Distinguishing between the concepts of supply chain agility and resilience

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to add clarity to the multidimensional concepts of agility and resilience. In addition, this paper seeks to clarify the differences and similarities between the two concepts by integrating the distinct bodies of knowledge on agility and resilience. Design/methodology/approach A multidisciplinary systematic literature review is conducted. The concept of agility is explored through a review of the sports science, manufacturing, organizational, information systems and information systems development and supply chain literature bases. The concept of resilience is investigated through a review of the psychological and psychopathological, ecological, economic, organizational and supply chain literature bases. Findings Examining the complex relationship between the two constructs led to the emergence of six major dimensions to capture the concept of agility (i.e. ability to quickly change direction, speed/accelerate operations, scan the environment/anticipate, empower the customer/customize, adjust tactics and operations (flexibility), and integrate processes within and across firms). Similarly, six dimensions were uncovered for resilience (i.e. ability to resist/survive disruptions, avoid the shock altogether, recover/return to original form following disruption, speed/accelerate operations, adjust tactics and operations (flexibility) and scan the environment/anticipate). Agility and resilience were found to share three common dimensions (i.e. ability to adjust tactics and operations (flexibility), speed/accelerate operations and scan the environment/anticipate). Practical implications The identification of the common characteristics of agility and resilience carries important managerial implications from a resource allocation perspective. Allocating resources to the development of the common characteristics of agility and resilience can help firms maximize the impact of such investments. That is, by investing in the common characteristics of both they can improve supply chain agility and supply chain resilience. If firms approach the development or improvement of supply chain agility or resilience independent from one another, without an awareness of the common characteristics, they could be duplicating their investments resulting in supply chain redundancies and inefficiencies. Originality/value Not having a clear and comprehensive understanding of the similarities and differences between agility and resilience is problematic from a theoretical perspective. A clear understanding of what each construct represents provides a platform for building generalizable theory by helping researchers operationalize these constructs in a consistent manner. Further, providing a generalizable, comprehensive and multidisciplinary perspective on agility and resilience within supply chain management literature can help increase the visibility of the field of supply chain management across other disciplines as scholars outside the field of supply chain management can utilize the results of this research effort.

Redesigning Supply Chains using Blockchain-Enabled Circular Economy and COVID-19 Experiences

“…Supply chain localization research has understandably not included pandemics but has focused on financing issues ( Reza-Gharehbagh, Hafezalkotob, et al., 2020 ) and warehouse optimization ( Pereira, Sousa, Ferreira, et al., 2019 ). Similarly, agility supply chain research has followed a similar research path to measure flexibility ( Ifran, Wang, and Akhtar, 2019 ), linking agility to technology ( Russell and Swanson, 2019 ), or linking agility to resilience ( Gigor, Gligor, and Holcomb et al, 2019 ). Digitization research is also growing in its linkage with supply chain management.…”

Strategies for Managing the Impacts of Disruptions During COVID-19: an Example of Toilet Paper

“…Studies reveal that an adaptive supply chain recovery strategy is required for each supply chain disruption risk. Therefore, adjusting tactics and operations for recovering from disruptions is essential (Paul et al 2014b ; Gligor et al 2019 ; Paul et al 2019b ; Kumar and Anbanandam 2020 ). Moreover, a flexible supply chain network structure is found appropriate for formulating appropriate disruption risk recovery strategies (Dubey et al 2015 ; Gunasekaran et al 2016 ; Ivanov and Sokolov 2019 ).…”

Dealing with the unpredictable: supply chain resilience

“…Jüttner and Maklan, 2011) and their interrelationship (e.g. Brandon-Jones et al, 2014;Scholten and Schilder, 2015;Gligor et al, 2019); studied SCRes in specific contexts, such as disaster relief (e.g. Day, 2014;Scholten et al, 2014) and the agri-food industry (Leat and Revoredo-Giha, 2013); related resilience to sustainability (e.g.…”