Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Expert Systems With Applications 173 (2021) 114690 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Expert Systems With Applications journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eswa Modelling of supply chain disruption analytics using an integrated approach: An emerging economy example Syed Mithun Ali a, Sanjoy Kumar Paul b, Priyabrata Chowdhury c, Renu Agarwal d, Amir Mohammad Fathollahi-Fard e, *, Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour f, g, Sunil Luthra h a Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Australia School of Accounting, Information Systems and Supply Chain, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia d UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Australia e Department of Electrical Engineering, École de Technologie Supérieure, University of Québec, Montréal, Canada f Lincoln International Business School (LIBS), University of Lincoln, UK g FIA Business School, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Paulista University, Sao Paulo, Brazil h Department of Mechanical Engineering, State Institute of Engineering & Technology, India b c A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Keywords: Supply chain management Disruption factors and drivers Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process Delphi method The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework to identify, analyze, and to assess supply chain disruption factors and drivers. Based on an empirical analysis, four disruption factor categories including natural, humanmade, system accidents, and financials with a total of sixteen disruption drivers are identified and examined in a real-world industrial setting. This research utilizes an integrated approach comprising both the Delphi method and the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP). To test this integrated method, one of the well-known examples in industrial contexts of developing countries, the ready-made garment industry in Bangladesh is considered. To evaluate this industrial example, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to ensure the robustness and viability of the framework in practical settings. This study not only expands the literature scope of supply chain disruption risk assessment but through its application in any context or industry will reduce the impact of such disruptions and enhance the overall supply chain resilience. Consequently, these enhanced capabilities arm managers the ability to formulate relevant mitigation strategies that are robust and computationally efficient. These strategies will allow managers to take calculated decisions proactively. Finally, the results reveal that political and regulatory instability, cyclones, labor strikes, flooding, heavy rain, and factory fires are the top six disruption drivers causing disruptions to the ready-made garment industry in Bangladesh. 1. Introduction Firms are increasingly exposed to various supply chain disruptions (SCDs) in today’s competitive and uncertain business environment (Bugert & Lasch, 2018; Guo, He, & Gen, 2019; Ivanov, 2020; Wagner, Mizgier, & Arnez, 2014). The term ‘SCDs’ is defined as catastrophic events that occur at different levels in a supply chain (Tang, 2006). Such disruptions reduce the supply chain performance with regards to the risk analysis (Abdi, Abdi, Fathollahi-Fard, & Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, 2019; Hoffmann, Schiele, & Krabbendam, 2013; Paul, 2015). For example, Ericsson lost over 400 million Euros in potential revenue and 14% of its market shares in 2000 when their supplier—Philips Semiconductors—shut down due to a fire event. Hendricks and Singhal (2005) found that companies suffering from SCDs experienced 33–40% lower stock returns than that of the industry average. Consequently, mitigation of SCDs is a top priority for firms worldwide. To develop mitigation strategies and resilient capabilities for SCDs, evaluating their factors and drivers (Chopra & Sodhi, 2004; Peck, 2005) is vital for firms (Blackhurst, Scheibe, & Johnson, 2008; Ivanov, 2020; Kleindorfer & Saad, 2005). However, such evaluations are not easy due to the presence of qualitative factors and the natural uncertainty in the human decisionmaking process (Ivanov, 2020). Traditionally, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a popular method to handle such qualitative factors, * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: sanjoy.paul@uts.edu.au (S. Kumar Paul), priyabrata.chowdhury@rmit.edu.au (P. Chowdhury), renu.agarwal@uts.edu.au (R. Agarwal), amirmohammad.fathollahifard.1@ens.etsmtl.ca (A.M. Fathollahi-Fard), f.chiappetta-jabbour@montpellier-bs.com (C. Jose Chiappetta Jabbour). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114690 Received 5 June 2020; Received in revised form 10 December 2020; Accepted 5 February 2021 Available online 10 February 2021 0957-4174/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.