The main areas of methodological reflection in the supply chains research

• Autorzy: Ciesielski Marek , Konecka Sylwia

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17270/J.LOG.2019.341

Warianty tytułu

PL

Najważniejsze obszary refleksji metodologicznej w badaniach nad łańcuchami dostaw

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background: The most important contemporary methodological problems in the study of supply chains include creating and verifying hypotheses and theories as well as selecting appropriate research schemes. An acceptance of the different ways to explain problems (induction, deduction or abduction) is key. It should be remembered that interesting and useful results can be achieved only with well-formulated questions and research problems. All of these issues relate to the need to strengthen methodological rigor within the research into supply chains. Methods: The primary method employed in this article is critical analysis. This article focuses on the most important issues related to the construction of a theory and its verification, as well as the issue of the pattern of research and the cognitive scheme. In addition, the issue of the correctness of definitions has been developed, as these are often wrongly formulated and do not fulfil their role. Results: The main purpose of this article is to indicate that supply chain research requires a change in the general model of scientific practice, assigning a higher rank to replication research and increasing the role of scientific criticism. Potential drivers of supply chain research are all types of reasoning: deduction (reasoning, checking), reduction and its special case induction (translation, command), and the systematization of knowledge. The knowledge gained from this research is so extensive and varied that its further development is possible through refutation, i.e. thesis making, defence and falsification. The aim of this article is also the systematization and analysis of theories and methodological assumptions in the area of supply chain management. Conclusions: The analysis points to a need to structure the definitions of supply. What needs to be established is a set of basic theories useful in the study of supply chains and the assessment of the assertions formulated with regards to hypotheses. The improvement of methodological assumptions, as well as the search for methodological elements useful in this study, need to be continuously ensured. The scope of the theories used in the research should be broadened, but at the same time, new theories should be examined which also pertain to their usefulness in explaining and creating the concept and practical recommendations. It is suggested that research on supply chains needs to be approached in a slightly broader way than has been done so far in the literature. The methodology is recognized as a system of analysis in a particular area of study or activity. Therefore, the majority of publications retrieved according to this key word refer only to examples of the use of particular methods, tools for researching supply chains, or only some aspects of its functioning. However, methodology can also be understood as a philosophy of science. This approach to supply chain research methodology is an important research gap and a new view on supply chain management.

PL

Wstęp: Do najważniejszych, współczesnych problemów metodologicznych w badaniach łańcuchów dostaw należą: tworzenie i sprawdzanie twierdzeń oraz teorii i wybór schematów badania. Kwestią krytyczną jest też akceptacja sposobów wyjaśniania (indukcja, dedukcja lub abdukcja). Trzeba przy tym pamiętać, iż wartościowe rezultaty można uzyskać tylko przy dobrze sformułowanych pytaniach i problemach badawczych. Wszystkie wymienione kwestie wiążą się z potrzebą wzmocnienia rygoryzmu metodologicznego w badaniach związanych z łańcuchami dostaw. Metody: W artykule podstawową metodą jest analiza krytyczna. Wyniki: Dokonano systematyzacji i analizy teorii i założeń metodologicznych w obszarze zarządzania łańcuchami dostaw. Wnioski: Analiza dowodzi, że wpierw należy zlikwidować bałagan w definiowaniu łańcuchów dostaw. Można odwołać się do teorii grafów i używać prostej definicji: zbiór przedsiębiorstw i relacji między nimi, w którym firmy są dla siebie dostawcami i odbiorcami. Trzeba także rozwijać zbiór podstawowych teorii przydatnych w badaniach łańcuchów dostaw i ocenić poziom asercji formułowanych hipotez. Należy stale dbać o ulepszanie założeń metodologicznych i szukać elementów metodologii przydatnych dla omawianych badań. Warto zwiększać zakres teorii wykorzystywanych w badaniach. Ale jednocześnie należy ustalić pochodzenie wykorzystywanych i nowych teorii i ich przydatność w procesie wyjaśniania i tworzenia koncepcji oraz rekomendacji dla praktyki.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

methodology; theory; reasoning; cognitive scheme; hypothesis; supply chains

PL

metodologia; teoria; łańcuchy dostaw

• Wydawca: Wyższa Szkoła Logistyki
• Czasopismo: LogForum
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: Vol. 15, no. 3
• Strony: 351--361
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Ciesielski Marek

• Poznań University of Economics and Business, Faculty of Management, Department of Logistics and Transport, al. Niepodległości 10, 61-200 Poznań, Poland

autor

Konecka Sylwia

• Poznań University of Economics and Business, Faculty of Management, Department of Logistics and Transport, al. Niepodległości 10, 61-200 Poznań, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Ateş M.A., Wynstra F., van Raaij E.M., 2015. An exploratory analysis of the relationship between purchase category strategies and supply base structure, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 21 (3), 204-219. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.04.007.
• 2. Brito R.P., Miguel P.L.S., 2017. Power, governance, and value in collaboration: Differences between buyer and supplier perspectives. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 53 (2), 61-87, http://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12134.
• 3. Carnovale, S. Yeniyurt, S., Rogers, D.S., 2017. Network connectedness in vertical and horizontal manufacturing joint venture formations: A power perspective, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 23 (2), 67-81, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2017.01.005.
• 4. Ciesielski M., 2017. Supply Chains - A Theoretical and Methodological Perspective, Transport Economics and Logistics, University of Gdańsk Press, http://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0010.5592.
• 5. Craighead C.W., David J. Ketchen Jr. and Li Cheng, 2016. "Goldilocks" Theorizing in Supply Chain Research: Balancing Scientific and Practical Utility via Middle Range Theory, Transportation Journal, 55, 3, Special Issue: Linking Practice and Theory, 241-257, http://doi.org/10.5325/transportationj.55.3.0 241.
• 6. Christopher M., 2016. Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 5th Edition, FT Press, Pearson Education, Harlow. ISBN-13: 9781292083797.
• 7. Cudziło M., Voronina R., Dujak D., Koliński A., 2018. Analysing the Efficiency of Logistic Actions in Complex Supply Chains - Conceptual and Methodological Assumptions of Research, Logforum Issue 2, 2018, 3, http://doi.org/10.17270/J.LOG.255.
• 8. Diabat A., Deskoores R., 2016. A hybrid genetic algorithm based heuristic for an integrated supply chain problem, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 38, 172-180, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2015.04.011.
• 9. Foerstla K., Schleperband M.C., Henke M. ,2017. Purchasing and Supply Management: From efficiency to effectiveness in an integrated supply chain, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 23, 4, 223-228, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2017.08.004.
• 10. Glaser B.G., Strauss A.L., 2017. Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies for Qualitative Research, New York, Imprint Routledge, http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206.
• 11. Gligor D., Bozkurt S., Russo I., Omar A., 2019. A look into the past and future: theories within supply chain management, marketing and management, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24 1, 170-186, http://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0124.
• 12. Hoddy E.T., 2019. Critical realism in empirical research: employing techniques from grounded theory methodology, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22, 1, 111-124, http://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1503400.
• 13. Kaufmann L., Denk N., 2011. How To Demonstrate Rigor When Presenting Grounded Theory Research In The Supply Chain Management Literature, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 47, 4, http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745493X.2011.03246.x.
• 14. Ketchen D.J.Jr., Hult G.T.M., 2007, Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: The case of best valve supply chains, Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 573-580, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.05.010.
• 15. Lacoste S., Johnsen R.E., 2015. Supplier - customer relationships: A case study of power dynamics, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 21 (4), .229-240, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2014.12.006.
• 16. Liker J.K., 2005. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer, McGraw-Hill. Available from Internet: http://gtu.ge/AgroLib/%5BJeffrey_Liker%5D_The_Toyota_ Way_-_14_Management_Pri(BookFi.or.pdf (02/02/2018).
• 17. Mokhele M., 2018. What practice can learn from theory: The potential impact of disposition decision factors on organisational performance, Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 12, http://doi.org/10.4102/jtscm.v12i0.338.
• 18. Nobari A., Kheirkhah A., Esmaeili M., 2019. Considering chain to chain competition in forward and reverse logistics of a dynamic and integrated supply chain network design problem, Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 12, 1, 147-166.
• 19. Northcott R., 2019, Prediction versus accommodation in economics, Journal of Economic Methodology, 26, 1, 59-69, http://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1561080.
• 20. Reinhold S., Beritelli P., 2016. Changing Actor's Cognitive Schema of the Destination: Implications of a Flow-Based View, 3rd Biennial Forum on Advances in Destination Management. - Vail, USA.
• 21. Sarafan M., Squire B., Brandon-Jones E., 2019. A Behavioural View of Supply Chain Risk Management [in:] Zsidisin G., Henke M. (eds) Revisiting Supply Chain Risk, Springer Series in Supply Chain Management, 7, Springer, http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-038137_14.
• 22. Schniederjans M., Schniederjans D., Cao R. Q., 2018. Topics in Lean Supply Chain Management, World Scientific Publishing Co, Singapore. ISBN-13: 978-9812818553.
• 23. Schweiger J., 2015. Development of a Purchasing and Supply Management Maturity Framework, Operations and Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 8, 1, 2015,11-21. http://doi.org/10.31387/oscm0190142.
• 24. Simpson D., Meredith J., Boyer K., Dilts D., Ellram L.M., Leong G.K., 2015. Professional, Research, and Publishing Trends in Operations and Supply Chain Management, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 51, 3, 87-100, http://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12078.
• 25. Spina G., Caniato F., Luzzini D., Ronchi S., 2016. Assessing the Use of External Grand Theories in Purchasing and Supply Management Research, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 22 (1), 18-30. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.07.001.
• 26. Taleb N.N., 2015. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, Penguin Books.
• 27. Touboulic A., Walker H., 2015. Love me, love me not: A nuanced view on collaboration in sustainable supply chains, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 21 (3), 178-191, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2015.05.001.
• 28. Urbina D.A., Ruiz-Villaverde Albert, 2019. A Critical Review of Homo Economicus from Five Approaches, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 78: 63-93. http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12258.
• 29. Wieland, A., Handfield, R.B., Durach, C.F., 2016. Mapping the Landscape of Future Research Themes in Supply Chain Management, Journal of Business Logistics, 37 (3), 1-8, http://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12131.
• 30. Wu Y., Wang J., Li C., 2019. Decisions of Supply Chain Considering Chain-to-Chain Competition and Service Negative Spillover Effect, Sustainability 2019, 11(6), 1612, http://doi.org/10.3390/su11061612.
• 31. https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/publications/248659

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2019).