Sometimes I am approached by potential guest bloggers and this is meant to be used as a first stop for all those of you interested in writing on SCRM Blog.
Of course a great way to gain visibility for oneself or a company is to become a guest blogger in a respectable and popular blog.
The goal is a win-win situation. I am always looking for valuable content for my readers and the guest blogger is interested in making oneself known to the audience on the blog.
So, the answer I give is always similar: Yes, but…
My name is Daniel Dumke. At the moment I am research student at the University of Technology (TU) in Hamburg (Germany). My major research interest is in the risk management aspects of strategic supply chain design.
Today I picked a special article on corporate risks. “How Risky is your Company?” by Robert Simons of the Harvard Business School. Its a more business oriented view on how companies should handle risks, internally. But since internal risk management can be seen as a part of supply chain risk management, I also include it here.
Risk exposure
This article is about how risky one company is. About the internal risk. And by these risks, the author does not so much refer to the production processes, but the softer risks of managing a company.
Supply Chain Risk Management is one way to look at risks within a company (and beyond). But there are broader and more narrow disciplines as well, with Business Continuity on the one end and Supply Chain Crisis Management on the other.
This blog may be a good starting point for supply chain risk management related research and literature, but even with more than 140 articles reviewed in the blog I still just touched the tip of the iceberg. There are still many basic articles left. Like this one by Helen Peck (2006): “Reconciling supply chain vulnerability, risk and supply chain management”
Not only earthquakes and terrorist attacks can lead to supply chain disruptions. Supply chains are also subject to behavioral risks, meaning that participants of the supply chain could exhibit behavior which might be consistent with their goals, but contrary to the goals of the supply chain’s other participants.
