants (Ulusoy & Schembri, 2018). The focus of this study was not to gain an

understanding of cultural beliefs or characteristics of grocery store supply chain

managers but to rather explore how grocery store supply chain managers successfully

mitigated disruptions in their companies’ supply chain.

Researchers use the phenomenological approach to understand and garner the

knowledge of the individuals’ lived experiences of the phenomenon (Gauche, de Beer, &

Brink, 2017). In phenomenological research, researchers aim to get an in-depth

understanding of individuals experienced during a phenomenon occurrence so that the

researchers could draw informed conclusions (Wiles & Crawford, 2017).

Phenomenological researchers garner knowledge of the participants lived experiences

through interviews, observations and documents analysis (Truong & Hallinger, 2017).

The phenomenological design was not appropriate for my study because the focus of this

study was not to interpret supply chain managers’ lived experiences but rather gain

supply chain managers’ knowledge of how to successfully prevent and mitigate

disruption in the grocery store supply chain.

In a qualitative study, the researcher gathers enough data to validate the research

(Emerson, 2015). The qualitative researchers can validate the study by increasing the

sample size to reach data saturation (Boddy, 2016). The researcher can collect data

through the semistructured interview and could validate the qualitative study by

interviewing more people until reaching data saturation (Hsieh, Sonmez, Apostolopoulos,

& Lemke, 2017; Jin, Pang, & Smith, 2018). In this study, I reached data saturation by

continuing to interview supply chain managers until no new insights or data emerged.

Population and Sampling

The population of this study consisted of four supply chain managers in

Northwest Arkansas with successful experience in mitigating grocery stores’ supply

chain disruptions. I used purposive sampling to identify and select participants with the

most knowledge about preventing and mitigating disruptions in the grocery store supply

chain. Researchers use purposive sampling to select participants with relevant experience

and expertise of the phenomenon under study and collect necessary data (Bachman et al.,

2017; De Andrade, Spotswood, Hastings, Angus, & Angelova, 2017; Tsun-lok & Pik-

Ching, 2017). Purposive sampling is the most popular and convenient method of

sampling used by qualitative researchers to identify and select samples that would

provide rich information about the phenomenon under study (Palinkas et al., 2015; Siew

Khoon Khoo, & Saleh, 2017).

Fugard and Potts (2015) postulated that a sample size selection in an important

stage in the planning of the study as the sample size could vary between 2 to 400 and to

find the number in between would depend on the phenomenon under study. Rasila and

Jylha (2015) indicated that large sample sizes sometimes might not yield an in-depth

understanding of the phenomenon. A qualitative researcher must ensure that the correct

effective sample size is selected to get robust results. Qualitative researchers strive to

understand the right sample size for their study, and according to Boddy (2016), a

researcher that aims at positivism may require a larger sample size than a researcher

conducting an in-depth qualitative study. Additionally, Boddy posited that a sample size

as low as one could be appropriate for a study. In this study, I interviewed four supply

chain managers meeting the following three criteria: (a) must have served as a senior

supply chain manager, (b) must have had extensive information about disruptions, and (c)

must have successfully prevented and mitigated disruptions in the grocery supply chain

of their companies.

Data saturation is a phenomenon that compliments the data sampling, as the

qualitative researcher must collect data from the participants or other records until no

new information, themes, and codes emerge, which may increase or decrease the sample

sizes (Shams, Sari, & Yazdani, 2016). The qualitative researcher ensures that the data

collected are valid and accurate by continuing to collect data until achieving data

saturation, which means that no new themes or codes emerge (Fusch & Ness, 2015;

Joubert & Loggenberg, 2017). In my data collection, I continued to interview the supply

chain managers of grocery stores using the same interview questions, and in the same

timeframe, until I reached data saturation, which meant no new information, code, and

themes emerged. According to Yin (2018), case studies provide a researcher the

opportunity and flexibility to achieve data saturation by conducting in-depth interviews

with the participants.

Ethical Research

Protecting participants of the research study is a fundamental ethical research

standard, and the researcher must protect the well-being of the participants by minimizing

risks of harm and maximizing any potential benefits to them (Hunter et al., 2018; Ross,

Iguchi, & Panicker, 2018). According to Hammersley (2015), a researcher must act

equitably, minimize harm, respect autonomy, and preserve the privacy of the participant

to have a valid and acceptable ethical research. Additionally, the researcher must ensure

that the participants are selected based on the purpose and outcome of the research, and

no participant must be selected based on easy availability or manipulability (Ross et al.,

2018). According to Martha et al. (2017), some researchers may give incentives to the

participants of the study, a phenomenon that continue to be under ethical consideration.

Martha et al. did not give financial incentives to the participants to ensure ethical results.

To maintain ethical results, I did not provide incentives to the participants for them to

participate in the research but provided them with a summary of my research findings and

conclusions. Thorpe (2014) postulated that the participants have the right to withdrawal

from the research study anytime without any consequences even though their action may

adversely affect the researcher. The participants in my study had a right to withdraw from

the study at any time either by written or verbal notice without any negative

consequences.

Researchers use the informed consent form to ensure that participants of the

research are protected and not harmed in any way (Lie & Witteveen, 2017). All

participants signed an informed consent form before participating in the study. The

consent form contained the (a) background information on the research topic and purpose

of the study (b) research procedures, (c) voluntary nature of the study, (d) risks and

benefits of being in the study, and (e) confidentiality and safety procedures. Uneke,

Sombie, Lokossou, Johnson, and Ongolo-Zogo (2017) postulated that a consent form is

critical to the research study because the researcher uses it to maintain the privacy of

participants and ensure confidentiality of the study findings wherever applicable. I

adhered to the informed consent form principles and the purpose of my study and

explained to the participants the research benefits and risks, and the extent of

confidentiality protections.

After I obtained IRB approval (approval number 01-29-19-0657276), I included

the approval number on the informed consent form and emailed it to the participants well

ahead of the interviews to ensure they made an informed decision. A researcher must

obtain an IRB approval before commencing any study that involves humans to ensure

adherence of the ethical standards (Bierer, Barnes, & Fernandez Lynch, 2017; Blackwood

et al., 2015; McEvoy, Enright, & MacPhail, 2017). Blackwood et al. (2015) posited that

the IRB approval criteria include (a) ensuring minimal risks to subjects, (b) ensuring

reasonable risks to subjects relative to anticipated benefits, (c) ensuring equitable

subject’s selection, (d) seeking voluntary informed consent, and (e) having the

appropriate documentation of informed consent.

Protection of participants in this study was vital. To ensure privacy and

confidentiality, I did not include the names of the participants and their organization in

the study. Instead, I assigned a letter and a number, such as P1, P2, P3, and P4 for

identification. According to Lahat, Adali, and Jutten (2015), a researcher can improve

the study’s credibility and efficiency by organizing data. Additionally, Hiriscau,

Stingelin-giles, Stadler, Schmeck, and Reiter-theil (2014), stated that in an informed

consent process, researchers must indicate how they will securely store the confidential

information provided during the research. I locked up all the materials related to the study

including audio recordings, interview transcriptions, and company documentations in a

single key file cabinet accessible only by me. I will dispose of the materials after 5 years

from the completion of my study. Disposing of materials will include shredding all

documents and erasing any electronic data from my thumb drive.

Data Collection Instruments

Data collection is a process that allows participants involved in the study to help

answer the overarching research question and achieve the objectives of the research

(Dlodlo & Hamunyela, 2017). The data collection process involves interaction with the

participants and building trust with them to yield robust results (Celestina, 2018; Myers,

2015). The participants have the power to decide the type of information they may

disseminate and building trust with them is critical to a study to ensure more information

gets collected during the study (Celestina, 2018). In qualitative research, a researcher is

the primary data collection instrument (Rich & Misener, 2017), and must remain

unbiased when collecting data. During interviews, the researcher must pose a non-leading

question to the participants to minimize biases about the way the researcher asks the

questions (Watts et al., 2017). Additionally, the researcher must sample data directly

from the population of interest and not mostly rely on secondary data to strengthen the

inferences drawn from the population (Watts et al., 2017). I served as a primary data

collection instrument and I used a professional recording device to capture the

participant's responses during interviews. In addition, I reviewed the archival, company

documentation related to company policy and business procedures as another source of

information. According to Yin (2018), qualitative researchers use documents to support

the evidence collected from other sources. Marshal and Rossman (2016) posited that

researchers must diligently peruse through documents that would support the research

study. Felype Neis, Fernandes Pereira, and Antonio Maccari (2017) conducted a study

about strategic planning process and organizational structure, and used documentary

research a secondary data collection instrument to semistructured interviews. Similarly,

Southcott and Joseph (2017) used documentary sources, such as annual reviews to

understand the connection between social entrepreneurship, corporate philanthropy, and

community engagement.

Researchers use semistructured interviews to understand and explore the subject’s

lived experiences of the phenomenon under study (De Saeger, Bartak, Eder, &

Kamphuis, 2016; Levitt, Pomerville, Surace, & Grabowski, 2017). To understand the

effects of a decade-long HIV/AIDS financial aid influx from donor countries to

southwest Nigeria, Adefemi, Yates, Awolaran, and Bakare (2017) conducted a

semistructured interview with twelve senior healthcare professionals. Similarly, Geelan

and Hodder (2017) used in-depth semistructured interviews to examine a new UK-based

organization, the Union Solidarity International’s (USI) influence on trade unions beyond

the United Kingdom borders. I used semistructured interview questions to explore the

strategies that grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of

disruptions in their companies’ supply chain (see Appendix A). I also asked each

participant for the company’s documentation and records about mitigation strategies.

Researchers conduct semistructured in-depth interviews according to a defined

protocol (Golik, Blanco, & Czikk, 2018). An interview protocol is a guide with a

question that aims to collect information about the phenomenon under study (Cho et al.,

2017). According to Marshall and Rossman (2016), the qualitative researcher uses the

interview protocol to focus on the inquiry during the interview. Additionally, Yin (2018)

posited that the interview protocol must contain (a) research study overview, (b) data

collection procedures, and (c) the interview questions. In my study, I used the interview

protocol (see Appendix B).

To enhance the veracity, validity, and credibility of the data collection process,

qualitative researchers use member checking (Liao & Hitchcock, 2018). Member

checking is when the researcher paraphrases the participant’s responses for each question

into the researchers’ own words, and then researcher asks the participant to ensure that

the researcher accurately interpreted participant’s intended message for each question

(Korstjens & Moser, 2018; Randall et al., 2016). According to Yin (2018), qualitative

researchers use member checking to enhance quality and data credibility. After

conducting interviews, I gave participants my interpretation of their responses to

interview questions and asked participants to check for any errors to ensure validity and

credibility.

Data Collection Technique

According to Brooks and Normore (2015), researchers and scholars use

interviews, observations, and documents to explore the research question. To have

successful interviews, researchers use semistructured interview schedule and

predetermined questions as a guide to ensure a natural flow of the interviews (Gupta &

Pathak, 2018). For this study, I used semistructured interviews and review company

documents as data collection techniques. I conducted a face-to-face interview with the

participants of this study by using the interview protocol (see Appendix B). I reviewed

documents related to supply chain disruptions to gain knowledge of how grocery store

supply chain managers mitigated and prevented disruptions in the supply chain. I

triangulated all information obtained from the interviews with the information collected

from the documents and review to see if there is corroboration. The triangulation of the

two sources of information would show the comprehensiveness of the case study (Yin,

2018). I conducted the interviews at a place that was convenient for the participants.

Researchers use semistructured interviews to gain an in-depth understanding and nuanced

account of a phenomenon (Murtagh, Achkar, & Roberts, 2018; Pandey & Chawla, 2016).

Researchers utilize a semistructured interview technique to explore and gain an

understanding of the real-life experiences of the participants to answer the research

question (Ramji & Etowa, 2018). Additionally, researchers use the scripted open-ended

questions to elicit in-depth answers to the research question (Huynh, 2018). Similarly, for

this study, I used the open-ended questions listed in Appendix A.

Semistructured interviews provide the researcher with rich and detailed

information about participant’s explanations, opinions, and perceptions of the

phenomenon under study (Agboola & Scofield, 2018). Additionally, Agboola and

Scofield (2018) posited that semistructured interviews allow the researcher to probe

issues in-depth, clarify precise meanings, and reduce ambiguity. By using semistructured

interviews, a researcher can fully capture the experiences and practices of the participants

in regard to the phenomenon under study. The semistructured interviews have some

disadvantages that include (a) bias because of poorly articulated questions, (b) researcher

interpretation bias, and (c) interviewees memory relapse of past events (De Massis &

Kotlar, 2014). To mitigate bias in data collection De Massis and Kotlar (2014) suggested

that researchers must use different and well-informed interviewees that view the research

question from different perspectives. I interviewed well-informed and knowledgeable

supply chain managers from four different grocery stores for this study.

After receiving IRB approval, I contacted potential interviewees through email

and included the informed consent form for them to sign. I reached out to each participant

and scheduled the appropriate time for the face-to-face interviews. During the interview, I

audio recorded the interviews as well as wrote notes. Upon the completion of the

interviews, I transcribed the audio recordings. I also used member checking to ensure that

I captured the participants’ views correctly. Member checking is an important quality

control process that researchers use to verify interview information with the participants

to improve the quality and credibility of data (Yin, 2018). According to Debono et al.

(2017), member checking is a process of providing the participants the study’s findings to

get their feedback on the interpretations to establish their credibility and accuracy. To

validate the findings of the study, researchers also use member checking by allowing the

participants to validate the findings’ accuracy (Wang, Duan, & Yu, 2016).

Gebauer, Haldimann, and Saul (2017) postulated that some researchers could

conduct a pilot study to build the legitimacy of the study. Additionally, Cohen, Darnon,

and Mollaret (2017) conducted a pilot study of understand the relevance of the

phenomenon understudy before delving deeper into other sections of the research study.

Yeardley (2017) also posited that some researchers conduct pilot studies to establish a

benchmark of the research to follow. For this study, I did not conduct a pilot study

because I had the right set of participants that provided legitimate responses to my

research question and create credibility.

Data Organization Technique

The researchers are responsible for data organization and must ensure that data

organization is consistent to avoid researchers from having to spend time harmonizing the

data later and uphold the data integrity (Broman & Woo, 2018). Broman and Woo (2018)

encouraged researchers to use a single common value for the subjects under study.

According to Almutairi, Gardner, and McCarthy (2014), data organization is the

phenomenon that involves classifying and assigning file names for stored research data

with identifiable content. In a qualitative study, researchers use research logs to keep

track of all the research processes and produce a log, a journal, a story that describes and

reflects on that process (Fluk, 2015). I used the research log to keep track of all research

activities for this study. I also used alphanumeric codes for each of the participants to

maintain privacy. An example of an alphanumeric code format is P1.

Yin (2018) postulated when conducting research project, a researcher must create

a secure data repository for the information gathered. To store transcribed interview data,

I used a thumb drive. I saved the transcribed data of each participant by using the

alphanumeric codes. I used the digital audio recorder to capture the interviews of the

participants. According to Johnson (2014), researchers must safeguard the participant’s

raw data and identity to uphold the privacy and confidentiality. According to Ellis (2016),

researchers could use a computer that is password protected to ensure no one has access

to the information but the researcher. To safeguard the thumb drive, audio recorder, and

back up disks of the separate participants’ word files, I stored them in a locked and secure

file cabinet. I also have research study files stored on my computer, which can be only

accessible to me and protected by a secure password. Additionally, some researchers use

NVivo to store and organize electronic data for easy retrieval (Mertens & Hesse-Biber,

2015). I also used NVivo 12 plus software to organize and store data for easy access to

them. All the information about this study will also be kept in the cabinet and secured

location for 5 years. After the 5 years, I will destroy the information by deleting the files

from the computer and shredding all paper documents related to the study.

Data Analysis

Qualitative data analysis is a systematic review of data elements that involves data

interpretation to discover the underlying meaning (Carter, Bryant-Lukosius, DiCenso,

Blythe, & Neville, 2014). In this study, I used Yin’s 5-step process to analyze data, which

involved compiling the database, disassembling data, reassembling data, interpreting

data, and conclusion (Yin, 2018). I collected the data, stratified the data, reassembled

data, interpreted the data, and provided a conclusion. According to Shaw and Satalkar

(2018), data analysis involves transcribing and coding data using software to come up

with themes by using deductive analysis. Qualitative researchers may also use ATLAS.ti

software program to analyze the transcripts (Wyte-Lake & Griffin, 2018). Additionally,

Wyte-Lake and Griffin (2018) posited that the content analysis technique helps the

researcher to conduct data analysis by using the preliminary codes built on the interview

guides and come up with themes. Damani et al. (2018) in their study indicated that

researchers could use standard qualitative thematic analysis to analyze the data and come

up with codes and themes. Damani et al. also utilized NVivo software for the data

analysis. I used NVivo 12 plus software to analyze the data for this study and deduct the

codes and themes.

In a qualitative study, researchers use multiple sources of data to ensure the

validity of the research (Ghadge, Fang, Dani, & Antony, 2017). Researchers may use any

of the four triangulation types when conducting research, which are (a) data triangulation,

(b) investigator triangulation, (c) theory triangulation, and (d) methodological

triangulation (Yin, 2018). Researchers use more than one sources of data as a form of

data triangulation to avoid biased analyses and maintain accurate analyses (Da Silva, De

Resende Melo, Esteves, & Gomes, 2016; Yin, 2018). According to Krichanchai and

Maccarthy (2017) researchers conduct data triangulation by using semistructured

interviews and document analysis, a phenomenon that enhances the study’s reliability and

validity. For this study, I used semistructured interviews and document analysis to fulfill

methodological triangulation.

Buljan, Barac, and Marusic (2018) posited that data analysis process includes (a)

coding of the transcripts, (b) categorizing the initial codes, and (c) generating themes and

patterns. Sousa and Figueiredo (2014) identified sequential steps of data analysis that

include (a) cleaning and organizing the data, (b) coding the data, (c) identifying emerging

patterns and themes, (d) interpreting the data, and (e) evaluating results. Coding is a

critical part of the data analysis process because it provides the context from which the

major themes of the study could be generated (Fletcher, 2017). Once I obtained the

approval from the IRB to collect data, I collected data through interviews, cleaned and

organized them, and applied necessary codes helped me deduce critical themes for this

study.

According to Paulus, Woods, Atkins, and Macklin (2017), qualitative data

analysis software has been vital to researchers when analyzing data. Qualitative data

analysis software has several advantages that include (a) improves quality over the

manual process, (b) handles large datasets, and (c) enhances the trustworthiness by

providing a transparent audit trail. NVivo is one the computer-aided qualitative data

analysis software that can analyze the qualitative data and develop codes and theme

quicker than a manual process. NVivo software can be used to analyze interview data and

create codes and themes for the study (Ruggunan, 2016). I used NVivo 12 plus software

to analyze data that I collected from the participants through semistructured interviews

and reviewed of company documents. Bryman and Bell (2015) posited that researchers

could use interview process and code each interview separately to choose a common

framework. I transcribed the audio recordings from each of the interviews and saved

them in a Microsoft word files then I uploaded the transcriptions into the NVivo software

to identify the themes. According to Abro, Khurshid, and Aamir (2015), data integration

from multiple sources provides a better picture of the study than one source of

information. After identifying themes using NVivo software, I correlated the key themes

with the literature review findings, including the new studies published after writing my

doctoral study, and the conceptual framework. I was guided by the RDT when

interpreting the data and making conclusions.

Reliability and Validity

Reliability

A qualitative researcher addresses the reliability of the study by ensuring the

accuracy and consistency of the documentation of the procedures and results (Yin, 2018).

According to Ma, Lund, Nielsen, Aamand, and Su (2015), a researcher can show

reliability by providing the objectivity and replicability of collected data and consistent

results. To establish the trustworthiness of the study, the researcher must ensure that all

the components of the research such as the research question, the literature review,

methodological choices, and the theoretical interpretation of the findings are consistent

(Cuervo-Cazurra, Andersson, Brannen, Nielsen, & Rebecca Reuber, 2016). Reliability of

the research means that the research results are stable and that another researcher could

replicate the study (Hatamleh, Hiyassat, Sweis, & Sweis, 2018). In this study, I ensured

that all the contextual components were consistent to establish reliability. Researchers

also conduct audit trail, member checking, review transcripts, and use interview protocol

to increase the reliability of the research (Yin, 2018). To increase the study’s reliability, I

paraphrased the participant’s responses for each question into my own words and then

asked the participants to ensure that I accurately interpreted the intended message for

each question. I audited the research steps taken in my study from start to finish and

ensured that I followed the correct steps to enhance reliability. Additionally, I used

interview protocol to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon from the

participants and enhanced the reliability of the study.

Researchers can achieve reliability in the study through member checks and data

triangulation (Bizri, 2017; Liao & Hitchcock, 2018; Ramji & Etowa, 2018). In my study,

after conducting the interviews and document reviews, I gave participants my

interpretation of their responses to the interview questions and asked participants to check

for any errors to ensure reliability. Additionally, I used semistructured interviews as well

as the company’s archive documents to triangulate data and ensure reliability. According

to Fusch and Ness (2015), data saturation also helps to ensure the dependability of the

study. Researchers can achieve data saturation by continuing to interview participants

until they cannot obtain any new information (Joubert & Loggenberg, 2017). During the

data collection phase of my study, I continued to interview the grocery store supply chain

managers in Northwest Arkansas until I did not get any new information.

Validity

Qualitative researchers strive to have rigorous and trustworthy research to ensure

research validity (Le Roux, 2017). According to Leung (2015), the validity pertains to the

appropriateness of the research tools, processes, and data. The researchers must ensure

that credibility of the research by thoroughly capturing the details of events such as

interview proceedings and verifying details with the participants (Pandey & Chawla,

2016). The validity of research signifies the accuracy and trustworthiness of the

instrument used and that the research results have minimal systematic errors (Chander,

2018). To ensure the integrity of the research study, the researcher must understand the

research in the lens of credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability

(Cope, 2014). After conducting research, I sent the analyzed data to the participants to

validate them and ensure the data accuracy.

The credibility of research is critical to the overall study and researchers must

ensure the believability of the research results through the lens of the participants (Elo et

al., 2014). To establish the credibility of their study of professional socialization of

nursing students, Gibbon and Crane (2018) returned transcripts to the participants to

ensure the coded themes truthfulness to the participant's views. Cope (2014) postulated

that the credibility of the research study is enhanced through a researcher’s ability to

verify the research findings with the research participants. According to Korstjens and

Moser (2018), researchers use (a) prolonged engagement, (b) persistent observation, (c)

triangulation, and (d) member check to establish credibility in the study. I conducted

member checking, returned my interpretation of participants’ responses to interview

questions to participants for verification, and triangulated the interview data and the

archival document data sources to establish credibility.

Confirmability of the study pertains to the ability of other researchers to confirm

the study and ensure that the study’s findings are derived from the data and not the

researcher’s imaginations (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). Lyons, Karkou, Roe, Meekums,

and Richards (2018) posited that when researchers avoid biases in the data, they will

achieve research confirmability. According to Cypress (2017), qualitative researchers

achieve confirmability by maintaining a reflective journal to keep notes and

documentation of the study’s process. Additionally, researchers use the reflexivity and

bracketing method to guard their biases (Cypress, 2017). For this study, I kept a reflective

journal to record the daily activities from the start of the data collection until project

completion to combat biases.

Researchers achieve the transferability when they provide a detailed description

of the research study participants and processes used when researching so the reader can

decide whether to use the study or not as per their setting (Korstjens & Moser, 2018).

According to Abdalla, Oliveira, Azevedo, and Gonzalez (2018), the researcher must

ensure that the research study has sufficient information, such as time, place, and

individuals for the reader to determine whether to use the study findings. To enhance

transferability, researchers can provide detailed documentation of data collection methods

and analyses, and ensure data saturation (Noble & Smith, 2015; Yin 2018). For this

study, I provided a detailed description of data collection tools and procedures,

participants, and research findings. Additionally, I reached data saturation in my data

collection.

Transition and Summary

In Section 2, I present the justification for selecting a qualitative multiple case

study to explore strategies that grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the

effects of disruptions in their companies’ supply chain in Northwest Arkansas. Section 2

of the study includes the purpose statement, the role of the researcher, the research

participants, research method and design, population and sampling, ethical research, and

data collection instruments. Additionally, Section 2 includes data collection and

organization technique, data analysis, and reliability and validity. In Section 3, I present

the findings from the interviews and documents analyses; discuss how the results of the

findings apply to professional practice; and provide the implications for social change,

recommendation for actions, recommendations for future research, reflections, and

conclusion.

Section 3: Application to Professional Practice and Implications for Change

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore strategies that

grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their

companies’ supply chains. The population included four participants from four different

grocery stores in Northwest Arkansas. The participants were grocery store supply chain

managers who (a) served as senior supply chain managers, (b) had extensive information

about disruptions, and (c) had experience in implementing successful strategies for

preventing disruptions in the grocery store supply chain. Other sources of information

included company policy documents and procedural manuals and business continuity

plans. The findings from the in-depth interviews and company documents and policies

review revealed four themes that included (a) supply chain partners’ collaboration, (b) a

multiple supply base and supplier qualification, (c) inventory management, and (d)

information technology, and communication.

Presentation of the Findings

The overarching question for this study was: What strategies do grocery store

supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their companies’

supply chains? I used semistructured interviews and open-ended questions to collect

information on how grocery stores’ supply chain managers mitigated and reduced

disruption in the supply chain. Within 5 days after each interview, I summarized the

interview responses for each participant and conducted member checking to ensure the

validity and accuracy of the results. All the participants indicated that my summaries

were a true reflection of their answers in the interviews. After completing the member

checking, I used NVivo 12 plus software to sort, code, and analyze the data. The four

themes that emerged from the data analysis are presented in Table 1.

Table 1

Themes and Occurrences

Name of the theme

N = 4

% of theme

occurrence

Supply chain partners’ collaboration

24%

Multiple supply base and supplier qualification

21%

Inventory management

36%

Information technology and communication

19%

Theme 1: Supply Chain Partners’ Collaboration

The first theme that emerged from the interviews and review of organizational

documents was collaboration among supply chain partners to mitigate disruption in the

supply chain. All four participants indicated that collaborating with partners in the supply

chain by sharing information, such as forecasts and future critical events, helped

managers mitigate disruption in the supply chain. P1 stated,

One of our hot commodities is the African yam, that come from Ghana. So, we

have to know the specific quantity to order because they are perishables. So, we

have not been able to find a balance whether to order a hundred this month or two

hundred. This item is also seasonal, so you have to really know whether they are

fresh yams that will stay longer on the shelf or old yams that will spoil quicker.

Also, the temperature on the ship and how long will last on the ocean. These are

all barriers that we sometimes have control over them and sometimes we do not

have control over them by the time they get here, and how we track them in. So

it’s a moving target. However, by sharing forecasting, demand information and

collaborating with the wholesalers and other logistical companies in the supply

chain, we have been able to minimize the disruption of the yam in the supply

chain. The wholesalers provide us critical information on when to order to

minimize risk of business interruption.

P2 said,

We share our forecasts for critical items in the store with our distributors in the

supply chain to ensure business continuity. Most of the times the distributor will

let us know of the market trends for the products and may tell us to increase our

orders to avoid a disruption.

P3 stated that “we continuously share inventory forecasts with our suppliers

and when they ship the items, they provide the information of the carrier and we can

track the goods online.” While P4 said,

In grocery store business you must talk to the partners in the supply chain to

unveil critical information about a product, because some of the product we sell

can be discontinued by the wholesaler or distributor. Once we share critical

information with our partners, we can find alternative supply source or order

substitutes to the product.

All four participants indicated that information sharing and collaborating with

other partners in the supply chain is critical to business continuity. The four participants

concurred with Raweewan and Ferrell (2018) who posited that the benefits of

collaboration in the supply chain by sharing information outweighs the risk.

I reviewed P4, P2, and P1’s weekly minutes found in log books that included the

forecast and delivery information that was shared with their distributors and wholesalers,

indicating collaboration between the grocery stores and the distributors and wholesalers.

This type of collaboration enabled grocery stores’ supply chain managers to know the

quantity of items expected and when to expect them. The collaboration among the

grocery store supply chain partners is a critical strategy in avoiding disruption in the

supply chain. Zhu et al. (2017) posited that by having a good relationship and

connections with the supply chain partners and collaborating in many ways helps to

mitigate disruption in the supply chain. Concurring with Zhu et al., P4 stated, “I have

very close connections with the distributors and all my other suppliers and that helps me

get my grocery items quickly and with minimal disruption.” One of the tenets of the RDT

is that organizational leaders must work with supply chain trading partners by

interchanging resources to mitigate uncertainty in the supply chain (Zhou et al., 2018),

concurring with the responses from all four participants regarding collaboration in the

supply chain.

Another intriguing collaboration strategy that emerged from the interviews was

that P1, P2, and P4 work together with other grocery stores in their areas to mitigate

disruption in the supply chain. P1 said,

The other goods that we tend to have challenge with is goat meat. Goat meat is

one of the unique items that we sell in our grocery store and this is sourced from

Australia and sometimes we have difficulties maintaining inventory. So, we found

out that a local Hispanic grocery store has the meat, so we place a bulk order with

their supplier and share the cost and that is one strategy we are employing to

mitigate disruption in the supply chain.

P2 remarked,

We have many other different grocery stores in general that if we would need like

let’s say special type of meat that we don’t have, and another grocery store have

it, we can just run to that grocery store really quick and borrow it since we are all

in a local community. Or we just buy from them depending on how much is

needed and resale it here at our store to minimize disruption to our customer.

Additionally, P4 observed,

I have some families that also have grocery stores around this area, and I utilize

them in order to get goods from them that I may be running out or when my order

is delayed. And it works both ways, they need something from me they come or

contact me, and if I need something from them I contact them, and we just help

one another. You know what, you cannot do it all yourself, we have to help each

other out in this business.

P1, P2, and P4 indicated that it is not all about competition but ensuring that their

customers are happy; therefore, they work together with other grocery store businesses to

minimize disruption to their customers. This phenomenon further validated my use of the

100

RDT for this study because according Malik, Ngo, and Kingshott (2018), the RDT logic

is that firms do not exist in a vacuum but rely on other firms’ resources in the

environment. P1, P2, and P4 worked together with other grocery store businesses in their

environment by sharing resources to ensure business continuity.

Theme 2: Multiple Supply Base and Supplier Qualification

The second theme that emerged from the analyzed data was the multiple supply

base and supplier qualification. All four participants stated that having a multiple supply

base is one of the strategies that they use to mitigate disruption in the supply chain.

Namdar et al. (2018) postulated that single sourcing has some benefits such as stronger

relationships and reduced administration costs; however, when there is a disruption in the

supply chain the negative effects are high. According to Fan, Schwartz, and VoB (2017),

supply chain managers utilize a multiple supply base to provide a more resilient supply

chain for their company and mitigate disruption in the supply chain. Supply chain

managers must utilize a multiple supply base to mitigate disruption in the supply chain.

Concurring with Fan et al., Sabouhi, Pishvaee, and Jabalameli (2018) postulated that

using multiple suppliers enhances resilience in the supply chain. P4 said, “The best thing

I can say is that don’t ever just have one source of supply. You need to have multiple

suppliers and different connections to mitigate disruption in the supply chain.”

Concurring with P4, P1 said,

We have had to rely on multiple suppliers instead of depending on one major

supplier. We have had to have multiple just in case we are unable to find our

product from our key supplier then we now have multiple suppliers that we go to.

101

Additionally, P1 indicated that the supply chain managers also utilized a local

Sam’s Club to mitigate disruption in the supply chain. Concurring with P1 and P4, P3

said, “So we utilize other vendors that are available with the same product or same

product with a different brand name to minimize disruption in the supply chain.” P3 also

noted that for some products, such as snacks and chips, if there is a disruption in the

supply chain, the associates can make them in the restaurant, which P3 also owns. After

making the products the associates can put the grocery store’s brand name and introduce

the products to the market. P2 concurred with P1, P4, and P3 said,

We have many distributors that when one fails us, we can go to the next one. And

there are some local and there some that are out of town as well. We have some in

Oklahoma, and some come from Dallas, Texas. Also, we have a local Sam’s club,

if everything fails, we have Sam’s club that is very close to us, where we can run

to and pick up everything we need.

Additionally, P1 and P4 indicated that having a multiple supply base in the supply

chain is an excellent idea, but the supplier must be qualified by the grocery store’s supply

chain managers before being part of the supply chain base. According to Ojadi, Tickle,

Adebanjo, Laosirihongthong, and Boon-itt (2017), supply chain managers must qualify

suppliers before selecting them. Ojadi et al. posited that supplier performance and

capacity should be among the qualifications criteria of a supplier. P1 said that “we vet

suppliers to know whether they have capacity to perform, deliver on time, have good

pricing, excellent quality products and meet our requirements,” concurring with Ojadi et

al. In addition, P4 concurred with P1 and said,

102

I make sure that whenever I am vetting the suppliers that they need to have

capital. I need to make sure that they have the capacity to provide the grocery

items, the manpower, good price, quality products and just everything in order for

me to do business with them, because if they have everything set up, it is going to

be a lot easier on me. And I just don’t want to go mom and pop shop and start

from there, I need someone that has the capital, the manpower and the resource to

provide what I need.

P1 and P4 provided documentation that showed the criteria used to qualify and

select suppliers. My analysis of P1’s document revealed a grocery items list and their

preferable lead times as criteria used. There was also space on the document where the

prospective supplier would fill in their lead times of the listed grocery items.

Additionally, my analysis of P1’s document revealed excellent quality and pricing as

some of the criteria used to vet suppliers. After reviewing P4’s document, I noticed that

capacity, product’s quality, and financial stability were the critical elements that P4

requires from the suppliers. P4 showed no interest in doing business with a company that

could easily fold. All four participants indicated that they strive to have good

relationships with their supply base to ensure business continuity. P2 noted that some

suppliers have suggested items that do well in other areas to try and sell them in the store.

P2 said that, without an excellent relationship, such suggestions would not occur. P4 also

cherished the excellent relationship with the suppliers and supply chain partners who help

to keep inventories up to date and fully stocked. Aharonovitz, Vidal Vieira, and Suyama

(2018) indicated that maintaining excellent relationships with the suppliers and supply

103

chain partners can reduce inventories, improve lead times, and improve efficiency among

supply chain partners, concurring with what P2 and P4 had stated.

Research findings from the literature review support the study results that the use

of multiple supply base mitigated disruption in the grocery store’s supply chain. Lucker

and Seifert (2017) posited that having multiple suppliers provided the needed flexibility

should one supplier fold. Similarly, Ali, Nagalingam, and Gurd (2017) postulated that the

use of multiple supply base helps to build a resilient supply chain and to mitigate

disruption in the supply chain. Additionally, Das (2018) established that the fundamental

ways to contain disruption include (a) supplier flexibility, (b) supply location flexibility,

and (c) reliability of the supplier confirming the results and findings from my study.

According to the RDT, the organization’s survival depends on its ability to

acquire critical resources from its external environment (Pfeffer & Salancik, 2003).

Disruption in the supply chain can cause companies to fold. The four participants in this

study indicated that having a relationship with multiple supply base would mitigate the

disruption in the supply chain and ensure business continuity. The RDT aligns with the

findings from this study because the participants’ initiative of creating multiple supply-

base relationships in the environment indicates the dependency of companies on other

companies’ resources in the environment to mitigate disruption in the supply chain.

Pfeffer and Salancik (2003) postulated that company leaders could mitigate the resource

scarcity by creating diverse interlinkages with the organization’s environment to

minimize the dependence on one source. Company leaders could also mitigate resource

scarcity in the supply chain by establishing and strengthening the relationship with the

104

current environment and facilitating mutual dependence (Pfeffer & Salancik, 2003). The

participants’ efforts to qualify suppliers ensure the critical need of selecting the right

partners in the environment to ensure business continuity and meet customer

expectations.

Theme 3: Inventory Management

All participants indicated that managing their inventory was critical piece to their

business. They all indicated that they keep safety stocks of the critical items in the

backroom to avoid stockouts during a disruption. P1 said,

When we buy critical products from our suppliers, we buy in bulks to have

backup inventory and the cost is much lower to us than when we buy from local

suppliers as we pay more, and it impacts our profitability.

P1 explained that, in the past, when they had a disruption, they sourced from the

local suppliers, which cost them more money than buying from their normal suppliers. P1

indicated that having a safety stock has mitigated the unnecessary high cost payments for

items and minimized the disruption of those items. P1 also said,

To better manage our inventory, we also have triggers for certain levels of the

inventory for some products such as red, yellow and green: For critical items, we

have a report that managers produce at the end of every shift which has color code

beside each critical item. Red means item has run out, yellow the item is about to

run out and green means the item is fully stocked. We strive not to have a red

code, as such would signal a disruption to the customer.

105

P1 showed me the coded reports that shift managers produced for the past two

weeks. My analysis of the reports did not show any red-coded items but yellow and

green. P2 said, “sometimes when you source goods locally, the suppliers would increase

the price because they know you are in need of them. Therefore, we ensure to have

reasonable inventory levels in the backroom to avoid some of these costs.” P2 also

indicated that the company uses vendor managed inventory system. P2 said,

There are couple things that we get from the distributor that we don’t pay for them

till they are sold, so if it goes out of date and it’s not sold, they just come and

exchange them. The distributor comes anytime and monitors the stock levels to

ensure, we are fully stocked.

P2 indicated that the vendor-managed inventory system reduces unnecessary costs.

According to Wang et al. (2018), vendor managed inventory is an efficient inventory

management system whereby a supplier has access to the critical sales and inventory

information of the buyer and ensures inventory replenishment cycles are managed well.

Concurring with Wang et al., Verma and Chatterjee (2017) postulated that in the vendor

managed inventory, the suppliers take control of the replenishment of the critical items in

a business to ensure business continuity. The phenomenon aligns this study with the RDT

because companies in the supply chain rely on each other’s resources to mitigate

disruption in the supply chain. P2 also said that shift managers conduct a daily inventory

walk through and log the items that are running out in the log book for the supply chain

manager to order. P2 showed me the log book confirming what P2 had said during the

interview.

106

P3 indicated that the company uses an inventory management system called

shopventory which helps managers with the management of the grocery store’s inventory.

P3 said,

See what I always do is that I have a tool in place to track my inventory which is

called shopventory, that by using it, I can pull different varied reports, like

inventory turnover of certain products. I can know the how much turnover

monthly, quarterly, semiannually, and annually. And depending on the reports, I

will try to maintain backup always.

P3 showed me the monthly, quarterly, semiannually and annual reports and data

from shopventory, aligning with what was said in the interview. P4 also indicated that it

was critical to have safety stock for his business and said, “I always like to have a little

bit of an overstock for popular items, I always like to have popular inventory in stock

overstocked incase anything happens that I can’t get them right away.” According to

Chaturvedi, Martínez, and deAlbéniz (2016), most businesses carry extra safety stock to

minimize the uncertainty of demand and supply and avoid stockouts, concurring with P1,

P2, P3, and P4. Olbert, Protopappa, and Thonemann, (2016) posited that, to avoid

disruption in the supply chain and maintain customer service levels, supply chain

managers must ensure to have safety stock, concurring with P1, P2, P3, P4 and

Chaturvedi et al. P4 also said,

Some of the problems I have faced in the past were stockouts, so apart from

having over stock, another thing I did to fix the problem is that I implemented the

auto reorder system with the supplier here in Springdale. The supplier has access

107

to my inventory management system and monitors important items in my grocery

store.

In addition, the responses from P1, P3, and P4 regarding the importance of an

inventory management system confirmed the information found in the literature review

that information technology can assist supply chain managers to better manage the

inventory in their businesses (Obayi et al., 2017). Theme 3 related to RDT because, when

supply chain disruption occurs, supply chain managers would depend on the backup

inventory sourced from the environment in anticipation of the shortage of resources in the

supply chain. Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) postulated that, managers of firms must acquire

critical resources in the supply chain to help mitigate disruptions in the supply chain.

RDT helps managers to understand the need to control and manage inventory resources

in the environment to avoid disruption and ensure business profitably and continuity. Lii

and Kuo (2016), in their study based on RDT, indicated that when a firm cannot find

resources for itself, it must search for resources in the external environment and create

relationships with other businesses. Managers must search for resources in the external

environment for their firms and keep enough inventory in stock to mitigate supply chain

disruptions.

Theme 4: Information Technology and Communication

According to Tkalac Vercic and Poloski Vokic (2017), internal communication

can increase employee engagement in an organization and eventually improve

production. All four participants indicated that internal and external communication

played a vital role in mitigating disruption in the supply chain. P1 said that the strategies

108

to mitigating disruption in the supply chain were communicated to the employees and

managers through meetings and bulletin board. P1 said,

We communicated through meetings and also through a bulletin board. On the

bulletin board we post the top ten items that employees must always keep an eye

on, as another way of ensuring we don’t run out of critical items.

P1 also indicated that the use of WhatsApp technology enabled P1 to connect to

the suppliers all over the world and check on orders at a minimal cost. P2 said “to

communicate the mitigation strategies to our employees we held meetings and used face-

to-face interaction and explained what strategies were in place.” To further signify the

importance of communication, P2 said,

If the other manager ordered the merchandize and did not communicate with me,

then I would order more and create unnecessary overstock or if he did not

communicate the right amount, I could order less. To me our communication has

been a biggest thing for us.

Additionally, P2 indicated that they communicate regularly with the distributors

to ensure they have up to date inventory and to avoid stockouts in the grocery store. P2

also used telephone calls and emails to communicate with the distributors and

wholesalers. P3 communicated strategies to the employees through meetings and

reiterated the strategies through face-to-face interactions. P4 said, “communication is a

big part of making a business successful.” P4 also communicated the strategies to

mitigate disruption in the supply chain through meetings with the employees and also by

interacting with them to ensure that they have full comprehension of the strategy. P4 also

109

communicated with shift managers via text to ensure quick response to a need in the store

or a strategy that needed to be implemented quickly. In addition, P4 communicated with

the suppliers and distributors through text, email, and telephone. P4 said, “I like texting to

my suppliers because I get a quick response. The suppliers or distributors always text me

as well to let me know of future events that may impact my business.” Aggarwal and

Srivastava (2016) postulated that electronic communication can improve collaboration

between buyers and suppliers to ensure business continuity, aligning with the responses

from P1, P2, P3, and P4. Aligning with P1, P2, P3, and P4, in the literature review,

Mirkovski et al. (2016) posited that enhanced collaboration in the supply chain is

facilitated by the information and communications technology.

Schnittfeld and Busch (2016) indicated RDT has its foundation in three concepts

that include organizational effectiveness, interdependence, and external control. Theme 4

related to RDT because inter-organizational communication about disruption in the

supply chain can be facilitated by information technology and communication. Supply

chain managers can share critical information about a looming disruption among supply

chain partners quickly and mitigate the disruption in the supply chain. Additionally, IT

leaders can facilitate the communication of critical information within the organization,

help mitigate the supply chain disruption, and improve organizational effectiveness.

Managers within the organization can communicate inventory numbers using information

technology and place correct order quantities with suppliers. Supply chain managers can

use IT to facilitate payments to the suppliers and avoid disruption. According to Pfeffer

and Salancik, RDT stipulates that companies must work with other organizations in the

110

environment to obtain scarce resources. The RDT is critical to this study. The movement

of goods from the source to the consumer depends on information technology and

communication between supply chain partners to ensure minimal disruption in the supply

chain.

Applications to Professional Practice

According to Azimian and Aouni (2017), supply chain management involves the

partners in the supply chain, such as suppliers, manufacturers, warehouses, retailers,

transporters, and customers. Each partner in the supply chain plays a vital role to ensure

the efficient movement of goods from supplier to consumer with minimal disruption.

Disruption in the supply chain can negatively affect the financial state of the firm due to

loss of sales and customer loyalty, and it is critical for firms to have mitigation strategies

to minimize disruptions (Sawik, 2019). Concurring with Sawik (2019), Bode and

Macdonald (2017) indicated that supply chain disruptions could cause stock outs and loss

of sales for businesses. Finding supply chain mitigation strategies that grocery store

supply chain managers use to mitigate disruption in their supply chain can improve

business performance and ensure business continuity.

I conducted a qualitative multiple case study with grocery store supply chain

managers in Northwest Arkansas who had experienced supply chain disruptions and

successfully managed the effects of the disruptions in their supply chain. From my study

with the grocery store supply chain managers, four themes emerged that include, (a)

supply chain partners’ collaboration, (b) multiple supply base and supplier qualification,

111

study findings could contribute to improving business practice by providing critical

information on how to mitigate the effects of disruption in the supply chain. Additionally,

the themes and the shared responses from the participants could help sustain other

businesses and help reduce the impact of supply chain disruptions.

Based on the responses of the grocery store supply chain managers, the

collaboration of supply chain partners was one of the significant strategies that supply

chain managers used to mitigate disruption in the supply chain. Revilla and Saenz (2017)

postulated that companies that collaborate by sharing vital information in the supply

chain are less likely to be hit hard by a disruption. Additionally, Revilla and Saenz

indicated that collaboration in the supply chain improves the business performance of all

the partners in the supply chain. Concurring with Revilla and Saenz, Colicchia, Creazza,

Noe, and Strozzi (2019) posited that collaboration among supply chain partners involves

sharing of information that can be leveraged to mitigate disruption and increase resilience

in the supply chain. The grocery stores’ supply chain managers in this study attested that

by collaborating with the suppliers, distributors and wholesalers in the supply chain

helped to mitigate disruptions in the supply chain.

The grocery stores’ supply chain managers could use this study to implement and

improve strategies of mitigating disruption in the supply chain by using strategies such as

collaboration, multiple supply base, inventory management, and information technology

and communication. The results for this study may add to the existing body of literature

covering topics that include, effects of disruptions in the supply chain, strategies to

mitigate disruptions, and supply chain resilience.

112

Implications for Social Change

The goal of every grocery store business manager or owner is to meet and satisfy

customer needs. The business owners who meet the customer demands and needs by

providing the needed merchandize on shelves would see an increased customer base,

which could translate into more sales and perhaps profits. However, the turbulent global

environment has made the disruption in the supply chain inevitable, as companies are

exposed to myriad internal and external risks (Wieteska, 2018). Supply chain managers

must strive to achieve customer demand and order fulfillment to ensure customer

satisfaction and business continuity (Shamout & Emeagwali, 2016).

The findings from this study could help me to provide positive social change, as

the strategies used to mitigate disruption in the supply chain could help reduce the supply

chain costs. The reduction in supply chain costs could improve the cash flow of the

businesses whose owners could invest in more grocery stores and create jobs for the

people in the community. Additionally, the collaborative partnership of the supply chain

partners could mitigate any disruption in the movement of goods from the supplier to the

customer. The uninterrupted flow of grocery merchandise to the community could result

in a positive social change by helping to ensure that community members have timely

access to food. The reduction in supply chain costs could also translate to lower grocery

prices that would benefit the community and have a positive social impact.

Recommendations for Action

Disruption in the grocery store supply chain can be devastating to the business

and supply chain manager must have robust supply chain mitigation strategies to build a

113

more resilient supply chain and ensure business continuity (Behzadi, Olsen, & Zhang,

2018; Ivanov, 2018). The business problem addressed in this study was that some supply

chain managers in the grocery store industry lack strategies to mitigate the effects of

disruptions in their companies’ supply chain. I found that grocery store supply chain

managers could successfully use different strategies to mitigate the effects of disruption

in the supply chain. The strategies include (a) supply chain partners’ collaboration, (b)

multiple supply base and supplier qualification, (c) inventory management, and (d)

information technology and communication. Based on the review of findings from his

study, I recommend the following actions:

1. Adopt a systematic approach to mitigating disruption risk in the supply chain.

The supply chain managers should critically assess the risk sources, and the

level of impact, monitor the risk drivers and select the appropriate mitigation

strategy.

2. The supply chain managers must develop and establish strategic relationships

with financial institutions that may help finance their grocery stores on capital

investments and emergency financial needs to ensure business continuity.

3. The supply chain managers should develop and train employees on inventory

controls to ensure business continuity.

4. The supply chain managers should form strategic, win-win relationships with

the local suppliers and agree on better pricing for both businesses.

5. The supply chain managers should create a strong line of communication with

external supply chain partners by establishing quarterly meetings and

114

conference calls to discuss market conditions, key performance indicators, and

prospective disruptions if known or discuss a post-disruption phenomenon.

6. The supply chain managers must formulate a written step-by-step process and

protocol on what to do when a disruption event occurs. The protocol should be

known by all the employees to ensure business continuity.

The results from this study may contribute to the body of knowledge related to the

supply chain disruptions. The findings and recommendations from this study could be

critical to all supply chain managers in all industries, organizational leaders, researchers,

and scholars. I will disseminate the information through multiple stakeholders, such as

conferences, training seminars, and professional development workshops.

Recommendations for Further Research

In this qualitative multiple case study, I explored how grocery store supply chain

managers successfully employed strategies to mitigate disruption in the grocery store

supply chain. I chose a multiple case study design and used semistructured interviews and

organizational documentation to collect data. This research study was limited to grocery

store supply chain managers in Northwest Arkansas. Future researchers could use the

quantitative methodology to compare the relationships and effectiveness of different

strategies used to mitigate disruption in the grocery store supply chain. Additionally,

future researchers could identify disruption precursors in the grocery store supply chain

that could help in mitigating disruption in the supply chain. Knowing the disruption

precursors could help minimize the effects of disruption in the grocery store supply chain.

115

The primary limitation of this study was that the grocery store supply chain

managers were from Northwest Arkansas and not the entire United States. Future

researchers could expand the geographical area of study and perhaps include the entire

country and find ways in which the grocery store supply chain managers mitigate the

effects of disruption in the supply chain. The second limitation was that the supply chain

managers’ busy schedules could make it difficult to find the appropriate time to meet and

conduct semistructured interviews. Future researchers could utilize technology and send

email or text message reminders to the prospective participants a week in advance to

ensure that the participants can allocate appropriate time for the interviews. The third

limitation was that the sample size of the study consisted of four grocery store supply

chain managers from four different grocery stores. Future researchers could increase the

sample size. Meyvis and Van Osselaer (2018) posted that increasing the sample size of

the study increases the power of the research.

Reflections

The focus of this study was to explore successful strategies that grocery store

supply chain managers use to mitigate disruptions in their companies’ supply chain.

Before starting this study, I had no preconceived ideas of the strategies used in the

grocery store supply chain to mitigate disruption. Before my current job, I managed

grocery businesses in Nashville, Tennessee. However, I had not experienced a major

disruption during my tenure to know the strategies used to mitigate the effects of

disruption. However, after conducting a comprehensive literature review, I noticed

excellent strategies that supply chain managers use to mitigate disruption in the supply

116

chain. When I conducted this research study, I was careful not to be biased or provide

strategies during interviews. I gained much knowledge from the interviews and

organizational documents. It was intriguing to know that all the grocery store supply

chain managers that I interviewed use global supply chain to supply goods to their

businesses. The grocery store businesses’ supply chain managers in Northwest Arkansas

are not limited to the borders but source grocery merchandises overseas as well.

Globalization has played a vital role in the supply chain of most companies.

In this research study, I received cooperation from five grocery store businesses,

and I interviewed four grocery store supply chain managers and reached data saturation.

The fifth participant had a death in the family and I could not get an interview set up

because the participant was in bereavement. The participants that I interviewed gave

candid responses to the interview questions, and I gained an in-depth understanding of

the phenomenon under investigation to answer the study’s overarching research question.

The participants allowed me to review some company documents to garner more

information about supply chain mitigation strategies. Coding the themes was an excellent

exercise, and I enjoyed it. I used NVivo 12 plus software to create codes. Reflecting on

the research results, I was intrigued to learn that grocery store businesses shared

inventory, information, and collaborated to mitigate disruption in the supply chain. The

supply chain managers of businesses did not see each as competitors but partners in

ensuring customer satisfaction. Additionally, the use of information technology by the

supply chain managers was impressive and helped mitigate disruption in the supply

117

chain. I am thankful for the research as it has helped me understand the grocery store

supply chain mitigation strategies.

Conclusion

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to explore strategies that

grocery store supply chain managers use to mitigate the effects of disruptions in their

companies’ supply chain. Upon completion of this study, I found that grocery store

supply chain managers could mitigate the effects of disruption in the grocery stores’

supply chain effectively by collaborating with supply chain partners, utilizing multiple

supply base and qualifying suppliers, managing the inventory, utilizing information

technology, and improving communication in the supply chain. The grocery store supply

chain managers must first critically assess the disruption sources and their level of

impact, monitor the risk drivers, and select the appropriate mitigation strategy.

Additionally, I found that, by applying the strategies that emerged from the responses of

the participants, grocery store supply chain managers could improve their businesses and

ensure business continuity.

Disruption in the supply chain can increase the cost of doing business and

negatively affect the profitability of the company (Chunhua Tang, Honglin Yang, Erbao

Cao, & Kin Keung Lai, 2018). The useful application of the strategies from this study by

the grocery store managers could improve performance, customer satisfaction, and create

a competitive edge, which could lead to the profitability of the business. I recommend

that grocery store supply chain managers, scholars, and researchers use the findings and

118

recommendations of this study to gain new insights and knowledge of mitigating the

effects of disruption in the grocery store’s supply chain.

119

References

Abdalla, M. M., Oliveira, L. L., Azevedo, C. F., & Gonzalez, R. K. (2018). Quality in

qualitative organizational research: Types of triangulation as a methodological

alternative. Administraçao: Ensino E Pesquisa, 19, 66-98.

doi:10.13058/raep.2018.v19n1.578

AbouAssi, K., & Tschirhart, M. (2018). Organizational response to changing demands:

Predicting behavior in donor networks. Public Administration Review, 78, 126-

136. doi:10.1111/puar.12786

Abro, M. M. Q., Khurshid, M. A., & Aamir, A. (2015). The use of mixed methods in

management research. Journal of Applied Finance and Banking, 5, 103-108.

Retrieved from http://www.scienpress.com

Adefemi, K., Yates, C., Awolaran, O., & Bakare, J. (2017). Effects of donor HIV/AIDS

funding on primary healthcare delivery in southwest Nigeria: Evidence from

hospital administrators. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 10,

160-166. doi:10.1080/20479700.2016.1229900

Agboola, A. O., & Scofield, D. (2018). Time to completion in the Lagos commercial real

estate market: An examination of institutional effects. Journal of Property

Research, 35, 164-184. doi:10.1080/09599916.2018.1436582

Aggarwal, S., & Srivastava, M. K. (2016). Towards a grounded view of collaboration in

Indian agro-food supply chains. British Food Journal, 118, 1085-1106.

doi:10.1108/BFJ-08-2015-0274

120

Aharonovitz, M. C. S., Vidal Vieira, J. G., & Suyama, S. S. (2018). How logistics

performance is affected by supply chain relationships. International Journal of

Logistics Management, 29, 284–307. doi:10.1108/IJLM-09-2016-0204

Akhavan, R. M., & Beckmann, M. (2017). A configuration of sustainable sourcing and

supply management strategies. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 23,

137-151. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2016.07.006

Akkermans, H. A., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (2018). A dynamic model of managerial

response to grey swan events in supply networks. International Journal of

Production Research, 56, 10-21. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1395492

Alcantara, P. (2015). Measuring the influence of industry sector membership on supply

chain disruption reporting. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency

Planning, 8, 299-306. Retrieved from: https://www.theicor.org/jbcep.html

Ali, I., Nagalingam, S., & Gurd, B. (2017). Building resilience in SMEs of perishable

product supply chains: Enablers, barriers and risks. Production Planning &

Control, 28, 1236-1250. doi:10.1080/09537287.2017.1362487

Ali, S. M., Rahman, M. H., Tumpa, T. J., Moghul Rifat, A. A., & Paul, S. K. (2018).

Examining price and service competition among retailers in a supply chain under

potential demand disruption. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 40, 40-

47. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.08.025

Almutairi, A. F., Gardner, G. E., & McCarthy, A. (2014). Practical guidance for the use

of pattern-matching technique in case-study research: A case presentation.

Nursing & Health Sciences, 16, 239-244. doi:10.1111/nhs.12096

121

Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J. V., & Cantor, D. E. (2016). Supply chain risk mitigation

competency: An individual-level knowledge-based perspective. International

Journal of Production Research, 54, 1398-1411.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1070972

Anderson, V. (2017). Criteria for evaluating qualitative research. Human Resource

Development Quarterly, 28, 125-133. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21282

Andjelkovic, A. (2017). Proactive supply chain risk management approach:The case of

Serbia. Ekonomski Anali/Economic Annals, 62, 121-137.

doi:10.2298/EKA1714121A

Andrews, R., & Beynon, M. (2017). Managerial networking and stakeholder support in

public service organizations. Public Organization Review, 17, 237-254.

doi:10.1007/s11115-015-0340-0

Archibald, M. M., & Gerber, N. (2018). Arts and mixed methods research: An innovative

methodological merger. American Behavioral Scientist, 62, 956-977.

doi:10.1177/0002764218772672

Arnold, V., Benford, T., Canada, J., & Sutton, S. G. (2015). Leveraging integrated

information systems to enhance strategic flexibility and performance: The

enabling role of enterprise risk management. International Journal of Accounting

Information Systems, 19(1), 1-16. doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2015.10.001

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

122

Arto, I., Andreoni, V., & Rueda Cantuche, J. M. (2015). Global impacts of the

automotive supply chain disruption following the Japanese earthquake of

2011. Economic Systems Research, 27, 306-323.

doi:10.1080/09535314.2015.1034657

Asadabadi, M. R. (2017). A customer based supplier selection process that combines

quality function deployment, the analytic network process and a Markov

chain. European Journal of Operational Research, 263, 1049-1062.

doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.06.006

Ateş, M. A., Van den Ende, J., & Ianniello, G. (2015). Inter-organizational coordination

patterns in buyer-supplier-design agency triads in NPD projects. International

Journal of Operations & Production Management, 35, 1512-1545.

doi:10.1108/IJOPM-01-2013-0036

Azimian, A., & Aouni, B. (2017). Supply chain management through the stochastic goal

programming model. Annals of Operations Research, 251, 351-365.

doi:10.1007/s10479-015-2007-1

Babaian, T., Xu, J., & Lucas, W. (2018). ERP prototype with built-in task and process

support. European Journal of Information Systems, 27, 189-206.

doi:10.1057/s41303-017-0060-3

Badewi, A., Shehab, E., Zeng, J., & Mohamad, M. (2018). ERP benefits capability

framework: Orchestration theory perspective. Business Process Management

Journal, 24, 266-294. doi:10.1108/BPMJ-11-2015-0162

123

Bachman, S. S., Wachman, M., Manning, L., Cohen, A. M., Seifert, R. W., Jones, D. K.,

Riley, P. (2017). Social work’s role in medicaid reform: A qualitative

study. American Journal of Public Health, 107, S250-S255.

doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.304002

Banchuen, P., Sadler, I., & Shee, H. (2017). Supply chain collaboration aligns order-

winning strategy with business outcomes. IIMB Management Review (Elsevier

Science), 29, 109-121. doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2017.05.001

Bao, Y., Li, Y., Pang, C., Bao, Y., & Yi, X. (2017). Do resource differences between

manufacturers and suppliers help or hinder product innovation of manufacturers?

The moderating role of trust and contracts. Industrial Marketing Management, 64,

79-90. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.02.004

Barnham, C. (2015). Quantitative and qualitative research. International Journal of

Market Research, 57, 837-854. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2015-070

Basaez, M. O., Aranda, D. A., Djundubaev, R., & Montesinos, F. S. (2014). The role of

CRM-SRM bolt-ons in enterprise resource planning system: Toward a customer-

oriented supply chain. Strategic Change, 23, 389-400. doi:10.1002/jsc.1984

Behzadi, G., O, S. M. J., Olsen, T. L., & Zhang, A. (2018). Allocation flexibility for

agribusiness supply chains under market demand disruption. International

Journal of Production Research, 56, 3524–3546.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1349955

124

Bejger, S. (2016). The specifics of supply chain of medical kits product group in the

context of using enterprise resource planning class systems. Ekonomia I

Prawo, 15, 419-438. doi:10.12775/EiP.2016.028

Bierer, B. E., Barnes, M., & Fernandez Lynch, H. (2017). Revised 'common rule' shapes

protections for research participants. Health Affairs, 36, 784-788.

doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0307

Birkie, S. E., Trucco, P., & Fernandez Campos, P. (2017). Effectiveness of resilience

capabilities in mitigating disruptions: Leveraging on supply chain structural

complexity. Supply Chain Management, 22, 506-521. doi:10.1108/SCM-01-2017-

0009

Bizri, R. M. (2017). Refugee-entrepreneurship: A social capital

perspective. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29, 847-868.

doi:10.1080/08985626.2017.1364787

Blackhurst, J., Rungtusanatham, M. J., Scheibe, K., & Ambulkar, S. (2018). Supply chain

vulnerability assessment: A network based visualization and clustering analysis

approach. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 24, 21-30.

doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2017.10.004

Blackwood, R. A., Maio, R. F., Mrdjenovich, A. J., VandenBosch, T. M., Gordon, P. S.,

Shipman, E. L., & Hamilton, T. A. (2015). Analysis of the nature of IRB

contingencies required for informed consent document approval. Accountability

in Research: Policies & Quality Assurance, 22, 237-245.

doi:10.1080/08989621.2014.956866

125

Boardman, R., & McCormick, H. (2018). Shopping channel preference and usage

motivations. Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, 22, 270-284.

doi:10.1108/JFMM-04-2017-0036

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

Bode, C., & Macdonald, J. R. (2017). Stages of supply chain disruption response: Direct,

constraining, and mediating factors for impact mitigation. Decision Sciences, 48,

836–874. doi:10.1111/deci.12245

Botes, A., Niemann, W., & Kotze, T. (2017). Buyer-supplier collaboration and supply

chain resilience: A case study in the petrochemical industry. South African

Journal of Industrial Engineering, 28, 183-199. doi:10.7166/28-4-1736

Booth-Bell, D. (2018). Social capital as a new board diversity rationale for enhanced

corporate governance. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of

Effective Board Performance, 18, 425-439. doi:10.1108/CG-02-2017-0035

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, 7, 798.

doi:10.1108/IJEM-06-2015-0083

Broman, K. W., & Woo, K. H. (2018). Data organization in spreadsheets. American

Statistician, 72, 2-10. doi:10.1080/00031305.2017.1375989

Brunswicker, S., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2015). Open innovation in small and medium-

sized enterprises (SMEs): External knowledge sourcing strategies and internal

126

organizational facilitators. Journal of Small Business Management, 53, 1241-

1263. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12120

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. United Kingdom: Oxford

University Press.

Buljan, I., Barac, L., & Marusic, A. (2018). How researchers perceive research

misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in

a small scientific community. Accountability in Research: Policies & Quality

Assurance, 25, 220-238. doi:10.1080/08989621.2018.1463162

Busse, C., Schleper, M. C., Niu, M., & Wagner, S. M. (2016). Supplier development for

sustainability: Contextual barriers in global supply chains. International Journal

of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 46, 442-468.

doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2015-0300

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

Cannella, S., Framinan, J. M., Bruccoleri, M., Barbosa-Póvoa, A. P., & Relvas, S. (2015).

The effect of inventory record inaccuracy in information exchange supply

chains. European Journal of Operational Research, 243, 120-129.

doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2014.11.021

127

Cappellaro, G. (2017). Ethnography in public management research: A systematic review

and future directions. International Public Management Journal, 20, 14-48.

doi:10.1080/10967494.2016.1143423

Caputo, A., Marzi, G., & Pellegrini, M. M. (2016). The internet of things in

manufacturing innovation processes. Business Process Management Journal, 22,

383-402. doi:10.1108/BPMJ-05-2015-0072

Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use

of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41, 545-547.

doi:10.1188/14.ONF.545.547

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(2), 39-45. doi:10.1108/10878571311318231

Chander, N. (2018). Study validity. Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 18, 1-2. doi:

10.4103/jips.jips_322_17

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

Chaturvedi, A., & Martínez, deAlbéniz, V. (2016). Safety stock, excess capacity or

diversification: Trade-offs under supply and demand uncertainty. Production &

Operations Management, 25, 77–95. doi:10.1111/poms.12406

128

Chaudhuri, A., Boer, H., & Taran, Y. (2018). Supply chain integration, risk management

and manufacturing flexibility. International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 38, 690-712. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-08-2015-0508

Chavez, H., Castillo-Villar, K. K., Herrera, L., & Bustos, A. (2017). Simulation-based

multi-objective model for supply chains with disruptions in

transportation. Robotics & Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 43, 39-49.

doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2015.12.008

Cheng, J., & Lu, K. (2017). Enhancing effects of supply chain resilience: Insights from

trajectory and resource-based perspectives. Supply Chain Management, 22, 329-

340. doi:10.1108/SCM-06-2016-0190

Chi, M., Zhao, J., & George, J. F. (2015). Mediation and time-lag analyses of e-alignment

and e-collaboration capabilities. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115,

1113-1131. doi:10.1108/IMDS-01-2015-0016

Chi, M., Zhao, J., George, J. F., Li, Y., & Zhai, S. (2017). The influence of inter-firm IT

governance strategies on relational performance: The moderation effect of

information technology ambidexterity. International Journal of Information

Management, 37, 43-53. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.11.007

Cho, B., Ryoo, S., & Kim, K. (2017). Interorganizational dependence, information

transparency in interorganizational information systems, and supply chain

performance. European Journal of Information Systems, 26, 185-205.

doi:10.1057/s41303-017-0038-1

129

Cho, Y., Park, J., Han, S., Ju, B., You, J., Ju, A., ... Park, H. Y. (2017). How do South

Korean female executives’ definitions of career success differ from those of male

executives? European Journal of Training & Development, 41, 490-507.

doi:10.1108/EJTD-12-2016-0093

Choi, T., Yeung, W., Edwin Cheng, T. C., & Yue, X. (2018). Optimal scheduling,

coordination, and the value of RFID technology in garment manufacturing supply

chains. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 65, 72-84.

doi:10.1109/TEM.2017.2739799

Choi, S., Min, H., Joo, H., & Choi, H. (2017). Assessing the impact of green supply chain

practices on firm performance in the Korean manufacturing

industry. International Journal of Logistics: Research & Applications, 20, 129-

145. doi:10.1080/13675567.2016.1160041

Choy, K., Ho, G., & Lee, C. (2017). A RFID-based storage assignment system for

enhancing the efficiency of order picking. Journal of Intelligent

Manufacturing, 28, 111-129. doi:10.1007/s10845-014-0965-9

Chunhua Tang, Honglin Yang, Erbao Cao, & Kin Keung Lai. (2018). Channel

competition and coordination of a dual-channel supply chain with demand and

cost disruptions. Applied Economics, 50, 4999–5016.

doi:10.1080/00036846.2018.1466989

Clemons, R., & Slotnick, S. A. (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

130

Cohen, J., Darnon, C., & Mollaret, P. (2017). Distinguishing the desire to learn from the

desire to perform: The social value of achievement goals. Journal of Social

Psychology, 157, 30-46. doi:10.1080/00224545.2016.1152216

Colicchia, C., Creazza, A., Noè, C., & Strozzi, F. (2019). Information sharing in supply

chains: a review of risks and opportunities using the systematic literature network

analysis (SLNA). Supply Chain Management, 24, 5–21. doi:10.1108/SCM-01-

2018-0003

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

Coupet, J., & McWilliams, A. (2017). Integrating organizational economics and resource

dependence theory to explain the persistence of quasi markets. Administrative

Sciences (2076-3387), 7, 1-13. doi:10.3390/admsci7030029

Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Andersson, U., Brannen, M., Nielsen, B., & Rebecca Reuber, A.

(2016). From the editors: Can I trust your findings? Ruling out alternative

explanations in international business research. Journal of International Business

Studies, 47, 881-897. doi:10.1057/s41267-016-0005-4

Cypress, B. S. (2017). Rigor or reliability and validity in qualitative research:

Perspectives, strategies, reconceptualization, and recommendations. Dimensions

of Critical Care Nursing, 36, 253-263. doi:10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253

Damani, Z., MacKean, G., Bohm, E., Noseworthy, T., Wang, J. H., DeMone, B., ...

Marshall, D. A. (2018). Insights from the design and implementation of a single-

entry model of referral for total joint replacement surgery: Critical success factors

131

and unanticipated consequences. Health Policy, 122, 165-174.

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.10.006

Das, K. (2018). Integrating resilience in a supply chain planning model. International

Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 35, 570-595. doi:10.1108/IJQRM-

08-2016-0136

Da Silva, T. M., De Resende Melo, P. L., Esteves, K., & Gomes, G. (2016). Franchisee

association and its mediation of relationship. Revista De Administração

Mackenzie, 17, 138-165. doi:10.1590/1678-69712016/administracao.v17n5p138-

165

De Andrade, M., Spotswood, F., Hastings, G., Angus, K., & Angelova, N. (2017).

Emotion in the ANDS (alternative nicotine delivery systems) market: Practice-

theoretical insight into a volatile market. Social Business, 7, 391-418.

doi:10.1362/204440817X15108539431569

Debono, D., Greenfield, D., Testa, L., Mumford, V., Hogden, A., Pawsey, M., ...

Braithwaite, J. (2017). Understanding stakeholders' perspectives and experiences

of general practice accreditation. Health Policy, 121, 816-822.

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.05.006

De Castro Moura Duart, A. L., De Souza, R. B., Romero Macau, F., & de Souza, L. J.

(2017). Supply Strategy: A quasi-experiment on the number and location of

suppliers. Brazilian Business Review (Portuguese Edition), 14, 528-543.

doi:10.15728/bbr.2017.14.5.5

De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2014). The case study method in family business research:

132

Guidelines for qualitative scholarship. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5,

15-29. doi:10.1016/j.jfbs.2014.01.007

De Saeger, H., Bartak, A., Eder, E., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2016). Memorable experiences

in therapeutic assessment: Inviting the patient's perspective following a

pretreatment randomized controlled trial. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98,

472-479. doi:10.1080/00223891.2015.1136314

De Vos, A., De Hauw, S., & Willemse, I. (2015). An integrative model for competency

development in organizations: The Flemish case. International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 26, 2543-2568. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.1003078

Dlodlo, N., & Hamunyela, S. (2017). The status of integration of health information

systems in Namibia. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 20,

61-75. Retrieved from www.ejise.com

Dolgui, A., Ivanov, D., & Sokolov, B. (2018). Ripple effect in the supply chain: An

analysis and recent literature. International Journal of Production Research, 56,

414-430. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1387680

Dong, D., Gao, X., Sun, X., & Liu, X. (2018). Factors affecting the formation of copper

international trade community: Based on resource dependence and network

theory. Resources Policy, 57, 167-185. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.03.002

Durach, C. F., Glasen, P. C., & Straube, F. (2017). Disruption causes and disruption

management in supply chains with Chinese suppliers. International Journal of

Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 47, 843-863.

doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-07-2017-0228

133

Ekanayake, S., Childerhouse, P., & Sun, P. (2017). The symbiotic existence of

interorganizational and interpersonal ties in supply chain

collaboration. International Journal of Logistics Management, 28, 723-754.

doi:10.1108/IJLM-12-2014-0198

Ellis, P. D. (2016). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis,

and the interpretation of research results. New York, NY: Cambridge University

89 Press.

Elo, S., Kaariainen, M., Kanste, O., Polkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngas, H. (2014).

Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1-10.

doi:10.1177/2158244014522633

Emerson, R. W. (2015). Convenience sampling, random sampling, and snowball

sampling: How does sampling affect the validity of research? Journal of Visual

Impairment & Blindness, 109(2), 164-168. Retrieved from

http://http://www.afb.org/jvib/jvib_main.asp

Fan, Y., Schwartz, F., & VoB, S. (2017). Flexible supply chain planning based on

variable transportation modes. International Journal of Production

Economics, 183, 654–666. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.08.020

Famiyeh, S., & Kwarteng, A. (2018). Supplier selection and firm

performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 35,

690-710. doi:10.1108/IJQRM-06-2016-0091

134

Fatemi, M., Azadi, H., Rafiaani, P., Taheri, F., Dubois, T., Van Passel, S., & Witlox, F.

(2018). Effects of supply chain management on tomato export in Iran: Application

of structural equation modeling. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24, 177-

195. doi:10.1080/10454446.2017.1266552

Feldon, D. F., & Tofel-Grehl, C. (2018). Phenomenography as a foundation for mixed

models research. American Behavioral Scientist, 62, 887-899.

doi:10.1177/0002764218772640

Felype Neis, D., Fernandes Pereira, M., & Antonio Maccari, E. (2017). Strategic

planning process and organizational structure: Impacts, confluence and

similarities. Brazilian Business Review (English Edition), 14, 479-492.

doi:10.15728/bbr.2017.14.5.2

Fletcher, A. J. (2017). Applying critical realism in qualitative research: Methodology

meets method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20, 181-

194. doi:10.1080/13645579.2016.1144401

Fluk, L. R. (2015). Foregrounding the research log in information literacy

instruction. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41, 488-498.

doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.06.010

Forkmann, S., Henneberg, S. C., Naudé, P., & Mitrega, M. (2016). Supplier relationship

management capability: A qualification and extension. Industrial Marketing

Management, 57, 185-200. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.02.003

135

Friday, D., Ryan, S., Sridharan, R., & Collins, D. (2018). Collaborative risk management:

a systematic literature review. International Journal of Physical Distribution &

Logistics Management, 48, 231-253. doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-01-2017-0035

Fugard, A. J., & Potts, H. W. (2015). Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic

analyses: A quantitative tool. International Journal of Social Research

Methodology, 18, 669-684. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.771005453

Fuchs, C., Beck, D., Lienland, B., & Kellner, F. (2018). The role of IT in automotive

supplier supply chains. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31, 64-

88. doi:10.1108/JEIM-03-2017-0038

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative

research. Qualitative Report, 20, 1408-1416. Retrieved from

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR

Ghadge, A., Fang, X., Dani, S., & Antony, J. (2017). Supply chain risk assessment

approach for process quality risks. International Journal of Quality & Reliability

Management, 34, 940-954. doi:10.1108/IJQRM-01-2015-0010

Gauche, C., de Beer, L. T., & Brink, L. (2017). Managing employee well-being: A

qualitative study exploring job and personal resources of at-risk employees. South

African Journal of Human Resource Management, 15(1), 1-13.

doi:10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.957

Gaukler, G., Ketzenberg, M., & Salin, V. (2017). Establishing dynamic expiration dates

for perishables: An application of RFID and sensor technology. International

Journal of Production Economics, 193, 617-632. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.07.019

136

Gawankar, S. A., Kamble, S., & Raut, R. (2017). An investigation of the relationship

between supply chain management practices (SCMP) on supply chain

performance measurement (SCPM) of Indian retail chain using

SEM. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24, 257-295. doi:10.1108/BIJ-12-

2015-0123

Gebauer, H., Haldimann, M., & Saul, C. J. (2017). Service innovations breaking

institutionalized rules of health care. Journal of Service Management, 28, 972-

935. doi:10.1108/JOSM-04-2017-0090

Geelan, T., & Hodder, A. (2017). Enhancing transnational labour solidarity: The

unfulfilled promise of the Internet and social media. Industrial Relations

Journal, 48, 345-364. doi:10.1111/irj.12190

Gerschberger, M., Manuj, I., & Freinberger, P. (2017). Investigating supplier-induced

complexity in supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution &

Logistics Management, 47, 688-711. doi:10.1108/IJPDLM-07-2016-0185

Gibbon, B., & Crane, J. (2018). The impact of 'missed care' on the professional

socialisation of nursing students: A qualitative research study. Nurse Education

Today, 66, 19-24. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2018.04.002

Gielens, K., Geyskens, I., Deleersnyder, B., & Nohe, M. (2018). The new regulator in

town: The effect of walmart's sustainability mandate on supplier shareholder

value. Journal of Marketing, 82, 124-141. doi:10.1509/jm.16.0276

137

Giri, B. C., & Bardhan, S. (2015). Coordinating a supply chain under uncertain demand

and random yield in presence of supply disruption. International Journal of

Production Research, 53, 5070-5084. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1030469

Gold, S., & Schleper, M. C. (2017). A pathway towards true sustainability: A recognition

foundation of sustainable supply chain management. European Management

Journal, 35, 425-429. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2017.06.008

Goldman, E. F., & Swayze, S. (2012). In-depth interviewing with healthcare corporate

elites: Strategies for entry and engagement. International Journal of Qualitative

Methods, 11, 230-243. Retrieved from

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/ijqm/index.php/IJQM/index

Golgeci, I., & Ponomarov, S. Y. (2015). How does firm innovativeness enable supply

chain resilience? The moderating role of supply uncertainty and

interdependence. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27, 267-282.

doi:10.1080/09537325.2014.971003

Golik, M. N., Blanco, M. R., & Czikk, R. (2018). On the trail of line managers as talent

spotters. Human Resource Development International, 21, 232-253.

doi:10.1080/13678868.2017.1385195

Gong, Y., Jia, F., Brown, S., & Koh, L. (2018). Supply chain learning of sustainability in

multi-tier supply chains. International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 38, 1061-1090. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-05-2017-0306

Gonul Kochan, C., Nowicki, D. R., Sauser, B., & Randall, W. S. (2018). Impact of cloud-

based information sharing on hospital supply chain performance: A system

138

dynamics framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 168-

185. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.10.008

Goyal, S., Hardgrave, B. C., Aloysius, J. A., & DeHoratius, N. (2016). The effectiveness

of RFID in backroom and sales floor inventory management. International

Journal of Logistics Management, 27, 795-815. doi:10.1108/IJLM-03-2015-0051

Green, K. W., Zelbst, P. J., Sower, V. E., & Bellah, J. C. (2017). Impact of radio

frequency identification technology on environmental sustainability. Journal of

Computer Information Systems, 57, 269-277.

doi:10.1080/08874417.2016.1184029

Grothe-Hammer, M. (2017). Preparing for the field by topics: A systems theory inspired

strategy for improving social access. Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 34,

41-50. doi:10.1002/sres.2393

Gupta, S., Misra, S. C., Kock, N., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Organizational, technological

and extrinsic factors in the implementation of cloud ERP in SMEs. Journal of

Organizational Change Management, 31, 83-102. doi:10.1108/JOCM-06-2017-

0230

Gupta, S., & Pathak, G. S. (2018). Virtual team experiences in an emerging economy: a

qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31, 778-794.

doi:10.1108/JOCM-04-2017-0108

Haddud, A., DeSouza, A., Khare, A., & Lee, H. (2017). Examining potential benefits and

challenges associated with the internet of things integration in supply

139

chains. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 28, 1055-1085.

doi:10.1108/JMTM-05-2017-0094

Hallavo, V. (2015). Superior performance through supply chain fit: A synthesis. Supply

Chain Management, 20, 71-82. doi:10.1108/SCM-05-2014-0167

Hammersley, M. (2015). On ethical principles for social research. International Journal

of Social Research Methodology, 18, 433-449.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2014.924169

Han, J., & Shin, K. (2016). Evaluation mechanism for structural robustness of supply

chain considering disruption propagation. International Journal of Production

Research, 54, 135-151. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1047977

Harrison, A., Burress, R., Velasquez, S., & Schreiner, L. (2017). Social media use in

academic libraries: A phenomenological study. Journal of Academic

Librarianship, 43, 248-256. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2017.02.014

Hatamleh, M. T., Hiyassat, M., Sweis, G. J., & Sweis, R. J. (2018). Factors affecting the

accuracy of cost estimate: Case of Jordan. Engineering Construction &

Architectural Management (09699988), 25, 113-131. doi:10.1108/ECAM-10-

2016-0232

He, B., Huang, H., & Yuan, K. (2016). Managing supply disruption through procurement

strategy and price competition. International Journal of Production Research, 54,

1980-1999. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1074297

Hiriscau, I. E., Stingelin-giles, N., Stadler, C., Schmeck, K., & Reiter-theil, S. (2014). A

right to confidentiality or a duty to disclose? Ethical guidance for conducting

140

prevention research with children and adolescents. European Child & Adolescent

Psychiatry, 23, 409-416. doi:10.1007/s00787-014-0526-y

Hou, Y., Wei, F., Li, S. X., Huang, Z., & Ashley, A. (2017). Coordination and

performance analysis for a three-echelon supply chain with a revenue sharing

contract. International Journal of Production Research, 55, 202-227.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2016.1201601

Hunter, R. F., Gough, A., O'Kane, N., McKeown, G., Fitzpatrick, A., Walker, T., ... Kee,

F. (2018). Ethical issues in social media research for public health. American

Journal of Public Health, 108, 343-348. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.304249

Huong Tran, T. T., Childerhouse, P., & Deakins, E. (2016). Supply chain information

sharing: challenges and risk mitigation strategies. Journal of Manufacturing

Technology Management, 27, 1102-1126. doi:10.1108/JMTM-03-2016-0033

Huynh, T. T. (2018). Exploring factors influencing technology transfer capability:

Constructing a model through grounded theory. International Journal of

Technology Management & Sustainable Development, 17, 49-64.

doi:10.1386/tmsd.17.1.49_1

Hwang, D., & Min, H. (2015). Identifying the drivers of enterprise resource planning and

assessing its impacts on supply chain performances. Industrial Management &

Data Systems, 115, 541-569. doi:10.1108/IMDS-10-2014-0284

Hsieh, Y., Sönmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y., & Lemke, M. K. (2017). Perceived

workplace mistreatment: Case of Latina hotel housekeepers. Work, 56, 55-65.

doi:10.3233/WOR-162467

141

Ibem, E. O., Aduwo, E. B., Tunji-Olayeni, P., Ayo-Vaughan, E. A., & Uwakonye, U. O.

(2016). Factors influencing e-procurement adoption in the Nigerian building

industry. Construction Economics & Building, 16, 54-67.

doi:10.5130/AJCEB.v%25vi%25i.4984

Imani-Nasab, M. H., Seyedin, H., Yazdizadeh, B., & Majdzadeh, R. (2017). A qualitative

assessment of the evidence utilization for health policy-making on the basis of

support tools in a developing country. International Journal of Health Policy &

Management, 6, 457-465. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2016.158

Ivanov, D. (2018). Revealing interfaces of supply chain resilience and sustainability: a

simulation study. International Journal of Production Research, 56, 3507–3523.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1343507

Iveroth, E. (2016). Strategies for leading IT-enabled change: Lessons from a global

transformation case. Strategy & Leadership, 44, 39-45. doi:10.1108/SL-06-2015-

0050

Jajja, M. S., Kannan, V. R., Brah, S. A., & Hassan, S. Z. (2017). Linkages between firm

innovation strategy, suppliers, product innovation, and business

performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 37,

1054-1075. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-09-2014-0424

Jain, V., Kumar, S., Soni, U., & Chandra, C. (2017). Supply chain resilience: Model

development and empirical analysis. International Journal of Production

Research, 55, 6779-6800. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1349947

142

Jannati, H., & Bahrak, B. (2016). Security analysis of an RFID tag search

protocol. Information Processing Letters, 116, 618-622.

doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2016.05.001

Jawad, H., Jaber, M. Y., & Nuwayhid, R. Y. (2018). Improving supply chain

sustainability using exergy analysis. European Journal of Operational

Research, 269, 258-271. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.10.007

Jemielniak, D. (2016). Wikimedia movement governance: The limits of a-hierarchical

organization. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29, 361-378.

doi:10.1108/JOCM-07-2013-0138

Jin, M., DeHoratius, N., & Schmidt, G. (2017). Want to reduce the bullwhip? Measure it.

Here’s how. Supply Chain Management, 22, 297-304. doi:10.1108/SCM-02-

2017-0088

Jin, Y., Pang, A., & Smith, J. (2018). Crisis communication and ethics: The role of public

relations. Journal of Business Strategy, 39, 43-52. doi:10.1108/JBS-09-2016-0095

Johnson, B. (2014). Ethical issues in shadowing research. Qualitative Research in

Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 9, 21-40.

doi:10.1108/QROM-09-2012-1099

Jones, G. J., Edwards, M., Bocarro, J. N., Bunds, K. S., & Smith, J. W. (2017).

Collaborative advantages: The role of interorganizational partnerships for youth

sport nonprofit organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 31, 148-160.

doi:10.1123/jsm.2016-0118

143

Joubert, Y. T., & Loggenberg, B. (2017). The impact of changes in labour broking on an

integrated petroleum and chemical company. Acta Commercii, 17(1), 1-9.

doi:10.4102/ac.v17i1.441

Kalaitzi, D., Matopoulos, A., Bourlakis, M., & Tate, W. (2018). Supply chain strategies

in an era of natural resource scarcity. International Journal of Operations &

Production Management, 38, 784-809. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-05-2017-0309

Kamalahmadi, M., & Parast, M. M. (2017). An assessment of supply chain disruption

mitigation strategies. International Journal of Production Economics, 184, 210-

230. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.011

Kanyoma, K. E., Agbola, F. W., & Oloruntoba, R. (2018). An evaluation of supply chain

integration across multi-tier supply chains of manufacturing-based SMEs in

Malawi. International Journal of Logistics Management, 29, 1001-1024.

doi:10.1108/IJLM-10-2017-0277

Kashmanian, R. M. (2017). Building greater transparency in supply chains to advance

sustainability. Environmental Quality Management, 26(3), 73-104.

doi:10.1002/tqem.21495

Katiyar, R., Meena, P. L., Barua, M. K., Tibrewala, R., & Kumar, G. (2018). Impact of

sustainability and manufacturing practices on supply chain performance: Findings

from an emerging economy. International Journal of Production Economics, 197,

303-316. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.12.007

Kauppi, K., Longoni, A., Caniato, F., & Kuula, M. (2016). Managing country disruption

risks and improving operational performance: Risk management along integrated

144

supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 484-495.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.10.006

Kavilal, E., Prasanna Venkatesan, S., & Harsh Kumar, K. (2017). An integrated fuzzy

approach for prioritizing supply chain complexity drivers of an Indian mining

equipment manufacturer. Resources Policy, 51, 204-218.

doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.12.008

Khan, Z., Sinkovics, R. R., & Lew, Y. K. (2015). International joint ventures as boundary

spanners: Technological knowledge transfer in an emerging economy. Global

Strategy Journal, 5, 48-68. doi:10.1002/gsj.1089

Kim, B., Park, K. S., Jung, S., & Park, S. H. (2018). Offshoring and outsourcing in a

global supply chain: Impact of the arm’s length regulation on transfer

pricing. European Journal of Operational Research, 266, 88-98.

doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.09.004

Kim, M., & Chai, S. (2017). The impact of supplier innovativeness, information sharing

and strategic sourcing on improving supply chain agility: Global supply chain

perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 187, 42-52.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.02.007

Kim, Y. H., & Davis, G. F. (2016). Challenges for global supply chain sustainability:

Evidence from conflict minerals reports. Academy of Management Journal, 59,

1896-1916. doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0770

145

Kırılmaz, O., & Erol, S. (2017). A proactive approach to supply chain risk management:

Shifting orders among suppliers to mitigate the supply side risks. Journal of

Purchasing & Supply Management, 23, 54-65. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2016.04.002

Klug, F. (2016). Analysing bullwhip and backlash effects in supply chains with phase

space trajectories. International Journal of Production Research, 54, 3906-3926.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2016.1162342

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

Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018) Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part

4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24,

120-124. doi:10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092

Krichanchai, S., & Maccarthy, B. L. (2017). The adoption of vendor managed inventory

for hospital pharmaceutical supply. International Journal of Logistics

Management, 28, 755-780. doi:10.1108/IJLM-01-2015-0010

Krolikowski, M., & Yuan, X. (2017). Friend or foe: Customer-supplier relationships and

innovation. Journal of Business Research, 78, 53-68.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.04.023

Kumar, A., & Kushwaha, G. S. (2018). Supply chain management practices and

operational performance of fair price shops in India: An empirical

study. Logforum, 14, 85-99. doi:10.17270/J.LOG.2018.237

146

Kumar, G., Banerjee, R., Meena, P., & Ganguly, K. K. (2017). Joint planning and

problem solving roles in supply chain collaboration. IIMB Management Review

(Elsevier Science), 29, 45-57. doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2017.03.001

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

Lahat, D., Adali, T., & Jutten, C. (2015). Multimodal data fusion: An overview of

methods, challenges, and prospects. IEEE Explore, 103(9), 1449- 1477.

doi:10.1109/JPROC.2015.2460697

Laihonen, H., & Pekkola, S. (2016). Impacts of using a performance measurement system

in supply chain management: A case study. International Journal of Production

Research, 54, 5607-5617. doi:10.1080/00207543.2016.1181810

Lal, P., & Bharadwaj, S. S. (2016). Understanding the impact of cloud-based services

adoption on organizational flexibility. Journal of Enterprise Information

Management, 29, 566-588. doi:10.1108/JEIM-04-2015-0028

Leguizamon, F., Selva, G., & Santos, M. (2016). Small farmer suppliers from local to

global. Journal of Business Research, 69, 4520-4525.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.017

Lehoux, N., LeBel, L., & Elleuch, M. (2016). Benefits of inter-firm relationships:

Application to the case of a five sawmills and one paper mill supply

chain. Infor, 54, 192-209. doi:10.1080/03155986.2016.1197538

147

Le Roux, C. S. (2017). Exploring rigour in autoethnographic research. International

Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20, 195-207.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2016.1140965

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

Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-

Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary,

qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA

publications and communications board task force report. American

Psychologist, 73(1), 26-46. doi:10.1037/amp0000151

Levitt, H. M., Pomerville, A., Surace, F. I., & Grabowski, L. M. (2017). Metamethod

study of qualitative psychotherapy research on clients' experiences: Review and

recommendations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64, 626-644.

doi:10.1037/cou0000222

Li, G., Fan, H., Sun, H., & Cheng, T. (2017). An information processing perspective on

supply chain risk management: Antecedents, mechanism, and

consequences. International Journal of Production Economics, 185, 63-75.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.015

Li, G., Yu, G., Wang, S., & Yan, H. (2017). Bullwhip and anti-bullwhip effects in a

supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 55, 5423-5434.

doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1319087

148

Li, X., Wu, Q., Holsapple, C. W., & Goldsby, T. (2017). An empirical examination of

firm financial performance along dimensions of supply chain

resilience. Management Research Review, 40, 254-269. doi:10.1108/MRR-02-

2016-0030

Liao, H., & Hitchcock, J. (2018). Reported credibility techniques in higher education

evaluation studies that use qualitative methods: A research synthesis. Evaluation

& Program Planning, 68, 157-165. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.03.005

Lie, R., & Witteveen, L. (2017). Visual informed consent: Informed consent without

forms. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20, 63-75.

doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1116835

Lier, T., Caris, A., & Macharis, C. (2016). Sustainability SI: Bundling of outbound

freight flows: Analyzing the potential of internal horizontal collaboration to

improve sustainability. Networks & Spatial Economics, 16, 277-302.

doi:10.1007/s11067-014-9226-x

Lii, P., & Kuo, F. (2016). Innovation-oriented supply chain integration for combined

competitiveness and firm performance. International Journal of Production

Economics, 174, 142-155. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.01.01

Liu, J., Sarkar, S., Kumar, S., & Jin, Z. (2018). An analysis of stock market impact from

supply chain disruptions in Japan. International Journal of Productivity &

Performance Management, 67, 192-206. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-06-2016-0104

149

Liu, S., Yang, Y., Qu, W. G., & Liu, Y. (2016). The business value of cloud computing:

The partnering agility perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116,

1160-1177. doi:10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0376

Liu, X., Xie, X., Wang, K., Qi, H., Cao, J., Guo, S., & Li, K. (2017). Pinpointing

anomaly RFID tags: Situation and opportunities. IEEE Network, 31(6), 40-47.

doi:10.1109/MNET.2017.1700043

Loh, H. S., Thai, V. V., Wong, Y. D., Yuen, K. F., & Zhou, Q. (2017). Portfolio of port-

centric supply chain disruption threats. International Journal of Logistics

Management, 28, 1368-1386. doi:10.1108/IJLM-09-2016-0208

Lucker, F., & Seifert, R. W. (2017). Building up resilience in a pharmaceutical supply

chain through inventory, dual sourcing and agility capacity. Omega, 73, 114-124.

doi:10.1016/j.omega.2017.01.001

Lyons, S., Karkou, V., Roe, B., Meekums, B., & Richards, M. (2018). Research article:

What research evidence is there that dance movement therapy improves the health

and wellbeing of older adults with dementia? A systematic review and descriptive

narrative summary. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 60, 32-40.

doi:10.1016/j.aip.2018.03.006

Ma, P., Lund, M. S., Nielsen, U. S., Aamand, G. P., & Su, G. (2015). Single-step

genomic model improved reliability and reduced the bias of genomic predictions

in Danish Jersey. Journal of Dairy Science, 98, 9026-9034.

doi:10.3168/jds.2015-9703.

Strategies to Mitigate Supply Chain Disruptions in Grocery Busines

Students also viewed