How to promote resilience in the supply chain in the context of COVID-19? An exploratory study using the Delphi method

dos Santos, Devisson Mesquita et al. Article How to promote resilience in the supply chain in the context of COVID-19? An exploratory study using the Delphi method Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications Provided in Cooperation with: Emerald Publishing Limited Suggested Citation: dos Santos, Devisson Mesquita et al. (2024) : How to promote resilience in the supply chain in the context of COVID-19? An exploratory study using the Delphi method, Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, ISSN 2631-3871, Emerald, Bingley, Vol. 6, Iss. 3, pp. 303-329, https://doi.org/10.1108/MSCRA-11-2022-0032 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/314929 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ How to promote resilience in the supply chain in the context of COVID-19? An exploratory study using the Delphi method Devisson Mesquita dos Santos, Fernanda Leandra Leal Lopes, Andr e Cristiano Silva Melo and Denilson Ricardo de Lucena Nunes State University of Par a, Bel em, Brazil Izabela Simon Rampasso Catholic University of the North, Antofagasta, Chile, and Vitor William Batista Martins State University of Par a, Bel em, Brazil Abstract Purpose –This paper is dedicated to elaborating, proposing and validating an action plan to enhance the mitigation of risks generated by the COVID-19 pandemic in the electric sector supply chain, aiming to promote a more resilient supply chain. Design/methodology/approach –For this, a systematic review of the literature was carried out to prepare an action plan that was validated by a group of experts, through the Delphi methodology. Findings –As a result, an action plan was obtained, with 18 actions subdivided into 13 resilience elements and related to 20 main risks arising from the pandemic. The actions oriented to the development of relationships among supply chain members, promotion of a culture oriented to learning and problem solving, contingency plan, safety stock and risk management were pointed as those capable of generating resilience in the chain analyzed in the moment of crisis. Originality/value –The results achieved can contribute to the expansion of debates in the area of resilient supply chain management, as well as contribute to supply chain managers in their elaboration and definition of actions that aim to make the supply chain more resilient. It is noteworthy that no similar study was found in the literature considering the specificities of supply chain management in the Brazilian Amazon region. Keywords Risk management, Supply chain, Resilience, COVID-19, Electric sector Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction The intensification of competition among companies and the acceleration of technological transformation are factors that demand better competitive strategies of companies and, in this scenario, supply chains should be constantly transformed to remain aligned with the market (Bas ¸tu g and Yercan, 2021;Jafari et al., 2021). These chains have become more complex and more difficult to control, since in addition to operating in more competitive markets, Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 303 © Devisson Mesquita dos Santos, Fernanda Leandra Leal Lopes, Andr e Cristiano Silva Melo, Denilson Ricardo de Lucena Nunes, Izabela Simon Rampasso and Vitor William Batista Martins. Published in Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2631-3871.htm Received 23 November 2022 Revised 2 April 2023 29 May 2023 18 July 2023 23 October 2023 11 February 2024 9 April 2024 14 June 2024 24 July 2024 Accepted 26 July 2024 Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications Vol. 6 No. 3, 2024 pp. 303-329 Emerald Publishing Limited 2631-3871 DOI 10.1108/MSCRA-11-2022-0032 events such as political changes, economic crises and environmental disasters expose them even more to the risk of disruptions (Bui et al., 2021). Currently, the world is being impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and, according to information from the Pan American Health Organization –PAHO, this disease causes serious respiratory problems and has a high transmission capacity (OPAS, 2020). The virus was first detected in December 2019 in China and classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a pandemic in March 2020. In Brazil, according to data from the National Council of Health Secretaries –Conass, the total number of deaths by COVID-19 until August 2021 was 579.010 (CONASS, 2021). In addition to a large number of deaths, the pandemic caused social, cultural, political and economic impacts in the world, as the main measure suggested by the WHO to flatten the contagion curve was social isolation, an action that generated a stoppage in the productive market, affecting organizations around the world all (Silva, 2020). As a consequence of these events, according to the Institute for Supply Management – ISM, in May 2020, 97% of the companies surveyed reported having been affected or believed that they would still suffer some impact due to disruptions in the supply chain, resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. In Brazil, according to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics –IBGE, in August 2020, 33.5% of companies in operation indicated that the pandemic had negatively affected their activities (IBGE, 2020). The impacts also should be analyzed according to the sectors of the supply chains. This work focused on the electricity sector in Brazil, as this sector suffered immediate consequences caused by the pandemic, mainly due to the reduction in electric consumption and the increase in default. Since, in March 2020, the National Electric Energy Agency – ANEEL approved Resolution number 878/2020, which guaranteed continuity in the distribution of electric energy and prohibited the suspension of supply due to the default of consumer units during the pandemic (Brasil, 2020). Thus, according to the National Association of Energy Consumers –ANACE, the delinquency of energy bills has increased, and, in a scenario of 50% delinquency of residential consumers and essential activities, the decrease in revenue reached almost 7 billion reais (around 1.358 billion dollars) monthly. The reduction in energy consumption, on the other hand, has the potential for a decrease in revenue of 1.7 billion in the month, in a scenario of a 30% reduction for non-residential consumption (ANACE, 2020). Although measures were created to reduce the impacts of the pandemic on the electric sector, such as the July 2020 Covid-account, which enabled greater liquidity and reduced impacts on energy bills (ANEEL, 2021), the sector is still experiencing delays in investments, a decrease in maintenance activities and a demand reduction (FGV, 2020). Considering the mentioned scenario, Supply Chain Risk Management (RMSC) can be a relevant ally, as it seeks to identify and control risks that can affect the performance of a supply chain (Matos et al., 2017). In addition, according to Silva (2020),Risk Management proves to be a basic tool to make supply chains more flexible in the face of adverse events. Without understanding the vulnerabilities that currently exist, it is not possible to make decisions to build resiliency in companies’supply chains, so they need to act now to discover the weaknesses that exist in their supply chains (Simchi-Levi and SimchiLevi, 2020). In this sense, this article aims to propose an action plan based on risk management and resilience in the supply chain, aiming to enhance the mitigation of risks arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, in an engineering company in the electric sector. For this, a systematic literature review was carried out to propose the action plan and later the Delphi method was used, in partnership with the company object of study, to validate it. MSCRA 6,3 304 2. Theoretical background 2.1 Supply chain management The Supply Chain (SC) is a set of companies involved in the manufacture of products for end consumers (Piovesan, 2020). Therefore, Supply Chain Management (SCM) is the way to connect suppliers, factories, warehouses and stores so that products arrive in the right quantity, at the right place and at the right time (Orenstein et al., 2016). The SC has become more complex, as uncertainty scenarios directly influence its performance (de Assunç~ ao et al., 2020). In this way, the concept of Risk Management in the Supply Chain (RMSC) emerged from the concern with vulnerabilities and risks of disruptions in the SC, aiming to reduce the probability of these risks (Norrman and Jansson, 2004). In addition, the RMSC is challenged to consider which impacts are related to risks and increased resilience in the SC (El Baz and Ruel, 2021). For this, according to Zsidisin and Ritchie (2009), the RMSC uses SCM and Risk Management (RM) concepts. The RM is a set of activities to manage and control risks (ISO, 2018), with some models focused on RMSC, such as those proposed by Manuj and Mentzer (2008),Sinha et al. (2004) and Gaudenzi and Borghesi (2006) which include the survey of risks, evaluation and analysis, the proposal of action plans, the proposal of strategies to reduce the probability of risks or mitigation of risks and monitoring (Tanoue, 2016). 2.2 Resilience in the supply chain Resilience can be understood as the ability of the entire SC to react to abrupt interruptions, thus, the use of resilience elements increases the robustness of companies (Martins et al., 2021). Resilience must be built into companies’systems to help them quickly recover and adapt in this scenario (Linkov et al., 2014). The pandemic has exposed vulnerability in the global SC, which has made SC resilience even more important (Shi et al., 2021). According to Tanoue (2016) One of the ways to achieve resilience in an organization is the RMSC, as it allows assessing the system’s ability to deal with disruptions and acts in the adaptation to complex systems, since threats cannot always be predicted or controlled (Sikula et al., 2015). In this way, when the risks involved in a situation are not identified, resilience must be created (Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983). Therefore, a SC presents resilience when it can withstand, adapt and recover from interruptions (Hosseini et al., 2019). Additionally, Liu et al. (2023) highlight that disruptive technologies result in new paradigms for supply chain risk management and, in addition, guarantee opportunities and bring challenges to a more resilient supply chain. 2.3 Elements of resilience in the supply chain Sawyerr and Harrison (2020) show 13 formative elements of resilience in SC. Below are defined concepts of the 13 elements of resilience (Collaboration, Flexibility, Redundancy, Agility, Decision making, Security, Culture, Robustness, Integration, Avoidance, Human resource management, Sustainability and Logistics capability). Agility, which is the chain’s ability to respond to unforeseen changes (Christopher and Peck, 2004;Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009) and Anticipation, which is the ability to proactively plan and design the SC, to anticipate unexpected events (Ponis and Koronis, 2012). Logistics capacity is related to the delivery speed, reliability, responsiveness and low-cost distribution of companies (Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009). Transport was immediately affected by the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in labor in the logistics sector, which caused a significant reduction in transport capacity (Liu et al., 2022). Collaboration refers to cooperation between SC participants to mitigate risk, increase resilience, and facilitate chain intelligence (Sawyerr and Harrison, 2020). Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 305 Organizational culture is associated with learning-oriented culture, information sharing or reporting and risk management culture (Sawyerr and Harrison, 2020). Flexibility lies in product, process, transport or service flexibility, or through supply flexibility through flexible suppliers, multiple sources of supply, and supplier diversification (Goyal et al., 2018; Sawyerr and Harrison, 2020). Human resource management involves human resource development and knowledge management (Ali et al., 2017;Pettit et al., 2013). And Integration allows an environment focused on end-to-end interaction of orders, inventory, transportation and distribution (Ponomarov and Holcomb, 2009). The redundancy is tangible when it comes to capacity utilization and intangible when it comes to supplier relationships (Sawyerr and Harrison, 2020). Robustness is the ability to maintain planned SC performance after an interruption (El Baz and Ruel, 2021). The Security element refers to protecting the SC from unexpected risks and events (Bandyopadhyay et al., 2016). Sustainability is the management of SC functions in line with the requirements of social, environmental and economic sustainability (Bui et al., 2021;Khan et al., 2021). And the Decision-Making element is the ability to decide on situations that impact the resilience of the SC (Jabbarzadeh et al., 2016). With the COVID-19 pandemic, many risks threatened organizations and in current studies 20 main risks arising from the pandemic were identified. Table 1 presents the risks in SC resulting from the pandemic identified in the literature and which are relevant in the context of the electricity sector in Brazil. Below are defined concepts of the 17 relevant risks found in the literature. 2.4 Risks in the supply chain Delays in deliveries are mainly due to the determination of large-scale social restrictions and the implementation of health protocols during the pandemic (Praharsi et al., 2021). This was one of the factors that caused price increases, forcing organizations to manage prices and costs together (Nascimento et al., 2021). The complexity of the chain was a risk that increased due to globalization and outsourcing along the SC, which make it less controllable and more sensitive to disruptions. In addition, this complexity limited the company’s vision and ability to identify potential threats (Free and Hecimovic, 2021). The delay in responding to the crisis caused a lack of resources and inventories, causing greater vulnerability for the company and exposure to various risks (Dellana et al., 2019; Nandi et al., 2021). Related to this risk is the delay in recovering from impacts and, therefore, it is necessary to provide an agile environment in the SC. In addition, changes in the market caused by disruptive events make it difficult to adapt (Do et al., 2021). The bullwhip effect is caused by the lack of information and demand variations, caused by uncertainties (Frederico et al., 2021). The shortage of resources/stocks was considered one of the main disruptions of the pandemic (Chowdhury et al., 2020) and a worrying risk, as in addition to the scarcity of stocks, labor resources, financial resources and raw materials, they generated bottlenecks in the process (Dohale et al., 2022). The risk of supplier bankruptcy is mainly caused by financial issues and can cause serious interruptions in the SC (Nascimento et al.,2021). Reliability can be observed in the delivery and quality of the products, therefore, when there is no reliability, there is a lack of respect for deadlines and a reduction in the quality of products (Bas ¸tu gand Yercan, 2021). Crises, such as the one caused by the pandemic, as they are low-probability and highimpact events, tend to bring uncertainty to global SCs and the lack of preparation for these crises leads to a lack of supplies, lack of information, lack of human resources, financial constraints, operational restrictions etc. (Bui et al., 2021). MSCRA 6,3 306 The weak relationship in the SC brings harm to its recovery in cases of interruptions, so sharing information and resources between members allows for better recovery (Bui et al., 2021;Iftikhar et al., 2021). Due to frequent changes in real demand, SC was more exposed to situations of difficulties in forecasting demand (Bui et al.,2021;Dohale et al., 2022). The unavailability of employees occurred, as employees had to be absent, due to isolation restrictions imposed by the pandemic, such as social distancing or the contagion of the Coronavirus (Do et al., 2021). The interruption in supply can occur due to limitations or cancellation of trips, lack of transport, lack of manpower (Bas ¸tu g and Yercan, 2021), product shortages, supplier payment interruption, and credit limitation (Chowdhury et al., 2020), among others. As the crisis caused by the pandemic caused an abrupt change in supply and demand (Do et al., 2021), failures to identify potential opportunities in the market and low speed of response to market volatility occurred (Dohale et al., 2022). Operations stoppages occurred due to a lack of raw material, labor or transport (Nandi et al., 2021). The reduction in product quality was due to a loss of quality in the production or supply of raw materials, caused by resource limitations, and transport failures, among others. In this way, better monitoring of the quality of the products received is fundamental (Nascimento et al., 2021). Restrictions on SC may occur due to unavailability of manpower, logistical bottlenecks or resource restrictions (Kouvelis, 2021). Disruption stems from the lack of products in stock, Risks References Delivery delay Bas ¸tu g and Yercan (2021),Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Chowdhury et al. (2020), Dohale et al. (2022),Frederico et al. (2021),Nandi et al. (2021),Praharsi et al. (2021),Purvis et al. (2020) Price increases Nascimento et al. (2021) Chain complexity Bas ¸tu g and Yercan (2021),Do et al. (2021),Free and Hecimovic (2021) Delay in crisis response Beilstein et al. (2021),Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Bui et al. (2021),Do et al. (2021), Iftikhar et al. (2021),Ivanov (2020),Nandi et al. (2021),Sharma et al. (2021) Delay in crisis recovery Do et al. (2021) Difficulty of adapting Beilstein et al. (2021),Do et al. (2021) Bullwhip effect Do et al. (2021),Frederico et al. (2021) Shortage of resources/ inventories Chowdhury et al. (2020),Do et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Frederico et al. (2021),Kouvelis (2021),Nascimento et al. (2021) Weak relationships in the chain Barbanti et al. (2022),Bui et al. (2021),Iftikhar et al. (2021),Nandi et al. (2021), Purvis et al. (2020),Sharma et al. (2021),Silva et al. (2021) Demand uncertainty Bui et al. (2021),Do et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Kouvelis (2021),Kumari et al. (2021),Mithun Ali et al. (2021),Modgil et al. (2022) Unavailability of employees Do et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Kumari et al. (2021) Interruption in supply Bas ¸tu g and Yercan (2021),Chowdhury et al. (2020),Frederico et al. (2021), Iftikhar et al. (2021),Mithun Ali et al. (2021) Market changes Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Bui et al. (2021),Do et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022), Kumari et al. (2021) Stoppage of operations Barbanti et al. (2022),Do et al. (2021),Nandi et al. (2021),Sharma et al. (2021) Reduction in product quality Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Frederico et al. (2021),Nascimento et al. (2021) Chain restrictions Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Bui et al. (2021),Kouvelis (2021),Kumari et al. (2021) Stock out Do et al. (2021),Free and Hecimovic (2021),Nascimento et al. (2021) Source(s): Authors (2021) Table 1. Pandemic risks in the supply chain Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 307 either due to supplier bankruptcy, low production level or interruption in production, due to a shortage of raw materials or high costs (Nascimento et al., 2021). Thus, for each risk mentioned, there are actions capable of promoting resilience in the SC and mitigating risks, also identified in the literature and presented in Table 2. Below are defined concepts of the 18 actions found in the literature that are relevant to the context of the electricity sector in Brazil. 2.5 Actions to mitigate risks in the supply chain The emergence of COVID-19 required SCs to respond quickly, however, this did not exist. This was a good warning for companies, as it demonstrated the need to be prepared for emergencies (Shi et al., 2021). Thus, All parts changed and inserted into the text were highlighted in red as requested by the editor. Actions are necessary as a way to mitigate risks in SC. There are actions capable of stimulating collaboration and integration during the pandemic involve a good relationship between SC members. That way, Dohale et al. (2022) mention the importance of sharing information and being transparent in the SC, to build trust and agility in responding to risks. Chowdhury et al. (2020) also highlight effective cooperation with suppliers, through information sharing, credit lines and prioritization in supply. Iftikhar et al. (2021) also point out that the integration with customers helps to obtain insights, to develop solutions for their needs and the integration with suppliers ensures consistent supply. In addition, creating collaborative solutions and coordinated investments among participants is one of the ways to improve intelligence in SC (Kouvelis, 2021). Actions References Favoring the Agile Supply Chain Nandi et al. (2021),Purvis et al. (2020),Sharma et al. (2021) Knowledge management Queiroz et al. (2021) Inventory balancing Free and Hecimovic (2021),Iftikhar et al. (2021),Kouvelis (2021) External collaboration and communication Dohale et al. (2022),Iftikhar et al. (2021) Supplier development Chowdhury et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Kouvelis (2021) Promoting a culture to support risk management Kumari et al. (2021),Yu et al. (2021) Use of multiple modes Abdolazimi et al. (2021),Free and Hecimovic (2021) Maintain short-term alternative sources of supply Abdolazimi et al. (2021),Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Nascimento et al. (2021) Conduct ongoing training Beilstein et al. (2021),Udofia et al. (2021) Generate greater transparency in the Supply Chain Chowdhury et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2021),Iftikhar et al. (2021) Use of multiple providers Abdolazimi et al. (2021),Bhattacharya et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022),Nascimento et al. (2021) Strategic Inventory Chowdhury et al. (2020),Dohale et al. (2022),Free and Hecimovic (2021),Iftikhar et al. (2021) Checking and avoiding risks Dohale et al. (2022),Iftikhar et al. (2021) Routine of auditing and inspecting Barbanti et al. (2022),Nascimento et al. (2021) Acquire insurance Aldrighetti et al. (2021),Jaziri and Miralam (2021),Karmaker et al. (2021) Engage the organization in risk management and crisis preparedness Beilstein et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2021) Be adaptable to changes Iftikhar et al. (2021),Yu et al. (2021) Consider the risks involved in decision making Anholon et al. (2021),Beilstein et al. (2021),Dohale et al. (2022), Ivanov (2022),Mithun Ali et al. (2021) Source(s): Authors (2021) Table 2. Risk mitigation actions MSCRA 6,3 308 Therefore, it is evident that better collaboration between members increases transparency and traceability, which are ways to mitigate risks throughout the SC during pandemic periods, such as COVID-19 (Nandi et al., 2021;Paul and Chowdhury, 2020;Sharma et al., 2021; Silva et al., 2021). As strategies for supply, there are: multiple sources of supply, flexible contracts, shortterm alternative suppliers (Abdolazimi et al., 2021;Bhattacharya et al., 2021;Dohale et al., 2022;Nascimento et al., 2021), emergency supply (Paul and Chowdhury, 2020), greater regionalization of SC (Free and Hecimovic, 2021;Modgil et al., 2022), local supplier development (Bhattacharya et al., 2021;Sreedevi et al., 2021), preservation of agile suppliers (Free and Hecimovic, 2021;Nandi et al., 2021) and promotion of alternative channels (Abdolazimi et al., 2021;Free and Hecimovic, 2021). Another action highlighted in the literature is the strategic stock, because, with a greater risk of interruption in supply and delays in delivery, companies began to request extra quantities, to minimize the shortage of products (Chowdhury et al., 2020). In this way, redundancy was generated with safety stocks, to meet the unforeseen or dammed demand (Dohale et al., 2022). Therefore, having slack resources, such as strategic stock in the SC, to accommodate shock events, is a way to mitigate the initial impact of disruption (Free and Hecimovic, 2021;Iftikhar et al., 2021). Knowledge management enables learning from past disruptions, to develop predictions for future disruptions (Queiroz et al., 2021). According to Kumari et al. (2021),an organizational culture that encourages collaboration, involvement and knowledge-sharing, generates greater interaction, understanding and innovation for the company. Therefore, the creation and innovation of knowledge are key resources (Yu et al., 2021). Agility can be achieved with the implementation of digital tools in SC (Nandi et al.,2021; Sharma et al., 2021), that is, through communication and digitalization technologies, the order point can be improved by increasing the frequency of receipt and reducing lead times along the SC, enabling the reduction of inventories (Purvis et al., 2020), thus favoring an agile SC. As for the anticipation strategy, it is recommended to create a team with different departments to identify and plan approaches to mitigate risks (Dohale et al., 2022). Iftikhar et al. (2021) also indicate that monitoring the environment in which the SC is inserted is a way of anticipating threats. In decision-making, risks must be recognized and correctly assessed through risk management tools, such as analysis of the most vulnerable touch points in the SC and simulation (Beilstein et al., 2021;Ivanov, 2020;Mithun Ali et al., 2021) and business continuity management (Anholon et al., 2021). However, in addition to using risk management tools, a leader should seek help from experienced employees as needed (Beilstein et al., 2021). With the risk of rupture, measures in the financial area were also developed (Aldrighetti et al., 2021), because there is a need to purchase insurance to cover economic losses (Jaziri and Miralam, 2021). Therefore, to help organizations survive, the government must encourage sustainable practices, such as funding for infrastructure, and access to sustainable and safe technologies (Karmaker et al., 2021). In addition, it is necessary to carry out audits on suppliers, as a way of guaranteeing and monitoring the quality of the product (de Assunç~ ao et al., 2020;Barbanti et al., 2022). In this period, an organization must also be ready for adaptation and continuous learning is a means of stimulating this. Therefore, leaders must support employees with feedback and a positive learning culture (Beilstein et al., 2021). Another strategy for employee development is workforce flexibility, as it ensures multifunctional employees and can be achieved through training (Udofia et al., 2021). Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 309 2.6 Resilience and risk in the supply chain The previous sections discuss the concept of supply chain management and its growing complexity influenced by uncertainty scenarios. It introduces Risk Management in the Supply Chain (RMSC) as a response to vulnerabilities and disruptions, aiming to reduce the probability of risks. Risk in the supply chain refers to the potential for disruptions, events, or factors that can negatively impact the normal flow of goods and services. It can take various forms, such as operational and disruption (Choi et al., 2019). Many risks intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic in the supply chain, such as delays in deliveries, chain complexity, resource shortages, the bullwhip effect, and the risk of supplier bankruptcy, emphasize the need for supply chain resilience. The Supply Chain Resilience define the ability to react to abrupt interruptions, enhancing the robustness of companies. Resilience is crucial, especially in the context of the global supply chain vulnerability exposed by the pandemic. A resilient supply chain is one that can adapt to changes, absorb shocks, and recover promptly from unexpected events. These can include various disruptions such as natural disasters, economic fluctuations, geopolitical events, and even pandemics (e.g. Christopher and Peck, 2004;Chopra et al., 2021;Wieland and Durach, 2021). Elements of resilience in the supply chain include agility, anticipation, collaboration, organizational culture, flexibility, human resource management, and sustainability, among others. In summary, supply chain resilience and risk in the supply chain are interrelated, with resilience efforts serving as a proactive response to address or mitigate identified risks. Building resilience enables a supply chain to navigate challenges and uncertainties, ultimately ensuring its sustainability and success in a dynamic business environment. 3. Methodological procedures This research comprised the following steps: (1) Systematic review of the literature; (2) Elaboration of the action plan; (3) Delphi development to validate the action plan; (4) Content analysis of the experts’answers, according to the model of Elo and Kyng€ as (2008), and (5) Establishment of results and conclusions. To carry out the systematic review of the literature, the steps suggested by Denyer and Tranfield (2009), as shown in Figure 1. First, the guiding questions for the research were formulated: (Q1) What were the risks in the supply chain resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic? And (Q2) What actions are capable of stimulating the elements of resilience in the supply chain to mitigate these risks? Then, the search keywords, “Risk Management”,“Supply Chain”,“Resilience”,“COVID19”and “Brazil”, were defined for research in the scientific bases Emerald Insight and Science Direct. Thus, 98 files were obtained in the first result, however 63 were excluded, as they did not focus on the theme of this article, according to the summary of the selected articles, presented in Table 3. It is noteworthy that the theoretical background presented in this paper was based on this methodology. As a result of the analysis of the selected articles, 20 risks were identified in the literature, resulting from the pandemic and 18 actions relevant to the stimulation of elements of resilience and mitigation of these risks, both results presented in Section 2.Tanoue (2016), the action plan at RMSC often uses the 5W2H methodology, because, for each identified risk, actions are established, where they will be carried out, who will be responsible, what deadlines, what benefits, what strategies and how much will be the investment. Thus, an action plan was prepared in the 5W1H format for not having access to the cost information of the analyzed sector. MSCRA 6,3 310 Ivanov, D. (2020), “Predicting the impacts of epidemic outbreaks on global supply chains: a simulation-based analysis on the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) case”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 136 March, 101922, doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2020.101922. Jabbarzadeh, A., Fahimnia, B., Sheu, J.B. and Moghadam, H.S. (2016), “Designing a supply chain resilient to major disruptions and supply/demand interruptions”,Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 94, pp. 121-149, doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2016.09.004. Jafari, T., Zarei, A., Azar, A. and Moghaddam, A. (2021), “The impact of business intelligence on supply chain performance with emphasis on integration and agility–a mixed research approach”,International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 72 No. 5, pp. 1445-1478, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-09-2021-0511. Jaziri, R. and Miralam, M.S. (2021), “The impact of crisis and disasters risk management in COVID-19 times: insights and lessons learned from Saudi Arabia”,Ethics, Medicine and Public Health, Vol. 18, 100705, doi: 10.1016/j.jemep.2021.100705. Karmaker, C.L., Ahmed, T., Ahmed, S., Ali, S.M., Moktadir, M.A. and Kabir, G. (2021), “Improving supply chain sustainability in the context of COVID-19 pandemic in an emerging economy: exploring drivers using an integrated model”,Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 26, pp. 411-427, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.019. Khan, M.I., Haleem, A. and Khan, S. (2021), “Examining the link between Halal supply chain management and sustainability”,International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 71 No. 7, pp. 2793-2819, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-07-2019-0354. Kouvelis, P. (2021), “Paradoxes and mysteries in virus-infected supply chains: hidden bottlenecks, changing consumer behaviors, and other non-usual suspects”,Business Horizons, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 469-479, doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2021.06.003. Kumari, S., Venkatesh, V.G., Deakins, E., Mani, V. and Kamble, S. (2021), “Agriculture value chain sustainability during COVID-19: an emerging economy perspective”,International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 280-303, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-04-2021-0247. Linkov, I., Bridges, T., Creutzig, F., Decker, J., Fox-lent, C., Kr€ oger, W., Lambert, J.H., Levermann, A., Montreuil, B., Nathwani, J., Nyer, R., Renn, O., Scharte, B., Scheffler, A., Schreurs, M. and ThielClemen, T. (2014), “Changing the resilience paradigm”,Nature Publishing Group, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 407-409, doi: 10.1038/nclimate2227. Liu, W., Liang, Y., Bao, X., Qin, J. and Lim, M.K. (2022), “China’s logistics development trends in the post COVID-19 era”,International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 965-976, doi: 10.1080/13675567.2020.1837760. Liu, W., He, Y., Dong, J. and Cao, Y. (2023), “Disruptive technologies for advancing supply chain resilience”, Frontiers of Engineering Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 360-366, doi: 10.1007/s42524-023-0257-1. Manuj, I. and Mentzer, J.T. (2008), “Global supply chain risk management strategies”,International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 192-223, doi: 10. 1108/09600030810866986. Martins, V.W.B., Anholon, R., Leal Filho, W. and Quelhas, O.L.G. (2021), “Resilience in the supply chain management: understanding critical aspects and how digital technologies can contribute to Brazilian companies in the COVID-19 context”,Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 2-18, doi: 10.1108/mscra-05-2021-0005. Matos, A.L.T., Vitorino Filho, V.A., Spers, V.R.E. and Pires, S.R.I. (2017), “A Produç~ ao Acad^ emica Internacional sobre Gest~ ao de Riscos na Cadeia de Suprimentos no Per ıodo entre 2005 e 2014”, Revista de Administraç~ ao FACES Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 45-65, ANPAD, doi: 10.21714/19846975faces2017v16n1art3647. Mithun Ali, S., Kumar Paul, S., Chowdhury, P., Agarwal, R., Fathollahi-Fard, A.M., Jose Chiappetta Jabbour, C. and Luthra, S. (2021), “Modelling of supply chain disruption analytics using an integrated approach: an emerging economy example”,Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 173, 114690, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114690. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 317 Modgil, S., Gupta, S., Stekelorum, R. and Laguir, I. (2022), “AI technologies and their impact on supply chain resilience during -19”,International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 130-149, doi: 10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2020-0434. Nandi, S., Sarkis, J., Hervani, A.A. and Helms, M.M. (2021), “Redesigning supply chains using blockchain-enabled circular economy and COVID-19 experiences”,Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 27 July, pp. 10-22, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.019. Nascimento, A.P.D, Oliveira, M.P., Pettit, T.J. and Bronzo, M. (2021), “Practices and mechanisms for increasing supply chain resilience: the supply chain resilience sheaf”,Continuity and Resilience Review, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 79-100, doi: 10.1108/crr-12-2020-0035. Norrman, A. and Jansson, U. (2004), “Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk management approach after a serious sub-supplier accident”,International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 434-456, doi: 10.1108/09600030410545463. Okoli, C. and Pawlowski, S.D. (2004), “The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications”,Information and Management, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 15-29, doi: 10. 1016/j.im.2003.11.002. OPAS (2020), “Folha informativa sobre COVID-19 –OPAS/OMS jOrganizaç~ ao Pan-Americana da Sa ude”. Orenstein, P., Ladik, D. and Rainford, S. (2016), “What are the key drivers of future supply chains?”, Pedagogy view project supply network topology view project what are the key drivers of future supply chains? What are the key drivers of future supply chains?. Paul, S.K. and Chowdhury, P. (2020), “A production recovery plan in manufacturing supply chains for a high-demand item during COVID-19”,International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 104-125, doi: 10.1108/IJPDLM-04-2020-0127. Pettit, T.J., Croxton, K.L. and Fiksel, J. (2013), “Ensuring supply chain resilience: development and implementation of an assessment tool”,Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 46-76, doi: 10.1111/jbl.12009. Piovesan, L.D. (2020), “An alise explorat oria da transformaç~ ao digital nos processos das cadeias de suprimento”. Ponis, S.T. and Koronis, E. (2012), “Supply chain resilience: definition of concept and its formative elements”,The Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 28 No. 5, p. 921, doi: 10.19030/jabr. v28i5.7234. Ponomarov, S.Y. and Holcomb, M.C. (2009), “Understanding the concept of supply chain resilience”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 124-143, doi: 10.1108/ 09574090910954873. Praharsi, Y., Jami’in, M.A., Suhardjito, G. and Wee, H.M. (2021), “The application of Lean Six Sigma and supply chain resilience in maritime industry during the era of COVID-19”,International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 800-834, doi: 10.1108/IJLSS-11-2020-0196. Purvis, L., Lahy, A., Mason, R. and Wilson, M. (2020), “Distributed manufacturing as an opportunity for service growth in logistics firms”,Supply Chain Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 307-322, doi: 10.1108/SCM-03-2019-0096. Queiroz, M.M., Fosso Wamba, S. and Branski, R.M. (2021), “Supply chain resilience during the COVID19: empirical evidence from an emerging economy”,Benchmarking, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 1999-2018, doi: 10.1108/BIJ-08-2021-0454. Sawyerr, E. and Harrison, C. (2020), “Developing resilient supply chains: lessons from high-reliability organisations”,Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 77-100, doi: 10.1108/SCM-09-2018-0329. Sharma, R., Samad, T.A., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J. and de Queiroz, M.J. (2021), “Leveraging blockchain technology for circularity in agricultural supply chains: evidence from a fast-growing economy”,Journal of Enterprise Information Management, doi: 10.1108/JEIM-02-2021-0094. MSCRA 6,3 318 Shi, X., Liu, W. and Zhang, J. (2021), “Present and future trends of supply chain management in the presence of COVID-19: a structured literature review”,International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, Vol. 0 No. 0, pp. 1-30, doi: 10.1080/13675567.2021.1988909. Sikula, N.R., Mancillas, J.W., Linkov, I. and McDonagh, J.A. (2015), “Risk management is not enough: a conceptual model for resilience and adaptation-based vulnerability assessments”,Environment Systems and Decisions, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 219-228, doi: 10.1007/s10669-015-9552-7. Silva, R.R. (2020), Os Efeitos Da Pandemia Da Covid-19 Na Cadeia De Suprimentos: Um Estudo De Caso Do Setor Supermercadista Brasileiro Sob A Perspectiva De Uma Rede Varejista. Silva, M.E., Silvestre, B.S., Del Vecchio Ponte, R.C. and Cabral, J.E.O. (2021), “Managing micro and small enterprise supply chains: a multi-level approach to sustainability, resilience and regional development”,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 311, 127567, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021. 127567. Simchi-Levi, D. and Simchi-Levi, E. (2020), “Building resilient supply chains won’t Be easy”,Harvard Business Review. Sinha, P.R., Whitman, L.E. and Malzahn, D. (2004), “Methodology to mitigate supplier risk in an aerospace supply chain”,Supply Chain Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 154-168, doi: 10.1108/ 13598540410527051. Sreedevi, R., Saranga, H. and Gouda, S.K. (2021), “Impact of a country’s logistical capabilities on supply chain risk”,Supply Chain Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 107-121, doi: 10.1108/SCM-092020-0504. Tanoue, G.O. (2016), Flexibilidade, Gest~ ao de Riscos e Resili^ encia Na Cadeia de Suprimentos, (1st ed.), Appris, Curitiba. Udofia, E.E., Adejare, B.O., Olaore, G.O. and Udofia, E.E. (2021), “Supply disruption in the wake of COVID-19 crisis and organisational performance: mediated by organisational productivity and customer satisfaction”,Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 319-338, doi: 10.1108/jhass-08-2020-0138. Wieland, A. and Durach, C.F. (2021), “Two perspectives on supply chain resilience”,Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 315-322, doi: 10.1111/jbl.12271. Yu, J., Pauleen, D.J., Taskin, N. and Jafarzadeh, H. (2021), “Building social media-based knowledge ecosystems for enhancing business resilience through mass collaboration”,International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 1063-1084, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-12-2020-2542. Zsidisin, G.A. and Ritchie, B. (2009), Chapter 1: Supply Chain Risk Management-Developments, Issues and Challenges. Corresponding author Vitor William Batista Martins can be contacted at: [email protected] Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 319 Appendix Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? * Delivery delay * Uncertainty of demand * Resource reduction Action 1: Favor the Agile Supply Chain Increase receiving frequency and reduce lead times along the supply chain Logistics Sector Matrix – Corporate Short term * Increase product availability * Reduce risks associated with maintaining high levels of inventories Adjusting the order point * Unavailability of employees * Supply interruption * Lack of preparedness for crises Action 2: Knowledge management Record and manage information from past disruption events, such as which processes/ products are most likely to experience disruptions, how these disruptions might occur, and which disruptions have already occurred Purchasing Sector Matrix – Corporate Mid-term * Portrait the realistic view of the processes * Harvest lessons from past failures * Be prepared for future failures * Maintain process knowledge in the company Preparing reports and procedures for failures and risks in the processes (continued) Table A1. Version 1 of the stock plan MSCRA 6,3 320 Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? * Delivery delay * Supply interruption * Uncertainty of demand Action 3: Inventory balancing Develop an integrated inventory system so that one warehouse can supply the other if needed Logistics Sector Matrix and Regionals Immediate * Ensure availability in case of supply disruption Developing an integrated inventory system to exchange information between warehouses * Price increase * Bullwhip effect * Supplier bankruptcy*Uncertainty of demand * Supply interruption * Reduction of resources Action 4: Collaboration and external communication Maintain continuous contact with suppliers and customers, sharing information among supply chain members, such as behavior and demand characteristics Supply Management Matrix – Corporate Immediate * Improve supply chain intelligence * Increase supplier monitoring Sharing information across the chain through reporting and constant contact * Out of stock Action 5: Supplier development Initiate and strengthen collaborative partnerships to develop relationships and supply chain members Supply Management Matrix – Corporate Mid-term * Improve supply chain intelligence * Increase trust among chain members * Strengthen the relationship between chain members Close agreements and close flexible supply contracts (continued) Table A1. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 321 Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? * Difficulty adapting * Delay in crisis response * Lack of preparedness for crises Action 6: Promote a culture that helps manage risk in the supply chain Encourage a culture oriented towards learning and sharing information/ knowledge Company Board Matrix – Corporate Managements –Regional Long term * Readiness to deal with change * Improve the chance of survival Create events with dynamic problem solving and knowledge sharing * Delivery delay * Supply interruption * Resource reduction * Chain restrictions Action 7: Use multiple modals Diversify the modes of transport used Purchasing Sector Matrix – Corporate Immediate * Prevent risk of transport breakage * Decrease the dependency relationship with companies Diversifying transport contracting Action 8: Maintain shortterm alternative sources of supply Having local suppliers as a contingency plan Purchasing Sector Matrix – Corporate and Regional Immediate * Ensure availability in case of supply disruption Mapping new regional suppliers * Lack of preparedness for crises * Unavailability of employees Action 9: Conduct ongoing training Conduct crosstraining for employees Logistics Sector Matrix – Corporate Mid-term * Develop crossfunctional teams * Improve employee flexibility Training the warehouse team (continued) Table A1. MSCRA 6,3 322 Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? * Delivery delay * Supplier bankruptcy*Uncertainty of demand * Supply interruption * Out of stock Action 10: Generate greater transparency in the Supply Chain Provide greater interaction between chain members Chain members Companies Long term * Bring greater transparency and information Through an integrated environment of information about order status, demand and distribution * Delivery delay * Supplier bankruptcy * Uncertainty of demand * Supply interruption * Out of stock Action 11: Use multiple providers Maintain alternate sources of supply for critical items Purchasing Sector Matrix – Corporate Short term * Ensure availability in case of supply disruption Mapping new suppliers Action 12: Strategic Inventory Review current safety stock level policy for critical products that have high inventory turns Logistics Sector Matrix – Corporate Short term * Ensure availability in case of supply disruption Adjusting the safety stock * Lack of preparedness for crises * Market changes * Uncertainty of demand * Stop operations Action 13: Check for risks and deal with them before they occur Form a specialized team to identify and manage risks Company Board Matrix – Corporate Mid-term * Maintain planned performance despite supply chain disruptions Using a risk identification and mapping committee (continued) Table A1. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 323 Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? * Lack of reliability * Lack of preparedness for crises * Reduction in product quality Action 14: Have a routine to audit and inspect Inspect the quality of products upon receipt Warehouse team Regionals Immediate * Ensure the safety of the operation * Ensure reliability with suppliers Through inspections upon receiving the material Action 15: Take out insurance Have insurance for unexpected events Company Board Matrix – Corporate Immediate * Share risks * Guarantee credit By hiring insurance companies * Delay in crisis recovery * Difficulty adapting * Lack of preparedness for crises Action 16: Engage the organization in risk management and crisis preparedness Train and engage employees in resolving challenges and crises Company Board Matrix – Corporate Long term * Increase the possibility of a faster and more efficient recovery Training and familiarizing the company with negative incident contexts Action 17: Be adaptable to change Encourage creative thinking and problem solving in the organization Company Board Matrix – Corporate Long term * Create solutions for crises and unforeseen events Fostering employee participation and collaboration in problem solving * Delay in crisis response * Weak relationship in jail Action 18: Consider the risks involved in decision making Analyze risks and consult chain information for decision making Company Board Matrix – Corporate Mid-term * Build strategic resilience in the company Using Risk Management Practices Source(s): Authors’own creation Table A1. MSCRA 6,3 324 Appendix 2. Resilience element Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? E1: Agility * Delivery delay * Uncertainty of demand * Reduction of financial resources and products in stock Action 1: Favor the Agile Supply Chain Increase receiving frequency and reduce lead times along the supply chain Logistics Sector Matrix – Corporate Short term * Increase product availability * Reduce risks associated with maintaining high levels of inventories * Optimize structures to reduce operating costs Adjusting the reorder point for items with higher inventory turnover E2: Anticipation * Unavailability/ Employee turnover * Supply interruption * Lack of preparedness for crises Action 2: Knowledge management Record and manage information from past disruption events, such as which processes/products are most likely to experience disruptions, how these disruptions might occur, and which disruptions have already occurred. As well as creating a specification catalog on the materials Purchasing Sector Matrix – Corporate Immediate * Portrait the realistic view of the processes * Harvest lessons from past failures * Be prepared for future failures * Maintain process knowledge in the company * Avoid errors in the purchasing process Preparing reports, failure procedures, process risks and creating catalogs with product specifications E3: Logistics capacity * Delivery delay * Supply interruption * Uncertainty of demand Action 3: Inventory balancing Develop an integrated inventory system so that one warehouse can supply the other if needed Logistics Sector Matriz and Regionals Immediate * Ensure availability in case of supply disruption Developing an integrated inventory and information exchange system between warehouses (continued) Table A2. Version final of the stock plan Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications 325 Resilience element Related risks Mitigation action What? Where? Who? When? Why? How? E4: Collaboration * Price increase * Bullwhip effect * Supplier bankruptcy * Uncertainty of demand * Supply interruption * Reduction of financial resources and products in stock * Out of stock Action 4: Collaboration and external communication Maintain continuous contact with suppliers and customers, sharing information among supply chain members, such as behavior and demand characteristics Supply Management Matrix – Corporate Immediate * Improve supply chain intelligence * Increase supplier monitoring Sharing information across the chain through reporting and constant contact Action 5: Supplier development Initiate and strengthen collaborative partnerships to develop relationships and supply chain members Chain members Companies Immediate * Improve supply chain intelligence * Increase trust among chain members * Strengthen the relationship between chain members Tightening agreements, closing flexible supply contracts and considering the reverse logistics of postconsumer materials E5: Organizational culture * Difficulty adapting * Delay in crisis response * Lack of preparedness for crises Action 6: Promote a culture that helps manage risk in the supply chain Encourage a culture oriented towards learning and sharing information/ knowledge Company Board Regional Managers Matrix – Corporate and Regional Mid-term * Improve readiness to deal with change * Improve the chance of survival Creating events with problem solving and knowledge sharing dynamics (continued) Table A2. MSCRA 6,3 326