Supply Chain Plasticity: Redesigning Supply Chains to Meet Major Environmental Change

• Published date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12226
• Date: 01 September 2019

Editorial

Supply Chain Plasticity: Redesigning Supply Chains to Meet Major

Environmental Change

Walter Zinn

1

and Thomas J. Goldsby

2

1

The Ohio State University

2

University of Tennessee

Supply chain plasticity refers to the capability of rapidly making major changes to a supply chain in order to accommodate significant shifts

in the business environment. We call for research in supply chain plasticity, as the need to adapt to environmental change has never been

greater. Further, a distinction between supply chain plasticity and flexibility is provided. We also introduce the articles appearing in this issue

of the Journal of Business Logistics, including three papers dedicated to the Special Topic Forum titled “Sustainable Supply Chains in a Digital

Inter-connected World.”

Keywords: supply chain; plasticity; environmental change; uncertainty; redesign

The mandate for major change in supply chains is as great as

ever. As the business environment changes in unprecedented

ways, supply chain managers must adapt. Take Brexit, for exam-

ple. British manufacturers are concerned about when and how

much rising tariffs and increased border friction will interfere

with business, as uncertainty persists about how Britain will exit

from the European Union. Furthermore, the uncertainty fallout

will likely continue after Brexit. The same is true for European

manufacturers (Gysegom et al. 2019). In such a changing envi-

ronment, how does one manage just-in-time deliveries? How

does one make commitments and then keep contractual obliga-

tions? A concern similar to Brexit is posed by the U.S.-China

prolonged trade war. Uncertainty about its depth and duration is

prodding firms to rethink their extended supply chains originat-

ing in China. Think of new tariffs being announced, then some-

times modified, retracted, delayed, or actually imposed within a

relatively short time period. Should firms wait it out? Move to

other Asian countries? Move elsewhere? Reshore?

Additional sources of uncertainty spread beyond political issues.

Disruptive technologies contributesignificantly. Newer technologies

such as blockchain (Wladawsky-Berger 2019), 3-D printing, the

Internet of Things, and artificial intelligence promise further disrup-

tion, albeit with different time horizons for implementation. Some of

these technologies have been the subject of previous JBL editorials

(Goldsby and Zinn 2016; Zinn and Goldsby 2017) and Special

Topic Forums. See, for instance, the STF on Digital Supply Chains

(JBL News 2019). Likewise for disruption brought about by con-

sumers. Supply chains are being changed by the growth of online

shopping as consumers shop for price and convenience, continu-

ously demandingservices that new technologies make possible.

These changes in the political environment, new technologies,

and consumer behavior often require that firms respond by

redesigning their supply chains in order to adapt. Is the existing

network design still optimal? Should the use of third-party ware-

housing be increased? Is the level of automation in warehousing

and transportation still appropriate? Should changes be made to

sourcing countries, suppliers, or ports of entry? Moreover, as

competitors also change in response to uncertainty, it is impor-

tant to change in a timely manner to stay ahead.

What matters to firms in such changing environments is their

capacity to closely monitor and predict change and to redesign sup-

ply chains accordingly. This raises two key questions: How fast

can a supply chain be redesigned to meet environmental change?

Can supply chains be designed to be capable of fast change?

Supply chain plasticity labels this capacity. Plasticity is the

capability to rapidly make major changes to a supply chain in

order to respond to, or to drive changes in the environment. In

contrast, plasticity differs from supply chain flexibility in that the

latter corresponds to changes made within the existing supply

chain design. Changing delivery routes and providing special ser-

vice to a key customer are examples of flexibility. Replacing

equivalent suppliers is flexibility. On the other hand, reshoring is

plasticity. Major network redesign is plasticity. Creating an

online channel is plasticity, as is investing in omnichannel capa-

bility. Nonetheless, there might be boundary issues to distinguish

plasticity and flexibility. Further research will be needed.

Given the rising levels of uncertainty, design for plasticity is a

growing need of supply chain management. It is also a subject

with significant potential as a research topic. A few sample ques-

tions might help spark interest. Which factors contribute to sup-

ply chain plasticity? What determines the speed with which

supply chains can change in order to adapt to a new environ-

ment? Should supply chains be designed for plasticity? Can the

existing supply chains be made more plastic as a contingency for

potential future environmental changes? Can the cost and benefit

of plasticity be measured? Can its effect on risk assessment be

measured? Are there organizational issues that may help or hin-

der supply chain plasticity? Can buyer/seller relationships be

structured in a way to facilitate or hinder the plasticity of a sup-

ply chain? And, ultimately, can a sustainable competitive advan-

tage be achieved through heightened plasticity?

Corresponding author:

Walter Zinn, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University,

2100 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210; E-mail: zinn.13@osu.edu

Journal of Business Logistics, 2019, 40(3): 184–186 doi: 10.1111/jbl.12226

© 2019 Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals