| Literature DB >> 35095153 |
Soumyadeb Chowdhury1, Oscar Rodriguez-Espindola2, Prasanta Dey2, Pawan Budhwar3.
Abstract
The impact of blockchain technology (BCT) implementation on the accuracy, reliability, visibility, incorruptibility, and timeliness of supply-chain processes and transactions, makes it attractive to improve the robustness, transparency, accountability and decision-making in risk management. Therefore, the emerging BCT can present an invaluable opportunity for the organisations in need of preparing for and responding to uncertain and complex instances. The adoption of BCT in the operations and supply chain management (OSCM) literature remains scarcely investigated, especially in the context of managing risks in emergency situations such as crises, disasters, and pandemics, which are characterised by volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) in the business environment. This article will contribute to the OSCM literature by developing a conceptual model that will examine the causal relationships between VUCA business environment, constructs derived from technology acceptance model (TAM), resilience and behavioural intention of the operations managers to adopt BCT for risk management. The model was tested by gathering responses from 116 operations managers in the UK (during COVID-19 pandemic) through structural equation modelling. Findings from the analysis suggest that understanding the benefits of BCT, involvement in resilient organisational practices and user-friendly implementation of the technology will have a significant and positive influence on the intention to adopt BCT for risk management in the OSCM context. Building upon these findings, we have proposed a BCT decision framework to assess the feasibility and suitability of adopting BCT in each context (such as risk management), which will have strategic implications for operations managers and the OSCM community.Entities:
Keywords: Blockchain technology; Decision framework; Risk management; Structural equation modelling; TAM; VUCA environment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35095153 PMCID: PMC8785698 DOI: 10.1007/s10479-021-04487-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Oper Res ISSN: 0254-5330 Impact factor: 4.820
Blockchain applications
| Organisation | Domain of use | Application of blockchain | Usefulness and relevance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Walmart | Food Retail | Provide consumers the information about the origin of the products at the farm level and streamline the restocking process. Increasing food trust among the consumers, and advocating its importance in the food supply chain | Product tracing and tracking from farm to fork to advocate food trust among consumers |
| Maersk | Shipping and logistics | Managing cargo remotely, track the movement of the cargo and reduce the waiting time by eliminating paper transactions in the destination port | Process optimisation and efficiency in International goods movement |
| British Airways | Airline | Streamline and efficiently present the information about flights accurately and consistently across multiple platforms—Website, airport gate monitors and the mobile apps | Information accuracy across multiple platform, concurrently |
| DHL | Logistics and pharmaceutical | In collaboration with Accenture (technology provider) reduce tampering or counterfeiting drug issues in the pharma industry, strategic alignment between the product manufacturing and its movement within the supply chain | Information resilience among the stakeholders is facilitated through transparency, traceability and trackability |
| Fedex | Logistics and customer relation | Store the data gathered from sensors and the customers to quickly resolve customer issues and disputes, by using permissioned ledgers among the various actors in the supply chain | Information aggregation through BCT platform has led to better co-ordination and collaboration among the various stakeholders to enhance customer experience and satisfaction |
| Abu Dhabi National Oil Company | Oil and gas supplier management | Managing the intergroup network (of 14 companies) involved in the extraction, processing, transportation, sales and marketing of oil and gas, for real-time accounting and providing full transparency to shareholders in a secure manner | Increase collaboration and partnership between the supply chain actors for responsible consumption and production |
| De Beers | Jewellery and diamond | Track the origin of diamonds from mining to the retail store, to help regulate the supply chain | Transparency in production, advocating decent work and responsible practices |
| Louis Dreyfus Company (LD | Food retail (bottling process) | Increase collaboration between the supply chain actors, and introduce technology intermediary to track, trace and employ responsible recycling in the bottling process of juices | Advocating environmental sustainability to reduce plastic waste and carbon emissions |
| Moyee Coffee | Exotic coffee distribution | Fair chain for the coffee industry by digitising the supply chain to be able to track the first mile (farmers) and last mile (consumers) | Providing full transparency in the payment system, in addition to evidence of the product quality |
| Cepham | Nutritional ingredient supply | Assess the quality of the products before they are consumed by the customers to alleviate risks of product quality | Product quality management in the supply chain |
| Uni Lever | Tea production and distribution | Maintain supply chain relationships and associated documentation in the tea sector, to maintain product quality and in line with the CSR objectives of the company | Digitalisation and disintermediation have resulted in reduced transaction costs and enhance quality management of the raw materials, product manufacturing |
| Ford | Raw material production in automotive industry | Tracing and tracking of raw material such as cobalt used to manufacture parts of the car in the industry | Responsible raw material mining, manufacturing and consumption practices for environmental sustainability |
Fig. 1Theoretical model—BCT adoption in risk management
Fig. 2Role of managers (sample selected)
Fig. 3Managers’ years of experience (sample selected)
Reliability and discriminant validity
| α | CR | AVE | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EAS | 0.873 | 0.848 | 0.584 |
| USE | 0.830 | 0.848 | 0.583 |
| VUCA | 0.894 | 0.865 | 0.617 |
| RES | 0.804 | 0.870 | 0.692 |
| INT | 0.932 | 0.884 | 0.657 |
Factor loadings
| EASE | USE | VUCA | RES | INT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ease_BC_1 | 0.782 | ||||
| Ease_BC_2 | 0.794 | ||||
| Ease_BC_3 | 0.794 | ||||
| Ease_BC_4 | 0.825 | ||||
| Useful_BC_1 | 0.700 | ||||
| Useful_BC_3 | 0.792 | ||||
| Useful_BC_4 | 0.754 | ||||
| Useful_BC_5 | 0.724 | ||||
| VUCA_1 | 0.730 | ||||
| VUCA_2 | 0.900 | ||||
| VUCA_3 | 0.823 | ||||
| VUCA_4 | 0.854 | ||||
| Org_Res_2 | 0.680 | ||||
| Org_Res_3 | 0.894 | ||||
| Org_Res_4 | 0.734 | ||||
| Intention_BC_1 | 0.843 | ||||
| Intention_BC_2 | 0.840 | ||||
| Intention_BC_3 | 0.882 | ||||
| Intention_BC_4 | 0.930 |
Goodness-of-fit of the SEM model
| CFI | GFI | TLI | RMSEA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 0.971 | 0.861 | 0.967 | 0.048 | 1.264 |
Fig. 4SEM path analysis
Summary of Hypothesis
| ID | Hypothesis | Standardised Estimate | Significance | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | VUCA – USE | 0.572 | *** | Supported |
| H2 | VUCA – EAS | 0.732 | *** | Supported |
| H3 | USE – INT | 0.334 | *** | Supported |
| H4 | EAS – INT | 0.430 | *** | Supported |
| H5 | RES – INT | 0.313 | *** | Supported |
Fig. 5BCT decision framework
Factors affecting information resilience
| Factors to consider | Yes | NO |
|---|---|---|
| Does the use-case/context require information sharing both at inter and intra organisation levels? | If the answers to these questions are YES, then BCT can offer value and benefits for the organisation in that use-case/context. Therefore, BCT adoption seems promising | If the answers to one or more of these questions is NO, then BCT should be deemed unsuitable for the given use-case/context |
| Does the use-case/context require persistent storage, i.e., storing the state of the current and historical information? | ||
| Does the use-case/context require efficient discovery of information in real-time? | ||
| Does the use-case/context require immutable and unchangeable records of information, to maintain integrity of the stored data? | ||
| Does the use-case/context require secure and safe transmission of data, which may or may not be business critical? |
Factors affecting information management in a shared virtual pace
| Factors to consider | Yes | NO |
|---|---|---|
| Will the information be shared with multiple parties (stakeholders) in the supply chain ecosystem? | If the answers to these questions are YES, then BCT should be adopted as it offers an automated mechanism and protocol for information management process within the blockchain network | If the answers to any these questions is NO, then BCT is not suitable for use, and a shared database can offer the features necessary to accomplish these tasks |
| Will multiple parties (stakeholders) in the supply chain ecosystem participate in the data input process? | ||
| Will the information be updated by multiple parties (stakeholders) in the supply chain ecosystem? | ||
| Will the information be audited by multiple parties (stakeholders) in the supply chain ecosystem? | ||
| Will the information validation require consensus from multiple parties (stakeholders) in the supply chain ecosystem? |
Understanding relationships within the supply chain ecosystem in a shared virtual pace
| Factors to consider | Yes | NO |
|---|---|---|
| Are all parties (stakeholders) known to each other (i.e., a working relationship exists between them) | If the answers to any these questions is YES, then BCT is not suitable for use, and a different alternative such as a centralised shared repository can meet these conditions (trusted third party) | If the answers to these questions are NO, then BCT should be adopted as it offers seamless transaction and information sharing in a trust less and decentralised environment satisfying the key requirements of the use-case pertaining to rules of information transmission |
| Are all parties (stakeholders) trust each other (in the context of sharing information and transactions) | ||
| Are all parties (stakeholders) have unified interest (for example responding to/ mitigating risks through a systematic strategy) | ||
| Do stakeholders need trusted central authority for validating/ managing the transactions (for the given context/use-case)? | ||
| Do stakeholders want to continue relying on 3rd parties for various processes and transactions (in the given context/use-case)? |
Understanding the business logic governing the processes and transactions
| Factors to consider | YES | NO |
|---|---|---|
| Can the business processes and transactions in the use-case/context, represented by conditional logic? | If the answers to these questions are YES, then BCT should be adopted as it offers mechanisms to write software logic that would govern the processes, transactions and their validation automatically in a decentralised virtual environment | If the answers to any these questions is NO, then BCT is not suitable for use, and a centralised share database repository is required, where rules governing the business logic can be dynamically updated and on a frequent basis |
| Can the business processes and transactions in the use-case/context, require a standalone system, which should be integrated with existing infrastructure? | ||
| Are the rules governing business processes and transactions in the use-case/context, more or less static, i.e., does not change regularly? | ||
| Does any stakeholder require control over the rules governing the business logic (i.e., rules are not determined a single entity)? | ||
| Does the business process, logic and rules involved managing contractual agreements between the stakeholders? |
Capacity and capabilities of the stakeholders in the context of digital readiness
| Factors to consider | YES | NO |
|---|---|---|
| Do stakeholders in the network use different technologies for this process? | If the answers to any of these questions is YES, then stakeholders should be provided with suitable knowledge resources and strategic guidelines which will help them to understand the BCT, its underlying concepts and anticipated impact on the business processes and productivity | If the answers to all these questions are YES, then the stakeholders should be engaged in a proof-of-concept implementation to understand, how the technology adoption will impact their individual organisations and their relationships with other entities in the supply chain ecosystem |
| Does BCT adoption require stakeholders to update/replace current practices and technologies, as a result of BCT adoption? | ||
| Do the stakeholders understand the positive and negative impact of BCT on business operations and productivity? | ||
| Do the stakeholders have capability (knowledge and understanding) for using BCT? | ||
| Do the stakeholders have capacity (technical, human and financial resources) for using BCT? | ||
| Do the stakeholders have a digital culture within their organisation (i.e., ability to digitally transform operational process, if not yet transformed)? |
Survey Instrument
| Construct | Latent Variables (Items) | References |
|---|---|---|
| VUCA Environment | • Blockchain technology would help minimize volatility caused by risk dynamics and velocity | Baran and Woznyj ( |
| • Blockchain technology would help minimize uncertainty (i.e. lack of information and contextual awareness) | ||
| • Blockchain technology would help minimize complexity due to vast and variable information | ||
| • Blockchain technology would help minimize ambiguity (i.e. confusion, subjective judgement and strategic misalignment) | ||
| Perceived Usefulness of BCT | Using blockchain technology would: | Wamba and Queiroz ( |
| • Facilitate tracing and tracking information related to processes for risk management | ||
| • Allow us to perform secure transactions for risk management | ||
| • Allow us to effectively communicate with customers and suppliers to manage risks | ||
| • Enhance information quality and reliability for risk management | ||
| • Facilitate swifter data-driven decision-making for risk management | ||
| Perceived ease of using BCT | • I would find it easy to get blockchain technology to do what I need to do for risk management | Wamba and Queiroz ( |
| • I think the technology is easy and understandable | ||
| • It would be easy for me to become skilful at using the technology for risk management | ||
| • I think integrating the technology will be fairly easy compared to conventional practices used for risk management | ||
| Resilience | • We are able to cope with changes brought by disruptions/ emergency situations | Dubey et al. ( |
| • We are able to adapt to the disruption easily | ||
| • We are able to provide a quick response to disruptions | ||
| • We are able to maintain high situational awareness at all times | ||
| Intention to adopt | • I predict my organisation will adopt blockchain technology for risk management in the future | Wang et al. ( |
| • I plan to integrate blockchain technology for risk management in the near future | ||
| • I expect that my organisation will integrate blockchain technology to enhance risk management in the future | ||
| • My organisation plans to digitally transform risk management operations through integrating blockchain technology |