Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Supply Chain Disruptions and Business Continuity: An Empirical Assessment

Azadegan, Arash, Mellat Parast, Mahour, Lucianetti, Lorenzo, Nishant, Rohit, Blackhurst, Jennifer·2020·Decision Sciences

Abstract

Are business continuity programs (BCPs) useful in improving company performance? Risk management research suggests that BCPs are important in response and recovery from disruptions. However, critics suggest that BCPs rely too much on known risks and are overly complicated. This creates a decision dilemma regarding whether to invest in BCPs or not. Using two empirical studies, this manuscript offers theoretical and empirical evidence as to whether BCPs help limit the damage caused by supply chain disruptions and improve company financial performance. Using structural contingency and organizational information processing theories, the study develops hypotheses on how BCPs channel resources to recover from supply chain disruptions, contingent on a company's flexible or procedural response orientation. In Study‐1, the hypotheses are tested based on a combination of subjective (Likert‐based responses) and objective (historical financial performance) data gathered and matched from a cross‐section of Italian companies. Results suggest that BCPs are beneficial to companies with a procedural or flexible orientation in limiting the damage caused by supply chain disruptions. Companies with strong BCPs show better financial performance in comparison to their competition. In Study‐2, a vignette‐based factorial experiment is used to offer insight on how managers perceive the effect of flexible or procedural response orientation on limiting the operational damage of disruptions. Finally, post‐hoc analyses using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) offers further evidence of a strong link between BCPs and financial performance (return on assets).

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/deci.12395

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 205

Metadata

Authors
Azadegan, A., Mellat Parast, M., Lucianetti, L., Nishant, R., & Blackhurst, J.
Venue
Decision Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06-06
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
38-73
ISSN
  • 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5915
OpenAlex
W2955402083
Cited by
205
References
8
FWCI
31.68
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 Disruptions and Business Continuity: An Empirical Assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/deci.12395
The paper
Azadegan, A., Mellat Parast, M., Lucianetti, L., Nishant, R., & Blackhurst, J. (2020). Supply Chain Disruptions and Business Continuity: An Empirical Assessment. Decision Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12395

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.