The influence of global value chain governance on supply network resilience

Larissa Statsenko, Kirstin Scholten, Mark Stevenson
{"title":"The influence of global value chain governance on supply network resilience","authors":"Larissa Statsenko, Kirstin Scholten, Mark Stevenson","doi":"10.1108/scm-05-2024-0328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Diversity – or having a range of different options – is an important part of being resilient. Yet research has not considered how diversity in terms of the governance relationship types that exist within a supply base or across a supply network relates to resilience. By drawing on a well-established global value chain (GVC) governance framework, this paper aims to investigate how different relationship governance types influence resilience at the dyadic and supply network level.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This research draws on 27 embedded cases of buyer-supplier relationships within a network, studied through 20 interviews in 11 organizations across four tiers of the Australian Defence Force supply network, including the end customer perspective, during and after a large-scale supply chain (SC) disruption. Analysis is conducted at the individual dyad and aggregated network levels.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>At the dyadic buyer-supplier level, a variety of different resilience strategies and practices are used across the relationship governance types. Consequently, at the network level, relationships characterized by market and relational governance created more vulnerabilities during COVID-19 than hierarchical and modular governance relationships.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>The GVC framework is extended to the SC domain, providing a deeper understanding of how GVC governance types in SC relationships relate to resilience strategies at the dyadic and network levels. Given that different governance relationships draw on different resilience strategies, diversity in governance relationships helps enhance overall resilience. Meanwhile, the findings show that resilience requires relational aspects to be considered alongside economic aspects of the GVC.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":30468,"journal":{"name":"Supply Chain Management Journal","volume":"344 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supply Chain Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-05-2024-0328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Diversity – or having a range of different options – is an important part of being resilient. Yet research has not considered how diversity in terms of the governance relationship types that exist within a supply base or across a supply network relates to resilience. By drawing on a well-established global value chain (GVC) governance framework, this paper aims to investigate how different relationship governance types influence resilience at the dyadic and supply network level.

Design/methodology/approach

This research draws on 27 embedded cases of buyer-supplier relationships within a network, studied through 20 interviews in 11 organizations across four tiers of the Australian Defence Force supply network, including the end customer perspective, during and after a large-scale supply chain (SC) disruption. Analysis is conducted at the individual dyad and aggregated network levels.

Findings

At the dyadic buyer-supplier level, a variety of different resilience strategies and practices are used across the relationship governance types. Consequently, at the network level, relationships characterized by market and relational governance created more vulnerabilities during COVID-19 than hierarchical and modular governance relationships.

Originality/value

The GVC framework is extended to the SC domain, providing a deeper understanding of how GVC governance types in SC relationships relate to resilience strategies at the dyadic and network levels. Given that different governance relationships draw on different resilience strategies, diversity in governance relationships helps enhance overall resilience. Meanwhile, the findings show that resilience requires relational aspects to be considered alongside economic aspects of the GVC.

全球价值链治理对供应网络弹性的影响
多样性——或者说拥有一系列不同的选择——是适应力的重要组成部分。然而,研究并没有考虑到在供应基地或跨供应网络中存在的治理关系类型的多样性是如何与弹性相关的。通过借鉴一个完善的全球价值链(GVC)治理框架,本文旨在研究不同的关系治理类型如何在二元和供应网络层面影响弹性。设计/方法/方法本研究借鉴了网络中27个买方-供应商关系的嵌入式案例,通过对澳大利亚国防军供应网络四个层次的11个组织的20次访谈进行了研究,包括在大规模供应链(SC)中断期间和之后的最终客户视角。分析是在单个和聚合网络级别上进行的。在二元买方-供应商层面,在关系治理类型中使用了各种不同的弹性策略和实践。因此,在网络层面,以市场和关系治理为特征的关系比分层和模块化治理关系在2019冠状病毒病期间造成了更多的漏洞。原创性/价值GVC框架扩展到供应链领域,提供了对供应链关系中的GVC治理类型如何与二元和网络层面的弹性策略相关联的更深入的理解。鉴于不同的治理关系利用不同的弹性策略,治理关系的多样性有助于增强整体弹性。同时,研究结果表明,弹性需要在考虑全球价值链的经济方面的同时考虑关系方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信