转变背景:传统、声誉和社会供应链风险的审查和研究议程

Martin C. Schleper, Sina Duensing, Christian Busse
{"title":"转变背景:传统、声誉和社会供应链风险的审查和研究议程","authors":"Martin C. Schleper, Sina Duensing, Christian Busse","doi":"10.1108/scm-04-2024-0280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This study aims to shape the future trajectory of scholarly research on traditional, reputational and societal supply chain risks and their management.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The research uses a narrative literature review of the overview type. To control bias stemming from the subjectivity of the methodology, the authors synthesized the relevant literature transparently and established various safeguarding procedures.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The established research stream on traditional supply chain risk has generated a wealth of concepts that can potentially be transferred to the study of reputational and societal risks. The maturing research stream on reputational risks has mostly focused on risk manifestation, from the upstream perspective of the focal firm. The emerging scholarship on societal supply chain risks has anecdotally highlighted detrimental effects on contextual actors, such as society-at-large.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>This study shifts scholarly attention to the role of the context in the risk manifestation process – as a potential risk source for traditional supply chain risk, during the risk materialization for reputational supply chain risk, and as the locus of the risk effect for societal supply chain risk.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This review is unique in that it fosters a holistic understanding of supply chain risk and underscores the increased importance of the context for it. The socioeconomic, institutional and ecological contexts connect the three reviewed research streams. Detailed research agendas for each literature stream are developed, comprising 23 topical areas in total.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":30468,"journal":{"name":"Supply Chain Management Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shifting the context: reviews and research agendas for traditional, reputational and societal supply chain risk\",\"authors\":\"Martin C. Schleper, Sina Duensing, Christian Busse\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/scm-04-2024-0280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>This study aims to shape the future trajectory of scholarly research on traditional, reputational and societal supply chain risks and their management.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>The research uses a narrative literature review of the overview type. To control bias stemming from the subjectivity of the methodology, the authors synthesized the relevant literature transparently and established various safeguarding procedures.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The established research stream on traditional supply chain risk has generated a wealth of concepts that can potentially be transferred to the study of reputational and societal risks. The maturing research stream on reputational risks has mostly focused on risk manifestation, from the upstream perspective of the focal firm. The emerging scholarship on societal supply chain risks has anecdotally highlighted detrimental effects on contextual actors, such as society-at-large.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>This study shifts scholarly attention to the role of the context in the risk manifestation process – as a potential risk source for traditional supply chain risk, during the risk materialization for reputational supply chain risk, and as the locus of the risk effect for societal supply chain risk.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This review is unique in that it fosters a holistic understanding of supply chain risk and underscores the increased importance of the context for it. The socioeconomic, institutional and ecological contexts connect the three reviewed research streams. Detailed research agendas for each literature stream are developed, comprising 23 topical areas in total.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":30468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supply Chain Management Journal\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-26\",\"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-04-2024-0280\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supply Chain Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-04-2024-0280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究旨在为有关传统、声誉和社会供应链风险及其管理的学术研究勾勒出未来的轨迹。为了控制因方法的主观性而产生的偏差,作者对相关文献进行了透明的综合,并建立了各种保障程序。研究结果关于传统供应链风险的既定研究流已经产生了大量概念,这些概念有可能转移到声誉和社会风险的研究中。对声誉风险的研究日趋成熟,主要侧重于从重点企业的上游角度研究风险的表现形式。本研究将学者们的注意力转移到背景在风险显现过程中的作用--作为传统供应链风险的潜在风险源,在声誉供应链风险的风险具体化过程中,以及作为社会供应链风险的风险效应所在地。独创性/价值 本综述的独特之处在于,它促进了对供应链风险的全面理解,并强调了背景对供应链风险的日益重要性。社会经济、制度和生态环境将所审查的三个研究流联系在一起。为每个文献流制定了详细的研究议程,共包括 23 个专题领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Shifting the context: reviews and research agendas for traditional, reputational and societal supply chain risk

Purpose

This study aims to shape the future trajectory of scholarly research on traditional, reputational and societal supply chain risks and their management.

Design/methodology/approach

The research uses a narrative literature review of the overview type. To control bias stemming from the subjectivity of the methodology, the authors synthesized the relevant literature transparently and established various safeguarding procedures.

Findings

The established research stream on traditional supply chain risk has generated a wealth of concepts that can potentially be transferred to the study of reputational and societal risks. The maturing research stream on reputational risks has mostly focused on risk manifestation, from the upstream perspective of the focal firm. The emerging scholarship on societal supply chain risks has anecdotally highlighted detrimental effects on contextual actors, such as society-at-large.

Research limitations/implications

This study shifts scholarly attention to the role of the context in the risk manifestation process – as a potential risk source for traditional supply chain risk, during the risk materialization for reputational supply chain risk, and as the locus of the risk effect for societal supply chain risk.

Originality/value

This review is unique in that it fosters a holistic understanding of supply chain risk and underscores the increased importance of the context for it. The socioeconomic, institutional and ecological contexts connect the three reviewed research streams. Detailed research agendas for each literature stream are developed, comprising 23 topical areas in total.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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