Supply network resilience capabilities:

a social–ecological perspective
Larissa Statsenko
UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe
UniSA Online, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia, and
Claudine Soosay
UniSA Business, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to investigate supply network (SN) resilience capabilities across the organizational, supply chain (SC) and industry levels
by drawing on the complex adaptive systems (CASs) theory and the social–ecological perspective of resilience. An empirically grounded framework
operationalizes the concept of social–ecological resilience by expounding resilience capabilities across phases of the CAS adaptive cycle.
Design/methodology/approach – This research uses a qualitative multiple case study approach. It draws on the case of the Australian Defence
Manufacturing SN (ADM SN) during COVID-19 disruptions. A total of 28 interviews with senior decision makers from 17 companies, complemented
by 5 interviews with the Australian Defence SC organizations and secondary data analysis, support the findings.
Findings – Individual organizations’ SC visibility and flexibility enabled by effective risk management and collaboration enhance the ability of the
SN to anticipate and prepare for disruption. At the same time, the strength of SC relationships reduces resilience. SN disruption response velocity is
enabled by inventory redundancy, process flexibility at the organizational level and visibility and collaboration at the SC level. Institutional support
at the national industry level, development of value-adding capabilities and manufacturing process flexibility at the organizational level enhances
the SN’s ability to re-organize. The transition from hierarchical to decentralized collaborative governance enhances SN resilience.
Practical implications – From a practitioner’s perspective, the findings highlight the need to embrace a broader view of SC beyond immediate tiers.
Decision-makers in multinational companies must recognize the long-term impact of their procurement decisions on the supplier ecosystem.
Developing local supplier capabilities rather than relying on established global SCs will pay off with future resilience. It, however, demands
substantial investment and radical changes across all SC tiers. The lesson for smaller firms is not to over-rely on the existing relationships with
supply partners. Although trust-based relationships and collaboration are essential, over-commitment can be counterproductive during global
disruptions. With a lack of visibility and control over the SC, operational flexibility is critical for small firms to adapt to shifts in supply and demand.
Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this empirical research is one of the first attempts to operationalize the social–ecological
perspective of SN resilience. Evidence-based theoretical propositions contribute to the emerging conversation about the CAS nature of resilience by
demonstrating the multi-level effects of resilience capabilities.
Keywords Case studies, Supply chain management, Resilience, Defence industry, Supply chain disruptions
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction The concept of SC resilience capabilities originates from the

SC risk management (SCRM) literature (Christopher and
The increasing frequency of “black swan” events – economic Peck, 2004; Sheffi and Rice, 2005; Ponomarov and Holcomb,
recessions, pandemics, wars and natural disasters – causing
2009; Scholten and Schilder, 2015). A plethora of research
global supply chain (SC) disruptions urges practitioners
studied SC resilience from a single-level perspective –
around the globe to rethink SC strategies (Herold et al., 2021;
organizational (Sheffi and Rice, 2005; Pettit et al., 2019),
Azadegan and Dooley, 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic has
dyadic relationship (Eckerd et al., 2022; Scholten and Schilder,
exposed vulnerabilities of the global overconnected SCs, and
2015) and network perspectives (Choi et al., 2001; Azadegan
future uncertainty of the economic and political environment
and Dooley, 2021; Adobor, 2020). However, supply networks
underscores the need for systemic approaches to building
resilient SCs (Azadegan and Dooley, 2021; Novak et al., 2021). (SNs) are recognized to be complex adaptive systems (CASs) co-
evolving with their environment at multiple levels (Wieland and

Some of the findings reported in this paper are based on the data from a
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald previous study funded by Defence SA, and the authors would like to
Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1359-8546.htm acknowledge the contribution from A/Prof Shruti Sardeshmukh, Mr Matt
Opie and Mr David Eyre.

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Received 24 November 2022
29/1 (2024) 1–26 Revised 14 March 2023
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546] 23 May 2023
[DOI 10.1108/SCM-11-2022-0438] Accepted 25 May 2023

1
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Durach, 2021; Adobor, 2020; Statsenko et al., 2018a). methodological considerations, Section 4 presents the findings,
Studying SN resilience (SNRES) at a single level, e.g. an and Section 5 presents the discussion and conclusion.
individual organization, SC or even its extended SN, does not
provide a holistic view and often does not account for the cross- 2. Literature review
level effects (Novak et al., 2021; Azadegan and Dooley, 2021;
2.1 Engineering and social–ecological views of supply
Adobor, 2020).
network resilience
Based on Holling’s (2001) study of nature’s laws, the social–
The underlying principles of SC resilience are well established
ecological view of SN resilience suggests that being a CAS, SN
in the literature (Christopher and Peck, 2004; Sheffi and Rice,
adapts and transforms in response to external factors while
2005). Studies have focused on the organizational, dyadic and
maintaining homeostasis – the same basic functionality (Choi
chain levels (Romano, 2003; Choi and Hong, 2002; Kim et al.,
et al., 2001; Novak et al., 2021). The concept of panarchy 2015). The traditional SC management literature defines the
explains how SN operates across multiple levels (Gunderson engineering view of SC resilience as the ability to “bounce back
and Holling, 2002). Panarchy reflects the embeddedness and and quickly restore its capacities after a disruption”
interdependency of CASs operating at different levels (Allen (Christopher and Peck, 2004; Pettit et al., 2019; Kamalahmadi
et al., 2014). SC resilience is formed and sustained at multiple and Parast, 2016). This view of SNRES regards the SC as a
levels, and the cross-level effects may reduce resilience at the closed linear system with “equilibrium-based” resilience – an
focal level or enhance it (Walker, 2020; Novak et al., 2021). adaptive capacity to tolerate disturbances to manage
Furthermore, from an engineered system perspective, SC environmental variability by rebuilding itself to either the
resilience capabilities define the ability of the SC to bounce original state or a more robust state than before (Ribeiro and
back and quickly restore capacity after a disruption Barbosa-Povoa, 2018; Adobor and McMullen, 2018). This
(Christopher and Peck, 2004; Pettit et al., 2019; Jüttner and view of resilience operates with such variables as “time to
Maklan, 2011). However, this view has limitations in recover,” which measures how long a SC node will take to
explaining SC resilience to “black swan” events with the long- return to full function, and “time to survive,” which identifies
lasting effects of cascading disruptions (Wieland and Durach, the maximum duration a SC can match supply with demand
2021; Adobor, 2020). The amplitude and multiplicity of following a disruption (Simchi-Levi et al., 2015, 2018).
disruptions caused by the global pandemic highlighted the Contingency planning and control-oriented strategies can
necessity for capabilities to maintain business continuity and ensure engineering resilience. However, recent SCRM
individual and team performance. These highlighted the literature acknowledges the limitations of this view. First, the
importance of the national, institutional and industry levels in control of a SC is rather illusionary; second, SC resilience and
building SN resilience (Scholten et al., 2020). stability are not the same – a SC can be resilient with low
Hence to address this gap, this research is based on an stability; and finally, SCs’ return to a pre-shock baseline
overarching research question: How can a social–ecological view condition is a misleading assumption – SC rarely if ever returns
of resilience assist in understanding the nature of SNRES capabilities to its previous states (Wieland and Durach, 2021; Novak et al.,
during global disruption? This can be answered with the following 2021).
sub-questions: Recent SCRM research, however, advocates CASs’ view of
 What capabilities are most critical to achieve SNRES as a SCs and the concept of social–ecological resilience as opposed
CAS at the organizational, SC and industry levels? to the traditional engineering view of resilience (Wieland and
 How do these capabilities contribute to SNRES at Durach, 2021; Adobor, 2020; Walker, 2020; Novak et al.,
different levels across phases of a CAS adaptive cycle? 2021). Increasingly, SCs are recognized as CAS with network-
centric properties (e.g.: Choi et al., 2001; Blackhurst et al.,
This paper develops a conceptual framework that 2011; Statsenko et al., 2018a). CAS theory posits the SC as an
operationalizes the social–ecological view of SNRES, drawing open system – a network of interconnected organizations
on the Australian Defence Manufacturing (ADM) SN facing embedded in the market, institutional, economic and social-
disruptions induced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Performing political environments (Choi et al., 2001; Harland et al., 2006;
under pressure to preserve and grow national sovereignty, the Wieland, 2021). Hence, SN structure and behavior are defined
ADM sector presents a unique case buoyant with government by the interplay of the internal mechanisms and the
support for developing new world-class warfare and significant environment (Adobor, 2020; Novak et al., 2021; Statsenko
upgrades to national assets. It is supported by specialist small et al., 2018a, b), notwithstanding the multi-level and multi-
and medium enterprises (SMEs) with capabilities required for scale nature of SNs (Scholten et al., 2020; Wieland, 2021;
Defence acquisition and sustainment projects, international Novak et al., 2021). Viewing SN as CAS has a direct
clients and multinational Defence primes and their global SCs. implication for understanding its resilience. The fundamental
The paper exposes resilience capabilities at different levels of difference between the resilience of a closed engineering system
ADM SN – individual organizations, their SCs and the broader and CAS is its reaction to a disruption. From the engineering
industry. A set of propositions is developed, highlighting multi- perspective, the disruption carries a negative connotation as the
level resilience capabilities as the SN experiences the phases of “amount of disturbance that can be sustained before a change
global disruption. in system control and structure occurs” (Holling, 1996, p. 33 in
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 Wieland and Durach, 2021), where change is seen as a threat.
provides the theoretical background and presents a conceptual It can stop a system from performing its functions, and a quick
framework that underpins the research. Section 3 explains the fix is the best strategy to return the system to its workable state.

2
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

From a CAS perspective, disruption is a manifestation of accumulation of system components and increasing
change with an associated opportunity for the system to adapt, connectedness among the organizations in SN. During this
transform and become stronger (Novak et al., 2021; Wieland phase, both SN connectedness and potential reach their highest
and Durach, 2021; Nikookar et al., 2021). If the SN is managed points as SN accumulates resources, creates redundancy and
as a CAS, it undergoes a series of transformations, reaching optimizes its structure (Wieland, 2021). As SN matures and
multiple points of equilibrium while maintaining homeostasis – becomes more complex, cost-efficient strategies, including
the same or similar critical functionality (Novak et al., 2021). outsourcing, lean and just-in-time practices are adopted. A
As the SN is a dynamic network of organizations, it operates supplier base is often established, creating a dependency on key
across regional, national and supra-national boundaries suppliers. SN participants become closely linked via collaborative
(Scholten et al., 2020). SNRES is a product of institutional cross-functional teams, and alliance-type relationships develop
forces, culture and legislative frameworks (Statsenko et al., and maturate (Wieland, 2021). However, at this stage, SNRES is
2018a; Wu and Jia, 2018). The SNRES also depends on lowest as it may become rigid and therefore fragile to potential
organizational, team and individual resilience (Adobor, 2020; disruptions if insufficient diversity and redundancy are evident in
Chowdhury and Quaddus, 2017). It is, therefore, the collective the SN. The SN maturates and evolves to a critical state, usually
property of resilience capabilities of individuals, teams and attributed to excessive connectedness, when even small events
organizations and their intertwined SCs that comprise the SN, can trigger a phase transition and, in some cases, a collapse of a
overlayed with the economic, political and social systems in system (Bak and Paczuski, 1995; Statsenko et al., 2018b). The
which it is immersed. conservation phase produces overconnected globalized SCs with
structures and processes that cannot cope with the pace and scale
2.2 Complex adaptive system adaptive cycle of supply of global disruptions (Ivanov and Das, 2020; Govindan
networks et al.,2020). Due to rigidity, SN structure and processes
In the disaster management literature (Kochan and Nowicki, eventually lose resilience and can collapse due to disruption
2018; Scholten et al., 2019), SC resilience is viewed through (Wieland et al., 2020).
phases of a disruption: pre-disruption, during-disruption and The release (X) phase is rapid and unleashes the potential
post-disruption, corresponding with organizational and SC accumulated during the exploitation and conservation phases.
capabilities to anticipate and prepare, respond and recover and The resilience increases because existing patterns and
learn and grow (Sheffi and Rice, 2005; Scholten et al., 2019). connections are destroyed, the costs of failure are low and
Researchers acknowledge that there is still an ambiguity in the released resources can be used to build new SN connections
definitions of the resilience phases, associated capabilities and (Wieland, 2021). The collapse of the existing SN structure
practical strategies, which requires further empirical work and during the disruption releases accumulated resources and
theoretical development (Ali et al., 2017; Scholten et al., 2020). creates a window of opportunity to level up and develop the
The social–ecological view of SNRES is based on Holling’s next-generation SCs (Adobor and McMullen, 2018). The
adaptive cycle model (Holling, 1985), originally developed for most viable businesses and practices survive, which spread
natural ecosystems, and recently recognized in the SCRM throughout the industry, nation and global SCs in the next
literature (Wieland and Durach, 2021; Adobor, 2020). It cycle, whereas ineffective strategies and practices are deemed to
captures levels and phases of resilience in complex systems. The extinction (Wieland and Durach, 2021).
concept of panarchy highlights that CAS operates at different Finally, the reorganization (a) phase follows the release, a
levels and goes through phases of development (Gunderson and relatively rapid period of re-assembly of SC components. It is
Holling, 2002). Unlike hierarchy, where upper levels control an opportunity for novel recombination, allowing creative
lower levels, panarchy reflects the embeddedness of CASs experimentation, learning and growth (Holling, 2001; Wieland
operating at different levels (Allen et al., 2014). et al., 2020; Scholten and Schilder, 2015). Given the right set of
Similarly, Holling’s (2001) framework explains the evolution circumstances, novel processes are incorporated and the CAS
of SN through the phases of exploitation (r), conservation (k), structure becomes quite different from what previously existed.
release (X) and reorganization (a), which correlate with the pre- The SN may respond to it by radical reorganization if
disruption, during disruption and post-disruption phases in a constituent organizations are diversified and innovative
traditional view of resilience (Wieland and Durach, 2021). enough. During the reorganization, SN may shift to a new
Levels of system connectedness, potential and resilience regime characterized by different processes and structures, or
characterize the four phases of CAS development. the original but modified structure may persist. Impact
At the exploitation (r) phase, there is rapid exploitation of mitigation, restoration and learning activities occur in parallel
resources. The connectedness of the SN is low because (Scholten and Schilder, 2015).
relationships between the company, its suppliers and
subcontractors are not strong enough. The SC governance is 2.3 Supply network resilience capabilities
mostly contractual, as long-term trust-based relationships are not The capacity of organizations to adapt and transform is
yet established. The SN potential is also low, as the skills and attributed to organizational dynamic capabilities (Teece et al.,
process maturity are not yet well developed (Wieland et al., 1997, p. 516). Originally advocated by Teece et al. (1997,
2020). However, resilience at this stage is high because not much p. 516), dynamic capabilities refer to organizations’ “ability to
investment is made. SN flexibility at this stage is also high – there integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external
are no significant costs for switching suppliers or logistics competencies to address rapidly changing environments”.
channels, but visibility, collaboration and redundancy are yet to Organizations develop, integrate and reconfigure operational
be developed. The conservation (k) phase is characterized by the resources to attain new capabilities in changing market

3
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

conditions and achieve a more desirable position (Ali et al., important for developing action plans based on operational
2022; Kähkönen et al., 2021). concepts (Scholten and Schilder, 2015; Ali et al., 2017), to the
Various studies have discussed SC resilience capabilities best of the authors’ knowledge, no empirical research exists that
from an organizational perspective (Jüttner and Maklan, 2011; operationalizes the social–ecological view of SNRES.
Tukamuhabwa et al., 2015; Scholten et al., 2019; Li and Zobel, Furthermore, the SCRM literature highlights these resilience
2020). The exhaustive list of SC resilience capabilities or capabilities enabling organizations to anticipate and prepare
antecedents as established in the seminal works of Christopher for, respond and recover from disruptions by adjusting
and Peck (2004), and further developed in SC management operations and transforming their SC structures (Jüttner and
literature (Jüttner and Maklan, 2011; Tukamuhabwa et al., Maklan, 2011; Tukamuhabwa et al., 2015; Scholten et al.,
2015; Scholten et al., 2019), is outside of the scope of this 2019; Li and Zobel, 2020). However, there is still a scarcity of
paper. These capabilities include SC agility, collaboration, risk research into resilience capabilities across phases of disruption
management culture and re-engineering (Christopher and (Ali et al., 2017). Even less is known about how capabilities
Peck, 2004), SC visibility, velocity, flexibility, redundancy manifest across SN levels and their combined effects on
(Jüttner and Maklan, 2011; Tukamuhabwa et al., 2015; Najar, SNRES (Novak et al., 2021; Adobor, 2020). Extending the
2022; Yu et al., 2019), robustness (Dovbischuk, 2022), risk concept of resilience to understand how SNRES capabilities
awareness and knowledge management (Bahrami and are built across SN levels provides a perspective into how
Shokouhyar, 2021); cooperation and information sharing multiple systemic risks are tackled by the network.
(Yaroson et al., 2021); resource reconfiguration, adaptability
(Feizabadi et al., 2021) and alignment (Yaroson et al., 2021) 2.4 Conceptual model
have been also identified as contributing to SC resilience. A conceptual model (Figure 1) was developed for empirical
In this paper, we focused on the capabilities most relevant for investigation coalescing the social–ecological view of resilience,
social–ecological resilience. Researchers suggest that flexibility, the SNRES levels in a CAS and Holling’s adaptive cycle
agility, redundancy and self-organization are critical for social– (Holling, 1985).
ecological resilience (Adobor and Mcmullen, 2018; Wieland and The SCRM view of SC resilience (Ali et al., 2017; Scholten
Wallenburg, 2012). For example, Adobor and McMullen (2018) et al., 2014) distinguishes the following phases of disruption:
distinguishing three types of SNRES suggest associated pre-disruption, which corresponds to the exploitation and
capabilities. Engineering resilience is enabled by SC efficiency conservation phase where anticipation and preparedness
through contingency planning and other control-oriented capabilities are critical; during disruption corresponds to the
approaches. Ecological resilience ensures adaptation and requires release phase, where risk mitigation strategies are applied, and
dynamic capabilities to withstand network shocks, such as post-disruption, which corresponds to reorganization, where
flexibility, redundancy and self-organization. Evolutionary resilience recovery, re-engineering, learning and exploration capabilities
is SC ability to change and transform into a new and better state are critical.
after a disruption (Adobor and McMullen, 2018). Visibility and
velocity play an important role in ensuring agility, whereas SC
3. Methodology
collaboration enables system-wide learning, inter-firm trust and
social capital are essential capabilities for this type of resilience 3.1 Research design
(Alikhani et al., 2021). Both ecological and evolutionary resilience This research used a qualitative multiple case study research
correspond to the social–ecological view of SNRES. design (Saunders et al., 2016; Yin, 2018; Eisenhardt, 1989) to
Scholars often use the terms agility, flexibility and examine SNRES capabilities across organizational, SC and
responsiveness interchangeably. In this paper we define flexibility industry levels and the phases of the CAS adaptive cycle before,
as the adaptability of internal functions including design, during and after the disruption. The study developed
engineering, manufacturing and assembly at the organizational theoretical propositions based on the empirical data, which
level (Christopher and Towill, 2001; Swafford et al., 2008); and allowed in-depth investigation, despite the lack of control over
at the SC level, as the ability to switch suppliers and logistics the rich data obtained from practitioners’ experiences at various
channels (Kamalahmadi and Parast, 2016; Scholten and SN levels (Patrucco et al., 2022; Statsenko et al., 2018a). The
Schilder, 2015). Following existing research, we attribute SC unit of analysis was the organization operating within ADM SN
response velocity and SC visibility to agility (Wieland and and its respective SCs.
Wallenburg, 2012). The summary of resilience capability The study used theoretical sampling (Eisenhardt, 1989),
definitions used in this research is presented in Table 1. seeking cases that enabled the examination of relevant
Despite recent progress in theoretical developments of SNRES organizations in ADM SC and their SCs. The Australian
from social–ecological and CAS perspectives, the research is still Government Department of Defence (DoD) was selected as the
in its infancy and mostly limited to conceptual frameworks primary client. The engineering design in most cases, is done by
(Novak et al., 2021; Wieland, 2021; Adobor and McMullen, the international Primes and original equipment manufacturers
2018). Previous research has established the conceptual bases of (OEMs), whereas local SMEs manufacture and assemble
the multi-level nature and adaptive cycle of SNRES (Wieland equipment, sub-systems and components and perform
and Durach, 2021; Wieland, 2021; Novak et al., 2021; Adobor equipment overhaul and maintenance. The companies:
and McMullen, 2018). However, these concepts have not yet  supplying goods and services to major Defence programs;
been operationalized through resilience capabilities, and the and
adaptive cycle of SNRES has not yet been empirically  with manufacturing capabilities, regardless of their tier
investigated in a specific context. Although it is critically position in ADM SN, were interviewed.

4
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table 1 SC resilience capabilities

Capability Description References
Flexibility  The ability to adapt to new and unexpected circumstance Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), Scholten and Schilder
while switching to alternative options in the SC. (2015), Jüttner and Maklan (2011), Sheffi and Rice (2005),
 Flexibility in the SC can be attained in several phases, such as Colicchia and Strozzi (2012), Chowdhury and Quaddus
production, contract, sourcing and distribution. (2017), Tukamuhabwa et al. (2015)
 The flexibility can be attained through various means, by
using multi-purpose machines; developing a supplier base;
maintaining a multi-skilled labor force, alternative distribution
channels and a culture with the freedom to act; and creating a
proper planning process.
Visibility  Ability to see the SC end-to-end, preventing interventions and Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), Scholten and Schilder
overreactions. (2015), Christopher and Peck (2004), Dubey et al. (2019),
 Visibility in SC can be achieved through various means, such Chowdhury and Quaddus (2017)
as sharing information, tracking of information on operations,
awareness of operating assets, business intelligence and flow
of real-time information.
Velocity  The speed at which the SC reacts to uncertainties or the time Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), Scholten and Schilder
taken for adoption. (2015), Christopher and Peck (2004)
 SC velocity can be achieved through reacting fast to supply-
side changes, reducing lead time, knowledge of the market,
customer status and legal requirements.
Redundancy  Ability to have a spare capacity for the machines, systems, Sheffi and Rice (2005), Ponis and Koronis (2012),
human resources, transport and storage and within the SC. Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), Chopra and Sodhi (2004),
 Redundancy can be achieved through various means such as Rice and Caniato (2003), Chowdhury and Quaddus (2017),
maintaining safety/extra stocks, having multiple/alternative Tukamuhabwa et al. (2015)
suppliers, having backup energy and utility sources.
Collaboration  The capability of two or more firms to plan and execute SC Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), Cao et al. (2010), Scholten
operations toward common goals with a shared vision and and Schilder (2015), Peck (2005), Lavastre et al. (2012),
commitment. Barlow (2012), Datta (2017)
 Buyer–supplier relationships have been a significant
collaboration towards SC resilience.
 Collaboration in the SC can be achieved through risk sharing,
cost sharing, information sharing, resources sharing and
collaborative communication.
Source: Authors’ own work

The DoD and SC industry associations were contacted to The interview participants were primarily SC, procurement
identify relevant organizations in the ADM SN. Pilot and operations management managers, executives and
interviews were conducted to refine the research design and industry association representatives involved in strategic
the conceptual framework. The pilot study yielded rich data, procurement and SC design decision-making, with relevant
which helped frame theoretical sampling to seek other cases experience in the ADM sector. The summary of the selected
in SC relationships with interviewed companies. The cases and interviewees is presented in Appendix 1:
researchers sought to examine cases that experienced similar Table A1.
situations in different industry and policy contexts to The interviews were conducted during 2020–2021 when the
understand the resilience capabilities at the organizational, effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in the ADM SN were
SC and industry levels in response to global disruption evident. The organizations were asked about their internal
(Gorod et al., 2021). strategies to overcome the disruption, the strategies adopted
A total of 17 case organizations were selected operating at across the entire SC and the industry in which the SC is
different tiers of ADM SN including 3 representatives from the embedded. The interview guide is presented in Appendix 2. All
DoD as the Client organization; 10 representatives of the 4 interviews were conducted by telephone or online using Zoom or
international Primes[1] leading major Defence programs; 15 Microsoft Teams and lasted between 60 and 90 min and were
representatives from 12 Tier 2, 3 and 4 suppliers of the SN in recorded with the consent of the interviewee. The data collection
ADM sector were selected to conduct 28 in-depth semi- continued until researchers reached theoretical saturation when
structured interviews to identify patterns, which collectively minimal incremental learning was obtained from a case
contributed to the development of theoretical proposition. (Saunders et al., 2018; Gorod et al., 2021; Eisenhardt, 1989).

5
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Figure 1 Conceptual model supply network levels across CAS adaptive cycle

3.2 Data analysis and coding suggested by Merriam (2009) and Saunders et al. (2016), each
The transcribed interviews and researcher’s notes were then interview was coded independently by three researchers and
used in the data analysis. The information was extracted from discussed to ensure that the ideas and themes were mapped
interview transcripts. Further clarifications were received at the accurately. Internal validity was ensured through thematic
post-interview follow-ups and by triangulating the finding with analysis pattern matching to develop theoretical propositions
each organization’s website (Patrucco et al., 2022). using empirical findings (Saunders et al., 2016). The study’s
Within case analysis was used to identify the companies’ external validity was ensured through analytic generalization
nature of the business, products and services, the structure of (Yin, 2018), which led to identifying patterns and developing
SCs and involvement in Defence projects and programs. The theoretical propositions. The reliability of the findings was
interview data combined with secondary sources – company ensured by case study design principles and rigorous research
capability statements and media articles were subjected to
protocol (Yazan and De Vasconcelos, 2016):
thematic analysis. A brief overview of each case, its SC and its  The multiple case study research design and the unit of
position in the ADM are provided in Appendix 1: Table A1.
analysis were selected based on the nature of the research
Cross-case analysis was guided by the proposed conceptual
questions.
framework. Initially, independent coding was done by three  The interview guide reflected the line of inquiry
researchers, and then the results were aggregated after each
(Appendix 2).
iteration, ensuring that multiple iterations were both
 A pilot study with 10 organizations in the SN in the ADM
parsimonious and complete (Yin, 2014). During the first
sector was conducted.
iteration, the initial coding yielded strategies adopted by
 Research ethics protocol was followed – an introductory
participants of the ADM SN before, during and some post-
disruption. In the second iteration, ex-ante constructs of letter, consent form and participant information sheet
resilience capabilities were used as themes to group the codes – were sent to participants to ensure respondent’s consent.
resilience strategies applied at the organizational, SC and
 Protocols for data capture, transcription and analysis were
industry levels. Finally, the capabilities and strategies were followed.
mapped against a priori constructs – levels and phases of
Holling’s adaptive cycle in the conceptual model (Wieland and
Durach, 2021; Christopher and Peck, 2004; Scholten et al.,
4. Findings
2019).
To ensure validity, the case study findings were triangulated 4.1 Exploitation and conservation phases: Australian
by using multiple sources of data, including expert interviews Defence Manufacturing supply network pre-disruption
and archival data. The interviewees checked the interview The capabilities contributing to resilience at the organizational
transcripts to ensure the accuracy of the transcribed data to and SC were those ensuring visibility and flexibility based on
enhance the credibility (Yazan and De Vasconcelos, 2016). As effective risk management. At the industry level, the nature of

6
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

the global SC governance affected individual organizations’ I guess it is the dynamics of our industry, if we were to just ring up a
competitor of one of our existing suppliers, in turn, they might have an
resilience and SCs (Appendix 1: Table A2). alliance with a competitor of ours, that our tier of the industry that we deal
ADM SN is embedded within the globalized manufacturing with [. . .] And they may not want to support us (Case O).
industry operating via free trade agreements, characterized by
Strong SC relationships nevertheless had positive effects. For
vertical disintegration, manufacturing to foreign intellectual
example, local subsidiaries of overseas OEMs in the power
property (IP), with a high share of outsourced manufacturing for
generation, cooling and refrigeration equipment SCs (Cases
the equipment, sub-systems and parts (Appendix 1: Table A1).
M, P) benefited from their global parent company that had
As a result, such SCs often rely on market or alliance-based
resources and diversified logistics networks to overcome lead-
relationships and low-cost, just-in-time, low-inventory principles.
time problems when they arose:
Local SMEs often depend on the foreign IP and supply of
bespoke equipment and sub-systems and are integrated into For nearly all the equipment we have seen maybe an extra two weeks of lead
time. Maybe there is one supplier where we have seen an extra four weeks,
global markets to supply standard sub-parts and materials. but we are talking about equipment with 10-12-14 weeks lead time anyway,
Most of the Prime companies (Cases B-F) exercised control so there is nothing (Case P).
having visibility over their SCs. Primes (Cases B-F) had well-
established SCRM frameworks. Primes (Cases B-F), with
4.2 Release phase: Australian Defence Manufacturing
mature SCs, were better prepared for the disruption with a
supply network during the disruption
good understanding of the vulnerabilities and bottlenecks in the
The capabilities contributing to resilience at all levels were
upstream SCs a few tiers up. SC visibility and information
velocity, operational flexibility (process and volume), redundancy,
transparency across SC tiers and dual and multiple sourcing
visibility and collaboration. (Appendix 1: Table A2)
arrangements were also in place to ensure flexibility. This
The cascading effects of COVID-19 included international
enhanced the anticipation and preparedness capability of
border closures and travel restrictions, lockdowns and social
defence Primes. However, international border closure
distancing resulting in global and localized shifts of demand
exposed dependency on foreign allies to supply top critical sub-
and supply, which affected ADM SN at different levels.
systems (Cases B, C):
Increased lead times were reported due to lockdowns of
There are probably four or five critical pieces of equipment in our SC where manufacturing facilities in Asia and Europe, which triggered
COVID-19 has exposed a level of dependency on a particular supplier that
was uncomfortable (Case B). global demand shifts.
The price of sub-parts for electronics manufacturing
A few SMEs (Case M, Q) were increasing visibility by mapping
companies rose due to the scarcity of supply. Sub-parts
value streams to develop a more resilient SC before global
distributors prioritizing large markets pushed back orders from
disruptions. They were able to proactively switch to local
smaller players, including Australian manufacturers. Cases B,
vendors.
I, J and K experienced a tenfold price rise and up to 20 times
Most of the smaller manufacturing companies (Cases I, J, N)
increase in delivery rates:
had neither visibility nor control over their SC to face the
disruption. For example, the hierarchical nature of the Last September, the lead time might have been two weeks. Some of them
are out now at 50 weeks. Some are going into about 20 weeks lead time
electrical and electronics SCs has been driven by an oligopoly (Case N).
of global distributors built upon just-in-time, low inventory
principles. Cases I–K, N had no visibility of their SCs beyond I started to look for other places. I might buy that one-cent item in two
the global sub-parts distributors. For example, the complexity months for a dollar because I need them (Case J).
and diversity of SC for manufacturing and assembly of the Further increase in component prices was driven by the rise in
printed, electronic circuit boards made it impossible to track the US$, the reduced capacity of overseas suppliers and
beyond the immediate tier: elevated transportation costs:
If you were buying between 6 and 8 thousand different components, some of So, as freight routes have significantly reduced internationally and
them might have 14 to 15 inputs. I cannot track all of that [. . .] (Case I). domestically, we have seen an escalation in freight cost (Case B).
In some cases, the design and manufacturing processes were Restrictions on on-site visits, equipment trials and technical
also highly dependent on bespoke sub-parts (e.g. electronic training (Cases D, F, M), cancelation of trade shows and
chips), where dual or alternative sourcing required significant exhibitions, limited access to sites and interstate warehouses
effort to re-engineer the process: (Cases C, M, P), and all cases reported reduced freight
You design your product or performance around particular components and shipment capacity across both international and interstate
finding an alternative might take you a year. So, it is not just a question of a borders which posed challenges:
dual source, it needs to double the engineering effort [. . .] (Case J).
We have our warehouse in Sydney. But we couldn’t access it. We couldn’t
The absence of local alternative suppliers compelled firms to go and inspect and check on equipment and are getting more equipment
rely heavily on global partners and lock in their existing SCs: delivered (Case M).

We have bought very successfully for many years from one place in China. I Those suppliers could not get their sales or their equipment into the
cannot go and buy those locally; there is no other option (Case N). country. Sometimes their equipment was there, but they didn’t want to go to
trial without them being present (Case D).
The established long-term relationships with key vendors
prevented some firms in the hydraulics and pneumatics Companies with limited to no control over their upstream SCs
industry from seeking alternative vendors, as switching from a were focused on maintaining the continuity of their business
long-term relationship could negatively affect their reputation operations through process flexibility, redundancy and velocity.
and future business deals: Clients’ support in accommodating delivery delays, adjusting

7
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

“on-the-fly” and the ability to make quick decisions were [In] our production facility [. . .] we have several 3D printers. The process of
producing plastic parts for face shields on a 3D printer is a slow one. We are
critical. dedicating two machines to producing parts permanently, making sufficient
Companies built time buffers into production schedules, parts for six face shields every four hours (Case I).
ensuring flexibility of operations and availability of workforce to The manufacturing flexibility and the shift in demand toward
accommodate the late delivery of equipment and sub- first-aid medical equipment generated an interesting cross-level
components. Case B, for example, built time buffers into effect in SCs. For example, when the upstream supplier of the
production schedules and reassessed the risks of late delivery on glue used in the manufacturing of electronic circuit boards
the operational schedules: diverted capacities to produce nation critical goods to serve
If the impacts were felt for twelve months, then that buffer only brought us a national interest (organizational level), it created a bottleneck
certain level of protection. So, we looked at where the delay was extending in the electronics SCs at the SC level (Case J). Velocity and
beyond what we would call the ‘readiness window’, or buffer [. . .] So, that
narrowed down the equipment delays that were of concern to us (Case B).
visibility were critical for the companies to quickly restructure in
response to the financial pressures to sustain the business
At the process level, companies who had to shut down (Cases N, O, Q). To retain key personnel, some companies
operations quickly restarted their production after applying focused on future capability development projects (Cases J, Q):
necessary health and safety precautions ensuring redundancy
It is the first six months of this year when all the changes have been in effect,
by running extra shifts (Cases J, L), demonstrating velocity of so I changed the business structure. Some people left the business, and I
response and redundancy. Cases D and N developed spare changed people’s roles, putting different structures in place (Case N).
capacity at the team level through cross-training of teams: Primes and medium-sized international subsidiaries reviewed
He split his key workers as much as possible, so if we had a problem on the SCs to ensure visibility. Primes (Cases B–F), with mature
shift well, at least the second shift could make the product in the evening diversified SCs, engaged with their upstream suppliers a few
(Case N).
tiers up to identify the level of uncertainty around the lead-
Most companies reviewed inventory strategies for critical times:
components to ensure production continuity for at least half a
There was a group of suppliers whom we reached out to confirm [delivery]
year ahead (Cases D, E, G, J). Increases in buffer stocks of dates during COVID-19, and they [. . .] got sufficient inventory. There were
critical components, which were previously delivered just-in- companies where there was an impact on material delivery, and they could
quantify that impact [. . .] we put revised delivery dates into our maintenance
time, came with significant cash flow implications. schedules and stress test what the impact of that was likely to be [. . .] In the
Redundancy at the SC level involved discussions with vendors third group of suppliers [. . .] we looked at where the delay was extending
on the potential bottlenecks in their upstream SC where beyond [. . .] the readiness window, or buffer [. . .] So, that narrowed down
the equipment delays that were of concern to us (Case C).
increased inventory stocks and production capacity
reservations were required. For Primes, where possible, Resourceful Primes started reviewing equipment source
alternative sourcing was a primary strategy (Cases C-F). For origins and logistics routes to eliminate potential bottlenecks
example, Case E switched to dual-sourcing arrangements for (Cases B, D, G):
specialized chemical, biological and explosive equipment parts. We have added a layer of governance on supplier solvency [. . .] several tools
However, for all Primes, alternative sourcing was not an option have emerged to support the pre-COVID supplier’s solvency risk profile
then overlays on that assessment, the sector impacts, the geographical
for the bespoke nature of complex sub-Defence equipment and impacts of COVID-19, and gives a post-COVID risk exposure, and
systems (Cases B-E, I, J). Alternative products were more guidance on the likely period to solvency issues (Case D).
expensive when sourced locally (Cases I, J); however, a few Companies (Cases H, I, M, O) positively spoke about the
companies could find replacement products at a competitive velocity of their overseas SCs, which enabled operations to
price (N, Q). resume quickly after lockdowns. Some cases worked on
Flexibility and velocity were important for internal resource expediting orders, although more costly, so as not to break
reconfiguration. Cases B and H had to reorganize the strong relationships with overseas suppliers (Cases J, O).
production process to accommodate shifts in demand across Collaboration across SCs was critical for resourceful Primes and
markets. When the pandemic began, Case K reported that SMEs to ensure velocity (Cases J, O, Q). Primes collaborated
European projects were put on hold while projects in the USA with suppliers helping them to manage upstream SC risks and
accelerated in anticipation of disruption effects. Some minimize the impacts of increased lead times (Cases B, E).
companies (Cases N, Q) restructured or even shut down parts Informal SC collaborative arrangements facilitated localized
of the business with no direct income and brought forward SC redundancy by pooling resources and exchanging personnel
quick-win projects: to maintain operations. For example, Case O closely
collaborated with a cluster of three local suppliers to minimize
We had an increase in demand, maybe double in some items. The others
went down 40-50% [. . .] we reviewed our value streams to accommodate the risk of shutdowns due to pandemic-related incidents by
that change (Case Q). committing to an exchange workforce:
In situations where direct transactions were deemed risky, there I also pledged that if he did have a problem, we would send our workers to
had been an increase in e-commerce, and businesses his facility (Case O).
restructured to accommodate the demand (Cases I, J, Q). The Australian Government and defence Primes exercised
The pandemic created a demand for personal protective collaboration through institutional support at the national level,
equipment (PPE). With government incentives, some implementing economic stimuli to assist business recovery,
companies repurposed production lines to produce essential providing financial support during the pandemic to ensure that
goods – face shields for front-end health-care workers, gloves the Defence industry continued with major projects. The
and even equipment for making PPE (Cases I, H): Australian government also issued support packages for small

8
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

suppliers. The DoD provided Defence-related security services On the contrary, some companies (Case F, L, N, R) started to
for supplier business development (Case B, S, V). Primes reduce their supplier base and focus on strategically important
maintained upstream SCs by bringing forward orders and vendors to get a preferred customer status:
payments (Cases A, Q, U, W). We decided it is better to work with two suppliers, [. . .] where we know that
our orders will get priority, rather than having ten who don’t care about us
4.3 Reorganization phase: Australian Defence (Case R).
Manufacturing supply network post-disruption Companies also strengthened strategic partnerships with
We considered in this study that the reorganization phase reliable suppliers with whom they are comfortable to “go
started post-disruption when social distancing and travel through the hard times together” (Case L).
restrictions were eased and international borders re-opened. The lesson learnt from the disruption was that from the long-
Strategic reconfiguration of the organizational portfolio and term perspective, building local high value-added capability is
resources, SCs and industry procurement principles have been essential for onshoring. Case M, for example, was planning to
challenged to increase operational flexibility, redundancy and establish a manufacturing assembly and testing facility in
visibility (Appendix 1: Table A2). Australia to repair and maintain power systems for major
At the organizational level, manufacturing businesses Defence projects. The company is growing the supply
repurposed their facilities and production lines to enhance ecosystem onshore and investing in future capabilities for the
process flexibility (Cases H, I, N), some leveraging advanced sustainment phase. To justify the investments, the company
manufacturing and 3D printing (Cases I, N). Issues of
wants to develop capability to serve a variety of ship platforms:
embracing 3D printed parts came up, such as the availability of
material inputs and quality assurance, as well as the need for the It should be a capability used across platforms, not just on an individual
vehicle or program (Case M).
supplier to be involved in the project at the design phase:
A few companies plan to establish facilities for manufacturing
[. . .] You have got to be in the design stage for 3D printing. [. . .] If you are
designing and printing right at the start and you validate a 3D printed part, and assembly in Australia, with sub-components to be
you have a lot more chance of it getting across the line, because you have not manufactured onshore using CAD and 3D printing capabilities
spent a year validating a part that is going to meet what the requirements are
through testing and so on. (Case I). of Australian firms (B, C, T-W):
The real opportunities are around the CAD [. . .] such as the virtual
Cases N and Q revamped production facilities to meet
shipyard, and those capabilities (Case B).
future demand, bringing critical processes in-house, upskilling
the workforce and introducing elements of advanced The development of local capability creates the need to simplify
manufacturing: the certification and pre-qualification processes across ADM
SN for local companies to meet the standards of overseas
Any painting we have done before, we sent out to other providers. So I want
to bring that in-house, so we can control the process (Case N). Primes (Cases A, B, T–W). The streamlined standards
regulating manufacturing activities among allied Defence
The lens, for example, must be done in-house because we modify and do a equipment manufacturing countries would simplify
lot of changes, and if we rely on a manufacturer [.], that will not be
economical for us (Case Q). participating in global SCs and realizing export potential. Cases
I and K proposed harmonizing European and Australian
Many companies’ SC risk assessment shifted to the supplier manufacturing standards to facilitate the integration of local
geographical profile. Cases B, D and E introduced country risk suppliers into global SCs:
profiles in their supplier assessment-evaluating their origins of
critical equipment. While Primes actively worked to increase Welding is one area where we have noticed it with some of the programs
Australian companies have to get a European welding standard to meet the
risk awareness in their extended SCs (Cases B, E), smaller requirements [. . .] why cannot we manufacture to the Australian Standard,
companies built strategic partnerships across their SCs with instead of having to spend twenty or fifty thousand dollars getting a
partners operating in different markets to monitor the certification for a program that may not be used again? (Case I).
environment (Cases K, M, P). A rapid pre-qualification program would help local companies
Value stream mapping enabled process and SC optimization. to meet the standards and win contracts with Defence Primes.
Case Q achieved a 30% reduction in imports from China upon As a result, the pool of Defence-ready local suppliers increases,
mapping their value stream. The company restructured its SC creating greater opportunities for building future self-reliant
to retain only in-house high value-added activities (e.g. R&D ADM SN (Cases B, S, W).
and design) and increased its share of in-house manufacturing. At the national industry level. Supporting Australian design for
This made the company expand its design team and employ Australian capabilities and materials is critical to ensuring long-
local experts, increasing the share of value-added activities term ADM SNRES. It was felt that more engineering design
onshore. and manufacturing need to be done onshore to reduce supplier
Primes (Cases B, C, D, F) expanded their supplier base and dependency on foreign IP:
built logistical redundancy onshore. Other companies also
It may cost a little bit more to manufacture or assemble in Australia than it
reconfigured their logistics networks and reviewed warehouse does with the OEMs, in our case being [company] in [European Country],
locations and transport routes (Cases I, J, N). Examples [. . .] which is a way of transferring technology but also a way of skilling our
included running several materials stores and distribution workforce [. . .], and also as a conduit for looking at investment and
infrastructure (Case C).
centers nationally to maintain a sufficient inventory of critical
sub-assemblies and componentry onshore (Case M): Primes saw value in involving local suppliers at the design stage
We have not had any impact, mainly because [. . .] we have lots of stores. We do (Cases B, C, D); however, building local SCs is a long-term
maintain a distribution centre. It is quite mature and advanced (Case M). process. Investments must be made upfront to “de-risk” local

9
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

SCs by establishing a workforce and supporting infrastructure, vulnerabilities and evaluate supplier profiles across industries
processes, technology and know-how (Cases C, F, L, P): and geographies. With high visibility and control over the
It is [. . .] discussions with [. . .] Defence Primes to understand the distribution facilities and transportation hubs, identifying weak
capabilities of what is available in Australia, not only just in manufacturing links minimized delays and inefficiencies. Primes appeared to
capabilities but also materials and processes (Case F). play a key role, where the resilience of the ADM SN was largely
driven by them orchestrating their SCs, supporting their
5. Discussion suppliers onshore and overseas and helping to increase visibility
and identify risks across the network.
The cross-case analysis revealed that various resilience It was also found that when there was a lack of visibility or
capabilities at the individual organization, SC and industry well-established SCRM, firms relied on collaborative efforts
levels collectively contributed to ADM SNRES (Figure 2). and information sharing among SC partners. This aligns with
previous research (Jüttner and Maklan, 2011; Dai et al., 2021).
5.1 Supply network resilience capabilities at the Although collaboration in SCs is not a substitute of SC visibility
conservation phase as reported by Scala and Lindsay (2021) in the UK medical
The SCs of the firms studied were well-established and supply sector, we found that vertical and horizontal collaboration
predominantly global, characterized by high connectedness raised situational awareness through communications about
across the supplier base, a high degree of outsourcing, low-cost upstream disruptions and negotiations to overcome increased
and just-in-time practices. Findings revealed that the lead times and delivery delays. Collaboration and information
companies with sufficient flexibility at the SC and the
sharing were also important for monitoring the environment to
organizational level pre-disruption were better positioned
anticipate risks and prepare mitigation strategies. This ensured
handle the consequences of the global disruption. Flexibility at
flexibility of the entire ADM SN and velocity at the response
the organizational and SC levels SC in the ADM SN resilience
phase:
was enabled by visibility beyond the immediate tiers and
effective risk management anticipation and preparedness P1. SC visibility and flexibility are critical at the conservation
strategies. phase to anticipate and prepare for the disruption. They
SC visibility depended on the availability of organizational are enabled by effective risk management, collaboration
financial and social capital (Adobor, 2020). Financial resources and information sharing.
were critical to establishing and using effective SCRM
strategies, including SC mapping, scenario planning and Previous research in the social–ecological view of SC resilience has
forecasting as previously noted by scholars (Chowdhury and established that commitment in SC relationships is one of the
Quaddus, 2017; Pettit et al., 2019). Effective SCRM at the pillars of the SNRES at the conservation phase (Adobor, 2020). It
organizational level enabled firms to swiftly uncover the single is accumulated during the growth phase, while conversely, too
points of failure in their SCs, proactively identify upstream much trust and commitment in SC relationships could impede

Figure 2 Resilience capabilities across supply network levels and phases of adaptive cycle

10
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

resilience (Greening and Rutherford, 2011). The findings flow of information through transparent and frequent
highlighted that firms, especially those in alliance-type communication across the SC was essential:
relationships, despite benefitting from information sharing and
collaboration with partners, were constrained in finding alternative P3. During the release phase, velocity is critical for efficient
response. At the organizational level, it is enabled by
supply sources, supportive of (Greening and Rutherford, 2011).
process flexibility and redundancy, while at the SC level,
This finding opposes research stating benefits of close-knit
it is enhanced by visibility and collaboration.
relationships with vendors (Adobor, 2020; Daedlow et al., 2011).
In the tightly coupled SCs, companies were cautious about their Building national resilience is imperative during major disruption
reputation in searching for novel SC solutions not to be seen as (Stewart et al., 2009; Jüttner and Maklan, 2011). At the national
opportunistic: industry level, the ADM sector received government support
through defence contract management and financial incentives
P2. Tightly coupled SCs based on strong relationships can be
during the pandemic. Swift implementation of the Australian
vulnerable. They often limit the flexibility of the SN.
Government’s fiscal, financial stimuli and support packages for
businesses and Primes introducing quick turnaround on invoices,
5.2 Supply network resilience capabilities at the release provided economic relief and a “safety net” for the ADM to
phase safeguard short-term financial viability. This finding aligns with
The release phase occurs during the disruption, when the SC research comments on the importance of institutional support for
building resilience at the national level to mitigate the impact of
structures formed during the exploitation and conservation
global crises (Azadegan and Dooley, 2021).
phases collapse and new structures emerge, evoking response
Across the industry, the schedules of major Defence projects
strategies across all levels (Gunderson and Holling, 2002;
were re-adjusted, and provisions were made to accommodate
Wieland, 2021). The CAS loses its capacity and connectedness
delivery delays enabling the ADM SN to maintain its
across the existing structures but resilience rapidly increases.
operations. Unlike findings from other researchers (Choi et al.,
During this phase, response strategies prevail, where
2021), where the practices of extending payment terms to
organizations’ SCs and entire industries focus on restoring suppliers were reported commonplace in modern SN,
control and efficiency (Adobor and Mcmullen, 2018). financially depriving smaller low-tier players in the SCs, Primes
Business continuity management was essential at the operating in ADM exercised a concerted effort to support local
response phase as recent research confirms (Azadegan and companies by reducing payment terms and quick turnaround
Dooley, 2021). We found that velocity was critical across all of invoices. The cross-level effect on the ADM SNRES was
levels to ensure business continuity. It was enabled by flexibility observed in how local institutional support offsets the negative
and redundancy at the organizational level and visibility and impact of the global disruptions across industries. The results
collaboration at the SC level. of international border closures, shifts in demands and reduced
Velocity represented the ability of organizations to swiftly re- production capacities were partially mitigated by favorable and
structure their processes, re-align resources and adjust swift responses of national regulatory bodies and Primes:
procurement strategies in anticipation of the changes in demand.
Smaller companies require flexibility at the organizational P4. Institutional support at the release phase enhances
process level to reconfigure internal resources in response to a organizational resilience, resulting in a more efficient
disruption, optimize production and build additional production response of the SN.
runs into manufacturing schedules (Shashi et al., 2020).
Repurposing manufacturing facilities to produce nation-critical
5.3 Supply network resilience capabilities at the
goods was a side benefit of manufacturing process flexibility
reorganization phase
helping to sustain the business. Redundancy of component stock,
At the reorganization phase, following response strategies to
organizational resources and time buffers were critical to
ensure business continuity, SC strategic re-structuring usually
maintaining business continuity.
takes place to maintain growth and sustainable operations long
SC collaboration was another pillar ensuring effective
term (Adobor and McMullen, 2018; Scholten et al., 2014).
response to disruption. While Primes played a key role in The scale and the magnitude of disruptions demonstrated
orchestrating their SCs, lower-tier suppliers engaged in the necessity of experimentation and improvisation in building
collaborative activities to respond to potential and emerging prolonged resilient SCs echoing recent research which
challenges. Polyviou et al. (2020) reported the role of social advocates for the importance of innovative capabilities in
capital and human resources for manufacturing organizations turbulent environments (Munir et al., 2022; Adobor, 2020).
during the disruption. Other research (Manhart et al., 2020; At the organizational level, flexibility in resource
Slay and Dooley, 2020) suggested that during disruption, reconfiguration and diversification of production lines through
companies build adaptive capacities through boundary- innovations and value-adding capabilities arose as a salient
spanning activities using a range of “bridging” capabilities with capability. The companies that increase their share of value-
SC partners. Similarly, working together as a cluster to adding capabilities were best positioned for long-term
streamline operations enabled smaller suppliers to keep abreast resilience. Re-shoring and bringing critical capabilities in-house
with the upcoming disruptions, plan for extended lead times by have also helped to achieve trade-offs between cost efficiency
negotiating delivery delays and reconfiguring internal resources and resilience (Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009; van Hoek and
to optimize production schedules. Maintaining a seamless Dobrzykowski, 2021). Conversely, a few cases, constrained in

11
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

their choice of suppliers and limited process flexibility, were proposes an empirically grounded conceptual framework. The
mainly focused on maintaining operations and optimizing framework operationalizes resilience capabilities and strategies
business structure while relying on collaborative relationships at the organizational, SC and industry levels at each phase of
with existing vendors and inventory redundancy for resilience. the disruption cycle and develops a set of theoretical
In the context of national threats, building national resilience propositions. The paper contributes to the theory in the
requires a critical mass of manufacturing process flexibility based following ways.
on advanced manufacturing and 3D printing capabilities to First, the study is one of the first attempts to operationalize
increase SC responsiveness (Betti and Ni, 2020). A flexible and the emerging paradigm of social–ecological resilience through
reconfigurable manufacturing process is paramount to empirical research. It conceptualizes SNRES through CAS
establishing new product lines and repurposing existing facilities adaptive cycle demonstrating that resilience is as much a
in response to emerging demand. Recent research shows that process as an outcome (Wieland and Durach, 2021; Adobor,
investments in advanced manufacturing technologies doubled to 2020). It also demonstrates how disruption exposes SN at all
meet the spikes in demand for nation critical goods during levels and creating opportunities for renewal, novelty and
COVID-19 (Kilpatrick et al., 2020; Kirk, 2020). Developing system change (Adobor, 2020). Second, the study empirically
knowledge-intensive capabilities can enable the establishment of demonstrates resilience capabilities at three levels, responding
local reconfigurable production networks to suit emerging needs: to calls for the need to recognize the multi-level nature of
resilience, often missing in SC literature (Novak et al., 2021;
P5. The increase in value-adding capabilities and Wieland and Durach, 2021; Azadegan and Dooley, 2021;
manufacturing process flexibility at the organizational Adobor and McMullen, 2018). The proposed framework takes
level enhances SN flexibility. a meso-level perspective (Azadegan and Dooley, 2021) and
views SN as a collective of individual organizations embedded
SC visibility beyond immediate tiers is critical to increasing SN not only in their SCs but also in industry, institutional, national
velocity and flexibility. At the SC level, there were bottlenecks in the and global contexts. Acknowledging network functioning at
supply of critical components from multinational distributors multiple levels of social organization (Adobor, 2020), the study
operating as hubs at the top of global SN hierarchies (Gereffi, highlights the dynamics of interactions, anticipation and
2012; Azadegan and Dooley, 2021). This aligns with the study by preparedness strategies operating at the organizational, SC and
Scala and Lindsay (2021), who found that distributor industry levels. Third, the proposed framework demonstrates
relationships often compromise the visibility of sub-tiers in the SC. how SCRES capabilities manifest through practical strategies
The inefficiency of the “hub-and-spoke” architectures of across the phases of a CAS adaptive cycle (Wieland and
global SCs warrants novel SC design. Existing research Durach, 2021). It contributes to SCRM literature by
advocates for the transition from global hierarchies to more underscoring practical strategies in a specific context (Scholten
decentralized, customer-driven SC architectures with multiple et al., 2020; Wieland et al., 2020). The research draws on an
localized production and distribution points (Scala and often-missing link between theory and the practical strategies
Lindsay, 2021; Shekarian et al., 2020). enacted in specific industries and geographical settings
Primes playing leading roles in their SCs facilitate the (Scholten and Schilder, 2015; Jüttner and Maklan, 2011).
development of local supplier ecosystems, revisited
procurement strategies and principles of SC design for future 6.2 Implications for policy and practice
resilience. Co-design with local suppliers was among the most The paper contributes to managerial and policy decision-
favorable strategies for enhancing innovative development making in the following ways.
through technology transfer and creating value onshore. In this SC decision-makers could learn approaches for exercising
process, gaining access to IP and knowledge from Primes and control over their SCs to anticipate and prepare for disruption.
parent companies is crucial. Otherwise, including new From the practitioner’s perspective, the key lesson is the need
suppliers in the network may be slow and limited, as prior to embrace a broader view of SNs beyond immediate tiers. It
research highlights (van Hoek and Dobrzykowski, 2021). helps to identify potential points of failure and proactively
The pandemic has emphasized the need for the nation to engage with upstream tiers to mitigate risks. Decision-makers
invest in local capabilities to build redundancy in SCs onshore. in multinational companies must recognize the long-term
SC collaboration is critical to enhancing SN resilience at the impact of their procurement decisions and SC strategy on the
meso-level (Azadegan and Dooley, 2021): broader supplier ecosystem. Developing local supplier
capabilities rather than relying on established global SC
P6. Transition from global SC hierarchies to localized,
hierarchies with pay off in the future. This, however, requires
collaborative SCs enhances SN resilience. Decentralized substantial investments and demand radical changes to be
architectures and increased collaboration between implemented across SC tiers. The lesson for smaller firms is not
Primes and SMEs result in increased SN visibility, to over-rely on the existing relationships with supply partners.
flexibility and velocity. Although trust-based relationships and collaboration are
important, over-commitment can be counterproductive during
global disruptions. With lack of visibility and control over the
6. Conclusion SC, operational flexibility is critical for small firms to adapt to
6.1 Theoretical implications shifts in supply and demand.
Drawing on the case studies of the organizations and their SCs From the policymakers’ perspective, the findings draw attention
operating as a SN of the Australian Defence, this paper to the effects of global SC hierarchies on local firms. National

12
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

policy incentivizing localization could encourage Primes, the vessels, aircraft components, armored vehicles, special
leading industry bodies and suppliers to establish new military equipment and sustainment of gas turbines, jet
collaborative arrangements enabling local knowledge and and tank engines (Commonwealth of Australia, 2021).
capability development, instrumental for resilient local SN,
supported by advanced manufacturing capabilities.
From the institutional perspective, industry associations and References
government agencies play a critical role in stabilizing
Adobor, H. (2020), “SC resilience: an adaptive cycle approach”,
organizational micro- and SN meso-level structures. The need
for regulators to force sustainable and responsible procurement The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 31
practices is emphasized. Reliable and sustainable procurement No. 3, pp. 443-463, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-01-2020-0019.
sources as the priority for global economies, call for Adobor, H. and McMullen, R.S. (2018), “Supply chain
policymakers to commit to enhancing logistics infrastructure resilience: a dynamic and multidimensional approach”, The
capacities to ensure SC diversification by engaging friendly International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 29 No. 4,
nations. The need for industrial standards harmonization has pp. 1451-1471, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-04-2017-0093.
also been emphasized as a critical mechanism in reducing the Ali, A., Mahfouz, A. and Arisha, A. (2017), “Analysing SC
barriers to building boundary-spanning SCs with friendly resilience: integrating the constructs in a concept mapping
nations. Finally, at the national level, the collaboration between framework via a systematic literature review”, Supply Chain
government and industry for identifying economic Management: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 1,
vulnerabilities spanning from the dependency on highly pp. 16-39, doi: 10.1108/SCM-06-2016-0197.
concentrated markets, stockpiling and buffering of critical Ali, I., Arslan, A., Chowdhury, M., Khan, Z. and Tarba, S.Y.
inputs and rethinking national logistics channels emerged at the (2022), “Reimagining global food value chains through effective
top of long-term resilience strategies. resilience to covid-19 shocks and similar future events: a dynamic
capability perspective”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 141,
6.3 Limitations and future research directions pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.006.
The proposed framework has limitations. First, based on the Alikhani, R., Torabi, S.A. and Altay, N. (2021), “Retail supply
research questions and the context in which the research was chain network design with concurrent resilience
conducted, the proposed framework presents a subjective view capabilities”, International Journal of Production Economics,
that recognizes three levels of CAS, referring to SN as a meso- Vol. 234, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108042.
level system embedded in industry and national contexts, and Allen, C.R., Angeler, D.G., Garmestani, A.S., Gunderson, L.
adopts the “process and people” view to evaluate the H. and Holling, C.S. (2014), “Panarchy: theory and
organizational level resilience. Other levels could also be application”, Ecosystems, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 578-589, doi:
considered, along with resilience strategies. For example, 10.1007/s10021-013-9744-2.
industry sector resilience and individual and team-level Azadegan, A. and Dooley, K. (2021), “A typology of supply
resilience contribute to organizational resilience (Adobor and network resilience strategies: complex collaborations in a
McMullen, 2018). The impact of governance mechanisms on complex world”, Journal of Supply Chain Management,
SC structure and resilience could be further examined Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 17-26, doi: 10.1111/jscm.12256.
(Statsenko et al., 2018b). Second, this research attempted to Bahrami, M. and Shokouhyar, S. (2021), “The role of big data
take a step toward conceptualizing the phases of SNRES, which analytics capabilities in bolstering SC resilience and firm
is still under-researched. Further research must clarify performance: a dynamic capability view”, Information
resilience phases as related to capabilities and strategies (Ali, Technology and People, doi: 10.1108/ITP-01-2021-0048.
2017). The primary purpose of this study was to review the Bak, P. and Paczuski, M. (1995), “Complexity, contingency, and
cross-level effects of resilience capabilities in the pre-disruption, criticality”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 92
disruption and post-disruption phases. Limited attention has No. 15, pp. 6689-6696, doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.15.6689.
been placed on the exploitation and conservation phases which Barlow, R.D. (2012), “Conquering the chaos when disaster
set the context for understanding subsequent phases. Finally, strikes: recovery, rebuilding efforts test supply chain resolve
the key findings that emerged in this study are based on and resilience”, Healthcare Purchasing News, Vol. 36 No. 1,
observations from the ADM sector responding to a disruption pp. 36-40.
caused by a global COVID-19 pandemic. Further research is Betti, F. and Ni, J. (2020), “How China can rebuild global SC
required to verify the applicability of the proposed framework resilience after COVID-19”, World Economic Forum, available at:
in other industry contexts and disruptions. www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/coronavirus-and-global-
supply-chains/ (accessed 27 July 2020).
Blackhurst, J., Craighead, C.W., Elkins, D. and Handfield, R.B.
Note
(2011), “An empirically derived framework for global supplier
1 Prime companies have contracts awarded directly by the risk management”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 47
government to produce and supply defence products and No. 2, pp. 6-18, doi: 10.1111/j.0000-0000.2011.01032.x.
services. Primes are responsible for the overall Cao, M., Vonderembse, M., Zhang, Q. and Ragu-Nathan, T.S.
management of projects and lead delivery of defence (2010), “Supply chain collaboration: conceptualization and
contracts by sub-contracting and managing global and instrument development”, International Journal of Production
local sub-contractors. Projects include the design, Research, Vol. 48 No. 22, pp. 6613-6635, doi: 10.1080/
manufacture, commissioning and sustainment of naval 00207540903349039.

13
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Choi, T.Y. and Hong, Y. (2002), “Unveiling the structure of Eckerd, S., Handley, S. and Lumineau, F. (2022), “Trust violations
supply networks: case studies in Honda”, Journal of in buyer–supplier relationships: spillovers and the contingent role
Operations Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 469-493, doi: of governance structures”, Journal of Supply Chain Management,
10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00025-6. Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 47-70, doi: 10.1111/jscm.12270.
Choi, T.Y., Dooley, K.J. and Rungtusanatham, M. (2001), Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study
“Supply networks and complex adaptive systems: control research”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14
versus emergence”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 532-550, doi: 10.5465/amr.1989.4308385.
No. 3, pp. 351-366, doi: 10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00068-1. Feizabadi, J., Gligor, D.M. and Alibakhshi, S. (2021),
Choi, Y.E., Oh, C.O. and Chon, J. (2021), “Applying the “Examining the synergistic effect of SC agility, adaptability
resilience principles for sustainable ecotourism development: and alignment: a complementarity perspective”, Supply
a case study of the Nakdong estuary, South Korea”, Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 4,
Tourism Management, Vol. 83, p. 104237, doi: 10.1016/j. pp. 514-531, doi: 10.1108/SCM-08-2020-0424.
tourman.2020.104237. Gereffi, G. (2012), “Value chains”, The Wiley-Blackwell
Chopra, S. and Sodhi, M.M.S. (2004), “Managing risk to Encyclopedia of Globalization, John Wiley & Sons.
avoid: supply-chain breakdown”, MIT Sloan Management Gorod, A., Hallo, L., Statsenko, L., Nguyen, T. and Chileshe,
Review, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 53-61. N. (2021), “Integrating hierarchical and network centric
Chowdhury, M.M.H. and Quaddus, M. (2017), “SC management approaches in construction megaprojects using
resilience: conceptualization and scale development using a holonic methodology”, Engineering, Construction and
dynamic capability theory”, International Journal of Architectural Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 627-661, doi:
Production Economics, Vol. 188, pp. 185-204, doi: 10.1016/j. 10.1108/ECAM-01-2020-0072.
ijpe.2017.03.020. Govindan, K., Mina, H. and Alavi, B. (2020), “A decision
Christopher, M. and Peck, H. (2004), “Building the resilient support system for demand management in healthcare supply
SC”, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 15 chains considering the epidemic outbreaks: a case study of
No. 2, pp. 1-13, doi: 10.1108/09600030110394914. coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)”, Transportation
Christopher, M. and Towill, D. (2001), “An integrated model Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 138,
p. 101967, doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2020.101967.
for the design of agile supply chains”, International Journal of
Greening, P. and Rutherford, C. (2011), “Disruptions and supply
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 31 No. 4,
networks: a multi-level, multi-theoretical relational perspective”,
pp. 235-246, doi: 10.1108/09600030110394914.
The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 22 No. 1,
Colicchia, C. and Strozzi, F. (2012), “Supply chain risk
pp. 104-126, doi: 10.1108/09574091111127570.
management: a new methodology for a systematic literature
Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. (Eds) (2002), Panarchy:
review”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,
Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural
Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 403-418, doi: 10.1108/13598541211246558.
Systems, Island Press.
Commonwealth of Australia (2021), “Australian defence
Harland, C.M., Lamming, R.C., Zhemg, J. and Johnsen, T.E.
industry”, available at: www.defence.gov.au/Initiatives/ADI/
(2006), “A taxonomy of supply networks”, The Journal of
Defence-Industry.asp (accessed 20 June 2022).
Supply Chain Management, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 21-27, doi:
Daedlow, K., Beckmann, V. and Arlinghaus, R. (2011),
10.1111/j.1745-493X.2001.tb00109.x.
“Assessing an adaptive cycle in a social system under external
Herold, D.M., Nowicka, K., Pluta-Zaremba, A. and Kummer,
pressure to change: the importance of intergroup relations in S. (2021), “COVID-19 and the pursuit of supply chain
recreational fisheries governance”, Ecology and Society, resilience: reactions and ‘lessons learned’ from logistics
Vol. 16 No. 2, doi: 10.5751/ES-04053-160203. service providers (LSPs)”, Supply Chain Management: An
Dai, J., Xie, L. and Chu, Z. (2021), “Developing sustainable International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 702-714, doi:
supply chain management: the interplay of institutional 10.1108/SCM-09-2020-0439.
pressures and sustainability capabilities”, Sustainable Holling, C. (1985), “Resilience of ecosystems: local surprise
Production and Consumption, Vol. 28, pp. 254-268, doi: and global change”, Cambridge University Press, No. 5.
10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.017. Holling, C. (2001), “Understanding the complexity of
Datta, P. (2017), “Supply network resilience: a systematic economic, ecological, and social systems”, Ecosystems, Vol. 4
literature review and future research”, The International No. 5, pp. 390-405, doi: 10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5.
Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, Holling, C.S. (1996), “Engineering resilience versus ecological
pp. 1387-1424, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-03-2016-0064. resilience”, Engineering within Ecological Constraints, pp. 31-42,
Dovbischuk, I. (2022), “Innovation-oriented dynamic available at: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/4919/
capabilities of logistics service providers, dynamic resilience chapter/4
and firm performance during the COVID-19 pandemic”, Holling, C.S. and Gunderson, L.H. (2002), “Resilience and
The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 33 adaptive cycles”, in Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S.
No. 2, pp. 499-519, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-01-2021-0059. (Eds), Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S.J., Papadopoulos, T., and Natural Systems, pp. 25.-62.
Blome, C. and Luo, Z. (2019), “Antecedents of resilient Ivanov, D. and Das, A. (2020), “Coronavirus (COVID-19/
supply chains: an empirical study”, IEEE Transactions on SARS-CoV-2) and supply chain resilience: a research note”,
Engineering Management, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 8-19, doi: International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, Vol. 13
10.1109/TEM.2017.2723042. No. 1, pp. 90-102, doi: 10.1504/IJISM.2020.107780.

14
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Jüttner, U. and Maklan, S. (2011), “SC resilience in the global Nikookar, E., Varsei, M. and Wieland, A. (2021), “Gaining
financial crisis: an empirical study”, SC”, Supply Chain from disorder: making the case for antifragility in purchasing
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, and SC management”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply
pp. 246-259, doi: 10.1108/13598541111139062. Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, p. 100699, doi: 10.1016/j.
Kähkönen, A.K., Evangelista, P., Hallikas, J., Immonen, M. pursup.2021.100699.
and Lintukangas, K. (2021), “COVID-19 as a trigger for Novak, D.C., Wu, Z. and Dooley, K.J. (2021), “Whose
dynamic capability development and SC resilience resilience matters? Addressing issues of scale in SC
improvement”, International Journal of Production Research, resilience”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 42 No. 3,
Vol. 61 No. 8, doi: 10.1080/00207543.2021.2009588. pp. 323-335, doi: 10.1111/jbl.12270.
Kamalahmadi, M. and Parast, M.M. (2016), “A review of the Patrucco, A., Harland, C.M., Luzzini, D. and Frattini, F. (2022),
literature on the principles of enterprise and SC resilience: “Managing triadic supplier relationships in collaborative
major findings and directions for future research”, innovation projects: a relational view perspective”, Supply
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 171, Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 27 No. 7,
pp. 116-133, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.10.023. pp. 108-127, doi: 10.1108/SCM-05-2021-0220.
Kilpatrick, J., Alexander, C. and Barter, L. (2020), “COVID-19: Peck, H. (2005), “Drivers of supply chain vulnerability: an
orchestrating the recovery of organizations and SCs”, Deloitte integrated framework”, International Journal of Physical
Canada, available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/ca/en/pages/ Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 35 No. 4,
finance/articles/covid-19-orchestrating-recovery-of-organizations- pp. 210-23, doi: 10.1108/09600030510599904.
supply-chains.html# (accessed 20 June 2022). Pettit, T.J., Croxton, K.L. and Fiksel, J. (2019), “The
Kim, Y., Chen, Y. and Linderman, K. (2015), “Supply evolution of resilience in SC management: a retrospective on
network disruption and resilience: a network structural ensuring SC resilience”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 40
perspective”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 33-34 No. 1, pp. 56-65, doi: 10.1111/jbl.12202.
No. 1, pp. 43-59, doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.006. Polyviou, M., Croxton, K.L. and Knemeyer, A.M. (2020),
Kirk, M. (2020), “Does the SC look the same after COVID-19 as “Resilience of medium-sized firms to SC disruptions: the
before?”, Squire Patton Boggs, pp. 19-20, available at: www. role of internal social capital”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 40 No. 1,
globalsupplychainlawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/
pp. 68-91, doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-09-2017-0530.
2020/04/Does-the-Supply-Chain-Look-the-same-after-
Ponis, S.T. and Koronis, E. (2012), “Supply chain resilience:
(accessed 3 November 2021).
definition of concept and its formative elements”, Journal of
Kochan, C.G. and Nowicki, D.R. (2018), “Supply chain
Applied Business Research (JABR), Vol. 28 No. 5,
resilience: a systematic literature review and typological
pp. 921-930, doi: 10.19030/jabr.v28i5.7234.
framework”, International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Ponomarov, S.Y. and Holcomb, M.C. (2009), “Understanding
Logistics Management, Vol. 48 No. 8, pp. 842-865, doi:
the concept of SC resilience”, The International Journal of
10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2017-0099.
Logistics Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 124-143, doi:
Lavastre, O., Gunasekaran, A. and Spalanzani, A. (2012),
10.1108/09574090910954873.
“Supply chain risk management in French companies”,
Ribeiro, J.P. and Barbosa-Povoa, A. (2018), “SC resilience:
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 828-838, doi: definitions and quantitative modelling approaches – a
10.1016/j.dss.2011.11.017. literature review”, Computers & Industrial Engineering,
Li, Y. and Zobel, C.W. (2020), “Exploring supply chain Vol. 115, pp. 109-122, doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2017.11.006.
network resilience in the presence of the ripple effect”, Rice, J.B. and Caniato, F. (2003), “Building a secure and
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 228, doi: resilient supply network”, Supply Chain Management Review,
10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107693. Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 22-30, available at: www.academia.edu/
Manhart, P., Summers, J.K. and Blackhurst, J. (2020), “A 522102/Building_a_Secure_and_Resilient_Supply_Network
meta-analytic review of SC risk management: assessing (accessed 20 May 2022).
buffering and bridging strategies and firm performance”, Romano, P. (2003), “Co-ordination and integration mechanisms
Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 56 No. 3, to manage logistics processes across supply networks”, Journal
pp. 66-87, doi: 10.1111/jscm.12219. of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 9 No. 3,
Merriam, S.B. (2009), Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design pp. 119-134, doi: 10.1016/S1478-4092(03)00008-6.
and Implementation, John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2016), Research
Munir, M., Jajja, M.S.S. and Chatha, K.A. (2022), Methods for Business Students, Pearson Education Ltd,
“Capabilities for enhancing supply chain resilience and Harlow, England.
responsiveness in the COVID-19 pandemic: exploring the Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. and Bourgeois, D.
role of improvisation, anticipation, and data analytics (2018), Research Methods for Business Students, 7th ed.,
capabilities”, International Journal of Operations & Production Pearson Education Limited.
Management, Vol. 42 No. 10, doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-11-2021- Scala, B. and Lindsay, C.F. (2021), “SC resilience during
0677. pandemic disruption: evidence from healthcare”, Supply
Najar, T. (2022), “Lean-agile SC innovation performance; the Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 6,
mediating role of dynamic capability, innovation capacity, pp. 672-688, doi: 10.1108/SCM-09-2020-0434.
and relational embeddedness”, SC Forum, pp. 1-22, doi: Scholten, K. and Schilder, S. (2015), “The role of
10.1080/16258312.2022.2031276. collaboration in SC resilience”, SC Management: An

15
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 471-484, doi: Tukamuhabwa, B., Stevenson, M., Busby, J. and Zorzini, M.
10.1108/SCM-11-2014-0386. (2015), “Supply chain resilience: definition, review and
Scholten, K., Scott, P.S. and Fynes, B. (2014), “Mitigation theoretical foundations for further study”, International
processes–antecedents for building SC resilience”, Supply Journal of Production Research, Vol. 53 No. 18, pp. 592-623,
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, doi: 10.1080/00207543.2015.1037934.
pp. 211-228, doi: 10.1108/SCM-06-2013-0191. van Hoek, R. and Dobrzykowski, D. (2021), “Towards more
Scholten, K., Scott, P.S. and Fynes, B. (2019), “Building routines balanced sourcing strategies – are supply chain risks caused by
for non-routine events: SC resilience learning mechanisms and the COVID-19 pandemic driving reshoring considerations?”,
their antecedents”, SC Management: An International Journal, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 26
Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 430-442, doi: 10.1108/SCM-05-2018-0186. No. 6, pp. 689-701, doi: 10.1108/SCM-09-2020-0498.
Scholten, K., Stevenson, M. and van Donk, D.P. (2020), Walker, B.H. (2020), “Resilience: what it is and is not”, Ecology
“Dealing with the unpredictable: SC resilience”, and Society, Vol. 25 No. 2, doi: 10.5751/ES-11647-250211.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Wieland, A. (2021), “Dancing the SC: toward transformative
Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-01-2020-789. SC management”, Journal of Supply Chain Management,
Shashi, P.C., Cerchione, R. and Ertz, M. (2020), “Managing Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 58-73, doi: 10.1111/jscm.12248.
SC resilience to pursue business and environmental Wieland, A. and Durach, C.F. (2021), “Two perspectives on
strategies”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 29 SC resilience”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 42 No. 3,
No. 3, pp. 1215-1246, doi: 10.1002/bse.2428. pp. 315-322, doi: 10.1111/jbl.12271.
Sheffi, Y. and Rice, J.B. (2005), “A supply chain view of the Wieland, A. and Wallenburg, C.M. (2012), “Dealing with
resilient enterprise”, MIT Sloan Management Review, MIT supply chain risks: linking risk management practices and
Press, Cambridge, MA, available at: https://sloanreview.mit. strategies to performance”, International Journal of Physical
edu/article/a-supply-chain-view-of-the-resilient-enterprise/ Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 42 No. 10,
(accessed 15 January 2022). pp. 887-905, doi: 10.1108/09600031211281411.
Shekarian, M., Nooraie, R.S.V. and Parast, M.M. (2020), “An Wieland, A., Bals, L., Mol, M.J. and Handfields, R.B. (2020),
examination of the impact of flexibility and agility on “Overcoming blind spots in global sourcing research: exploiting
mitigating supply chain disruptions”, International Journal of the cross-sections between SC management and international
Production Economics, Vol. 220, p. 107438, doi: 10.1016/j. business”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 26 No. 1,
ijpe.2019.07.011. p. 100709, doi: 10.1016/j.intman.2019.100709.
Simchi-Levi, D., Schmidt, W., Wei, Y., Zhang, P.Y., Combs, K., Wu, Z. and Jia, F. (2018), “Toward a theory of SC fields –
Ge, Y. and Zhang, P.Y. (2015), “Identifying risks and mitigating understanding the institutional process of SC localization”,
disruptions in the automotive supply chain”, Interfaces, Vol. 45 Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 58-59 No. 1,
No. 5, pp. 375-390, doi: 10.1287/inte.2015.0804. pp. 27-41, doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2018.03.002.
Simchi-Levi, D., Wang, H. and Wei, Y. (2018), “Increasing Yaroson, E.V., Breen, L., Hou, F. and Sowter, F. (2021),
supply chain robustness through process flexibility and “Advancing the understanding of pharmaceutical SC
inventory”, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 27 resilience using complex adaptive system (CAS) theory”, SC
No. 8, pp. 1476-1491, doi: 10.1111/poms.12887. Management: An International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3,
Slay, C. and Dooley, K. (2020), Climate Risks and Resilient SCs, pp. 323-340, doi: 10.1108/SCM-05-2019-0184.
the Sustainability Consortium, Scottsdale, AZ. Yazan, B. and De Vasconcelos, I.C.O. (2016), “Three
Statsenko, L., Gorod, A. and Ireland, V. (2018a), “A complex approaches to case study methods in education: Yin,
adaptive systems governance framework for regional supply Merriam, and Stake”, Meta: Avaliacao, Vol. 8 No. 22,
networks”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, pp. 149-182, doi: 10.22347/2175-2753v8i22.1038.
Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 293-312, doi: 10.1108/SCM-08-2017-0279. Yin, R.K. (2014), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th
Statsenko, L., Gorod, A. and Ireland, V. (2018b), “A supply ed., Sage Publications.
network governance framework: a case study of the South Yin, R.K. (2018), Case Study Research and Applications: Design
Australian mining industry”, Journal of Global Operations and and Methods, 6th Ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Strategic Sourcing, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 55-78, doi: 10.1108/ Yu, W., Jacobs, M.A., Chavez, R. and Yang, J. (2019),
JGOSS-03-2017-0007. “Dynamism, disruption orientation, and resilience in the SC and
Stewart, G.T., Kolluru, R. and Smith, M. (2009), “Leveraging the impacts on financial performance: a dynamic capabilities
public-private partnerships to improve community resilience perspective”, International Journal of Production Economics,
in times of disaster”, International Journal of Physical Vol. 218, pp. 352-362, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.013.
Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 39 No. 5,
pp. 343-364, doi: 10.1108/09600030910973724.
Further reading
Swafford, P.M., Ghosh, S. and Murthy, N. (2008), “Achieving
supply chain agility through IT integration and flexibility”, Statsenko, L., Ireland, V. and Gorod, A. (2016), “Self-organizing
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 116 No. 2, supply networks: a case study of the SA mining industry”, 2016
pp. 288-297, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.09.002. 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), IEEE,
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997), “Dynamic pp. 1-5, available at: 10.1109/SYSOSE.2016.7542919
capabilities and strategic management”, Strategic Management Yazan, B. (2015), “Three approaches to case study methods in
Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-533, available at: www.jstor. education: yin, Merriam, and stake”, The Qualitative Report,
org/stable/3088148 Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 134-152, doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2102.

16
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Appendix 1

Table A1 Brief overview of each case and its supply chain

Position in the Designation of
Case supply chain Size Organization profile Interviewees
Interviews
Case A Client (Australian N/A The organization is part of the Department of Defence. It exists to 1. Defence SC Facilitator,
Government) meet the Australian Defence Force’s (ADF) military equipment and Centre for Defence
supply requirements identified by Defence and approved by the Industry Capability
Government. 2. Defence SC Advisor,
Responsible for building and enhancing relationships with industry to Office of Defence Industry
provide expertise in managing projects in the defence acquisition and Support
sustainment phases. The organization purchases and maintains 3. Defence SC Advisor,
military equipment and supplies in the quantities and to the service Office of Defence Industry
levels required by Defence and approved by Government. It manages Support
nationally significant projects. It focuses on planning and governance,
while the industry focuses on execution – Awards Head Contracts to
industry Primes in Australia
Case B Tier 1 supplier (Prime) 2,500 A prime company that focuses on maritime programs and acts as an 4. Australian SC Head
international company’s subsidiary. The company builds and maintains 5. Executive manager SC
a sovereign supply chain as a part of the company’s Maritime strategy. capability development
A vast majority (92%) of materials, engineering and manufacturing
services for maritime sustainment are provided by Australian suppliers,
and a small amount (8%) of OEM equipment is from Europe.
Responsible for designing, delivering and sustaining naval combat
vessels while providing in-operation service and support to deliver
world-class availability to the Royal Australian Navy. Upgrades the
Collins fleet with the latest advanced sonar systems, decoy methods
and radars at specialized facilities in South Australia and Western
Australia
Case C Tier 2 supplier (Prime) 90,500 Design, manufacturing and maintenance of advanced, technology-led 6. Procurement Director
defence, aerospace and information security solutions. Develop, 7. Head of Strategic
engineer, manufacture and support products and systems to deliver Sourcing
military capability and infrastructure security. The current projects in 8. Senior Project Manager
the ADM include naval vessel design and acquisition to contribute to 9. Senior Program
air and surface warfare defence and its primary mission of anti- Manager
submarine warfare. The Project is at the Design and Commissioning 10. Defence Industry/
Stage, which includes conducting detailed design, procuring long lead Australian SC
time items, and commencement of prototyping.  20,000 suppliers Development Manager
internationally  1,300 Australian companies in the supply chain
Case D Tier 2 supplier (Prime) 15,168 The company designs, builds, integrates, dismantles and deconstructs 11. Procurement Manager
submarines and surface ships and provides in-service support. As an 12. Australian Industry
industrial contractor, designer and overall integrator of whole Capability Manager
warships and combat systems, it also offers a full range of services to
naval bases and shipyards. The ADM Program seeks to establish the
Australian industrial capability to support future submarines’ build,
operation and sustainment. The supply chain arrangements aim to
maximize the involvement of the Australian industry in all phases of
the program without compromising capability, cost, schedule or risk.
The contracts include procuring potential Attack Class components
from more than 100 businesses based across Australia and testing and
qualification services to assess their suitability for use in the
submarines. Items categorized as the standard technology for the
project include steel and alloys, insulation, fasteners, pipes, filters, O-
rings, hoses, sockets, valves, seals, cables and switches
(continued)

17
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A1

Position in the Designation of

Case supply chain Size Organization profile Interviewees
Case E Tier 2 supplier (Prime) 35,500 A Prime Australian company that delivers asset management services 13. Head of Land
across the Marine, Aviation and Land sectors. It has a broad spread of Programs, Australia
contracts and serves sectors such as Defence, ship management for
freight and carrier lights, metropolitan fire services and mining and
quarrying in South Australia. The company focuses on equipment
distribution and maintenance in aerospace and maritime programs
across Defence domains. A total of 95% of Prime equipment for
Defence (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive) is
sourced from Europe or USA. In contrast, the sub-parts of the
equipment are mainly sourced from China and Europe. There is an
open supply chain for standardized aircraft parts, and aircraft repair
and maintenance are performed locally
Case F Tier 2 supplier 18,153 A leading Defence, Security and Traffic Management solutions 14. Director/Business
provider specializing in complex computer-based command and Development Manager
control systems, integrator of complex Defence and security systems in 15. Head of Industry
Australia. Developed and integrated technology for Australia’s Navy, Engagement
Army and Air Force. Systems for allied nations and technology for
security and aviation. Provides capability, leveraging the extensive
global portfolio of Saab’s international products and services for
military, civil security and aviation applications. The company is
focused on transferring technology to Australia, maximizing local
industry involvement in these sub-systems’ manufacturing, assembly,
integration, testing and sustainment.  500 Australian companies in
the supply chain
Case G Tier 3 supplier 450 Australian sovereign supplier of systems engineering, training and 16. National Delivery
through-life support services for Australian Defence. Australian Manager of Defence
Industry Content provider of maritime electrical power and control
systems to prime defence contractors and key OEMs. Support a variety
of OEMs and affiliated contracts, including through Life Support
services and fleet sustainment contracts. Delivery of fit-for-purpose
electrical and control systems. Worldwide supply chain, with a
significant share from India, China and Taiwan
Case H Tier 4 supplier <25 Design and manufacturing for Defence and Space. Australian-owned 17. Chief Executive Officer
and operated company offering specialist development services and
small satellite mission solutions. A small satellite-based Space Domain
Awareness mission to support the global space network is developing,
as is a smart Earth imaging mission for direct-to-user services.
Specialist manufacturing research and development for Defence.
Simulation and modelling, tactics, countermeasures, electronic
warfare, Space Domain Awareness mission systems, and systems
engineering. 70% overseas intermediary manufacturing goods,
30% local design, development and assembly services
Case I Tier 3 supplier 200 A manufacturing company based in South Australia with a complex 18. Director Maritime SC
and highly globalized supply chain. The company designs, 19. Defence Account
manufactures and assembles bespoke electronics onshore. They have Manager
leveraged their commercial business to work with Defence. Currently,
they primarily focus on ‘build-to-print’ work in the LAND 19 Short
Range Ground Based Air Defence Program and in conversation with
several other Primes. The company manufactures electronics for
printed circuit boards and electronic modules for heavy vehicles and
emergency services, in-vehicle continuous battery charges, AC-DC
charging systems which involve the complex assembly of hundreds of
(continued)

18
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A1

Position in the Designation of

Case supply chain Size Organization profile Interviewees
components. They have an on-site test facility for pre-compliance and
full life cycle electronics systems with cradle-to-grave capability
Case J Tier 3 supplier 74 A medium-sized manufacturing company based in South Australia 20. Australian SC
which works with multiple primes and various suppliers. The company Manager
specializes in precision electronics manufacturing and assembly for all
three Defence areas: Marine, Land, and Aerospace. They manufacture
critical components for submarine engines in-house. While
maintaining 97% of local manufacturing, including the recent switch
from New Zealand to Australia for aluminium extrusions because of
COVID-19, the company sources electronics components from Europe
and the USA
Case K Tier 4 supplier <25 Digital technology and automation solutions upgrade the capabilities 21. Operations Manager
of defence primes and government organizations and transform small
and medium-sized businesses, so they become Defence ready. Industry
4.0 systems include robotics, Automation Design, Manufacture,
Installation and Support, and partnering with International OEMs for
technology transfer and domestic systems support. Assessment of
imported equipment, PLC and SCADA Software Development,
Automated Equipment Obsolescence Management, Maintenance and
Upgrade of Legacy Electrical and Control Systems for Infrastructure
and Manufacturing. Design and assembly are performed in Australia,
majority of the supply chain for electronic equipment, components and
sub-part comes from overseas Taiwan, China and India
Case L Tier 4 supplier <25 Information Warfare provider, providing the Australian Defence 22. CEO
Organization and industry partners with mission-critical operational
and technical experience in Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance
and Electronic Warfare (ISREW). Deployment of software-defined,
hardware-enabled technologies that support mission flexibility.
Development and deployment of ISREW solutions to the
electromagnetic battlespace across the sea, air, land, space and cyber
domains. The company uses local specialist services design and
development. A significant share of electronic sub-components comes
from USA, Europe and Asia
Case M Tier 3 supplier 1,000 A subsidiary of a European OEM with a close collaborative relationship 23. Australian SC
of primes and an exclusive licensing agreement to sell, support and Manager
overhaul diesel engines in the Australasia and Pacific Islands region. 24. General Manager
The company manufactures diesel engines installation, repair and
maintenance for Maritime. Most of the hardware and assembly comes
from a European Prime, and 5%–10% is sourced from local suppliers
and subcontractors providing specialist services of engine overhaul
activities
Case N Tier 3 supplier 1,700 A medium-to-large leading electrical company that provides electrical 25. Commercial Director
services, maintenance activities, electrical construction services and
communication and data management services for Maritime, Cyber
and Aerospace. Some of the projects awarded to the company for the
Defence sector are building switchboards for marine crafts, supply of
replacement equipment for marine crafts and building switchboards
for Defence applications. About half of the company`s components are
locally supplied, and the remaining half are sourced from Asia, mainly
Malaysia, China, Taiwan and Thailand
(continued)

19
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A1

Position in the Designation of

Case supply chain Size Organization profile Interviewees
Case O Tier 4 supplier 40 A medium to large South Australian-based company with the core 26. Business Development
business of distribution of hydraulic and pneumatic equipment and Manager
componentry. The company has a long-term alliance with critical
suppliers. Most components and materials of the company are
commercial items. 75% of components and raw materials such as
metal alloys, hydraulic rubber hoses and fittings, and filtration sub-
components are from Australian distributors sourced from Southeast
Asia, Malaysia, China, Germany, Poland, USA, while valves and
manifolds and hydraulic cylinders are sourced from South Australian
suppliers
Case P Tier 3 supplier  67 Small and medium scale enterprise with a broad range of Defence and 27. Chief Executive Officer
commercial experience. The company provides refrigeration and
cooling systems design, engineering and deployment in the land,
aerospace and maritime defence sector. The Defence work is primarily
undertaken in South Australia out of Adelaide. They have collaborated
with European companies for larger projects and have also been
involved in maintenance for maritime. 80% of significant plant and
equipment is manufactured overseas and procured by Australian
vendors or directly from overseas. The remaining 20% of all pressure
vessels are manufactured in Australia
Case Q Tier 3 supplier  200 A globally spread and medium-scaled company that manufactures 28. Business Development
lighting equipment and tactical optics for aerospace. The company is a Manager
new member of the SA Defence. As the biggest supplier of military
scopes, it has contracts with the US military. The defence contacts
usually have a well-defined plan for five years and are renewed yearly
based on the supplier’s performance. The company sources 50% of
the components locally and 50% from overseas countries such as
China, Japan and Taiwan
Supplier chain membership organizations
Case S Supplier membership The organization performs the defence supply and support industry, 29. President
organization collaborating with Prime Defence contractors, SMEs, Professional
Service Providers and Academic Institutions. It supports and assists the
defence industry and its members in developing functional,
competitive, collaborative business relationships.
They were connecting companies, both nationally and internationally,
to secure tender opportunities. The organization works to connect
3,000 SMEs with Prime Defence contractors
Case T Supplier membership An organization creates a link for Australian SMEs looking to enter or 30. CEO
organization expand their capabilities in the Defence industry. The organization’s
core function, through its industry engagement teams around
Australia, is to provide advisory, guidance and mentoring services to
SMEs.
Works closely with State and Territory agencies and Defence business
partners to help deliver capability that equips and sustains the
Australian Defence Force
Case U Supplier membership The organization draws on collective resources, market intelligence 31. CEO
organization and expertise to improve member capabilities, market engagement
and business opportunities. The organization established as an
important part of the Upper Spencer Gulf economic development
framework as a regional connector for major Projects and asset
owners to local suppliers in a collaborative effort to reach their local
procurement targets
(continued)

20
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A1

Position in the Designation of

Case supply chain Size Organization profile Interviewees
Case V Supplier membership Organization assists its members in dealing with the Australian 32. SC Consultant
organization Government (including Government Departments) and Defence prime
contractors. Facilitate the dissemination of Australian Government
and prime contractor defence and security-related policy and
procurement information to members. Assist in developing policies
focused on SMEs in the Defence and Security sectors.
Actively advocate Federal and State/Territory Governments, Prime
Contractors and Government departments such as Defence and Border
forces to maximize opportunities for Australian SMEs
Case W Supplier membership Network of industry procurement and supply chain specialists who 33. SC Consultant
organization introduce businesses to large and small projects across Australia and
New Zealand. The organization helps bring suppliers and project
owners, significant operations, OEM and other buyers together by
giving exclusive access to their online database and extensive network
of Industry Consultants
Source: Authors own work

21
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A2 Capabilities and strategies: organizational level

Phase
Exploitation and
conservation Reconfiguration
Themes Codes (Anticipation and Release (Learning and
SNRES capability resilience strategy Example of an interview excerpt Preparedness) (Response) Growth)
Operational Building buffers into “Obviously, if the impacts were felt for twelve x x
flexibility (process production schedules months, then that buffer only brought us a
and volume) to accommodate certain level of protection. So, we looked at
delays in delivery where the delay was extending beyond what
we would call the readiness window. . . or
buffer. . . So, that then that narrowed down
the equipment delays that were of concern to
us”
Diverting capacities “We could do everything, and we could stop x x
to produce nation all our other work that those people were
critical items by working on and be able to design and
leveraging CAD and manufacture the component or the tooling
3 D printing quite quickly to mould the parts. So, with
having that all in-house capability it certainly
reduces your lead-times, because you’re not
relying on other people to have to drop their
work and they may not be able to stop work
and make the call”
Resource “The other thing is, we are investing our x x
reconfiguration resources and time into capability, and we’ve
done a nine-month strategy and execution
plans from the second week of the COVID-19
crisis, and then we started re-visiting that
every week”
Bringing critical and “We decided to set up painting. . .Once the x x
value-adding process is established in-house, we have a
capabilities in-house chance of controlling the quality, efficiency,
time and cost of the process and enhance the
speed of the production process”
Visibility Understanding “We make sure we’ve got an understanding x x
upstream supply of what the requirements are and where their
chain risks delays could be, because if we don’t know
that, then we could be going in blind to our
customer and saying. . .. there’s no issue. But
really, there is a potential issue coming up, so
we need to have an understanding of our
supply chain’s supply chain, and how far that
flows down and where it all comes from”
Value stream “We have mapped all the product lines, x x
mapping especially we sell in seven continents as well,
and then we started identifying where we get
what from”
Redundancy Ensuring workforce “We had team members in production x
availability to working in logistics and quality working in
accommodate production, and we’ve done that cross-training
delivery delays exercise on different members”
Increasing stock of “We have – and we hold it [buffer stock], in x x
critical components part for occasions exactly like this. So, we have
drawn down on our inventory to ensure that
were able to continue to provide the parts and
maintain the submarines”
Source: Authors own work

22
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A3 Capabilities and strategies: SC level

Phase
Exploitation and Reconfiguration
Themes SNRES Codes resilience conservation (Anticipation Release (Learning and
Capability strategy Interview excerpts and preparedness) (Response) growth)
Flexibility Reshoring “We started doing that [supply chain x
mapping] and we ended up replacing China
with local manufacturers in Australia. That
does the same thing and the funny part
would be actually the price was the same.
We were able to negotiate the same price”
More diversified and “When I first joined, we had around maybe x x x
localized supplier 80% reliance on China. The first six months
base doing the value stream exercise we went
down to around 50% before COVID-19”
“. . .that’s resulted in finding a good quality
Australian supplier and a good price point,
so we haven’t actually lost out, it’s just
brought in locally”
Alternative and dual “Then I start to look for other places. I x x
sourcing might end up buying that one cent item, in
two months’ time, for a dollar because I
need them”
“. . .when we switched we weren’t chasing
a price, weren’t chasing quality, it was just
the supply wasn’t there”
Visibility Understanding “We were looking with our supplies at x x
upstream risks single points of failure upstream. . .and
making sure we have a backup strategy”
Knowing our upstream bottlenecks . . .was
important, so we started looking across
local and overseas suppliers to see where
might have problems”
Velocity Overseas suppliers “Most of them [overseas suppliers] have x
recovered quickly surprisingly gone back into production”
Process agility “We had to be very agile to get back up to x
speed, we communicated across the supply
chain and developed a strategy to tackle
this [increased lead times]”
Expediting delivery “We work with the supplier on x
opportunities to expedite the order. . .
might be very simple, rather than using sea
freight, air freight”
“. . . the official lead time is 14 weeks for x
that piece of equipment . . .due to shipping
and other restrictions at the moment, but
for an extra $300 they were able to air
freight it into Australia within a week and a
half, but that is something they normally do
not offer. . .it is the personal contact with
the SC and the procurement guys in our
suppliers”
(continued)

23
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A3

Phase
Exploitation and Reconfiguration
Themes SNRES Codes resilience conservation (Anticipation Release (Learning and
Capability strategy Interview excerpts and preparedness) (Response) growth)
Redundancy Reviewing inventory “We sat down and talked with our suppliers x x
management about how much would we need based on
strategies across our current capacity going forward. Now
supply chain they can think how much stock contingency
they need. . .”
Reviewing warehouse “We do maintain a distribution centre. It is x
and distribution quite mature and advanced and caters to
centers locations both Defence and commercial customers.
So we stock a lot of parts anyway. . .with
COVID-19 we are now reviewing locations
and capacities. . .”
Alternative logistics “We stopped moving people and we started x x
and freight routes moving stuff into SA [South Australia]”.
“So we have our warehouse in Sydney. But
we couldn`t access it. So we couldn`t go and
inspect and check on equipment. . .now we
ship it directly to SA [South Australia]”
Collaboration Information sharing “I have six companies in the group as well, x x
across supply chain and they have got the same essence or DNA
for situational but they are different markets and different
awareness personas, and different customers. We had
to understand their problems at the
beginning because there was no playbook
to look at”.
“We just make sure that they have got the
strategies in place to be able to deal with
the uncertainty. . . .Generally, we sit with
the supplier and work out what they need
and do; they have more than one avenue of
access to goods”
Expediting orders “Where our readiness window couldn’t x
with suppliers protect us, where we weren’t able to draw
down on inventory, to work with the
supplier on opportunities to expedite the
order. . . might be very simple, rather than
using sea freight, air freight”
Source: Authors own work

24
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Table A4 Capabilities and strategies: Industry level

Phase
Exploitation and Reconfiguration
Themes SCNRES Codes Resilience conservation (Anticipation Release (Learning and
Capability Strategy Interview excerpts and preparedness) (Response) growth)
Flexibility within Standard “Material standards, again back onto x
ADM SCN harmonization material, you know, Australian versus
European versus American, availability of
materials is one thing that we notice quite a
bit”
Simplification of the “All of the Defence programs that we’re x
certification and pre- working on have a requirement for
qualifications process cybersecurity, and that’s if you want to be a
Defence supplier, then that’s the
requirement that’s there because of the sort
of area you’re working in and the types of
components and assemblies that we’re
manufacturing”
Development of high- “And it may cost a little bit more to x
value adding manufacture or assemble in Australia than
capabilities onshore it does with the OEMs, in our case being
[company] in [European Country]. So that’s
from an acquisition perspective is to
assemble the product here, which is a way
of transferring technology but also a way of
skilling our workforce and building up our
workforce, and also as a conduit for looking
at investment and infrastructure”
Collaboration in the Issuing grants and “The grants are really beneficial for an SME, x
ADM SN (Public – supporting packages because it helps with your cashflow and it
Private) for SMEs means you can keep investing in other
areas”
Designing with “Making sure that the Defence primes are x
involvement of local working with design for Australian
suppliers capabilities, not just having a design that’s
suitable for Europe manufacturing”
Strategic partnerships “Some Defence primes are really looking at x
building strategic partnerships with their
suppliers and making sure they understand
the supply chain that they’ve got and how
they can best utilise the supply”
Source: Authors own work

25
 Supply network resilience capabilities Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Larissa Statsenko, Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe and Claudine Soosay Volume 29 · Number 1 · 2024 · 1–26

Appendix 2. Interview guide 6 Strategies applied to recover its supply chains in response
to the COVID-19 outbreak.
1 Current projects in Defence the company is involved in.
7 Strategies to avoid/mitigate disruptions in the future.
2 Industry structure and the nature of supply chains.
8 Capabilities to be developed in the country and what are
3 Example of how one of the core capability/product supply the gaps in meeting the demand for current and future
chains looks like and key considerations for the SC design major Defence projects? (including industry associations).
and management pre-disruption.
4 Parts of the supply chain affected by COVID-19
disruptions and their effects, time to recover, strategies
applied. About the authors
 Critical items/components/capabilities in the supply Larissa Statsenko is Associate Professor of Project
chains that are sourced from overseas that Management at UniSA STEM. Her research focuses on
experienced disruptions. supply chain management including resilience, value chain
 Challenges during the recent COVID-19 outbreak optimization, sustainability, Industry 4.0 and critical minerals
concerned with component supply disruptions, shifts supply chains. Larissa Statsenko is the corresponding author
in demand, resource reallocation, switching supply and can be contacted at: larissa.statsenko@unisa.edu.au
channels, freight, inbound and outbound logistics, Dr Ruchini Senarath Jayasinghe is an Online Course
etc. Facilitator at University of South Australia (UniSA) Online
 Challenges and strategies of finding alternative (STEM). Her research interests are circular economy, reverse
sources/localizing supply chains (e.g. price point and logistics, sustainability and supply chain management.
product/service quality). Claudine Soosay is Associate Professor of Operations and
 Reasons for adopting/not exercising certain Supply Chain Management at UniSA Business. Her research
strategies. focuses on operations and supply chain management, with
5 Strategies applied to anticipate and prepare its supply projects including sustainability, value co-creation, Industry
chains in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. 4.0 and intelligent manufacturing.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

26