Cogent Business & Management

2024, VOL. 11, NO. 1, 2296608

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2296608

MANAGEMENT | RESEARCH ARTICLE

The nexus between digital collaboration, analytics capability and
supply chain resilience of the food processing industry in Jordan
Rawan Odeh Alshawabkeh , Amani Rajab Abu Rumman and Lina Hamdan Al-Abbadi
Business School, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The major aim of the study is to examine the impact of Digital Collaboration (DC) and Received 29 August 2023
Analytics Capability (AC) on Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES). The study used data Revised 12 December
gathered from senior managers of the food processing industry in Jordan using a 2023
Accepted 13 December
self-reported questionnaire designed and distributed to a purposive sample via email. 2023
A purposive sample consisted of 200 managers. To achieve the aim of the study,
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with Partial Least Squares (PLS) was used for KEYWORDS
analysis. Responses used in data analysis composed 71% of the distributed Analytics capability;
questionnaires. The study results supported the hypotheses that AC has positive digital collaboration;
significant effects on DC and visibility of the SCRES while DC shows significant effects supply chain resilience;
food processing industry
on velocity and flexibility of the supply chain. The study contributes to the body of companies; Jordan
knowledge on Resource-based view (RBV) and Supply chain literature by emphasizing
that the AC between companies is a key antecedent of DC as well as AC and DC are REVIEWING EDITOR
crucial prerequisites for organizations to improve their performance by supporting the Pablo Ruiz, Universidad
de Castilla-La Mancha,
resilience of their supply chains. In light of the study results, managers and
Spain
decision-makers need to prioritize and invest in improving their AC and fostering DC
due to their impact on SCRES, which is especially critical considering the increasing SUBJECTS
challenges that organizations are currently facing, the increasing state of uncertainty in Social Sciences;
the external environment, and the limited ability of organizations to predict their ability Economics, Finance,
Business & Industry;
to obtain the resources and production inputs they need. Business, Management
and Accounting;
IMPACT STATEMENT Production, Operations &
In today’s dynamic and unpredictable business environment, the importance of supply Information Management;
chain resilience, analytics capability, and digital collaboration cannot be overstated. These Risk Management;
elements serve as the backbone of organizations striving to thrive in an era marked by Management of
rapid technological advancements, global connectivity, and unforeseen disruptions, such Technology & Innovation
as the recent global health crisis. Our article delves into the critical intersection of these
three vital components and their profound impact on the sustainability and success of
modern businesses. We seek to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field
of supply chain management. Our findings aim to benefit practitioners, researchers,
policymakers, and the broader public by promoting more resilient, efficient, and sustainable
supply chains. In doing so, we hope to inspire organizations to embrace the transformative
potential of analytics capability and digital collaboration, ultimately strengthening supply
chain resilience in an increasingly interconnected world.

1. Introduction
Supply chains around the world have been exposed to many severe disruptions and disasters, some of
which were caused by external sources, which were in the form of natural hazards such as earthquakes,
floods, fires, and tsunamis, and some were unnatural such as wars, terrorist attacks, SARS, financial crises,
geopolitical crises, and most recently, the COVID-19 crisis (Dubey et al., 2023; Ivanov, 2018; Ponomarov
& Holcomb, 2009), as well as from internal sources, such as the loss of an exceptionally vital supplier, or

CONTACT Rawan Odeh Alshawabkeh r.alshawabkeh@ammanu.edu.jo Business School, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman 19111,
Jordan
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been
published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
2 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

inefficient supply chain integration. These can lead to undesirable effects such as increased costs, losses,
and market share decline (Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009; Yazdanparast et al., 2021). One of the most
affecting disruptions to supply chains was COVID-19, which appeared at the beginning of 2020 and led
to an unprecedented situation that affected all aspects of human life more than ever (Al-Shbail et al.,
2021; Wadaa & AlAdamat, 2020). COVID-19 caused instability and disturbances to supply chains by cre-
ating an imbalance between supply and demand for many vital facilities and activities (AlAmayreh, 2020;
Alomoush, 2021; Al-Shbail et al., 2021; Ivanov & Dolgui, 2020).
Today’s supply chains are a complex network of firms and are more vulnerable to volatile disturbances
than in the past (Yazdanparast et al., 2021). The good performance of the supply chain of manufacturers
is a vital component for financial success and the achievement of company objectives, whereas the
effectiveness and robustness of the supply chain that will attain a competitive advantage of the organi-
zation (Ivanov et al., 2019). However, the size, scope and construction of supply chains, and their global
nature, make them susceptible increasingly to many disturbances (Grzybowska & Stachowiak, 2022). This
requires that supply chains operate in an uninterrupted manner, which means that they must be resilient
to sudden changes, and must be workable, this is possible through monitoring and responding to dis-
ruptions (Yazdanparast et al., 2021). Thus, it was imperative to take proactive solutions and identify strat-
egies that allow the supply chain to recover and return to its original state or even transfer it to its
better functional state (Jüttner & Maklan, 2011).
Supply chain resilience (SCRES) enables organizations to be prepared for unforeseen events mitigates
the impact of disruptions and improves the ability to recover quickly from them. This is accomplished
by maintaining continuity at the level of interdependence while retaining control, over the structure and
function (Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009; Scholten & Schilder, 2015). The importance of SCRES and robust-
ness, as capabilities for companies to effectively handle disruptions is garnering attention from both
academia and industry (Li et al., 2023). SCRES defined as the capability to respond to disturbances
through adequate preparation ahead of time and maintaining continuity of operations (Ponomarov &
Holcomb, 2009).
Based on this, the experimental and conceptual literature shed light on many capabilities that help
the survival and adaptation of the supply chain and its durability in the face of changes, continuous
disturbances, and external shocks. Some studies focused on the importance of collaborative capabilities
to build and improve a resilient supply chain, such as (Jüttner & Maklan, 2011; Scholten & Schilder, 2015),
and other studies focused on the importance of data analysis and its role in enhancing SCRES and pro-
tecting it from sudden interruptions (Dubey et al., 2021).
In today’s economy that based on information technology, digital technology that plays an increasing
role in everyone’s daily life, the analytics capability (AC) has become essential these days and is high on
the agenda and priorities of the company to improve its decision-making abilities (Dubey et al., 2021).
Many companies embark on digital transformations, they will often need to acquire and build data ana-
lytics capabilities to fundamentally change their decision-making processes (Dremel et al., 2017).
According to Barney (2001), the resource-based theory provides better clarity for investigating the power
of the AC because it assumes that an organization typically consists of a series of unique resources and
capabilities it possesses and how it organizes and uses resources that allow it to achieve significant
competitive advantages. The AC of the organization affects the ambidexterity and speed of the supply
chain, which then affects the company’s performance.
The rapid increase of Internet use in the previous decades has impressively contributed to bringing
about a major change in various organizations, their practices, activities, and functions. Digital collabora-
tion (DC) in organizations today has undergone a major change because of the use of the Internet,
communications, and information technology, which contributed to the escalation of organizational per-
formance. With the increasing challenges and disruptions faced by supply chains, companies cannot
respond to such challenges on their own. They need to work and collaborate with their supply chain
partners to be better equipped to deal with such challenges and enhance the resilience of supply chains.
Therefore, companies must focus on improving cooperation, the speed of interactions, and the inte-
gration of operations with their partners in the supply chain in order to be able to create a resilient
supply chain that is able to continue and avoid shocks and interruptions. Through collaboration, infor-
mation can flow smoothly and quickly between each member and actor of the supply chain through
 Cogent Business & Management 3

communication about the presence of a need to change plans, change orders, improve the quality of
information, or what is related to production, inventory, and transportation issues (Banomyong, 2018).
This collaboration includes the exchange of information and data. Always and in any context, collab-
oration arises from the interactions of people and different entities. In the current era, this requires
automated skills along with personal skills, which may be innate and appear in style and personality to
enhance collaboration, which is greatly influenced using technological means. The topics of collabora-
tion, learning and knowledge represent basic pillars in the light of the digital society, which intersect at
many points and affect each other (Sorrentino & Pettenati, 2014). However, optimizing digitally driven
SCRES is not only about adopting specific digital technologies to reduce risk but also integrating digital
technologies into the entire SCRES system and creating a digital resilience management framework.
Furthermore, some literature suggests that digitalization and SCRES can contribute to higher levels of
performance (Zhao et al., 2023a). Digital transformation has a significant impact on SCRES (Yuan et al.,
2023). The role of collaboration in the resilience of manufacturing companies is a controversial topic that
deserves investigation. Collaboration between manufacturers and suppliers includes the development of
relevant plans, proposed solutions, and actions for the strategy final supply chain. Moreover, they must
jointly assume related responsibilities so that cooperative enterprises can coordinate, and every link can
be seamlessly connected (Yang, 2023). This is because cooperative relationships and partnerships help
companies remain flexible, resilient, and adaptable to change through engaging in information sharing,
cooperative communication, and joint efforts, which enhances the SCRES in terms of its velocity, visibility,
and flexibility (Scholten & Schilder, 2015).
The impact of the food processing industry on human health is direct, influencing aspects such as
nutrition and potential food hazards (Haddad, 2020). The growth and sustainability of medium and small
enterprises within this sector hinge on the thorough training and education of their human resources in
food safety measures and laboratory testing. Despite being a heavily regulated field under the consistent
scrutiny of the Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA), it comprises a significant number of infor-
mal small businesses. These businesses, including home-based enterprises, farm operations, and small
shops specializing in dairy products, Arabic sweets, jams, pickles, and more, are predominantly dispersed
around Amman and in various governorates. Across its 11 sub-sectors, alongside fresh produce and ani-
mal husbandry, the processed food industry employed approximately 49,935 workers in 2017. With rev-
enues reaching JOD 4.112 billion in 2016, it constituted 6.3% of the gross domestic product (GDP). In
2017, the sector’s exports amounted to JOD 524.8 million, making up 10.2% of Jordan’s total industrial
exports. The sector’s significance stems from its high level of diversity, encompassing businesses of all
sizes; over 95% are Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), with 80% falling under the category
of micro and small enterprises. Its importance is further accentuated by its forward and backward link-
ages in the economy, degree of integration, and the added value generated through these connections.
Contributing 25.9% to the net added value within Jordan’s industrial economy, the sector has evolved
into a strategic player in both the industrial and agricultural realms (Hundaileh & Fayad, 2019).
Since the food processing sector is one of the vital and crucial sectors in Jordan, serving as a pillar
for the Jordanian economy and a leading sector in exporting to foreign markets, it was necessary to
explore the antecedents and capacities that were previously represented to fortify the SCRES, enhancing
its sustainability, especially for this crucial sector. This enables organizations to maintain their logistical
operations without interruption or disruption. Hence, this study aims to explore and assess the impact
of AC and DC on SCRES of the food processing industry in Jordan, with a focus on three key dimensions.
First, it will investigate the extent of DC by examining the extent of collaboration based on the use of
communication tools and platforms and information sharing within the organization and among supply
chain stakeholders. Second, the study will assess the AC of the organizations, concentrating on the use
of data analytics tools to enhance decision-making processes throughout the supply chain. Third, it will
explore the current level of SCRES, identifying antecedents that may impact the organizations’ response
to disruptions. Additionally, the study will delve into the interconnections between DC, AC, and SCRES
to understand their synergies and contributions to challenges within the industry. It specifically aims to
evaluate the effectiveness of advanced analytics tools in bolstering the food processing industry’s supply
chain resilience by anticipating and responding to potential disruptions. The investigation will also focus
on the role of DC platforms in enhancing real-time communication and information sharing among
4 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

stakeholders within the food processing supply chain, with a particular emphasis on improving velocity,
visibility, and overall flexibility during disruptions. The study will explore the influence of robust AC mea-
sures on the effectiveness of digital collaboration within the food processing supply chain. Furthermore,
it will analyze the outcomes of AC and DC to identify vulnerabilities in the food processing supply chain
to mitigate risks specific to the food processing industry. Key performance indicators related to AC and
DC effectiveness within the food processing industry will be defined and assessed to provide insights
into the success of implemented strategies in enhancing overall supply chain resilience. Furthermore, the
study will identify best practices and successful strategies employed by industry leaders to enhance DC,
AC, and overall SCRES. Finally, the study will propose recommendations to improve the integration of DC
and AC, aiming to strengthen supply chain resilience within the specific context of the food processing
industry in Jordan.
In the current unpredictable environment, it is crucial to enhance SCRES effectively. This is particularly
significant as the AC and DC maintain a robust connection with SCRES. Specifically, only a few studies have
examined the impact of AC on SCRES, and less attention has been paid to the impact of the DC on SCRES.
As a result, prior research has predominantly concentrated on either investigating the influence of collabo-
ration on SCRES or examining the impact of digitization on SCRES (for instance, Li et al., 2023; Dubey et al.,
2023; Umar & Wilson, 2021; Scholten & Schilder, 2015). Other studies have delved into the effects of AC on
specific facets of SCRES, such as flexibility and velocity (Botes et al., 2017). However, only a limited number
of studies have endeavored to delineate the dimensions, subdimensions, and comprehensively model their
holistic impact on supply chain performance (Wamba & Akter, 2019). To address this gap, this study formu-
lates and validates the AC and DC. It evaluates their direct influence on SCRES by estimating the significance
of various dimensions and subdimensions within these capabilities, elucidating their overall effects on SCRES.
The rest of our study is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews related literature in more detail and
develops our hypotheses. Section 3 focuses on study methods, including study sample, data collection,
measurement, and study model. Section 4 presents the data analysis and results. Section 5 summarizes
study results, discusses the theoretical and practical implications, and presents limitations and recom-
mendations for future research.

2. literature review and hypotheses development

This study draws upon two key theories, namely the Resource-Based View (RBV) and Dynamic Capability
Theory (DCT). Originally proposed by Barney (1991), the RBV serves as a strategic tool to elucidate the
creation and sustenance of competitive advantage. It contends that disparities between competing firms
stem from each firm’s distinctive ability to identify and cultivate a bundle of valuable, rare, inimitable,
and non-substitutable resources. Despite its significance in supply chain management. The Dynamic
Capability Theory (DCT) emphasizes a firm’s capacity to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and
external resources to adapt in volatile markets (Teece et al., 1997; Teece, 2014).
The incorporation of Resource-Based Theory (RBT) assumes a critical role in delineating the relation-
ships within our model. RBT serves as a valuable framework that allows us to scrutinize the distinctive
resources and capabilities inherent in Analytical Capability (AC) and Digital Collaboration (DC) and their
subsequent impact on Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES). This vantage point proves indispensable in com-
prehending how organizations can harness their unique competencies to bolster resilience in the face of
uncertainties. Additionally, our exploration of Dynamic Capabilities Theory (DCT) has been expanded to
shed light on its influence over the relationships posited in our study. In a dynamic environment, dynamic
analytics capabilities and digital collaboration become crucial for supply chain flexibility and adaptability.
Hence, this study asserts that AC and DC are complementary dynamic capabilities, contributing to sus-
tainable competitive advantage by leveraging data-driven insights for enhanced SCRES.

2.1. Digital collaboration

The Web can offer a way to establish and improve long-term relationships and collaborative work through
the development and delivery of innovative products, cutting-edge services, and complex models to
 Cogent Business & Management 5

achieve customer satisfaction. Collaboration is supported at the individual, group, and organizational
levels (Zwass, 2003). Gursoy et al. (2015) defined that the collaboration as a deep collective fortitude to
achieve common objectives through sharing the knowledge, continuous learning, and harmony creation
between two or more organizations.
Hardwig and Weißmann (2021) described the Digital collaboration (DC) as the amount of employee
cooperation with each other through the use of digital media to accomplish the tasks and works required
of them. It is certain that this will have many advantages, but the work can become more complex with
the presence of digital cooperation, as it requires the introduction of new tools and processes, and thus
increases the requirements of self-organization.
Zwass (2003) believes that DC can be enabled inside and outside an organization by integrating
means and tools of e-mail, web-based group support systems, and web-based workflow systems with
task-specific software that supports computer-aided design (CAD), simulation, and visualization.
Collaboration within an organization can be conducted via an intranet, and collaboration between orga-
nizations via extranets or the open Internet. Emmanuel et al. (2018) believes that the adoption of digital
technology in product delivery is seen as DC.
Collaboration through the web achieves many advantages at both levels (interorganizational and
intraorganizational collaboration) including the rapid response to changes in the environment, respond-
ing quickly to market opportunities and reversals, expansion of organizational knowledge with accom-
panying economies of time and capital, and extending the client in order to ensure responsive and
reflective conceptual design for suppliers (Zwass, 2003). As for Inter-organizational cooperation is con-
cerned with the transfer, collection and exchange of knowledge, technology, assets and business pro-
cesses, which helps organizations achieve much better results than if they worked separately (Greasley
et al., 2008). Moreover, collaboration helps the organizations to take advantage from distant and hard-to-
reach markets, which leads to increase the organizational visibility (Gursoy et al., 2015).
Digital technology that encourages different types of communication between individuals and orga-
nizations by assisting the generation, storing, and processing of data (AlMkaneen, 2021; Ibem & Laryea,
2014), which leads to reduced time, efforts, and costs due to enabling the Internet to bring about coop-
eration and the development of organizations and their transition to digital spaces and the seamless
exchange of data and information (Antonelli et al., 2015). Moreover, Lindquist (2018) pointed that the
use of visual communication between different stakeholders and decision makers can expand their
knowledge and capabilities related to understanding, thinking, inspiring, collaborating and reflecting.
All this led to the emergence of the term of ‘collective intelligence’ which is the use of a set of strat-
egies that seek to achieve collective positive results through continuous interactions between groups
through the digital space (Malone et al., 2010). DC acts as a facilitator for innovation, and it also helps
to integrate people, groups, and institutions into the supply chain (Shen et al., 2009), and this can be
achieved by facilitating and organizing cooperation between people with different experiences, and
online networks can help in creative problem-solving (Yu et al., 2012).
Therefore, in our study, we will define DC as the amount of use of digital media inside and outside
the organization, that is, between members or partners of the supply chain, and the extent of their use
of it during their cooperation to achieve common goals.

2.2. Analytics capability

Analytics capability (AC) has been increasingly studied by many researchers. There are many AC defi-
nitions in the previous literature, for Wu et al. (2020), AC refer to the ability to analyze, convert, and
process data into valuable and useful information to support decision-making process, by providing
worthwhile insights, and revealing patterns may improve by artificial intelligence and digitization, it
involves successful adaptation of data, data-related technologies, and data-related human resources.
AC is defined as the ability of an organization to deploy data and information related resources
(Gupta & George, 2016). The AC has been used to describe organizational competencies that enable
the organizations to gather, store, accumulate, visualize, and process data to develop beneficial per-
ceptions that can attain the competitiveness, through the use of a set of tools, techniques and
6 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

processes that enable managers to make the right decisions in efficient and effective way (Dubey
et al., 2021).
As proposed by Barney (2001), AC clearly involves identification of data resources, data warehousing,
and data analytics, which represents the development of intangible organizational resources. Trkman
et al. (2010) define AC as the ‘application of various advanced analytic techniques to data to answer
questions or solve problems’. The importance of AC can be determined by the ability to improve decision
models, analyze cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of inputs and outputs, better identify potential mar-
ket opportunities, and improve the communication relationship between different business units and
different functions within the organization (Khattab et al., 2022), which enhancing customer experiences
(Elia et al., 2022).
Previous studies have confirmed that realizing the commercial value of big data due to its AC, they
emphasize that it depends not only on data quality but also on the quality of data collection, storage,
and analysis process. They also point out that the ability of AC includes the intangible ability to support
the business decisions of organizations (Khattab et al., 2022).
Returning to many of the prior literatures, it can be said that AC consists of technical, administrative
and organizational dimensions. The technical dimension of AC includes the use of cutting-edge techno-
logical tools and expertise related to data acquisition and storage, data software and data visualization,
and various types of AC. The managerial dimension includes human knowledge regarding data and data
analysis, including managerial, domain, and organizational knowledge and experience. The organizational
dimension of AC is related to organizational structure, learning, and culture. AC related to utilizing data
generated by different information systems for decision support, solving business problems, achieving
strategic goals, and for identifying new problems or solutions from data, which are not usually seen by
the business in their normal operations (Madhala et al., 2023).
Depending on as suggested by Sincorá et al. (2018a) and Sincorá et al. (2018b) where AC conceptu-
alized as a construct consist of three dimensions:

• Statistical abilities refer to the ability to use quantitative data by developing logical, critical, and
analytical thinking about organizational reality.
• Business capabilities related to the ability to identify problems, develop solutions, and implement
them, which helps to make the right decisions based on data and facts, and develop expression and
communication compatible with the business environment.
• Information technology capabilities and proficiency related to the ability to use computer modeling
to benefit from the operation of machines and information systems.

2.3. Supply chain resilience

Recently, the importance of supply chain resilience (SCRES) was at the forefront of minds for managers
and decision makers in todays’ organizations, especially because of the effects of Covid-19 on various
societies (Elwood, 2021). The first famous study on SCRES was launched in the early 2000s, resulting in
the disturbances to transport triggered by petroleum complaints and the eruption Diseases. Next that,
experts from the Cranfield University dealing with the issue of resilience, which required in-depth and
detailed research on the issue of flexibility and the ability to maintain logistical supplies (Pettit et al.,
2010). SCRES increases as capability increases and as vulnerability to disturbances decreases (Yazdanparast
et al., 2021), more and more organizations paid attention to it.
SCRES has been defined in many literatures as the adaptive capacity of the Supply Chain to reduce
the likelihood of encountering sudden disruptions or any unexpected events, resisting the spread of
disruptions by maintaining control over structures and functions, and recover and respond by immediate
and effective reactive plans to transcend the disturbance and restore the supply chain to a maintain the
continuity of operations while retaining the system’s basic function and structure (Carvalho et al., 2012;
Christopher & Peck, 2004; Holling, 1973; Kamalahmadi & Parast, 2016; Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009;
Yazdanparast et al., 2021). Ivanov (2018) defined SCRES as the ability to sustain, perform and recuperate
or adapt planned implementation along with achievement of the planned performance. As Tan et al.
 Cogent Business & Management 7

(2019) pointed that SCRES is the ability of a supply chain (SC) to resist disturbances and recuperate its
operational capability after disturbances. Whereas Hosseini et al. (2019) indicated that the degree of SC
resilience is based on its vulnerability (Vol) and recoverability (ReC). Similarly, Melnyk et al. (2014) defined
it as the ability of a supply chain to both resist disturbances and recover operative capability after dis-
turbances happen.
The SC can be resilient if it is capable of captivating the undesirable effects of unpredicted turbu-
lences and unexpected risk events to be prepared for, less vulnerable to supply chain disruptions,
responding and recovering quickly from them by being more proficient of absorbing more shock result-
ing from supply chain disturbance in order to increase customer satisfaction, financial performance, and
its market share (Hohenstein et al., 2015; Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009).
Different authors identified multiple phases of SCRES, we can summarize them as follows in Table 1.
Researchers have been dealt with SCRES from various points of view, but there is a clear agreement
between them, which most of the literature indicated that the SCRES contains of many measurements,
and the Table 2 shows the subdimensions adopted by the researchers in different research environments,
which are as follows.
Upon reviewing the multiple perspectives of SCRES in the previous literatures that were addressed by
researchers, it became evident that the three dimensions (velocity, visibility, and flexibility) are the most
frequently recurring in prior research that explored the topic of SCRES. Furthermore, they are appropriate
for the study population. As part of the analysis, the study excluded collaboration after confirming the
adoption of DC as an independent variable, assuming its impact on SCRES. The following is an explana-
tion of the concepts of each of the three sub-dimensions adopted in the study:

• Velocity (VEL):
Velocity refers to the total time it takes to move product and materials from one end of the supply
chain to the other’ (Datta, 2017; Riglietti et al., 2021). Jüttner and Maklan (2011) defined it as the
spewed of the supply chain can react to any market changes or possible events. Velocity places a
strong emphasis on the supply chain’s response and recovery efficiency.
• Visibility (VIS):
Riglietti et al. (2021) stated that visibility is a clear view of upstream and downstream inventories,
demand and supply conditions, and production and purchasing schedules’ also they divided it into:
Visibility over disruptive events (VoE), Visibility over risks (VoR), Visibility over suppliers’ activities and
performance (VoS). Jüttner and Maklan (2011) defined it as the extent to which supply chain actors
have the ability or access to share the SC operations’ information, management and other actors
consider as being useful to their operations.
• Flexibility (FLX):
One of the three main ways to build SCRES, Fayezi et al. (2017) define it as the operating capability
of the supply chain and its main associates or partners to be sensitive to the slight or major envi-
ronmental changes, appropriately make a decision about real circumstances, rapidly change with
little effort and cost, and finally, make an effective integration of supply chain relationship to control
the system. Jüttner and Maklan (2011) defined it as the ease of supply chain to change its possible
options and the degree of the heterogeneity between the options in order to adapt or cope with a
range of market dangers or possible events while performing comparably well.

Table 1. The multiple phases of SCRES.

Author(s) (Year) SCRES phases
Pettit et al. (2010) Respond, Recover, and Grow
Jüttner and Maklan (2011) Respond and Recover
Ponomarov and Holcomb (2009); Readiness, Response and Recovery
Al-Hakimi and Borade (2020);
Goaill and Al-Hakimi (2021)
Hohenstein et al. (2015) Readiness, Response, Recovery and Growth
Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016) Anticipation, Resistance, Recovery and Responses
Hendry et al. (2019) Pre-disruption, During disruption and Post-disruption
Ali et al. (2017)
Wieland and Durach (2021) Adaptability, Transformability, Foreseeing and Influencing developments that occur outside of the supply chain
Zhao et al. (2023b) Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Adaptation for the future
 8

Table 2. Different perspectives of SCRES measures.

Author(s)
R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

(Year) SCRES measures

Building
Information Knowledge Situation Contingency Market Social
Velocity Visibility Flexibility Collaboration Agility Alignment Sharing Redundancy Leadership Innovation Traceability Management Preparedness Awareness Robustness Security Planning Position Capital
Jüttner & √ √ √ √
Maklan
(2011)
Scholten and √ √ √
Schilder
(2015)
Mandal et al. √ √ √ √
(2016)
Ahimbisibwe √ √ √
et al.
(2016)
Ali et al. √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
(2017)
Riglietti et al. √ √ √ √
(2021)
Juan et al. √ √ √ √
(2022)
Shen & Sun √ √ √
(2023)
Zhao et al. √ √ √ √ √
(2023b)
Zhao et al. √ √ √ √ √ √ √
(2023c)
Mawonde √ √ √
et al.
(2023)
Frequency 6 7 8 7 4 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
 Cogent Business & Management 9

2.4. Digital collaboration and supply chain resilience

Recently, organizations are increasingly investing in building supply chain resilience (SCRES) in the wake
of disruptions caused by natural disasters, geopolitical crises, and pandemics. The positive impact of
digitization and the creation of a more open environment has brought about many beneficial changes.
Despite this, different countries have shown varying degrees of digital responsiveness during the pan-
demic as they try to deal with the effects of different COVID strains (Dubey et al., 2023). However, firms
cannot respond to such challenges on their own. They need to work with their supply chain partners
and stakeholders. However, to be better equipped in dealing with such challenges. Entering alliances and
collaborating with supply chain partners can help reinforce the resiliency of supply chains. At the heart
of this collaboration is the sharing of information and data. Improving levels of collaboration can also be
considered as part of a risk mitigation strategy when developing resilient supply chains (Banomyong, 2018).
As a result of the COVID-19 crisis, the role of emerging technologies has increased significantly in all
parts of life (Dubey et al., 2023; Mahdi, 2021). Despite the increase in popularity of the role of digital
technologies especially during the COVID-19 crisis in enhancing SCRES, it remains poorly understood
both in theory and its application (Dubey et al., 2023). Present day supply chains are global, global sup-
ply chains require sophisticated capabilities to monitor, report, adapt and analyze the flow of events that
occur. To be able to manage such events, collaboration with partners and suppliers of products and
services is required to shift from a ‘plan and do’ to a ‘sense and respond’ way of operating
(Banomyong, 2018).
Furthermore, Dubey et al. (2023) found that it is crucial to enhancing SCRES by enhancing digital
adaptability and agility. However, the organizations have to enhance SCRES to remain competitive in the
digital era through developing their digital abilities and adaptabilities.
Botes et al. (2017) confirmed the importance of collaborative communication and information sharing
in impending supply chain disruptions. Thus, the organization has the flexibility which gives it enough
time to coordinate other supply chain resources to achieve the desired result. Here, the importance of
collective learning from past disruptions in gaining insight and prompting managers some insight into
how joint retrospective learning from disruptive events allows the supply chain owner to quickly identify
impending disruption. Supply chain practitioners should be aware that collaboration with suppliers
should not aim directly at increasing flexibility. Several resilience scholars point to the collaboration of
organizational capabilities that provide the potential to overcome disturbances and disruptions in the
supply chain (Banomyong, 2018).
Li et al. (2023) showed that the digitization is positively related to SCRES, and supply chain collabora-
tion can directly facilitate both resilience and robustness, and they confirmed the mediating role of sup-
ply chain collaboration on the relationship between digitization and SCRES. Furthermore, their study
reveals only an indirect mediating effect of supply chain collaboration on the relationship between dig-
itization and supply chain robustness. Although digitization cannot directly improve supply chain robust-
ness, there is a significant indirect effect of digitization on supply chain robustness through supply chain
collaboration.
Further to this, digitization provides the digital infrastructure for collaboration among supply chain
partners, thus enabling firms to share risk information and respond quickly to changes in the environ-
ment (Li et al., 2023; Scholten & Schilder, 2015). When disruptions threaten the operation of the supply
chain system, companies can be incentivized to work with suppliers and customers with shared goals to
maintain original supply chain performance, which further helps in dealing with risks and improving
resilience, robustness, and durability (Li et al., 2023).
Umar and Wilson (2021) confirmed the role of active collaboration both vertically and horizontally
within networks for enhancing the SCRES. At the vertical level, buyers and suppliers cooperate, and on
the horizontal level, there is clear cooperation between actors at the same level (such as different whole-
salers in the same market, working together) and the government. Collaboration appears to be a key
component for the overall supply chain system to survive and thrive in difficult times.
Dremel et al. (2017) showed that collaboration will be as antecedent for resilience construct, so col-
laborative activities can lead to a resilient supply chain. Hence, previous studies show that collaboration
is important for optimizing response and mitigating the effects of disruption. Consequently, collaboration
10 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

does not directly, but indirectly lead to a more resilient supply chain, as it is not a construct of resilience,
but an antecedent of visibility, velocity, and flexibility.
Based on the proceeding discussion, it was expected that DC is positively related to SCRES dimen-
sions. Hence, the following three hypotheses were proposed based on the preceding discussions:
H1: Digital collaboration (DC) is positively related to supply chain velocity (VEL).

H2: Digital collaboration (DC) is positively related to supply chain visibility (VIS).

H3: Digital collaboration (DC) is positively related to supply chain flexibility (FLX).

2.5. Analytics capability and supply chain resilience

Analytics capabilities facilitate the evaluation of operational alternatives when there are fluctuations in demand
or supply lacks, and to improve resources and cost-saving measures to reduce the supply and demand imbal-
ance (Laguir et al., 2023). Srinivasan and Swink (2018) argue that data analytics enable organizations to gather
data from various sources. Hence, this will increase the capacity of information processing.
Few studies have dealt with AC and SCRES, Dubey et al. (2021) found that there is positive relation-
ship between AC and SCRES, their study results propose the importance of AC as a complementary
competency of the organization that often works under high complexity and uncertainties. Hence, the
use of data technology which might support decision makers to identify probable threats, dangers, or
sources of disturbance so they can develop business continuity plans that may help to pace the recovery
process in the event of disruption is occurred. As Frederico (2021) concluded that advanced technologies
(e.g. Big Data, Artificial Intelligence, cyber-physicalbiotech) may play a vital role for SCRES and respon-
siveness for any disruption happenings. Srinivasan and Swink’s (2018) reported that the mixture of AC
and organizational flexibility have a positive impact on competitive advantage and SCRES. Whereby,
organizations that are proficient in increasing visibility of the demand and supply chain can build potent
and efficient systems and processes that support AC, so they deal with the two terms as a complemen-
tary term to each other. In the same vein, Jüttner and Maklan (2011) confirmed that the supply chain
visibility could decrease the harmful impact of a supply chain disturbance.
The results of Al-Shbail et al. (2021) found that the AC had significant effects on overcoming supply
chain disruptions and enhancing the sustainability of supply chains during such situations, in addition to
providing high-value and distinguished services to society.
Such studies (e.g. El Baz & Ruel, 2021; Wang et al., 2016) emphasized that companies can apply digital
technologies (for example, big data analytics) to monitor supply chain operations in real time, identify
sources of supply chain disruption risks, identify root causes of problems and defects, and thereby
develop effective risk prevention plans. It was suggested that AC could be used to manage safety stocks
that help absorb the negative impact of supply chain risk (Roßmann et al., 2018).
Figure 1 shows how smart data is collected across industrial supply chains. Data is collected from each
member of the supply chain synchronously and then stored in a cloud, to be analyzed and results
extracted. The results are then shared simultaneously with all members of the supply chain to make
informed, fast, and accurate decisions. This results in the smart factory capable of:

• Schedule production based on real-time demand data from retail stores and orders from smart
homes/customers.
• Reflection of raw material requirements at the supplier point automatically,
• The ability to see the manufacturer of the possible delivery date.
• Recognizing any disruption along the supply chain immediately, giving the company the opportu-
nity to use mitigation measures to avoid damages (Mageto, 2021).

Laguir et al. (2023) added that the AC of an Organization had significant effect on both Supply Chain
Disruption Orientation (SCDO) and SCRES under environmental uncertainty in order to achieve the desired
operational performance. However, under the moderation of environmental uncertainty, the link between
AC of an Organization and SCRES was supported, and this further enhanced operational performance.
 Cogent Business & Management 11

Figure 1. Smart data collection across a manufacturing supply chain adopted from (Mageto, 2021, P. 5).

Consequently, it was believed that AC had a positive impact on SCRES, in order to test that impact,
the following hypotheses were formulated:
H4: Analytics capability (AC) is positively related to supply chain velocity (VEL).

H5: Analytics capability (AC) is positively related to supply chain visibility (VIS).

H6: Analytics capability (AC) is positively related to supply chain flexibility (FLX).

2.6. Analytics capability and Digital collaboration

Several authors note that many companies around the world have adopted the analytics approach– also
known as Business Analytics – as a competitive differentiator in their operations (Milhomem et al., 2022).
According to Baah et al. (2022), information sharing is a vital method to improve supply chain visibility,
collaboration, agility, and performance. Galbraith (1974) concluded that the development such external
relations increases the organizational capacity of information processes. Hence, the convenience of rele-
vant, precise, and well-timed data from supply chain partners enables organizations to increase
information-processing capacity and develop valuable insights. Organizations may utilize obtainable
insights to advance the SCRES and increase their competitiveness.
Wiengarten et al. (2016) indicated that when analyzing the factors that precede collaborative advan-
tage, it is possible to identify indicators that indicate that AC elements provide for the emergence of
relational performance, which is a joint benefit that accumulates for cooperative partners through the
combination, exchange, and development of idiosyncratic resources. That is, it focuses on the co-creation
of value in the binary relationship (Wiengarten et al., 2016; Milhomem et al., 2022).
According to Gold et al. (2020), there is a suspicion that the effect of using AC in generating collab-
orative advantage, in the context of contract management, may not occur or be directly understood.
Improve visibility and processing of information, as well as increase predictive ability comes from the
analytical approach, which has three main distinct influences Aspects: in reducing the opportunism of
12 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

the agents involved in the relationship, in Information asymmetries and in contract control costs – affect-
ing Generate a competitive advantage (Gold et al., 2020; Milhomem et al., 2022).
The empirical results of Milhomem et al. (2022) study showed that the business analytics (BA) acts as
antecedents of collaborative advantage. In line with this discussion, the results of Ji et al. (2022) study
found that there was a relationship between AC implemented individually or jointly (by both firms) and
cooperation mode (loose or tight mode). Furthermore, Redmond et al. (2012) confirmed that the exchang-
ing of information, data security and protection are also important to ensure effective DC and facilitating it.
It was noted on the ground of literature review conducted in different environments, that there is a lack of
studies that carried out to test the effect of AC on DC. To investigate that effect, it was hypothesized that:
H7: Analytics capability (AC) is positively related to Digital collaboration (DC).

3. Study methods
3.1. Study sample and data collection
The population of the study consisted of (200) senior managers working in food processing industry
firms in Jordan accepted our investigation invitation. A purposive sample was used for the present study.
Respondents’ profile can be seen in Table 3. Data were collected by a questionnaire developed for the
purpose of the current study using a 5-point Likert scale in which 1 refers to ‘strongly disagree’, 2 rep-
resents ‘disagree’, 3 denotes ‘neutral’, 4 refers to ‘agree’, and 5 signifies ‘strongly agree’. 200 questionnaires
were distributed and due to incomplete or inaccurate responses, the total number of (142) question-
naires were suitable to analysis requirement, yielding a 71% effective response rate.

3.2. Measurements
A self-reported questionnaire was used as the study instrument. The study used Analytics Capability (AC)
was assessed using three items (Laguir et al., 2023; Milhomem et al., 2022; Sincorá et al., 2018a; 2018b).
Digital Collaboration (DC) was measured using three items (Chierici et al., 2021; Easley et al., 2003;
Gopinathan et al., 2022; Saputra et al., 2021). Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES) consists of three dimen-
sions: visibility, velocity, and flexibility (Scholten & Schidler, 2015; Mandal et al., 2016). The first dimen-
sions were measured by three items: Visibility over disruptive events (VoE2), Visibility over risks (VoR3),
and Visibility over suppliers’ activities and performance (VoS4) (Riglietti et al., 2021). The second one was
evaluated by three items: Supply chain decision-making speed (VEL2), Product launch speed (VEL3), and
Product delivery speed (VEL4) (Juan et al., 2022). Finally, flexibility was assessed via two items: Supply
chain activities flexibility (e.g. sourcing flexibility, operating system flexibility, distribution flexibility) (FLX1)
and Information system flexibility (FLX2) (Juan et al., 2022).
The following Table 4 illustrates a description of all the sub-variables covered in the study:

3.3. Study model

Figure 2 shows the conceptual model of the study. It exhibits seven proposed hypotheses between
research variables (H1-H7).

Table 3. Participants’ profile.

Variables Categories Frequency Percent
Gender Male 43 30.3
Female 99 69.7
Education Undergraduate 118 83.1
Graduate 24 16.9
Designation Assistant Manager 24 16.9
Manager 51 35.9
Senior Manager 55 38.7
Deputy Manager 12 8.50
Years of Experience 1–5 years 51 35.9
5–10 years 48 33.8
More than 10 years 43 30.3
Table 4. Variables descriptions.
Main variables Operational definition Items Operational definition/ description
Analytics Capability (AC) Analytics capability pertains to an organization’s competence and Statistical Abilities Statistical proficiency involves utilizing quantitative data to cultivate logical,
ability to employ data analytics tools, methodologies, and critical, and analytical thinking regarding organizational dynamics (Sincorá
techniques for extracting valuable insights, facilitating informed et al., 2018a; 2018b)
decision-making, and securing a competitive edge (Khattab Business Capabilities Business competencies encompass the capacity to identify issues, formulate
et al., 2022; Wu et al., 2020). solutions, and execute them to make well-informed decisions (Sincorá et al.,
2018a; 2018b).
Information Technology Proficiency in information technology pertains to the skill in utilizing computer
Capabilities modeling to leverage the functioning of machinery and information systems
(Sincorá et al., 2018a; 2018b).
Digital Collaboration (DC) Digital collaboration between workers and internal and external Sharing Resources Sharing Resources refers to the evaluation revolves around the willingness of
partners is the collaboration involves the use of organizations to collaborate with each other rely on digital tools to meet
technology-driven platforms, tools, and systems to facilitate many of their collaborative needs (Chierici et al., 2021; Saputra et al., 2021).
seamless and interactive communication, coordination, and Collaboration Quality Collaboration quality denotes the degree of effectiveness, efficiency, and
cooperation for intra-/inter-organizations to accomplish joint satisfaction achieved in the collaborative efforts facilitated by digital
tasks (Chierici et al., 2021; Saputra et al., 2021). technologies (Saputra et al., 2021).
Adoption of Digital Collaborative The adoption of digital collaborative tools pertains to the degree to which
Tools technological platforms and tools are utilized to ease communication, share
information, and engage in collaborative work (Chierici et al., 2021;
Gopinathan et al., 2022; Saputra et al., 2021).
Supply Chain Resilience Supply chain resilience refers to the capability of a supply chain to Visibility Visibility is a comprehensive evaluation of the extent to which relevant
(SCRES) effectively anticipate, adapt to, respond to, and recover from stakeholders can observe and comprehend the flow of products, information,
disruptions, ensuring the uninterrupted flow of goods, services, and processes throughout the supply chain (Jüttner & Maklan, 2011; Riglietti
and information (Hohenstein et al., 2015; Ponomarov & Holcomb, et al., 2021).
2009). Its dimensions:
• Visibility over disruptive events (VoE2)
• Visibility over risks (VoR3)
• Visibility over suppliers’ activities and performance (VoS4) (Riglietti et al.,
2021).
Velocity Velocity is the comprehensive measure of the time taken for the transportation
of products and materials across different segments of the supply chain
(Datta, 2017; Riglietti et al., 2021).
Its dimensions:
• Supply chain decision-making speed (VEL2)
• Product launch speed (VEL3)
• Product delivery speed (VEL4) (Juan et al., 2022)
Flexibility Flexibility in the supply chain is the operational capacity to adapt and respond
efficiently to dynamic changes in demand, supply conditions, and unforeseen
disruptions (Fayezi et al., 2017; Jüttner & Maklan, 2011).
Its dimensions:
• Supply chain activities flexibility (e.g. sourcing flexibility, operating system
flexibility, distribution flexibility) (FLX1)
Cogent Business & Management

• Information system flexibility (FLX2) (Juan et al., 2022)

13
14 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

Figure 2. Study framework.

3.4. Integrating PLS and AMOS in structural equation modeling: A comprehensive approach
This subsection elucidates the rationale behind the bifurcated use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) for
hypothesis testing and Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) for model fit analysis, highlighting the
advantages and specific applications of each method.
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) stands as a versatile methodology for testing complex hypotheses
and relationships within a theoretical framework. The selection of Partial Least Squares (PLS) as the
methodology for hypothesis testing is based on its intrinsic capabilities in managing small sample sizes
and conducting exploratory research (Hair et al., 2017). PLS proves particularly effective when the main
emphasis is on verifying specific hypotheses and establishing connections among latent constructs. After
formulating and assessing the initial hypotheses using PLS, it becomes crucial to shift to AMOS for a
comprehensive examination of model fit. AMOS, being a covariance-based SEM technique, offers a more
rigorous assessment of how well the structural model aligns with the data (Byrne, 2010).
AMOS provides a comprehensive evaluation of model fit with a variety of fit indices, such as chi-square,
Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), contributing to a
holistic assessment. Moreover, AMOS enhances the understanding of latent variable relationships through
standardized path coefficients, aiding in the interpretation of the strength and direction of proposed
paths (Byrne, 2010). Conversely, PLS demonstrates resilience in exploratory research, proving effective in
situations with limited sample sizes and insensitivity to non-normality, making it especially suitable for
hypothesis-generating inquiries. Additionally, PLS excels in managing formative constructs, providing an
efficient method to accommodate such constructs and fostering a nuanced comprehension of intricate
phenomena (Hair et al., 2017).
In summary, the strategic fusion of PLS for hypothesis testing and AMOS for model fit analysis in SEM
allows researchers to leverage the unique strengths of each method. PLS serves as a robust tool for
testing specific hypotheses and exploring relationships, while AMOS provides a strong foundation for
thorough model fit assessment, guaranteeing the structural model’s validity and reliability. This inte-
grated approach elevates the overall quality and credibility of SEM studies.

3.5. Study measurement model

This section begins with a summary of the findings obtained from the measurement study. A critical
component of this analysis is the utilization of confirmatory factor analysis, typically executed through
structural equation modeling (SEM), to evaluate the reliability and validity of the measurements. The
 Cogent Business & Management 15

Table 5. Results of study measurement model.

Constructs Items L* α CR** AVE*** AC DC FLX VIS VEL
AC AC2 0.768 0.730 0.845 0.645 –
AC3 0.758
AC4 0.878
DC DC1 0.897 0.852 0.909 0.770 0.745 –
DC2 0.852
DC4 0.883
FLX FLX1 0.929 0.741 0.882 0.789 0.699 0.891 –
FLX2 0.846
VIS VoE 0.869 0.817 0.890 0.730 0.797 0.600 0.452 –
VoR 0.776
VoS 0.911
VEL VEL2 0.759 0.694 0.829 0.619 0.489 0.863 0.690 0.838 –
VEL3 0.862
VEL4 0.734
*L: Loading **CR: Composite Reliability ***AVE: Average Variance Extracted.

survey instrument employed a five-point Likert scale for ranking. On the other hand, the findings of
Garson (2012) suggest that the factor loading (L) is the measure which assist in terms of determining
the variance which is extracted by the factor from a variable. The results of the measurement model as
illustrated in Table 5 showed that all factor loadings are acceptable since their values are greater than
0.70. Reliability as a measure of internal consistency was tested using Cronbach’s alpha (α) and compos-
ite reliability (CR). Values of both measures should be greater than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2017). Convergent
validity was measured by the average variance extracted (AVE), which should be higher than 0.50 (Hair
et al., 2017); Discriminating validity was tested via Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT), which should be
less than 0.90 (Henseler et al., 2015). On the other hand, this measure is used for the purpose of deter-
mining that the constructs are distinct from each other. With reference to Table 5, all the constructs are
distinct are distinct as none of the values exceeds the threshold of 0.9 and based on the highest value
of HTMT which is computed to be 0.891.

4. Empirical results and discussion

4.1. Structural model evaluation
The study also evaluated the structural model through PLS-SEM analysis to check the interested model
paths and the relations between the variables and test the study hypotheses. The conceptual model
(Figure 3) was examined and tested using SEM analysis with the approach of the maximum likelihood
estimate.
Figure 3 shows R-squared values that stamp the ability of the model to predict the dependent vari-
ables. According to Hair et al. (2011), a structural model can be evaluated using R2 and Stone–Geisser’s
Q2 values. R2 values between 0.25 and 0.50 are deemed moderate while Q2 should be larger than zero.
It can be noted that the model is able to predict 38% of the variance in DC, 48% in Velocity, 45% in
Visibility, and 60% in flexibility. Moreover, the results showed that all Q2 values were greater than zero
(0.271–0.437).

4.2. Hypotheses testing

Testing of the seven research hypotheses is shown in Figure 4. Out of the seven paths, four were signif-
icant at P-value less than 0.05, which means that four hypotheses were supported by the current data.
The structural model was validated and tested. The adequacy of the hypothesized model’s goodness-of-
fit was assessed through various indices, including the Chi-square to degree of freedom ratio (χ2/df ),
goodness of fit index (GFI), comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA). The results are summarized in Table 6, demonstrating that the structural model meets the cri-
teria for goodness-of-fit indices, with χ2/df ≤ 5, CFI ≥ 0.90, RMSEA ≤ 0.08, and GFI ≥ 0.90.
Table 7 illustrates detailed results of study hypotheses testing. There is a significant effect of DC on
both velocity (Estimate = 0.765, t = 13.71, P = 0.000) and flexibility (Estimate = 0.692, t = 12.93, P = 0.000)
16 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

Figure 3. Evaluation of study structural study.

while there is no significant effect of DC on visibility (Estimate = 0.167, t = 1.846, P = 0.065). These results
supported H1 and H3 and rejected H2. Regarding H4, H5, and H6, the results underlined a significant
effect of AC on visibility (Estimate = 0.557, t = 10.35, P = 0.000) whereas no significant effects of AC on
velocity (Estimate = 0.136, t = 1.555, P = 0.120) and on flexibility (Estimate = 0.115, t = 1.713, P = 0.087).
Therefore, H5 was accepted and H4 as well as H6 were rejected. Finally, the effect of AC on DC was
significant (Estimate = 0.619, t = 15.72, P = 0.000), thus, H7 was accepted.
In line with the current results, Botes et al. (2017) found a significant impact of DC on velocity and
flexibility. In terms of the effects of AC, Srinivasan & Swink (2018) indicated that AC significantly affects
VIS. Moreover, Roßmann et al. (2018); AlShbail et al. (2021); Laguir et al. (2023) found a significant rela-
tionship between AC and SCRES & overcoming SC disruptions. Concerning the effect of AC on DC,
Redmond et al.’s (2012) revealed that AC practices had significant effects on DC. According to the studies
of Wiengarten et al. (2016); Gold et al. (2020); and Milhomem et al. (2022), there is a significant positive
association between collaboration and AC. also, Dubey et al. (2021) found a positive relationship between
AC and the SCRES, organizational flexibility, and competitive advantage. Furthermore, the current study
are consistent with some previous studies. For example, Li et al. (2023) and Dubey et al. (2023) revealed
that digitalization had a significant effect on SCRES, robustness, and durability. Umar and Wilson (2021)
reported significant effects of the vertical and horizontal collaboration practices on both supply chain
survive and thrive. According to Scholten and Schilder (2015), there is a significant effect of collaborative
activities on the visibility, velocity, and flexibility of the supply chain. Despite agreements and disagree-
ments with previous studies, the current study engenders a significant contribution as the next section
highlights. In particular, the role that of the SCRES will play in enhancing the organization’s performance
and survival, especially its operational performance in light of contemporary challenges and uncertainty
in the surrounding environment.
 Cogent Business & Management 17

Figure 4. Paths of study structural model.

Table 6. Goodness-of-fit results.

Goodness of fit index Model results Criteria Conclusion
χ2 adjusted for degrees for freedom (χ2/df) 1.87 ≤5 Good-fit
Goodness of fit index (GFI) 0.922 ≥ 0.90 Good-fit
Comparative fit index (CFI) 0.918 ≥ 0.90 Good-fit
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) 0.061 ≤ 0.08 Good-fit

Table 7. Results of study hypotheses testing.

H Paths Estimate SD T values Prob
H1 DC → Velocity 0.765 0.056 13.71 0.000***
H2 DC → Visibility 0.167 0.091 1.846 0.065
H3 DC → Flexibility 0.692 0.053 12.93 0.000***
H4 AC → Velocity −0.136 0.087 1.555 0.120
H5 AC → Visibility 0.557 0.054 10.35 0.000***
H6 AC → Flexibility 0.115 0.067 1.713 0.087
H7 AC → DC 0.619 0.039 15.72 0.000***
Note: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

5. Study contribution and implications

The current study has both theoretical and practical implications. The study contributes to the literature
through examining the impact of AC and DC of SCRES considering the lack of theoretical and empirical
studies on such an impact. Previous works were interested in investigating the impact of AC on other
constructs such as collaboration behavior (e.g. Dremel et al., 2017; Umar & Wilson, 2021), Digitalization
(Li et al., 2023). However, other studies were concerned with exploring the impact of AC on some aspects
of SCRES of performance such as flexibility and velocity (Botes et al., 2017). Moreover, the study explored
the impact of DC on SCRES dimensions and therefore filled the gap in literature in this regard. Researchers
observed that previous studies did not specifically examine the impact of DC, either within or outside
the organization on the SCRES. Most previous studies focused either on examining the impact of
18 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

collaboration on SCRES or on exploring the impact of digitization on SCRES (e.g. Dubey et al., 2023,
Umar & Wilson, 2021; Li et al., 2023; Scholten & Schilder, 2015).
This lends our study a distinctive and valuable scientific and practical contribution, deserving further
exploration. As it establishes that DC and the use of advanced digital tools in relationship management
have a significant impact on the SCRES and reducing its disruptions. This is particularly relevant as our
study uniquely focuses on the food processing industry, a sector that consistently plays a crucial role
at both the local and national levels. It serves as a central component for maintaining the health and
sustainability of individuals and contributes significantly to economic growth. Additionally, the study
contributes to the literature via testing the impact of AC on SCRES. Theoretically, the study enriches the
literature and establishes a theoretical foundation on AC, DC, and SCRES. Practically, the study empha-
sized the importance of DC for velocity and flexibility as aspects of SCRES well as the importance of
AC practices for both DC and visibility. Based on these contributions, the study devises scholars to
investigate the effects of AC on the other dimensions of SCRES (i.e. velocity and flexibility), and the
effect of DC on visibility. Managers, on the other hand, are requested to pay a great attention to DC to
heighten visibility and to AC to improve both velocity and flexibility.
This can be achieved by enhancing the use of digital media and electronic tools, keeping track of
developments and updates in this field, and continually updating them while managing collaboration
within the organization and with external parties. Ensuring the velocity and flexibility of the supply chain
requires the presence of DC as one of the key prerequisites for achieving SCRES, as demonstrated by the
results of the current study. This result is logical, as keeping up with digital advancements and leveraging
modern technological tools will have a significant impact on saving time, effort, and money. This makes
the organization more efficient in managing its relationships, ensuring the continuity of its operations
and productivity, and avoiding disruptions in the supply chain or even delays in its processes. Particularly,
DC will enhance the flexibility of the supply chain, increasing its operational capacity to maintain rela-
tionships with other parties and mitigate the impact of external environmental variables, or even reduce
their negative effects.
The results of this study also have found that AC has an impact on the supply chain visibility. This
leads us to encourage organizations to enhance their ability to collect, store, accumulate, visualize, and
process data in an advanced manner, leveraging it to solve the problems they face. This ensures SCRES
and its continuity. It also proves that both DC and AC play complementary roles, together achieving the
SCRES dimensions. Considering that flexibility, velocity, and visibility are fundamental pillars of supply
chain resilience, this is what previous studies have focused on. This prompts us to advise managers and
decision-makers in the examined industry to focus on these essential capabilities to ensure the sustain-
ability of their organizations despite the challenges they may encounter.
Study results showed that there was a statistically significant impact of DC and AC on SCRES, This may
be due to digital capabilities and the role they play in following up, updating, storing, processing and
sharing data, which gives companies the ability to make the right decisions at the right time, especially
in the presence of participatory collaboration inside and outside the organization supported by various
digital means of communication. This will help enhance the of SCRES, continue its operations without
interruption, and enhance its operational performance.
Based on the study findings, we can say that the SCRES in the food processing industry holds signif-
icant importance, particularly in relation to analytics capability and digital collaboration. A resilient sup-
ply chain, supported by robust analytics capabilities, enables the food processing industry to identify and
assess potential risks. AC can provide predictive insights, allowing proactive risk mitigation strategies. DC
enhances risk management by facilitating real-time communication and information sharing among sup-
ply chain partners. Additionally, operational continuity is optimized through AC, aiding in efficient
decision-making processes. In the face of disruptions, a resilient supply chain, coupled with DC tools,
ensures uninterrupted operations. Collaborative platforms enable swift communication and coordination,
minimizing downtime and maintaining operational continuity.
Furthermore, adaptability to change through a resilient supply chain is crucial in the dynamic food
processing industry. AC helps in understanding market trends, consumer behavior, and demand fluctua-
tions. A resilient supply chain, supported by DC, allows for agile responses to changes, ensuring the
industry can adjust production, distribution, and logistics efficiently. Moreover, AC contributes to efficient
 Cogent Business & Management 19

resource allocation by providing data-driven insights into demand forecasting, inventory management,
and resource utilization. Combined with DC, this optimizes resource allocation across the supply chain,
enhancing overall efficiency and reducing waste.
Based on the study findings highlighting the impact of AC and DC on SCRES, consider the following
recommendations: Advocate for the adoption of advanced analytics tools, incorporating predictive ana-
lytics, data modeling, and machine learning to enhance the ability to foresee potential disruptions and
make informed decisions. Encourage the use of DC platforms that facilitate real-time communication and
information sharing inside the organization and among supply chain partners, improving coordination,
responsiveness, and overall flexibility in the face of disruptions. Foster a culture of cross-functional exper-
tise to ensure teams possess the necessary skills for leveraging analytics tools and effective collaboration
in the digital environment, enhancing overall organizational resilience. Emphasize continuous training
programs to keep supply chain professionals updated on the latest AC techniques and DC tools, ensuring
workforce adaptability to evolving technologies. Implement robust data governance and security mea-
sures to protect sensitive information exchanged during DC, fostering trust among supply chain partners.
Utilize AC to identify vulnerabilities and implement redundancy plans, diversifying suppliers, transporta-
tion routes, and storage locations to mitigate risks and enhance overall resilience. Define and regularly
monitor key performance indicators related to AC and DC effectiveness to ensure implemented strategies
deliver expected resilience outcomes. Work closely with technology providers and solution vendors to
stay abreast of the latest advancements in AC and DC tools, providing access to cutting-edge technolo-
gies and innovations. Use AC for scenario planning and simulation exercises, enabling the supply chain
team to understand potential disruptions and develop proactive strategies for effective responses. Engage
in industry collaborations and forums to share best practices and insights related to AC and DC for sup-
ply chain resilience, learning from others’ experiences. Finally, the researchers recommend the managers
and decision makers have to provide more attention and large investment in modern technologies and
digital media.

6. Study limitations and recommendations for future research

There are some limitations to this study, First, the study investigated the impact of AC and DC on
SCRES. Future studies should test the effects of AC and DC on other measures of the SCRES construct
(e.g. durability, adaptability, agility…). Furthermore, the model of the study comprised hypotheses
used to examine the effects between AC, DC, and SCRES. Given that both AC and DC are independent
variables that impact the dependent variable, which is the SCRES, although our study examined the
impact of the independent variables on each other through research, it did not address the mediating
effect of DC in the effect of AC on SCRES. Consequently, further studies are required to search the
mediating role of DC and to identify the extent to which each variable of SCRES is affected by both
AC and DC.
Second, the study sample size was 200 senior managers, but only 142 were subjected to analysis due
to incomplete answers and thus the sample size is considered relatively small. Further research may be
conducted and collect more data from the same population. Hence, the study’s findings are based on a
specific sample size, which may not fully represent the entire industry. A larger and more diverse sample
could provide a more comprehensive picture. Also, we recommend expanding the sample size and diver-
sifying it in terms of company size, geographic location, and sub-sectors within the food processing
industry could enhance the generalizability of findings.
Third, this study analyzes cross-sectional design, which means it captures a snapshot at a specific
point in time. As the association strength among variables in the research model might change over
time, Longitudinal studies could provide insights to track the evolution of DC, AC, and SCRES in the food
processing industry in Jordan over time would provide valuable insights to how these factors evolve
over time.
Fourth, this study was conducted after the occurrence of many negative impacts due to the spread
of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent closures and supply chain disruptions. However, it did
not take those impacts into account. This is a pivotal issue deserving further research and consideration.
20 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

Future research studies can explore the post-COVID-19 era as a variable in the relationship between DC
and SCRES.
Furthermore, expanding the study model that explores the impact of Analytics Capability (AC) and
Digital Collaboration (DC) on Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES) offers a promising avenue for the integra-
tion of additional variables, particularly the ethical dimensions within business organizations. The prem-
ise that ethical practices positively contribute to trust-building in the business environment aligns with
contemporary discussions on the strategic value of morality in business management and then cooper-
ate more with other agents, so then to learn more AC and also to develop DC. Drawing insights from
Ruíz-Palomino et al. (2011), it becomes evident that ethical considerations can confer competitive advan-
tages to companies.
Moreover, the leadership style of CEOs emerges as a significant factor influencing Digital Collaboration
(DC) within organizations. As in the study of González-Moreno et al. (2019), which suggests that an eth-
ical leadership style, characterized by a corporate social responsibility orientation, is conducive to foster-
ing cooperation with other firms. This implies that the ethical orientation of CEOs could positively
influence the development of Digital Collaboration capabilities within the organization.
Taking this a step further, the ethical leadership of CEOs may not only impact the cooperation with
external entities but also permeate throughout the organizational hierarchy, as emphasized in the study
by Ruíz-Palomino et al. (2013), suggests that ethical conduct has the potential to permeate through
different organizational levels. This trickle-down effect can contribute to shaping a corporate culture
where individuals interacting with suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders demonstrate heightened
ethical behavior, leading to the cultivation of increased trust. This augmented trust, in turn, can facilitate
enhanced cooperation and the development of Digital Collaboration (DC) capabilities within the sup-
ply chain.
Moreover, the findings from the study by Ruíz- Palomino et al. (2011) affirm the notion that ethical
leadership at the highest echelons of the organizational hierarchy can exert a cascading influence across
multiple hierarchical levels. Therefore, by incorporating ethical considerations into the model, future
research can explore how ethical leadership practices contribute to not only a more ethical organiza-
tional culture but also improved Digital Collaboration and, consequently, enhanced Supply Chain
Resilience. This expanded research framework provides a holistic understanding of the interconnected-
ness between ethics, leadership, Digital Collaboration, and overall supply chain resilience in the dynamic
landscape of modern business.
In conclusion, the model examining the interplay between AC, DC, and SCRES can be enriched by
expanding its scope to include ethical considerations and embracing the evolving technological land-
scape. This not only aligns with contemporary discussions on corporate responsibility but also positions
the research to provide a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted factors influencing supply
chain resilience in a rapidly changing business environment.
By rectifying these limitations and incorporating these suggestions, future research has the potential
to enrich our understanding of the interplay among DC, AC, and SCRES.

7. Conclusion
This study delved into the influence of Analytics Capability (AC) and Digital Collaboration (DC) on various
dimensions of Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES), encompassing velocity, visibility, and flexibility. The results
indicated a significant correlation between AC and visibility, highlighting its substantial impact on gain-
ing insights and foresight into the supply chain. However, the study observed that AC did not exert a
significant influence on velocity and flexibility within the supply chain. In contrast, Digital Collaboration
(DC) emerged as a formidable force, displaying significant effects on both velocity and flexibility. These
findings imply that while AC primarily enhances visibility, DC plays a crucial role in fostering increased
speed and adaptability in the supply chain. In conclusion, both AC and DC are pivotal in shaping overall
Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES). To emphasize these findings, additional hypotheses suggest that inte-
grating AC and DC may produce a synergistic effect, amplifying their individual impacts and further
contributing to a resilient supply chain. Additionally, considering the nuanced nature of the supply chain
in different industries, further research could explore the contextual variations in the impact of AC and
 Cogent Business & Management 21

DC on SCRES, providing valuable insights for tailored strategies in specific sectors. Overall, these expanded
hypotheses not only underscore the crucial roles of AC and DC but also pave the way for future inves-
tigations to unlock the full potential of AC and DC in enhancing supply chain resilience across diverse
operational landscapes.
These findings underscore the importance of organizational AC and the promotion of DC both internally
and externally for achieving comprehensive SCRES. Traditionally, previous studies emphasized collaboration as
a central aspect of SCRES, but this study positioned it as an antecedent to SCRES. Moreover, the study specif-
ically addressed DC, acknowledging the context of the contemporary digital age we inhabit today.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

About the authors

Rawan Odeh Alshawabkeh is an Associate Professor of Business Administration at Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Jordan,
with a Ph.D. in Management. She specializes in HRM, strategic management, TQM, Supply Chain Management, and
Knowledge Management. With over four years of teaching experience, she has published over 14 research papers in
prestigious journals and serves as a reviewer and article editor for international journals. Additionally, she currently holds
the position of Assistant Director of the Human Resources and Institutional Development Unit at the university.
Amani Abu Rumman, an Associate Professor in the Business Administration Department, joined Al-Ahliyya Amman
University in 2018. With a background in the Jordanian Military, Higher Media Council, Ombudsman Bureau, and
Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission, she brings extensive practical experience to her role. A certified EFQM
Assessor, her research interests and teaching areas include HRM, Change and Crisis Management, TQM, Knowledge
Management, and Entrepreneurship. Like her colleagues, she is passionate about charitable work, particularly in training.
Lina Al-Abbadi, also an Associate Professor in the Business Administration Department at the Business School, joined
Al-Ahliyya Amman University in 2018. As a Certified E-Learning Manager, her research spans various management areas,
and she teaches subjects such as HRM, Strategic Management, Knowledge Management, Supply Chain Management,
TQM and Entrepreneurship. She worked with accreditation and quality committees at the faculty level. She worked in
the Ministry of Education Beyond academia, she is actively involved in charity work, particularly in training.

ORCID
Rawan Odeh Alshawabkeh http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2451-5474

References
Ahimbisibwe, A., Ssebulime, R., Tumuhairwe, R., & Tusiime, W. (2016). Supply chain visibility, supply chain velocity,
supply chain alignment and humanitarian supply chain relief agility. European Journal of Logistics, Purchasing and
Supply Chain Management, 4(2), 1–26.
AlAmayreh, M. A. (2020). The impact of the emerging corona virus on the performance of insurance companies in
Jordan. Al-Balqa Journal for Research and Studies, 23(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.35875/1105-023-002-008
Al-Hakimi, M., & Borade, D. (2020). The impact of entrepreneurial orientation on the supply chain resilience. Cogent
Business & Management, 7(1), 1847990. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1847990
Ali, A., Mahfouz, A., & Arisha, A. (2017). Analysing supply chain resilience: Integrating the constructs in a concept
mapping framework via a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management, 22(1), 16–39. https://doi.
org/10.1108/SCM-06-2016-0197
AlMkaneen, M. (2021). Technology and ethics of responsibility. Al-Balqa Journal for Research and Studies, 24(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.35875/1105-024-001-001
Alomoush, M. A. (2021). The impact of business intelligence systems on crises management (Field Study in Greater
Amman Municipality). Al-Balqa Journal for Research and Studies, 24(1), 125–145. https://doi.
org/10.35875/1105-024-001-009
Al-Shbail, T., Maghayreh, A., & Awad, M. (2021). Big data analytics for supply chain sustainability: Amid the outbreak
of the COVID-19 pandemic. World Customs Journal, 15(2), 61–72.
Antonelli, D., Bruno, G., Taurino, T., & Villa, A. (2015). Graph-based models to classify effective collaboration in SME
networks. International Journal of Production Research, 53(20), 6198–6209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1
038368
22 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

Baah, C., Opoku Agyeman, D., Acquah, I. S. K., Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., Afum, E., Issau, K., Ofori, D., & Faibil, D. (2022).
Effect of information sharing in supply chains: Understanding the roles of supply chain visibility, agility, collabo-
ration on supply chain performance. Benchmarking, 29(2), 434–455. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2020-0453
Banomyong, R. (2018). Collaboration in supply chain management: A resilience perspective. International Transport
Forum Discussion Papers, OECD Publishing.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://
doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Barney, J. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based
view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700602
Botes, A., Niemann, W., & Kotzé, T. (2017). Buyer-supplier collaboration and supply chain resilience: A case study in
the petrochemical industry. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 28(4), 183–199. https://doi.
org/10.7166/28-4-1736
Byrne, B. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
Carvalho, H., Barroso, p., Machado, V., Azevedo, S., & Machado, C. (2012). Supply chain redesign for resilience using
simulation. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62(1), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2011.10.003
Chierici, R., Tortora, D., Giudice, M., & Quacquarelli, B. (2021). Strengthening digital collaboration to enhance social
innovation capital: an analysis of Italian small innovative enterprises. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 610–632.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0058
Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management,
15(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090410700275
Datta, P. (2017). Supply network resilience: A systematic literature review and future research. International Journal of
Logistics Management, 28(4), 1387–1424. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-03-2016-0064
Dremel, C., Herterich, M., Wulf, J., Waizmann, J., & Brenner, W. (2017). How AUDI AG established big data analytics in
its digital transformation. MIS Quarterly Executive, 16(2), 81–100.
Dubey, R., Bryde, D., Dwivedi, Y., Graham, G., Foropon, C., & Papadopoulos, T. (2023). Dynamic digital capabilities and
supply chain resilience: The role of government effectiveness. International Journal of Production Economics, 258,
108790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108790
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S., Wamba, S., Roubaud, D., & Foropon, C. (2021). Empirical investigation of data
analytics capability and organizational flexibility as complements to supply chain resilience. International Journal
of Production Research, 59(1), 110–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1582820
Easley, R., Devaraj, S., & Crant, J. (2003). Relating collaborative technology use to team work quality and performance:
An empirical analysis. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 247–265.
El Baz, J., & Ruel, S. (2021). Can supply chain risk management practices mitigate the disruption impacts on supply
chains’ resilience and robustness? Evidence from an empirical survey in a COVID-19 outbreak era. International
Journal of Production Economics, 233(107972), 107972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107972
Elia, G., Raguseo, E., Solazzo, G., & Pigni, F. (2022). Strategic business value from big data analytics: An empirical
analysis of the mediating effects of value creation mechanisms. Information & Management, 59(8), 103701. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2022.103701
Elwood, A. (2021). Supply chain resilience. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 15(1), 65–77.
Emmanuel, O., Omoregie, A., Ohis, A., & Nteboheng, K. (2018). Challenges of digital collaboration in the South African
Construction Industry. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations
ManagementBandung, March 6–8, 2018© IEOM Society.
Fayezi, S., Zutshi, A., & O’Loughlin, A. (2017). Understanding and development of supply chain agility and flexibility: A struc-
tured literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 379–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12096
Frederico, G. (2021). Towards a Supply Chain 4.0 on the post-COVID-19 pandemic: A conceptual and strategic discus-
sion for more resilient supply chains. Rajagiri Management Journal, 15(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/
RAMJ-08-2020-0047
Galbraith, J. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view. Interfaces, 4(3), 28–36. http://www.jstor.org/
stable/25059090 https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.4.3.28
Garson, G. D. (2012). Testing statistical assumptions. Statistical Associates Publishing.
Goaill, M., & Al-Hakimi, M. (2021). Does absorptive capacity moderate the relationship between entrepreneurial ori-
entation and supply chain resilience? Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975
.2021.1962487
Gold, S., Chowdhury, I., Huq, F., & Heinemann, K. (2020). Social business collaboration at the bottom of the pyramid:
The case of orchestration. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1), 262–275. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2363
González-Moreno, Á., Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Sáez-Martínez, F. (2019). Can CEOs’ corporate social responsibility orientation im-
prove firms’ cooperation in international scenarios? Sustainability, 11(24), 6936. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246936
Gopinathan, S., Kaur, A., Veeraya, S., & Raman, M. (2022). The role of digital collaboration in student engagement towards
enhancing student participation during COVID-19. Sustainability, 14(11), 6844. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116844
Greasley, K., Watson, P., & Patel, S. (2008). The formation of public-public partnerships: A case study examination of
collaboration on A ‘Back to Work’ Initiative. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(3), 305–313.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550810863204
 Cogent Business & Management 23

Grzybowska, K., & Stachowiak, A. (2022). Global changes and disruptions in supply chains – Preliminary research to
sustainable resilience of supply chains. Energies, 15(13), 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134579
Gupta, M., & George, J. (2016). Toward the development of a big data analytics capability. Information & Management,
53(8), 1049–1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.07.004
Gursoy, D., Saayman, M., & Sotiriadis, M. (2015). Collaboration in tourism businesses and destinations: A handbook (1st
ed.). Bingley, England.
Haddad, A. (2020). The impact of total quality management on the Jordanian food companies performance. Al-Balqa
Journal for Research and Studies, 23(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.35875/1105-023-001-009
Hair, J., Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling
(PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Hair, J., Matthews, L., Matthews, R., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which
method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1504/
IJMDA.2017.10008574
Hair, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Hardwig, T., & Weißmann, M. (2021). In: Mütze-Niewöhner, Susanne; Hacker, Winfried; Hardwig, Thomas; Kauffeld,
Simone; Latniak, Erich; Nicklich, Manuel; Pietrzyk, Ulrike (Eds.), Projekt- und Teamarbeit in der digitalisierten
Arbeitswelt: Herausforderungen, Strategien und Empfehlungen pp. 179-202. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-662-62231-5_9
Hendry, L., Stevenson, M., MacBryde, J., Ball, P., Sayed, M., & Liu, L. (2019). Local food supply chain resilience to con-
stitutional change: The Brexit effect. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 39(3), 429–453.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2018-0184
Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based
structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11747-014-0403-8
Hohenstein, N., Feisel, E., Hartmann, E., & Giunipero, L. (2015). Research on the phenomenon of supply chain resil-
ience: A systematic review and paths for further investigation. International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, 45(1/2), 90–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-05-2013-0128
Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245
Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis.
Transportation Research Part E, 125(1), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.001
Hundaileh, L., & Fayad, F. (2019). Jordan’s food processing sector analysis and strategy for sectoral improvement.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.
Ibem, E., & Laryea, S. (2014). Survey of digital technologies in procurement of construction projects. Automation in
Construction, 46, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.07.003
Ivanov, D. (2018). Revealing interfaces of supply chain resilience and sustainability: A simulation study. International
Journal of Production Research, 56(10), 3507–3523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1343507
Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2020). Viability of intertwined supply networks: extending the supply chain resilience angles
towards survivability. A position paper motivated by COVID-19 outbreak. International Journal of Production
Research, 58(10), 2904–2915. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1750727
Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., & Sokolov, B. (2019). The impact of digital technology and Industry 4.0 on the ripple effect
and supply chain risk analytics. International Journal of Production Research, 57(3), 829–846. https://doi.org/10.108
0/00207543.2018.1488086
Ji, G., Yu, M., Tan, K., Kumar, A., & Gupta, S. (2022). Decision optimization in cooperation innovation: The impact of
big data analytics capability and cooperative modes. Annals of Operations Research, 2022, 1–24. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10479-022-04867-1
Juan, S., Li, E., & Hung, W. (2022). An integrated model of supply chain resilience and its impact on supply chain
performance under disruption. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 33(1), 339–364. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IJLM-03-2021-0174
Jüttner, U., & Maklan, S. (2011). Supply chain resilience in the global financial crisis: An empirical study. Supply Chain
Management, 16(4), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541111139062
Kamalahmadi, M., & Parast, M. (2016). A review of the literature on the principles of enterprise and supply chain
resilience: Major findings and directions for future research. International Journal of Production Economics, 171(1),
116–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.10.023
Khattab, S., Al Shaar, I., Alkaied, R., & Qutaishat, F. (2022). The relationship between big data analytics and
green supply chain management by looking at the role of environmental orientation: Evidence from
emerging economy. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 10(2), 303–314. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.
uscm.2022.2.002
Laguir, I., Modgil, S., Bose, I., Gupta, S., & Stekelorum, R. (2023). Performance effects of analytics capability, disruption
orientation, and resilience in the supply chain under environmental uncertainty. Annals of Operations Research,
324(1–2), 1269–1293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04484-4
24 R. O. ALSHAWABKEH ET AL.

Li, Y., Li, D., Liu, Y., & Shou, Y. (2023). Digitalization for supply chain resilience and robustness: The roles of collabora-
tion and formal contracts. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 10(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s42524-022-0229-x
Lindquist, E. (2018). Visualization practice and government: Strategic investments for more democratic governance.
In J. Gil-Garcia, T. Pardo, & L. Luna-Reyes (Eds.), Policy analytics, modelling, and informatics: Innovative tools for solv-
ing complex social problems (PAIT, vol. 25) Springer.
Madhala, P., Lin, T., Li, H., & Helander, N. (2023). Data analytics capabilities for digital service development: A case
study. Proceedings Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (2023 PACIS), 110. 7-8-2023.
Mageto, J. (2021). Big data analytics in sustainable supply chain management: A focus on manufacturing supply
chains. Sustainability, 13(13), 7101. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137101
Mahdi, H. (2021). The perceptions of Al-aqsa university students regarding the e-learning under the (COVID 19) pan-
demic: A entrance to develop an e-learning framework in the tertiary education institutions. Al-Balqa Journal for
Research and Studies, 24(1), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.35875/1105-024-001-008
Malone, T., Laubacher, R., & Dellarocas, C. (2010). The collective intelligence genome. MIT Sloan Management Review,
51(3), 21–31.
Mandal, S., Sarathy, R., Korasiga, V., Bhattacharya, S., & Dastidar, S. (2016). Achieving supply chain resilience: The
contribution of logistics and supply chain capabilities. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built
Environment, 7(5), 544–562. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-04-2016-0010
Mawonde, D., Samuel, B., Nyoni, J., & Muzenda, A. (2023). The effect of supply chain resilient strategies on operation-
al performance of humanitarian organisations in Zimbabwe during the Coronavirus period. Cogent Business &
Management, 10(2), 2246741. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2246741
Melnyk, S., Narasimhan, R., & DeCampos, H. (2014). Supply chain design: Issues, challenges, frameworks and solu-
tions. International Journal of Production Research, 52(7), 1887–1896. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.787175
Milhomem, L., Sincorá, L., Oliveira, M., & Brandão, M. (2022). The impact of business analytics on collaborative advan-
tage: The mediating role of managing transaction costs. Brazilian Business Review, 19(1), 59–77. https://doi.
org/10.15728/bbr.2022.19.1.4
Pettit, T., Fiksel, J., & Croxton, K. (2010). Ensuring supply chain resilience: Development of a conceptual framework.
Journal of Business Logistics, 31(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2010.tb00125.x
Ponomarov, S., & Holcomb, M. (2009). Understanding the concept of supply chain resilience. The International Journal
of Logistics Management, 20(1), 124–143. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090910954873
Redmond, A., Hore, A., Alshawi, M., & West, R. (2012). Exploring how information exchanges can be enhanced through
Cloud BIM. Automation in Construction, 24, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.003
Riglietti, G., Avatefipour, A., & Trucco, P. (2021). The impact of business continuity management on the components
of supply chain resilience: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 15(2), 182–
195.
Roßmann, B., Canzaniello, A., Gracht, H., & Hartmann, E. (2018). The future and social impact of Big Data Analytics in
Supply Chain Management: Results from a Delphi study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 130(C), 135–
149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.005
Ruíz, P., Ruiz, C., & Martínez, R. (2011). The cascading effect of top management’s ethical leadership: Supervisors or
other lower-hierarchical level individuals? African Journal of Business Management, 5(12), 4755–4764.
Ruiz-Palomino, P., Gomis, A., & Amaya, C. (2011). Morals in business organizations: An approach based on strategic
value and strength for business management. Cuadernos de Gestión, 11, 15–31.
Ruiz-Palomino, P., Martínez-Ruiz, M., & Martínez-Cañas, R. (2013). Assessing ethical behaviours in the Spanish banking
and insurance industries: Evidence and challenges. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
24(11), 2173–2196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.725065
Saputra, N., Nugroho, R., Aisyah, H., & Karneli, O. (2021). Digital skill during Covid-19: Effects of digital leadership and
digital collaboration. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen, 19(2), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jam.2021.019.02.04
Scholten, K., & Schilder, S. (2015). The role of collaboration in supply chain resilience. Supply Chain Management,
20(4), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-11-2014-0386
Shen, W., Hao, Q., Mak, H., Neelamkavil, J., Xie, H., Dickinson, J., Thomas, J., Pardasani, A., & Xue, H. (2009). Systems
integration and collaboration in architecture, engineering, construction, and facilities management: A review.
Advanced Engineering Informatics, 24(2), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2009.09.001
Shen, Z., & Sun, Y. (2023). Strengthening supply chain resilience during COVID-19: A case study of JD.com. Journal of
Operations Management, 69(3), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1161
Sincorá, L., Oliveira, M., Filho, H., Carneiro, T., & Ladeira, M. (2018a). The role of business analytics on organizational
resilience. Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute Proceedings. Decision Sciences Institute, 1836–1853.
Sincorá, L., Oliveira, M., Zanquetto-Filho, H., & Ladeira, M. (2018b). Business analytics leveraging resilience in organi-
zational processes. RAUSP Management Journal, 53(3), 385–403. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-04-2018-002
Sorrentino, F., & Pettenati, M. (2014). Digital collaboration: forme sociali in evoluzione. Open Journal per La Formazione
in Rete, 14(1), 128–176. https://doi.org/10.13128/formare-14762
 Cogent Business & Management 25

Srinivasan, R., & Swink, M. (2018). An investigation of visibility and flexibility as complements to supply chain ana-
lytics: An organizational information processing theory perspective. Production and Operations Management, 27(10),
1849–1867. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12746
Tan, W., Cai, W., & Zhang, A. (2019). Structural-aware simulation analysis of supply chain resilience. International
Journal of Production Research, 58(17), 5175–5195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1705421
Teece, D. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic)
theory of firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0116
Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management
Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
Trkman, P., McCormack, K., Oliveira, M., & Ladeira, M. (2010). The impact of business analytics on supply chain per-
formance. Decision Support Systems, 49(3), 318–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.03.007
Umar, M., & Wilson, M. (2021). Supply chain resilience: Unleashing the power of collaboration in disaster manage-
ment. Sustainability, 13(19), 10573, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910573
Wadaa, N., & AlAdamat, O. (2020). Mental health crisis during the Corona COVID-19 pandemic among health workers
(a comparative study between Iraq and Jordan). Al-Balqa Journal for Research and Studies, 23(2), 113–122. https://
doi.org/10.35875/1105-023-002-009
Wamba, F., & Akter, S. (2019). Understanding supply chain analytics capabilities and agility for data-rich environ-
ments. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 39(6/7/8), 887–912. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJOPM-01-2019-0025
Wang, Q., Yu, S., Li, C., Lü, J., Fang, X., Guyeux, C., & Bahi, J. (2016). Theoretical design and FPGA-Based implementa-
tion of higher-dimensional digital chaotic systems. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and systems-I, 63(3), 1–12.
Wieland, A., & Durach, C. (2021). Two perspectives on supply chain resilience. Journal of Business Logistics, 42(3),
315–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12271
Wiengarten, F., Humphreys, P., Gimenez, C., & McIvor, R. (2016). Risk, risk management practices, and the success of
supply chain integration. International Journal of Production Economics, 171(3), 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijpe.2015.03.020
Wu, L., Hitt, L., & Lou, B. (2020). Data analytics, innovation, and firm productivity. Management Science, 66(5), 2017–
2039. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3281
Yang, X. (2023). A historical review of collaborative learning and cooperative learning. TechTrends, 67(4), 1–11. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00823-9
Yazdanparast, R., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Heidari, R., & Aliabadi, L. (2021). A hybrid Z-number data envelopment
analysis and neural network for assessment of supply chain resilience: A case study. Central European Journal of
Operations Research, 29(2), 611–631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-018-0596-x
Yu, L., Nickerson, J., & Sakamoto, Y. (2012). Collective creativity: Where we are and where we might go. Proceedings
of Collective Intelligence (January 10, 2012) (CI2012), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2037908
Yuan, Y., Tan, H., & Liu, L. (2023). The effects of digital transformation on supply chain resilience: A moderated and
mediated model. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2023, 74. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-08-2022-0274
Zhao, N., Hong, J., & Lau, K. (2023a). Impact of supply chain digitalization on supply chain resilience and perfor-
mance: A multi-mediation model. International Journal of Production Economics, 259, 108817. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108817
Zhao, G., Vazquez-Noguerol, M., Liu, S., & Prado-Prado, J. (2023b). Agri-food supply chain resilience strategies for
preparing, responding, recovering, and adapting in relation to unexpected crisis: A cross-country comparative
analysis from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Business Logistics, 2023, 12361. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12361
Zhao, G., Jones, P., Liu, S., Lopez, C., Dennehy, D., & Chen, X. (2023c). Analysis of the Drivers of Industry 4.0 Technology
Deployment to Achieve Agri-Food Supply Chain Sustainability: A hybrid approach. IEEE International Symposium on
Technology and Society (ISTAS), Advance online publication. 1–-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1161
Zwass, V. (2003). Electronic commerce and organizational innovation: Aspects and opportunities. International Journal
of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 7–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2003.11044273