Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 15;51(4):867–919. doi: 10.1111/deci.12470

Table 1.

Review of the most influential SCRM review articles

Author(s) (Year) Review Method Selective Set of Reviewed Journals (Yes/No) SCRM Areas Covered / SCR Classifications No. of Articles Covered Publication Dates Covered Main Identified Research Directions Citation Count (as of March 2020)
Tang (2006) Conceptual No
  • Supply management

  • Demand management

  • Product management

  • Information management

200+ 1964–2005
  • Incorporating nonstationary supply and demand processes

  • Considering alternative objective rather than cost/profit for disruption risks

  • Including dynamic supply configurations of suppliers in supply management strategies

  • Including dynamic pricing/revenue management in demand management strategies

  • Including dynamic assortment planning in product management strategies

  • Including Collaborative Planning, Forecasting, and Replenishment systems in information management strategies

1,119
Rao and Goldsby (2009) Conceptual No
  • Environmental risks

  • Industrial risks

  • Organizational risks

  • Problem‐specific risks

  • Decision‐maker risks

55 1998–2008 Using their proposed typology of risk to:
  • investigate the impact of risks on supply chains

  • investigate supply chain partner engagement

  • assess the benefits of visibility on reducing supply chain risk

281
Tang and Musa (2011) Citation/Cocitation analysis No
  • Material flow risk

  • Financial flow risk

  • Information flow risk

138 1995–2009
  • Developing quantitative models

  • Paying more attention to information flow risk

418
Colicchia and Strozzi (2012) Systematic literature network analysis (citation analysis) No
  • Complexity and uncertainty

  • Practices and tools for SCRM

  • Organization of SCRM process

  • Increased supply chain resilience and robustness

55 1994–2010
  • Incorporating supply chain complexity

  • Incorporating resilience and robustness in supply chain modeling

  • Managing disruption risks

  • Considering supply chains as interactive open systems

  • Assessing the value of supply chain resilience and robustness

233
Sodhi et al. (2012a) Participant observation, informant interviewing, and enumeration (survey) No
  • SCRM definition gap

  • SCRM process gap

  • SCRM methodology gap

31 1998–2010
  • Developing a clear definition of SCRM

  • Conducting research on the response to supply chain risks

  • Conducting more empirically oriented research on SCRM

1,035
Ho et al. (2015) Systematic literature review No
  • New SCRM definition

  • Supply chain risk categorization (macro risk, demand risk, manufacturing risk, supply risk, and infrastructural risk)

  • Factors affecting supply chain risks

  • Classification of quantitative and qualitative SCRM methods

224 2003–2013
  • Conducting research on infrastructural, manufacturing, or process risks

  • Exploring interrelations among various risk groups

  • Assessing the correlations between risk factors or probability of occurrence of each risk factor

  • Using empirical research to test existing SCRM models

  • Focusing on underrepresented sectors (e.g., public sector, renewable energy sector)

  • Paying more attention to service supply chains and the risk monitoring process

  • Benchmarking risk mitigation strategies

  • Adding “risk recovery” to SCRM approaches

  • Quantifying costs and benefits of SCRM

276
Heckmann et al. (2015) Conceptual No
  • Providing a clear definition of risk within SCRM

  • Reviewing quantitative approaches to SCRM based on the definition of supply chain risk and risk measures

162 N/A
  • SCRM approaches should address both efficiency‐ and effectiveness‐driven objectives

  • SCRM approaches should comprise factors such as a decision‐maker's risk attitudes and/or environmental factors

  • Integrating time‐based characteristics into risk assessments

288