The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Supply chain risks: a review and typology
Abstract
Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review the growing literature examining supply chain risk management (SCRM) and to develop a typology of risks in the supply chain. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws its insights and conclusions from a review of the literature on supply chain risk, and a synthesis of the broader domain of risk management. Findings – While the literature on SCRM is growing, the literature lacks an organized structure for the sources of supply chain risk. The current paper bridges this gap by synthesizing the diverse literature into a typology of risk sources, consisting of environmental factors, industry factors, organizational factors, problem‐specific factors, and decision‐maker related factors. Practical implications – The paper devises a typology that can be used by managers to measure and assess the vulnerabilities of their company and supply chain. The typology also provides avenues for future research that further guides practitioners in the management of their supply chain risk portfolio. Originality/value – SCRM is rapidly developing into a favored research area for academicians as well as practitioners, especially after the attacks of September 11 and the recent array of natural disasters. This paper develops a methodology for structuring academic inquiry in this important research area.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
Consumer perceived risk: conceptualisations and models
Mitchell, V. (1999) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090569910249229 · Cited by 1,582
Cited by
Supply chain sustainability: A risk management approach
Giannakis, M., & Papadopoulos, T. (2016) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.06.032 · Cited by 733
Munir, M., Jajja, M. S. S., Chatha, K. A., & Farooq, S. (2020) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107667 · Cited by 452
Supply Chain Risk Management: Literature Review
Gurtu, A., & Johny, J. (2021) · Risks · doi:10.3390/risks9010016 · Cited by 259
Supply chain risk and resilience: theory building through structured experiments and simulation
Macdonald, J. R., Zobel, C. W., Melnyk, S. A., & Griffis, S. E. (2018) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1421787 · Cited by 214
Metadata
- Authors
- Rao, S., & Goldsby, T. J.
- Venue
- The International Journal of Logistics Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-05-22
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 97-123
- ISSN
- 0957-4093 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2069005416
- Cited by
- 797
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 69.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Supply chain risks: a review and typology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09574090910954864
- The paper
- Rao, S., & Goldsby, T. J. (2009). Supply chain risks: a review and typology. The International Journal of Logistics Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090910954864
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.