Table 3.
2017–2019 | 2007–2016 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Resilience characteristics | Plan | Uses NAS phase of resilience | 65 | 41 |
Absorb | Uses NAS phase of resilience | 67 | 44 | |
Recover | Uses NAS phase of resilience | 72 | 31 | |
Adapt | Uses NAS phase of resilience | 54 | 17 | |
Resilience Metric or “Proxy” | Numeric measure of resilience, separate from network characteristica | 45 | 31 | |
Supply chain model representation | Linear | Unidirectional and no path options | 10 | 10 |
Branching | Unidirectional with path options | 29 | 15 | |
Graph | Multi-directional with path options | 38 | 17 | |
Otherb | Different enough to not classify as the others | 17 | 5 | |
Transportation model representation | None | Disruptions only within SC nodes | 50 | 18 |
Same as SC | SC links can be disrupted | 10 | 12 | |
Independent Links | Independent network for each SC link | 28 | 10 | |
Graph | Can be adjusted dynamically—SC nodes placed on a single transportation network | 5 | 5 | |
Other | Different enough to not classify as the others | 2 | 2 | |
Command and control representation | None/Pre-determined | Decisions on production and movement will not change | 20 | 4 |
If–then/Heuristic | Discrete, deterministic and simple rules for decision at each SC node; explicit guidance for managerial implications presented | 18 | 5 | |
Agent Based | Probabilistic and/or complex made by multiple independent actors | 13 | 5 | |
Optimization | Optimization algorithm employed to ensure "best" decisions made | 38 | 31 | |
Other | Different enough to not classify as the others | 6 | 2 | |
Disruption representation | Case Study | Real world circumstances used to model disturbances | 44 | 15 |
Set List | Pre-determined list of disturbances generated | 10 | 26 | |
Monte Carlo | Disturbances randomly generated | 11 | 7 | |
Targeted | Adversarial algorithm used to generate disturbances | 5 | 1 | |
None/Other | Different enough to not classify as the others | 25 | 4 |
aIn the 2017–2019 review, “proxy” was added as a way to differentiate between the numeric measure of supply chain resilience and other factors being used to measure supply chain resilience (e.g., disruption cost, product depreciation, time to receive a good, etc.). Of the 45 publications shown to contain a metric, 24 are considered proxy
bIn the 2017–2019 review, “other” encompasses supply chain models that focus more on resilience of the network within external contexts, as opposed to strict definitions and traditional graphic models of supply chains. Of the 17 publications considered other, 9 are considered to model supply chain resilience in relation to other networks, rather than within itself