Building Resilient Supply Chains: Perspectives on Procurement Risk Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the multifaceted strategies organizations employ to build resilient supply chains through effective procurement risk management. Conducted over a six-month period in 2024, the research involved semi-structured interviews with 25 industry professionals from sectors including manufacturing, retail, healthcare, and technology, alongside document analysis and case studies. The study identifies four key themes: risk identification and assessment, supplier relationship management, digitalization in risk management, and strategic resilience practices. The findings reveal that organizations face diverse risks, including supplier, supply market, and external environmental risks, necessitating comprehensive risk assessment methodologies. Supplier relationship management emerges as a critical factor in mitigating risks, with practices such as regular audits, collaborative risk management, long-term partnerships, and supplier diversification being crucial. The adoption of digital technologies like predictive analytics, blockchain, advanced analytics, and artificial intelligence enhances risk management capabilities, providing data-driven insights and fostering transparency. Strategic resilience practices, including inventory buffering, flexible sourcing, redundancy, and scenario planning, are essential for maintaining supply chain continuity amidst disruptions. The study underscores the importance of an integrated and proactive approach to procurement risk management that leverages robust assessment, strong supplier relationships, digital tools, and strategic planning. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how organizations can effectively manage procurement risks and build resilient supply chains in a dynamic global environment. The insights offer valuable guidance for procurement professionals and organizational leaders in developing resilient and adaptable supply chain strategies to navigate the complexities of today's market.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".