Knowledge sharing in the supply chain networks: A perspective of supply chain complexity drivers

Ahmed, Hareer Fatima; Hosseinian-Far, Amin; Khandan, Rasoul; Sarwar, Dilshad; Khushboo-E-Fatima Article Knowledge sharing in the supply chain networks: A perspective of supply chain complexity drivers Logistics Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Ahmed, Hareer Fatima; Hosseinian-Far, Amin; Khandan, Rasoul; Sarwar, Dilshad; Khushboo-E-Fatima (2022) : Knowledge sharing in the supply chain networks: A perspective of supply chain complexity drivers, Logistics, ISSN 2305-6290, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 6, Iss. 3, pp. 1-20, https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6030066 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/310275 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/ Citation: Ahmed, H.F.; Hosseinian-Far, A.; Khandan, R.; Sarwar, D.; E-Fatima, K. Knowledge Sharing in the Supply Chain Networks: A Perspective of Supply Chain Complexity Drivers. Logistics 2022,6, 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/ logistics6030066 Academic Editor: Robert Handfield Received: 10 August 2022 Accepted: 7 September 2022 Published: 16 September 2022 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). logistics Review Knowledge Sharing in the Supply Chain Networks: A Perspective of Supply Chain Complexity Drivers Hareer Fatima Ahmed 1, Amin Hosseinian-Far 1, Rasoul Khandan 1,2,*, Dilshad Sarwar 1and Khushboo E-Fatima 1 1Department of Business Systems and Operations, University of Northampton, Northampton NN1 5PH, UK 2College of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK *Correspondence: r[email protected] Abstract: Background: Knowledge transfer has been an important aspect in supply chain systems; however, there are many factors that affect the impact of transfer effectiveness. In previous studies, less attention has been given to the process of knowledge transfer and therefore, this paper highlights the significance of the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain processes. Enhanced supply chain networks have better performance when knowledge sharing is present, and it is important to identify and eliminate any supply chain complexity to improve the supply chain processes. Methods: A systematic review on the literature has been conducted to critically identify and evaluate the factors of supply chain complexity which impact knowledge transfer. Findings: The findings highlight the key benefits of effective knowledge transfer in supply chain systems by identifying risks associated with supply chain networks. Conclusion: The balanced power of facilitating knowledge transfer in supply chain processes helps in supply chain partnerships and reduces the supply chain complexity. This paper has both theoretical and practical contributions as it adds to the literature by identifying the factors of supply chain complexity drivers which are impacting the knowledge transfer. Keywords: supply chain complexity; supply chain systems; knowledge transfer; supply chain complexity drivers; systematic review 1. Introduction Supply chain performance benefits from knowledge transfer and the process of knowledge transfer is essential in supply chain systems. Supply chains are subjected to complexities or disruptions from a variety of sources, which could be related to the amount of knowledge that the firms have [ 1 ]. Knowledge transfer can respond to the new issues that supply chain management encounters in today’s complicated corporate situations [ 2 ]. This study aims to identify the supply chain complexity factors which impact the process of knowledge transfer. When current information is developed and communicated to impact and enhance supply chain functions, firms can compete better in a highly competitive environment [ 3 ]. According to [ 4 ], knowledge sharing across diverse stakeholders, including customers, suppliers, and partners, can have a substantial impact on a variety of business sectors, including customer service, production cycles, departmental cooperation, and alliance partner connections. As evidenced by the prime quality of product considering uniqueness and innovation, the partnership between various stakeholders that knowledge transfer empowers can improve customer service [5]. While some supply chain risks can be mitigated, there will always be circumstances where present methods and systems do not provide an acceptable planned reaction—nonroutine events. Supply chain disruptions are supply chain complexities that affect 75% of all businesses every year [ 6 ]. Accepting that supply chain disruptions are unavoidable, businesses must learn to adapt their routines and procedures to foster supply chain resilience, which is defined as the adaptive capability that reduces the impact of a non-routine Logistics 2022,6, 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics6030066 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/logistics Logistics 2022,6, 66 2 of 20 event by proactively identifying strategies that enable the supply chain to respond to and recover from such events [ 7 ]. This research shows how knowledge transmission across the supply chain and stakeholder network increases learning in all three phases of supply chain systems (preparation, response, recovery). As a result, unlike what has been proposed earlier by [8], learning can take place after the post-disruption stage as well. The background of the study explains the aim of this research. Furthermore, it highlights the research question for the systematic review being conducted in this paper. It gives an overview of the focus and background of the study and further explains the importance and significance of the systematic review used in this paper. Knowledge is known to be the fundamental building block of organisations as it allows the firms to develop core competencies, enables them to identify challenges and handle complexities and it helps firms to be competitive. Knowledge transfer is the process in which one unit has an impact on the other through the experience of another [ 9 ]. This study primarily focuses on the strategic knowledge sharing in supply chain networks. This is because the study successfully identifies the construct factors of supply chain complexity which impact the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain networks. Knowledge transfer is crucial because it can improve a firm’s innovativeness, competitive advantage [ 10 ], and performance [ 11 ]. External knowledge transferred through collaborative arrangements between external actors (such as customers, suppliers, and research institutes) and firms is one of the central tenets which underpin (inbound) open innovation and one of the key inputs into enterprises’ innovation [ 12 ]. Knowledge is a valuable resource for a company [ 13 , 14 ] that can be held within the company or through its supply chain [ 13 ]. The firm’s knowledge-based perspective implies that organisations can synergistically combine individual expertise and can gain long-term competitive advantage [ 13 – 16 ]. This concept was extended by [ 17 ], who proposed that corporations exist to coordinate individuals’ specialised knowledge. Competitive advantage is strategically dependent on an organization’s ability to manage and transmit information, which is driven by originality and the ability to execute and preserve that uniqueness [ 13 , 14 ]. One of the most important challenges in knowledge transfer, according to [ 18 ], is the definition and control of the primary factors capable of providing efficacy and efficiency to the entire process in business systems. According to [ 18 ], the content of knowledge to be transferred (the complexity, quality, and quantity of information transferred within the organisation) and the speed of the knowledge transfer process determine the maximum effectiveness and efficiency of the knowledge transfer process (the time in which the knowledge transfer can be realized). In addition, Ref. [ 19 ] sheds light on complexity management strategies which focuses on the reduction of the complexity in supply chain systems as it increases knowledge sharing. This systematic review examines and identifies the factors of supply chain complexity which impact the process of knowledge transfer. This study conducts a systematic review because it is a thorough, focused, and rigorous review process which ensures a structured approach in the identification of the factors that influence knowledge transfer in supply chain networks. It is crucial to identify and investigate the factors associated with supply chain complexity as they affect the process of knowledge transfer. Therefore, it is essential to highlight these factors so that researchers and practitioners can benefit from this knowledge and enhance supply chain operations. Figure 1projects the three important phases in the process of knowledge transfer between two organisations. The inter-organisational knowledge transfer process takes place when two organisations collaborate; however, there are different interactive dynamics which affect the process. Figure 1highlights different factors which play a vital role in the inter-organisational knowledge transfer process. The donor firm transfers knowledge as the absorptive capacity of retaining knowledge is quite high and the donor firm already practices the knowledge transfer process within its firm. Therefore, it has the motivation of teaching and spreading knowledge and information to the other firms for collaboration. However, the process of knowledge transfer has its own dynamics and nature as it includes tacitness, ambiguity, complexity, structures, risks associated, power relations and trust. Logistics 2022,6, 66 3 of 20 These dynamics should be taken under consideration when the knowledge is transferred to a recipient firm. This is because the recipient firm should be motivated for learning; however, these dynamics can create hurdles if they are not addressed properly. For instance, if the recipient firm lacks motivation to learn and vice versa, complexities could arise which could be a potential risk to overall knowledge transfer process. On the contrary, such hinderances can be prevented if they are tackled in a systematic and efficient manner. Logistics 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 23 practices the knowledge transfer process within its firm. Therefore, it has the motivation of teaching and spreading knowledge and information to the other firms for collaboration. However, the process of knowledge transfer has its own dynamics and nature as it includes tacitness, ambiguity, complexity, structures, risks associated, power relations and trust. These dynamics should be taken under consideration when the knowledge is transferred to a recipient firm. This is because the recipient firm should be motivated for learning; however, these dynamics can create hurdles if they are not addressed properly. For instance, if the recipient firm lacks motivation to learn and vice versa, complexities could arise which could be a potential risk to overall knowledge transfer process. On the contrary, such hinderances can be prevented if they are tackled in a systematic and efficient manner. Figure 1. Inter-organisational knowledge transfer and the factors influencing the knowledge transfer (adapted from [20]). In previous literature, research related to the supply chain complexity drivers is available. However, it lacks attention to the impact of the supply chain complexity drivers on knowledge transfer. Hence, this study addresses this literature gap and focuses on the identification of the supply chain complexity factors affecting knowledge transfer. The knowledge transfer process has its own challenges and supply chains constantly strive to eliminate the potential risks and complexities. The supply chain complexity drivers have various factors which influence the business operations and supply chain processes. Therefore, this paper has gathered the factors of supply chain complexity which have an impact on knowledge transfer. It is essential to identify these factors as it will increase the flow of knowledge transfer and will eventually increase the operations of the supply chain networks. This paper investigates and identifies the importance of knowledge sharing in supply chain processes. The study has practical implications as it provides firms with relevant information and knowledge related to supply chain complexity drivers and this can enhance supply chain practices within organisations. Mangers and decision-makers within organisations can improve supply chain networks by eliminating supply chain complexity and enhancing supply chain operations. This can help firms to achieve economic and social goals by effective knowledge transfer within supply chain networks. This paper conducts a systematic review and the research question for this study is: What are the supply chain complexity factors which are impacting the knowledge transfer process in organisations? Figure 1. Inter-organisational knowledge transfer and the factors influencing the knowledge transfer (adapted from [20]). In previous literature, research related to the supply chain complexity drivers is available. However, it lacks attention to the impact of the supply chain complexity drivers on knowledge transfer. Hence, this study addresses this literature gap and focuses on the identification of the supply chain complexity factors affecting knowledge transfer. The knowledge transfer process has its own challenges and supply chains constantly strive to eliminate the potential risks and complexities. The supply chain complexity drivers have various factors which influence the business operations and supply chain processes. Therefore, this paper has gathered the factors of supply chain complexity which have an impact on knowledge transfer. It is essential to identify these factors as it will increase the flow of knowledge transfer and will eventually increase the operations of the supply chain networks. This paper investigates and identifies the importance of knowledge sharing in supply chain processes. The study has practical implications as it provides firms with relevant information and knowledge related to supply chain complexity drivers and this can enhance supply chain practices within organisations. Mangers and decision-makers within organisations can improve supply chain networks by eliminating supply chain complexity and enhancing supply chain operations. This can help firms to achieve economic and social goals by effective knowledge transfer within supply chain networks. This paper conducts a systematic review and the research question for this study is: What are the supply chain complexity factors which are impacting the knowledge transfer process in organisations? This study uses a systematic review to collect the factors of supply chain complexity which impact knowledge transfer in the supply chain systems. Systematic reviews offer many benefits. The main benefit of conducting systematic review is that it delivers a clear and comprehensive study, and it helps in answering the specific research question in a rigorous and transparent form of literature. The aim of this study is to collect the Logistics 2022,6, 66 4 of 20 factors of supply chain complexity drivers which impact the process of knowledge transfer. This research contributes towards the managerial and practical practices of firms and organisations in supply chain networks. It also facilitates in eliminating the supply chain complexity drivers to increase knowledge transfer and operations of supply chain systems. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) in the systematic review is used in this study to enhance the process of research. This study uses PRISMA for its various potential benefits as it provides a clear guideline to this respective study. PRISMA provides the opportunity to conduct a systematic and transparent review process which is comprised of various steps such as eligibility, identification, evaluation, screening, and inclusion. The search process is carried out using online databases. It is a structured and step-by-step process which enhances the search process by deriving relevant articles. In this study, PRISMA helps to ensure that there is a transparent and complete reporting of the systematic review. The complete reporting provides an opportunity to analyse the appropriateness of the method and further authenticates the findings. The PRISMA flow diagram visually summarises the screening process. In the next section, materials and methods of collecting the data are discussed. This paper will explain all the steps taken to conduct the systematic review. The next section thoroughly explains the benefits of conducting a systematic review and PRISMA. Moreover, the results will be discussed at a later stage. 2. Materials and Methods This systematic review follows protocols and reporting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) methods and procedures [ 21 ]. Systematic reviews are a transparent form of the literature review, and they are known to be the most reliable as well as detailed work, which involves identification, synthesis and assessment of the available data and evidence. It is used to create a robust and empirically derived answer to a very focused question [22]. Systematic reviews have been conducted and used globally since the 1970s and they were frequency increased in 1980s. However, these reviews were conducted for medical research and natural sciences at that time. Systematic reviews were a useful method to facilitate the evidence base in the best possible way. Systematic reviews rely on a particular objective with clear transparency to reduce bias. In this study, a systematic review is used to collect the factors of supply chain complexity which impact the process of knowledge transfer. In the next section the methodological choice is discussed in detail, followed by the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this study. 2.1. Methodological Choice The systematic review is a well-documented, repeatable, and transparent process of search based on a theory-based understanding of the phenomenon of interest, and it improves the quality of the review process in the end [ 23 ]. Systematic reviews summarize what has been written and discovered about a study issue in an objective manner. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses is the proposed method adopted for this research methodology (PRISMA) [ 21 ]. The PRISMA statement is divided into two parts: systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This is especially useful in broad research topics when there are numerous papers, each focused on a certain facet of the field [24]. To make the process objective and repeatable, all review methods must be made apparent prior to the actual conduct of the review. The PRISMA statement’s major purpose is to assist researchers and practitioners in completing a clear literature review report. PRISMA has undertaken several previous investigations in a variety of domains in order to compile a thorough literature review [ 25 ]. Four primary PRISMA processes are completed in this review study: search and identification, screening, eligibility evaluation, and final selection. The systematic review approach, according to [ 23 ], is often used in modern business research and is a good research process for full analysis. The process of systematic review Logistics 2022,6, 66 5 of 20 facilitates the discovery of the factors that have the greatest impact on knowledge transfer for the purposes of this thesis. It is critical for researchers to determine the correct keywords and search strings in relation to the study topic or questions when it comes to finding papers [ 26 ]. On the other hand, Ref. [ 27 ] proposes that researchers efficiently conduct conceptual exploration through a systematic review and conceptual analysis of academic literature which contains these two constructs. A systematic review, according to [ 27 ], can be completed in four steps as shown in Figure 2. First, the researcher should create a repository of identified articles by conducting a thorough and systematic search to discover and extract all relevant literature published in academic papers about the research issue [ 27 ]. Second, the researcher may create a template for assessing each journal article, which is an iterative process involving the development of theoretically derived and empirically developing themes [ 27 ]. Finally, the researcher must analyse the findings and integrate them in the most meaningful way possible. This study uses PRISMA which has various potential benefits to business stakeholders and decision-makers. Use of PRISMA has provided a clear guideline for this respective study in terms of reporting the systematic review. Figure 2illustrates the four stages used in this systematic review. Logistics 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 23 Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram illustrating the stages in the systematic review. 2.2. Scope of the Review In prior systematic review studies, exclusion keywords were employed to meticulously restrict the search results to match the scope [28]. In this review, the papers that did not fit within the scope were deleted. Papers that are clearly different from the study’s subject were chosen and properly analysed to recognize the possible exclusion keywords. The exclusion terms were mostly in reference to forecasting areas that were deemed out of scope. 2.3. Searching Relevant Literature Two well-known databases were chosen as shown in Table 1, the Web of Science and Scopus, to extract all publications relating to supply chain complexity and its impact on knowledge transfer. However, there was a limited access available to Scopus; therefore, some of the articles could not be accessed in full. The literature search was conducted Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram illustrating the stages in the systematic review. Logistics 2022,6, 66 6 of 20 2.2. Scope of the Review In prior systematic review studies, exclusion keywords were employed to meticulously restrict the search results to match the scope [ 28 ]. In this review, the papers that did not fit within the scope were deleted. Papers that are clearly different from the study’s subject were chosen and properly analysed to recognize the possible exclusion keywords. The exclusion terms were mostly in reference to forecasting areas that were deemed out of scope. 2.3. Searching Relevant Literature Two well-known databases were chosen as shown in Table 1, the Web of Science and Scopus, to extract all publications relating to supply chain complexity and its impact on knowledge transfer. However, there was a limited access available to Scopus; therefore, some of the articles could not be accessed in full. The literature search was conducted using keywords such as “supply chain complexity drivers, supply chain complexity, supply chain disruptions, sustainable supply chain systems, knowledge transfer, sustainable logistics networks, sustainable supplier selection, green supplier selection, reverse logistics, supplier evaluation, Supply Chain performance, Supply Chain sustainability, purchasing and supply management and supply chain network design”. However, three keywords were eliminated because the scope was too wide. An initial examination of the literature was conducted to aid in the identification of keywords to include in search strings. The search strings were then finalized as shown in Table 1below. Table 1. Search strings used for collecting the studies from the databases. Search Strings Web of Science Scopus “Knowledge transfer” OR "Impact of knowledge transfer on supply complexity drivers” OR “Supply chain complexity drivers” OR “Supply chain complexity” OR “sustainable supply chain systems” OR "Supply chain disruptions" “Supply chain complexity” OR “Supply chain disruptions” OR “Knowledge sharing” OR “sustainable supply chain systems” OR “sustainable logistics networks” OR “Knowledge transfer” OR “Impact of knowledge transfer on supply chain systems” The aim was to gather the most recent published papers, which covered papers from 1 April 2003 to 1 March 2022. The lower limit is set for the year 1 April 2003 and the upper limit is set for 1 March 2022 as this research aims to gather all the relevant and up to date papers. The papers were screened thoroughly based on titles and abstracts, and papers that were irrelevant were eliminated. Finally, possibly related papers were left for this review to be conducted. The rationale for this study is the impact of supply chain complexity drivers on the process of knowledge transfer as it is an under researched area. Existing literature talks about the supply chain complexity drivers however, this study sheds light on the identification of factors of supply chain complexity which impact knowledge transfer. There are many supply chain complexity factors which hinder the process of knowledge transfer and influence supply chain operations. Hence, this study identifies the factors in order to improve knowledge transfer in supply chain networks and overall supply chain operations. The search was performed on two main databases known as Scopus and the Web of science. A total of 1628 articles resulted from the search of keywords. Based on that search, 432 duplicate articles were found, and they were removed so as to match the protocols set for eliminating the unwanted articles. After elimination, the selection from these articles resulted in peer-reviewed articles and the total number of those articles was 1196. Moreover, 707 papers were found published up until 1 March 2022 using the Scopus search engine’s ‘title, abstract, and keywords’ search fields and by restricting our search to peer-reviewed journal articles published in English. Furthermore, 921 papers were found published until 1 March 2022 using the Web of Science search engine’s title, abstract and keywords search fields. The same restrictions were applied to these articles as well. Logistics 2022,6, 66 7 of 20 The grey literature was not examined and considered in this respective study. This is because this study conducts systematic review to obtain results and findings. The low quality of such articles lacking relevant information, absence of peer review and lack of validation were some of the important reasons to exclude grey literature from this study. Therefore, the authors have decided not to include any grey literature as part of this study. 2.3.1. Eligibility of Articles All the papers were read independently with the full text of each paper retrieved from the previous step in this level of review for the purpose of determining eligibility. The final step was to carefully identify the linked articles in order to reach a consensus. Book chapters, unpublished working papers, editorial notes, master’s theses and doctoral dissertations, textbooks, and non-English papers were also omitted. Finally, 22 publications related to supply chain complexity drivers and their impact on knowledge transfer that matched our inclusion criteria from different scholarly international journals and conferences published between 1 April 2003 and 1 March 2022 were selected. Searching for relevant studies in peer-reviewed journals is part of the research strategy to gain a better understanding of the present status of research on supply chain complexity and its impact on knowledge transfer. Relevant studies and their sub fields are subject to a rigorous review. A primary search of the Scopus and Web of Science databases for publications published between 1 April 2003 and 1 March 2022 was conducted as part of this study. The next section explains in detail the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this study. 2.3.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria This study follows an inclusion and exclusion criteria explained in Table 2which helps in determining the papers that are selected for this systematic review. The selected studies for the systematic review can be empirical studies i.e., qualitative, or quantitative studies. In addition to this, theoretical and conceptual studies are also acceptable for this research. The databases which are used include Web of Science and Scopus. However, limited access was available for Scopus. All the studies included are in the English language and papers in other languages are excluded. The upper limit of the studies included is 1 March 2022 and the lower limit set for the included studies is 1 April 2003. This timeframe has covered most of the important aspects of the subject and recent papers are preferred. All the papers included fall under the criteria of answering the research question of this systematic review and therefore, this is a major inclusion criterion. The following Table 2explains the criteria in detail: Table 2. Inclusion and Exclusion criteria (author’s work). Criteria Inclusion Exclusion Type of study Empirical studies selected: Qualitative and quantitative OR theoretical and conceptual studies None Databases Limited access to Scopus and Web of Science Other databases Language English Other languages Time span 1 April 2003–1 March 2022 Any papers before 1 April 2003 Relevance 1. It should directly link with the research question 2. Identification of any companies involved in supply chain management and have gathered factors for supply chain disruptions 3. Studies discussing the supply chain complexity drivers and supply chain complexity 4. Studies indicating the importance of knowledge transfer and companies practicing knowledge transfer 5. Analysis level: Organizational level practices and procedures. 1. Not directly linked with the research question 2. Studies without any clear information available 3. Studies not containing any relevant information towards the collection of factors 4. Analysis level: Not firm-level practices and processes. Logistics 2022,6, 66 8 of 20 2.3.3. Data Pool Formation and Extraction The required information was gathered in the final step, and 22 papers were examined and summarized. All the articles were then categorized into the following categories: supply chain complexity, sustainable supply chain, supply chain complexity drivers, knowledge transfer and other related subject areas. Furthermore, articles were reviewed based on a variety of criteria, including the name of the author(s), publication year, the technique, the country, the scope, the study purpose, the research gap and contribution, the results and outcomes, and the journals and conferences in which they appeared. Reviewing, summarizing, and categorizing articles assists in achieving the different important hints. As a result, certain comments and recommendations for future research were also taken into consideration. The most difficult aspect of applying the PRISMA method was implicitly stating methodologies in the abstract and method section of the selected papers. As a result, the entire content of the articles was read thoroughly to dig deeper into the details to determine the exact factors which affect knowledge transfer in the firms. Even though the selection process took a long time, it assisted in selecting the best publications for finding the right factors [ 29 , 30 ]. The process of gathering and refining the literature pool is explained in detail in the Figure 3below. Logistics 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 23 Figure 3. Process of gathering and refining the literature pool (adapted from [28]). 3. Results Generic Observation The increasing interest in supply chain complexity and the role of knowledge transfer in it can be seen from the following Figure 4. The publication date reflects the rapid growth of complexity management in firms and organizations. As the technological advancements increased, so did the complexities; therefore, more interest developed throughout the years in different parts of the world; Europe and Asia being at the top. Figure 3. Process of gathering and refining the literature pool (adapted from [28]). Logistics 2022,6, 66 15 of 20 4. Discussion In various research and practices, supply chain complexity issue has been raised and is gaining a lot of acknowledgements [ 52 ]. Technological advancements and innovations play significant role in effective supply chain management and reduce supply chain risks thus ensuring efficient business activities and knowledge transfer [ 53 ]. It is vital to discuss and investigate the supply chain complexity and disruptions to identify the potential risks in supply chain management [ 54 ]. The factors of supply chain complexity have been identified in this research through a rigorous process of systematic review of the literature. A systematic review has been used to collect the relevant evidence related to supply chain complexity and factors that influence the process of knowledge transfer. The relevant evidence is based on the four main factors and the research goal. It further helps to answer the specific research question in an effective manner in this study. The benefit of conducting a systematic review includes minimising bias to achieve the research aims. It is a focused study where there is minimum bias in recognition, selection, analysis, and review of the studies. Other advantages of systematic review include the process of selecting the relevant studies which come under the eligibility criteria. The key attributes of systematic review are (1) a clear research question with a focused set of objectives, (2) reproducible methodology, and (3) a critical examination and validation of the included studies [ 55 ]. This study uses PRISMA in the systematic review to improve the overall process of this research. The use of PRISMA provides systematic searching process for example eligibility, identification, analysation, screening, and inclusion to enhance the search process via online databases. Moreover, it is a step-by-step process which improves the comprehensive searching to identify and attain the relevant articles. The PRISMA also gives a clearer picture of the overall process to the reader. It further helps the reader to observe easily and identify the connection between the sources used and information gathered through recording and evaluation of systematic reviews [56]. The complete reporting carried out through PRISMA gives an opportunity to evaluate the appropriateness of method used and validates the findings. Furthermore, it allows the summarising of the attributes of the study conducted and allows policy makers to analyse the applicability of findings according to their needs and settings. The implications of findings further help decision makers, policy makers and managers to appropriately use them for policy or practice. Complete and successful reporting also facilitates review updates and replication along with providing guidelines and overview of systematic reviews. Hence, business teams can consult the work that has already been completed and this reduces research waste [57]. This study has both theoretical and practical contributions. From a theoretical perspective, this study identifies the factors of supply chain complexity, which are highly crucial for effective knowledge transfer. Previous studies have discussed the significance of knowledge transfer; however, less attention has been given to the identification of factors of supply chain complexity which play an important role in process of knowledge transfer. From a methodological point of view, this study focuses on the construct factors of supply chain complexity in supply chain networks and systematic review is conducted for enhanced analysis. Hence, the identification of the supply chain complexity factors will contribute to research from a holistic perspective and enhance the understanding of the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain networks. This research also contributes to practical aspects as it identifies the supply chain complexity factors and discusses them for effective process of knowledge transfer. The identification of the construct factors also provides insight of these supply chain complexity factors and analyse its impact in efficient knowledge transfer. This information is beneficial for organisations, practitioners, and stakeholders to enhance the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain networks. In this study, the results in the above section highlight the four main factors which influence and impact the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain systems. The four main factors identified are product complexity, customer complexity, decision making complexity and process complexity. In today’s globalised world it is highly essential for Logistics 2022,6, 66 16 of 20 supply chain networks to respond and tackle the challenges in an efficient manner and from a practical perspective. It is not possible to eliminate the supply chain complexity; however, preventive measures can be taken to reduce the complexity faced within supply chain systems. However, to reduce the supply chain complexity, it is highly essential to understand what kind of complexity has a bigger impact and on which part of the supply chain. Hence, it is vital for managers and decision makers to identify the factors of supply chain complexity to ensure smooth business processes. It is important to understand that a decrease in the decision-making complexity reduces supply chain challenges and potential risks associated with them. Reduction in decision-making complexity allows sustainable business processes, affects organisational performance and behaviour and enables sound decision making. The factors which influence the decision-making complexity in organisations are social trust, a positive attitude and understanding the importance of internationalization. This overall not only encourages the process of knowledge transfer; it also speeds up the process of knowledge transfer. Another element of supply chain complexity which impacts the process of knowledge transfer is process complexity. As identified and evaluated from the results section, it is very clear that process complexity greatly impacts the processes and operations of supply chain systems. Innovative performance and competitiveness are the two important factors which were identified to be of high value in reduction of the process complexity in a supply chain network. Furthermore, product complexity also plays a significant role in supply chain systems. The factors identified are technological advancements and digitalisation as these have a positive impact on organisational performance. Digital supply chain networks play a vital role in the reduction of product complexity. Enhanced product supply chain networks show better performance in organisations when knowledge sharing is present, and it is important to identify and eliminate any supply chain complexity to improve the supply chain processes. Additionally, customer complexity also impacts the supply chain operations and processes, and thus, it is highly important to reduce it to gain supply chain benefits. The results highlight that a decrease in customer complexity can benefit the supplier and customer relationship and it enhances the overall process of knowledge transfer. The smooth process of knowledge transfer in supply chain networks ensure well-coordinated, sustainable, and well-integrated supply chain systems which enhance business output. To summarise, the results demonstrate that effective knowledge transfer in supply chain networks not only strengthens the different stages of a supply chain, but also clarifies the overall business processes for better functioning. 5. Conclusions The study findings investigate both the theoretical and practical aspects as it helps the managers to understand the importance of factors that influence knowledge transfer in supply chain systems. It helps them to improve their managerial practices in increasing knowledge transfer whilst timely identifying the supply chain complexities. This helps in enhancing supply chain operations and business performance of the supply chain networks. Effective transfer of knowledge also leads to financial and social gains and help to alleviate supply chain complexities for a well-structured, sustainable supply chain system in practical aspects. Identification of the factors of supply chain complexity also adds to the literature and contributes to academia. A crucial lesson for managers is the necessity to determine the specific procedures that best allow supply chain collaboration and hence knowledge transfer in the context of their supply chain partnership. Another important aspect is that managers should carefully consider what type of knowledge is mutually valuable in the partnership’s specific environment, or the content of knowledge transfer. The relevance of knowledge exchange as well as the content of the knowledge are emphasized within this section, and clearly, both are critical. Future study can evaluate the learning theory with the goal of expanding the knowledge transfer area of supply chain partnerships to include both exploration and exploitation of knowledge. Logistics 2022,6, 66 17 of 20 As this research is in a specific direction and has a study focus therefore, there are certain limitations associated with the research. A limitation of this study is that it focuses on supply chain complexity in general and its impact on knowledge transfer within organisations. However, future studies could potentially explore and research on specific supply chains like automotive supply chain, manufacturing supply chain, food supply chain etc. Moreover, this study lacks full access to some of the articles as the full text was not available. Furthermore, this study is limited to two databases: the Web of Science and Scopus. Researchers in future could use other databases to broaden the horizon of their research on collecting and identifying other factors which could potentially impact the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain systems. Moreover, it is important to highlight that this study is limited to identifying and focusing on four main factors of supply chain complexity that can influence the knowledge transfer process. However, future researchers can assess and identify other important factors that influence the process of knowledge transfer in supply chain systems, and this can help in reducing supply chain complexity. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.F.A. and A.H.-F.; methodology, H.F.A., A.H.-F., K.E.-F.; validation, R.K.; investigation, H.F.A.; project administration, D.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The presented data can be made available upon request from the corresponding author. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the University of Northampton which made it possible to conduct this study. Moreover, the authors would like to thank the Faculty of Business and Law at the University of Northampton for providing resources and guidance towards this study. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Appendix A No. Article Name Author Name Year Factor Relevance 1 The differential impact of product complexity, inventory level, and configuration capacity on unit and order fill rate performance Closs et al. 2010 Product complexity 2A case of trust-building in the supply chain: Emerging economies perspective Manfredi and Capik 2021 Process complexity 3 Order from chaos: A meta-analysis of supply chain complexity and firm performance Akın Ate¸s et al. 2022 Decision making complexity 4 Digital supply chain: literature review and a proposed framework for future research Büyüközkan and Göçer 2018 Customer complexity 5 Managing complexity in supply chains: a discussion of current approaches on the example of the semiconductor industry Aelker et al. 2013 Customer complexity 6 A modelling framework for the analysis of supply chain complexity using product design and demand characteristics Hashemi et al. 2013 Product complexity Logistics 2022,6, 66 18 of 20 No. Article Name Author Name Year Factor Relevance 7 Managing knowledge in organizations: an integrative framework and review of emerging themes Argote et al. 2003 Decision making complexity 8 Structural drivers of upstream supply chain complexity and the frequency of supply chain disruptions Bode and Wanger 2015 Process complexity 9 COVID-190s impact on supply chain decisions: strategic insights from NASDAQ 100 firms using Twitter data Sharma et al. 2020 Decision making complexity 10 Supplier development for sustainability: contextual barriers in global supply chains Busse et al. 2016 Product complexity 11 Interorganizational dependence, information transparency in interorganizational information systems, and supply chain performance Cho et al. 2017 Decision making complexity 12 Supply chain risk management and operational performance: the enabling role of supply chain integration Munir et al. 2020 Product complexity 13 An approach for analysing supply chain complexity drivers through interpretive structural modelling Piya et al. 2020 Decision making complexity 14 To eliminate or absorb supply chain complexity: a conceptual model and case study Aitken et al. 2016 Process complexity 15 The impact of knowledge transfer and complexity on supply chain flexibility: A knowledge-based view Blome et al. 2014 Decision making complexity 16 Knowledge transfer driving community-based business models towards sustainable food-related behaviours: a commons perspective De Bernardi et al. 2021 Customer complexity 17 The complexity of collaboration in supply chain networks Huang et al. 2020 Process complexity 18 A model of supply chain and supply chain decisionmaking complexity Manuj and Sahin 2011 Decision making complexity 19 Complexity and adaptivity in supply networks: Building supply network theory using a complex adaptive systems perspective Pathak et al. 2007 Product complexity 20 Transformative supply chain drivers during COVID-19: a customer perspective Alsmairat 2021 Customer complexity 21 Complexity transfer in supplier-customer systems Huaccho Huatuco et al. 2021 Customer complexity 22 Product Variety, Supply Chain Complexity, and the Needs for Information Technology: A Framework Based on Literature Review Huddiniah and ER 2019 Product complexity Logistics 2022,6, 66 19 of 20 References 1. Cerchione, R.; Esposito, E. A systematic review of supply chain knowledge management research: State of the art and research opportunities. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016,182, 276–292. [CrossRef] 2. Lim, M.K.; Tseng, M.L.; Tan, K.H.; Bui, T.D. Knowledge management in sustainable supply chain management: Improving performance through an interpretive structural modelling approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2017,162, 806–816. [CrossRef] 3. Huang, C.M.; Su, C.H.; Chen, P.K. An empirical study of the impact of knowledge creation and sharing on supply chain practice with competitive performance. J. Stat. Manag. Syst. 2010,13, 921–936. [CrossRef] 4. Rajabion, L.; Mokhtari, A.S.; Khordehbinan, M.W.; Zare, M.; Hassani, A. The role of knowledge sharing in supply chain success: Literature review, classification and current trends. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2019,17, 1222–1249. [CrossRef] 5. Akhavan, P.; Namvar, M. The mediating role of blockchain technology in improvement of knowledge sharing for supply chain management. Manag. Decis. 2021,60, 784–805. 6. Scholten, K.; Scott, P.S.; Fynes, B. Building routines for non-routine events: Supply chain resilience learning mechanisms and their antecedents. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2019,24, 430–442. [CrossRef] 7. Jüttner, U.; Maklan, S. Supply chain resilience in the global financial crisis: An empirical study. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2011 , 16, 246–259. [CrossRef] 8. Pettit, T.J.; Fiksel, J.; Croxton, K.L. Ensuring supply chain resilience: Development of a conceptual framework. J. Bus. Logist. 2010 , 31, 1–21. [CrossRef] 9. Blome, C.; Schoenherr, T.; Eckstein, D. The impact of knowledge transfer and complexity on supply chain flexibility: A knowledgebased view. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014,147, 307–316. [CrossRef] 10. Nielsen, L.; Heffernan, C.; Lin, Y.; Yu, J. The Daktari: An interactive, multi-media tool for knowledge transfer among poor livestock keepers in Kenya. Comput. Educ. 2010,54, 1241–1247. [CrossRef] 11. Corral de Zubielqui, G.; Lindsay, N.; Lindsay, W.; Jones, J. Knowledge quality, innovation and firm performance: A study of knowledge transfer in SMEs. Small Bus. Econ. 2019,53, 145–164. [CrossRef] 12. Shih, S.C.; Hsu, S.H.; Zhu, Z.; Balasubramanian, S.K. Knowledge sharing—A key role in the downstream supply chain. Inf. Manag. 2012,49, 70–80. [CrossRef] 13. Grant, R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1996,17 (Suppl. S2), 109–122. [CrossRef] 14. Spender, J.C. Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 1996 ,17 (Suppl. S2), 45–62. [CrossRef] 15. Zacharia, Z.G.; Nix, N.W.; Lusch, R.F. An analysis of supply chain collaborations and their effect on performance outcomes. J. Bus. Logist. 2009,30, 101–123. [CrossRef] 16. Takeishi, A. Bridging inter-and intra-firm boundaries: Management of supplier involvement in automobile product development. Strateg. Manag. J. 2001,22, 403–433. [CrossRef] 17. Kogut, B.; Zander, U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 1992 ,3, 383–397. [CrossRef] 18. De Luca, P.; Rubio, M.C. The curve of knowledge transfer: A theoretical model. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2018 ,25, 10–26. [CrossRef] 19. Iftikhar, A.; Purvis, L.; Giannoccaro, I.; Wang, Y. The impact of supply chain complexities on supply chain resilience: The mediating effect of big data analytics. Prod. Plan. Control. 2022, 1–21. [CrossRef] 20. Easterby-Smith, M.; Lyles, M.A.; Tsang, E.W. Inter-organizational knowledge transfer: Current themes and future prospects. J. Manag. Stud. 2008,45, 677–690. [CrossRef] 21. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2009,62, 1006–1012. [CrossRef] 22. Mallett, R.; Hagen-Zanker, J.; Slater, R.; Duvendack, M. The benefits and challenges of using systematic reviews in international development research. J. Dev. Eff. 2012,4, 445–455. [CrossRef] 23. Gast, J.; Gundolf, K.; Cesinger, B. Doing business in a green way: A systematic review of the ecological sustainability entrepreneurship literature and future research directions. J. Clean. Prod. 2017,147, 44–56. [CrossRef] 24. Budgen, D.; Brereton, P. Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, New York, NY, USA, 20–28 May 2006; pp. 1051–1052. 25. Nisrine, K.; Rhizlane, B. The exchange relationship between logistics partners and its impact on the performance of SCM A Systematic and PRISMA method. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Colloquium on Logistics and Supply Chain Management LOGISTIQUA, Paris, France, 12–14 June 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 1–6. 26. Adams, R.; Bessant, J.; Jeanrenaud, S.; Overy, P.; Denyer, D. A Report on Innovating for Sustainability: A Systematic Review of the Body of Knowledge, Network for Business Sustainability. 2012. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10036/4105 (accessed on 20 July 2022). 27. Voegtlin, C.; Greenwood, M. Corporate social responsibility and human resource management: A systematic review and conceptual analysis. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2016,26, 181–197. [CrossRef] 28. Perera, H.N.; Hurley, J.; Fahimnia, B.; Reisi, M. The human factor in supply chain forecasting: A systematic review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019,274, 574–600. [CrossRef] 29. Rahi, S. Research design and methods: A systematic review of research paradigms, sampling issues and instruments development. Int. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 2017,6, 1000403. [CrossRef] Logistics 2022,6, 66 20 of 20 30. Soheilirad, S.; Govindan, K.; Mardani, A.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Nilashi, M.; Zakuan, N. Application of data envelopment analysis models in supply chain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Oper. Res. 2018,271, 915–969. [CrossRef] 31. Closs, D.J.; Nyaga, G.N.; Voss, M.D. The differential impact of product complexity, inventory level, and configuration capacity on unit and order fill rate performance. J. Oper. Manag. 2010,28, 47–57. [CrossRef] 32. Manfredi, E.; Capik, P. A case of trust-building in the supply chain: Emerging economies perspective. Strateg. Change 2021 ,31, 147–160. [CrossRef] 33. AkınAte¸s, M.; Suurmond, R.; Luzzini, D.; Krause, D. Order from chaos: A meta-analysis of supply chain complexity and firm performance. J. Supply Chain. Manag. 2022,58, 3–30. [CrossRef] 34. Büyüközkan, G.; Göçer, F. Digital supply chain: Literature review and a proposed framework for future research. Comput. Ind. 2018,97, 157–177. [CrossRef] 35. Aelker, J.; Bauernhansl, T.; Ehm, H. Managing complexity in supply chains: A discussion of current approaches on the example of the semiconductor industry. Procedia CIRP 2013,7, 79–84. [CrossRef] 36. Hashemi, A.; Butcher, T.; Chhetri, P. A modeling framework for the analysis of supply chain complexity using product design and demand characteristics. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2013,5, 150–164. [CrossRef] 37. Argote, L.; McEvily, B.; Reagans, R. Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Manag. Sci. 2003,49, 571–582. [CrossRef] 38. Manuj, I.; Sahin, F. A model of supply chain and supply chain decision-making complexity. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2011,41, 511–549. [CrossRef] 39. Sharma, A.; Adhikary, A.; Borah, S.B. Covid-19’ s impact on supply chain decisions: Strategic insights from NASDAQ 100 firms using Twitter data. J. Bus. Res. 2020,117, 443–449. [CrossRef] 40. Busse, C.; Schleper, M.C.; Niu, M.; Wagner, S.M. Supplier development for sustainability: Contextual barriers in global supply chains. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2016,46, 442–468. [CrossRef] 41. Cho, B.; Ryoo, S.Y.; Kim, K.K. Interorganizational dependence, information transparency in interorganizational information systems, and supply chain performance. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2017,26, 185–205. [CrossRef] 42. Huddiniah, E.; ER, M. Product Variety, Supply Chain Complexity and the Needs for Information Technology: A Framework Based on Literature Review. Oper. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2019,12, 245–255. [CrossRef] 43. HuacchoHuatuco, L.; Smart, J.; Calinescu, A.; Sivadasan, S. Complexity transfer in supplier-customer systems. Prod. Plan. Control. 2021,32, 747–759. [CrossRef] 44. Alsmairat, A.K. Transformative supply chain drivers during covid-19: A customer perspective. Pol. J. Manag. Stud. 2021 ,24, 9–23. [CrossRef] 45. Bode, C.; Wagner, S.M. Structural drivers of upstream supply chain complexity and the frequency of supply chain disruptions. J. Oper. Manag. 2015,36, 215–228. [CrossRef] 46. Munir, M.; Jajja, M.S.S.; Chatha, K.A.; Farooq, S. Supply chain risk management and operational performance: The enabling role of supply chain integration. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020,227, 107667. [CrossRef] 47. Jermsittiparsert, K.; Srisawat, S. Complexities in a flexible supply chain and the role of knowledge transfer. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Rev. 2019,7, 531–538. [CrossRef] 48. Aitken, J.; Bozarth, C.; Garn, W. To eliminate or absorb supply chain complexity: A conceptual model and case study. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2016,21, 759–774. [CrossRef] 49. Huang, Y.; Han, W.; Macbeth, D.K. The complexity of collaboration in supply chain networks. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2020 , 25, 393–410. [CrossRef] 50. De Bernardi, P.; Bertello, A.; Venuti, F.; Zardini, A. Knowledge transfer driving community-based business models towards sustainable food-related behaviours: A commons perspective. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2021,19, 319–326. [CrossRef] 51. Pathak, S.D.; Day, J.M.; Nair, A.; Sawaya, W.J.; Kristal, M.M. Complexity and adaptivity in supply networks: Building supply network theory using a complex adaptive systems perspective. Decis. Sci. 2007,38, 547–580. [CrossRef] 52. Piya, S.; Shamsuzzoha, A.; Khadem, M. An approach for analysing supply chain complexity drivers through interpretive structural modelling. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2020,23, 311–336. [CrossRef] 53. E-Fatima, K.; Khandan, R.; Hosseinian-Far, A.; Sarwar, D.; Ahmed, H.F. Adoption and Influence of Robotic Process Automation in Beef Supply Chains. Logistics 2022,6, 48. [CrossRef] 54. Azizsafaei, M.; Sarwar, D.; Fassam, L.; Khandan, R.; Hosseinian-Far, A. A critical overview of food supply chain risk management. In Cybersecurity, Privacy and Freedom Protection in the Connected World; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 413–429. [CrossRef] 55. Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015,4, 1. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 56. Mohamed, R.; Ghazali, M.; Samsudin, M.A. A systematic review on mathematical language learning using prisma in scopus database. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2020,16, 1868. [CrossRef] 57. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021 ,10, 89. [CrossRef]