以下为《1-s2.0-S***00066-main (2)》的无排版文字预览，完整格式请下载

下载前请仔细阅读文字预览以及下方图片预览。图片预览是什么样的，下载的文档就是什么样的。

Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management " ("""") """–""" Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management journal homepage: doc.001pp.com/locate/pursup Articles Inter-relationship among risk taking propensity, supply chain security practices, and supply chain disruption occurrence Kihyun Park a, Hokey Min b,n, Soonhong Min c a Department of Management, Robert Morris University, 6001 University Boulevard, Moon, PA 15108, United States b Department of Management, College of Business Administration, Bowling Green State University, BAA 3008C, Bowling Green, OH 43403, United States c Sangnam Institute of Management, School of Business, Yonsei University, Republic of Korea article info Article history: Received 29 September 2014 Received in revised form 21 December 2015 Accepted 30 December 2015 Keywords: Supply chain security Supply chain disruption Risk taking propensity Contingency theory Survey Korea abstract Supply chain disruptions often led to declining sales, cost increases, and service failures for the company. Considering the profound impact of supply chain disruptions on business survivals, there is a need for formulating business initiatives that will make the company's supply chain network more resilient in the presence of risk and uncertainty. This paper sheds light on the inter-relationships among risk propensity, supply chain security practices, and disruption occurrence so that it can help the company ?gure out what it takes to overcome the company's vulnerability to supply chain risks and then gain competitive advantages over its rivals by better preparing for potential supply chain disruptions. This paper attempts to identify factors affecting the ?rm's risk behaviors and supply chain security practices based on the questionnaire survey of supply chain professionals. The ?nding indicates that ?rms which take the risk of supply chain disruption seriously are more likely to comply with security initiatives and build safety stocks and subsequently reduce the frequency of supply chain disruption occurrence. & 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction As the globalization of business activities accelerated, today's supply chains span the globe with unprecedented complexities and uncertainties. These complexities and uncertainties not only increase risk, but also reduce visibility that, in turn, makes supply chain operations more vulnerable to unforeseen disruptions. Re?ecting growing concerns over supply chain disruptions, supply chain risk management (SCRM) has become an emerging research topic (Altay and Ramirez, 2010; Ellis et al., 2011; Manuj and Mentzer, 2008a, 2008b; Revilla and Sáenz, 2014; Schoenherr et al., 2012; Son and Orchard, 2013; Tang, 2006a; Whitney et al., 2014; Zsidisin and Wagner, 2010). One of the central themes of past SCRM research includes the de?nition and categorization of supply chain risks and identi?cation of their sources. For instance, borrowing from investment portfolio concepts, Rao and Goldsby (2009) de?ned supply chain risk in two ways: First, risk is considered the manifestation of uncontrollability that may result in either positive or negative outcome. Second, risk refers to a form of negative outcomes that adversely affect organizational performance. Altay and Ramirez (2010) investigated how natural disaster n Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: parkk@rmu.edu (K. Park), hmin@bgsu.edu (H. Min), sminscm@yonsei.ac.kr (S. Min). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.12.001 1478-4092/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. such as earthquake, windstorms, ?oods, and ?res affected ?rms in different business sectors. They observed that ?rms did not take disaster disruption management seriously due to their perceived low probability of disaster occurrence, despite the fact that natural disaster actually affected ?rm performances. Considering the potential connection between the ?rm's perceived risk and risk mitigation actions, Ellis et al. (2011) identi?ed individual, organizational, and environmental factors that affected the formation of risk perception and mitigation actions. Despite a variety of risk factors (sources) and their level of importance to mitigation actions, Revilla and Sáenz (2014) found the level of disruption management implementation to be universal all across the world. More recently, Ambulkar et al. (2015) identi?ed three antecedents for enhancing the ?rm's resilience to supply chain disruptions: (1) supply chain disruption orientation; (2) resource recon?guration capabilities and (3) ?rm's risk management infrastructure. They found that supply chain disruption affected the ?rm's resilience level differently depending upon the ?rm's resource con?guration and risk management infrastructure. Focusing on the effectiveness of risk mitigation actions rather than the identi?cation of risk sources, Whitney et al. (2014) noticed that multiple sourcing was often used as a temporary hedge to reduce supply chain disruption risks. However, they found that temporary multiple sourcing turned out to be ineffective in dealing with supply chain disruption, if product design and manufacturing methods for the disrupted items were complex. Supporting this Please cite this article as: Park, K., et al., Inter-relationship among risk taking propensity, supply chain security practices, and supply chain disruption occurrence. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.12.001i 2 K. Park et al. / Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management " ("""") """–""" ?nding, Bode and Wagner (2015) showed that horizontal, vertical, and spatial supply chain complexities increased the frequency of supply chain disruption and thus made a temporary hedge less ef?cient. In the presence of various supply chain risks illustrated above, this paper aims to develop risk mitigation action plans that help ?rms better control such risks, while assessing the impact of supply chain security and safety stock practices on supply chain disruption occurrence based on the empirical study. In particular, drawing upon the contingency theory, this paper introduces ?rm's risk taking propensity as an antecedent, which may re?ect the ?rm's risk management behavior, proposes security compliance and safety stock plans, and identi?es various types of supply chain disruption occurrence. 2. Relevant literature Re?ecting the growing awareness of supply chain risk and a need for contingency planning, there exists abundant literature dealing with supply chain risk (e.g., Tang, 2006a, 2006b; Khan and Burnes, 2007; Manuj and Mentzer, 2008a, 2008b; Vanany et al., 2009; Tang and Nurmaya Musa, 2011; Chaudhuri et al., 2013, Zhao et al., 2013). Given the plethora of articles reviewing and synthesizing the past supply chain risk literature, our focus in this section is to examine what has been studied up to this point to identify various forms of supply chain disruption, and assess their impact of supply chain security practices on reduction of such disruption occurrence. 2.1. Risk taking propensity Since the ?rm's corporate culture in dealing with risk may in?uence the way the risk is managed, we take into account the degree of risk taking propensity for formulating SCRM strategy. Generally, risk taking propensity refers to a company's willingness to commit their resources to risk management (Miller and Friesen, 1978). Sitkin and Pablo (1992) de?ned risk taking propensity as a general tendency for a person to either take or avoid risks. Risk taking propensity ranges from risk-aversion tendencies to actively avoiding risk to risk-seeking tendencies to actively exploit uncertainty (Weber et al., 2002). Kocabasoglu et al. (2007) is one of the ?rst to study risk taking propensity at an organizational level to understand SCRM behavior and then de?ne risk taking propensity as a likelihood of a ?rm's acceptance of less or more risky behavior over time. Also, Gi 内容过长，仅展示头部和尾部部分文字预览，全文请查看图片预览。 ncy on disruption occurrence. J. Bus. Logist. 31 (2), 1–20. Zsidisin, G.A., Ellram, L.M., Carter, J.R., Cavinato, J.L., 2004. Analysis of supply risk assessment techniques. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 34 (5), 397–413. Please cite this article as: Park, K., et al., Inter-relationship among risk taking propensity, supply chain security practices, and supply chain disruption occurrence. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.12.001i [文章尾部最后500字内容到此结束,中间部分内容请查看底下的图片预览]请点击下方选择您需要的文档下载。

1. 4425
2. Unit 1 Reading1[课件]
3. 秋季大学英语四级考试全仿真试卷答案
4. 01 高考核心语法知识点精练1（名词）-届高考英语一轮复习核心语法知识精讲精练(通用版）
5. 求职招聘作文
6. 李亚琴蓝天杯教学设计
7. -历年大学英语四级真题及答案
8. 新世纪研究生公共英语教材听说(下)第二版听力原文及课题答案
9. 六级词汇大全
10. Unit2It’sinthewest
11. 教学设计Unit 2 Saving the Earth
12. Principles+of+Psychotherapy
13. Full_Paper_Template
14. A Study on Supporting the Deployment and Evaluatio
15. Python and HDF5
16. Crazy+Rich+Asians+-+Kevin+Kwan
17. 1-s2.0-S***00066-main (2)
18. YOLO V1
19. Silver diffusion and mechanism of CaO-MgO-SiO2 gla
20. 英语大一上学期测试

以上为《1-s2.0-S***00066-main (2)》的无排版文字预览，完整格式请下载

下载前请仔细阅读上面文字预览以及下方图片预览。图片预览是什么样的，下载的文档就是什么样的。