Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose Although supply chain risk mitigation (SCRM) and supply chain efficacy (SCE) hold significant promise in influencing competitive performance (CP), their effectiveness depends on various factors. However, given the significant role of successive disruptions in the supply chain (SC) network, empirical research is lacking in identifying the critical success factors that maximize SCRM and SCE. This study aims to apply the resource-based view (RBV) perspective to examine how supply chain integration (SCI), supply chain absorptive capacity (SCAC) and ambidexterity (SCA) can facilitate SCE and CP. The mediating role of SCRM is also investigated. Design/methodology/approach The study population encompasses a range of key positions, such as operations managers and SC managers, across various manufacturing firms (MFs) in the Middle East. The data collected from 260 participants were rigorously analyzed using partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Findings The findings suggest that SCI, SCAC and SCA enhance SCRM positively and directly. In addition, SCRM significantly influenced SCE and CP was influenced by SCE. Moreover, SCRM significantly mediated the relationships between SCI, SCA, SCAC and SCE. Practical implications The findings suggest that MFs can enhance SCE and SCRM by achieving full SCI with their partners. This integration not only strengthens operational processes but also expands the SCA and SCAC. Consequently, these improvements enhance the CP of MFs, underscoring the critical role of collaboration and integration in achieving sustainable success in a dynamic market environment. Originality/value This study offers novel insights into the specific enablers of SCRM that can be used to enhance SCE. It also deepens our understanding of how CP can be optimally harnessed within the RBV framework, thereby contributing to the existing literature.
Alsmairart et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: