Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Problem definition: We study sourcing behavior in severe conditions where supply disruptions are rare but carry the potential of wiping out several rounds worth of a firm’s profit. Academic/practical relevance: The tradeoff between scale economies from supplier consolidation and risk mitigation from supplier diversification is at the core of firms’ sourcing strategy and one that is empirically understudied. Methodology: We study supplier diversification through a behavioral lens and test theoretically derived predictions under controlled laboratory conditions. Results: Our data provide strong evidence for under-diversification. We posit that this pattern is partly because of the fact that investing in supplier diversification involves an upfront cost to achieve a delayed, and rarely encountered, benefit. Managerial implications: Under-diversification bias is costly, and its causes are difficult to overcome, presenting firms with the daunting task of devising debiasing mechanisms that reinforce a supplier diversification strategy when the rarity of disruptions almost always render supplier consolidation the ex post preferred strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goldschmidt et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: