شناسایی و بررسی اثر ریسک های زنجیرۀتأمین بر عملکرد مالی شرکت های بورسی
محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت صنعتی گرایش زنجیره تأمینعلیرضا شهرکی 1 , محمدرضا اصغریان 2
1 - دانشیارگروه مهندسی صنایع، دانشکده مهندسی شهید نیکبخت، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران.
2 - دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه مهندسی صنایع، دانشکده مهندسی شهید نیکبخت، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران
کلید واژه: اندازه گیری ریسک, ریسک و عملکرد, ریسک زنجیرۀتأمین, عملکرد مالی,
چکیده مقاله :
محققان از مدت¬ها پیش پیگیر این بودند که بفهمند چگونه ریسک¬های زنجیرۀتأمین بر عملکرد مالی شرکت تأثیر می¬¬گذارد. اما نمی¬توانند در بررسی¬های نظری و تجربی خود ادعا کنند که چگونه ریسک¬های زنجیرۀتأمین بر عملکرد مالی شرکت تأثیر می¬گذارد. هدف مقاله ما بررسی ارتباط بین ریسک¬های زنجیرۀتأمین و عملکرد مالی شرکت است. ما با استفاده از داده¬های نظرسنجی و صورت¬های مالی، چگونگی اثرگذاری ریسک¬های زنجیرۀتأمین بر عملکرد مالی شرکت را از منظر عملکرد مالی نهایی بررسی می¬کنیم. یافته¬های به¬دست آمده در مورد اهمیت ریسک خاص صنعت، ریسک سازمانی، ریسک فرآیند کسب¬و¬کار داخلی و ریسک تقاضا، با مطالعات پیشین سازگار است. ما دریافتیم که ریسک تقاضا دارای عملکرد مالی نهایی (MFP) -0.20 است. که بالاترین تأثیر منفی در بین متغیرهای ریسک می¬باشد. یافته¬ها هم¬چنین نشان می¬دهند که ریسک خاص صنعت، دارای عملکرد مالی نهایی (MFP) -0.16 می¬باشد که با وجود عدم تأثیر مستقیم بر عملکرد مالی، دومین تأثیر منفی است. همچنین ما فرض نمی¬کنیم که برآوردهای گزارش¬شده در مورد عملکرد مالی نهایی برای همه کسب و¬ کارها در کشورهای دیگر اعمال شود. با این¬حال، تحقیقات آینده می¬تواند یافته¬های ما را گسترش دهد. این مطالعه، نظرسنجی و داده¬های مالی را با هم ترکیب می¬¬کند تا چگونگی اثرگذاری ریسک¬های زنجیرۀتأمین بر عملکرد مالی شرکت را تحلیل کند. به-خصوص، روشی را برای برآورد روابط علت و معلولی کمی بین ریسک زنجیرۀتأمین و عملکرد مالی شرکت فراهم می-کند، که به این عنوان مهم در تحقیقات در زمینه مدیریت زنجیرۀتأمین توجه کمتری شده است.
Researchers have been pursuing for a long time to understand how supply chain risks affect the financial performance of companies, yet, they cannot claim this in their theoretical and empirical studies The purpose of the present study is to examine the relationship between supply chain risks and the financial performance of the company. Using survey data and financial statements, we investigate how supply chain risks affect the firm financial performance from the perspective of marginal financial performance(MFP). The findings regarding the importance of industry-specific risk, organizational risk, internal business process risk, and demand risk are consistent with previous studies. We found that demand risk has a final marginal financial performance (MFP) of -0.20, which is the highest negative impact among risk variables. The findings also show that industry-specific risk has a final marginal financial performance (MFP) of -0.16. Although there is no direct impact on financial performance, it is a second negative impact. We also do not assume that the reported estimates of marginal financial performance apply to all businesses in other countries. However, future research can expand our findings. This study combines survey and property data to analyze how supply chain risks affect firm's financial performance. In particular, it provides a method to estimate quantitative causal relationships between supply chain risk and firm financial performance, which has received less attention in supply chain management research.
Key Words: risk measurement, risk and performance, supply chain risk, financial performance
1.Introduction
In modern business environments characterized by increasing competition and globalization, managers use innovative technologies and strategies to achieve competitive advantage and maintain it. Since supply chains include all activities related to the flow and transformation of goods from the raw material stage to the end user, effective management of supply chain risk through coordination and cooperation among supply chain partners is key to ensure profitability and continuity. Moreover, if supply chain risks are not taken into account, we will face serious problems in the field of supply chain management and also financial operations of the company. For example, one of the recent findings is that two factors at the organization level, that is, perceived operational similarity and market leadership, have a significant impact on the risk manager's likelihood of learning about what can cause other companies' operational losses. Another finding is that improving the internal integration of core business processes in a company increases demand visibility and thus reduces demand risk. However, despite the wide range of studies that confirm the importance of these supply chain risks for company performance, relatively limited studies have analyzed the impact of supply chain risk on company financial performance. Although few studies have examined the impact of supply chain risk on financial performance, they largely rely on perceptual measures and they are unable to provide quantitative real financial performance.
- Literature Review
A supply chain is an integrated process in which raw materials are transformed into finished products and then delivered to customers through distribution, retail, or both (Cohen & Moon, 1990). Supply chain risk is the probability of an event or failure in the process of planning, implementation, monitoring and control of supply chain operations, which leads to financial losses for purchasing companies (Zsidisin & Ellram, 2003). Forecasting financial risk is important for supply chain stability. They evaluated a financial risk prediction model using buyer transaction behavior data (Yi et al., 2023). Another group also found that the alignment of the CEO and the board of directors significantly affect the company's financial performance through risk management (Hamid & Purbawangsa, 2022). Considering the importance of supply chain sustainability and risk management issues in various industries, they identified sustainability issues in the economic, social and environmental areas of supply chain and risk management (Isfahani Zanjani et al., 2019). They discussed the importance of production planning and control activities and supply chain risk management capabilities (Rehman et al., 2022). He has investigated the cost of supply chain risk by presenting and solving the combined model of Fuzzy Dimetal - Genetic Algorithm and has finally ranked the disruptions based on the costs they apply to the supply chain as follows: Disorders related to 1. natural disasters, 2. Supply, 3. transportation, and 4. demand (Salehi, 2019). They examined the information of 120 companies admitted to the Tehran Stock Exchange during the period of 2010 to 2019 and found that the risk management factor is effective for the pricing of capital assets and that the adjusted six-factor model with risk management has a better performance than three and five factor models adjusted with risk management (Ahmadi et al., 2022). They proposed an analytical hierarchy process model to identify supply chain risk factors. According to a case study of a central company, they concluded that the participation of managers of different fields is essential in conducting a complete risk analysis (Gaudenzi & Borgesi, 2006). Supply chain risk management through coordination and cooperation between supply chain partners is a key to ensure profitability and continuity (Brindley, 2004; Tang, 2006). One of the findings is that improving the internal integration of the main business processes in a company increases the visibility of the demand and thus reduces the risk of the demand (Kache & Seuring, 2014). They investigated the impact of credit risks, illiquidity and market on the financial efficiency of 102 companies of Tehran Stock Exchange during the years 2013 to 2014 (Seyfi & Erza, 2019). They combined the transaction cost theory and the resource-based perspective to create a framework of risk events and then used the hierarchical analysis method to rank the relative importance of risk events. Using a sample of 116 retail chains, they conclude that outsourcing risk perception has a positive relationship with the scope of outsourced logistics functions (Tsai et al., 2008). They use the combined method of factor analysis and logistic regression analysis to determine the reasons for labor turnover to help managers deal with labor-related supply chain risks. Using a sample of 634 manufacturing workers from various industries (e.g., electrical and electronic industries, plastics and rubber, machinery, etc.) they show that poor human resource management practices, poor production management activities, and performance and behaviors Buyer unfairness is a significant predictor of labor turnover for migrant workers (Jiang et al., 2009). Based on the study conducted using the structural equation modeling technique on 223 purchasing managers, they found that both the probability and the size of supply disruption are important for buyers' overall understanding of the risk of supply disruption (Ellis et al., 2010). used the systems thinking approach to create a framework for supply chain risk management and examined it using an industrial case study. They claim that their framework is able to assess risk and predict failure points as well as the overall impact of risk on the supply chain network (Ghadge et al., 2013). Using content analysis to conduct a systematic review of 103 articles published in ten prestigious journals related to logistics, supply chain management and operations management, they examined the relationship between collaboration, integration, risk and performance in the supply chain and concluded that collaboration and integration, as well as risk and performance management, are very important for supply chain management (Kache & Seuring, 2014). Small and medium companies have been used to investigate the relationship between supply risk and supply management. Based on a sample of 239 supply chain managers, they concluded that supply risk management has a positive direct effect and a positive indirect effect on supply chain management performance. Although many studies use different criteria to describe supply chain risk management performance and input characteristics that affect performance, relatively few of them have investigated the impact of supply chain risk on company performance (Pradhan & Routroy, 2016). These criteria cannot show the real financial performance quantitatively. This is important as the main feature of supply chain risk and according to its definition, and it requires evaluating the impact of an event or failure in supply chain operations on financial performance (Zsidisin, 2003). As a result, it is necessary to conduct a research to investigate and evaluate how the supply chain risk affects the final financial performance. Few studies have focused on the impact of supply chain risk on financial performance (Lanier et al., 2010; Pfohl & Gomm, 2009; Shi & Yu, 2013; Timme & Wanberg, 2011; and Wuttk et al., 2013). The following work points out that the coordination of physical and financial flows in supply chain networks is important for the overall performance of the supply chain. Using a case study of six manufacturing companies, they propose a supply chain finance adoption framework so that managers can better keep pace with these flows and thus improve working capital and reduce costs (Wuttk et al., 2013). Using the expert systems method, she investigated the existing risks and their impact in the conditions of uncertainty regarding the decision factors by two methods of fuzzy assumption testing and designing a decision support software system (Yousefi, 2014). Using content analysis to conduct a systematic review of the literature for 49 research articles published between 1990 and 2011, they concluded that effective supply chain management through improving revenue growth, reducing operating costs and working capital efficiency, increase accounting-based financial performance measures. and increases the market (Shi & Yu, 2013). Examining the impact of supply chain risks on the financial performance of a company is necessary and very useful because it prevents serious problems for supply chain management, however, this issue has not been addressed from the perspective of final financial performance. Therefore, the main goal of this research is to evaluate the effect of supply chain risks on the financial performance of listed companies from the perspective of final financial performance using a combined method of surveys and financial reports. In the current research, the aim is to find an answer for this main problem, that is, which of the supply chain risks have the greatest negative impact on the final financial performance of the investigated listed companies. Clarifying this issue helps supply chain management and supply chain risk management and has important effects on the financial performance of companies.
- Methodology
This survey instrument is based on a careful review of the literature in the fields of supply chain management and organization theory, as well as consultation with several experienced researchers. Before collecting the data, a group of supply chain experts from different industries reviewed this questionnaire in terms of structure, readability, clarity and completeness. The final version of the survey questionnaire consists of two parts. The first part consists of open-ended questions that collect detailed information about companies such as annual revenue, capital, and industry sector. The second part of the survey consists of multiple-choice questions in which respondents indicate on a seven-point Likert scale how many specific risk variables are present in the supply chain per year (if otherwise specified, all measures use a scale in which negative three means completely opposed, zero means neutral and three means completely agree. High and low scores indicate high and low risk, respectively). The data collection was done in two stages. In the first step, we contacted the companies admitted to the Tehran Stock Exchange. The reason for this is that they are generally very large companies and mostly represent their industries and publish annual and interim financial reports (six-monthly and quarterly) and provide the possibility of calculating the performance ratio. The target respondents were CEOs, presidents, general managers and industry managers, except for those in the financial services sector. The sample companies included 31 groups of industries: cement, lime and plaster, food, rubber and plastic, textile, electronic machinery, hardware and equipment, wood products, iron and steel, printing and publishing, equipment, telecommunications, ceramic tiles, chemicals, coal mining, household appliances, metal products, auto parts, petroleum products, automobiles, insurance, dairy products, textiles, leasing, ports and shipping, optical electronics, hotels and restaurants. Banks and credit institutions, information and communication, pharmaceutical products, sugarcane, paper products and air transportation. These 31 sectors include 123 companies during the period of 2010-2019. They indicated the level of existence of a specific risk variable in their supply chains that year, on a seven-point Likert scale. Out of 123 responses received (17 incomplete responses), 106 were usable, resulting in a response rate of 7.56%. The characteristics of the respondents are shown in Table 1. In the second stage, we collected the balance sheets and annual income statements of 1399 related to 106 companies from the database of Tehran Stock Exchange, that is, Codal to find the financial ratios used to evaluate the company's financial performance in 2019.
- Result
Examining H2b and H4 show that organizational risk and supply risk do not have much effect on demand risk and financial performance of the company. These results are somewhat unexpected because the general understanding of the reviewed articles and materials shows that the organizational risk affects the demand risk and that the financial performance of the company is significantly dependent on the supply risk. A possible explanation for the significant effect of organizational risk on demand risk is that the scale of items ultimately retained to create organizational risk is more on supply-side, such as competition for scarce resources and timely payment of supplies (see Table 2). Another explanation is that while organizational risk is potentially important for the demand of the company's products, Iranian industrial companies are able to separate product demand from this risk through effective management of buyer-supplier relationships. One of the possible explanations for the insignificant effect of supply risk on financial performance is that there is a perception gap between how respondents understand the impact of supply chain risk variables on financial performance versus how supply chain risk variables affect financial performance. Another explanation may be that although supply risk is an important factor for the demand of company products, companies in Iranian industries may be able to separate financial performance from this type of risk through dynamic management of supply-side relationships. Having said that, in order to clarify these unexpected results regarding the effect of organizational risk on demand risk and also the effect of supply risk on financial performance, it is necessary to conduct more research. The current study presents a financial model of corporate supply chain risk using a combined method of surveys and financial reports, based on the perspective of final financial performance. We define final financial performance as a change in the percentage of a determinant factor in supply chain risks, which quantitatively leads to changes in financial performance. The current study presents a financial model of corporate supply chain risk using a combined method of surveys and financial reports, based on the perspective of final financial performance. In the present research, the significant levels of type one statistical errors and the sample size remain constant throughout the process of building the model. Therefore, although we removed some item scales from each dimension, this does not affect type II errors. The analysis of the supply chain risk financial model reveals that demand risk has the largest negative impact (MFP = -0.20) on the company's financial performance, and industry-specific risk has the second largest negative impact (MFP = -0.16) on performance. Finance is involved although it itself has no direct influence.
- Discussion
The findings of the present research regarding the importance of industry-specific risk, internal business process risk and demand risk on the company's financial performance are consistent with previous studies (e.g., Cao & Zhang, 2011; Kache & Seuring, 2014; Miller, 1991; Rao & Goldsby, 2009; Selviaridis & Norman, 2014; Simangunsong et al., 2012). The present study quantitatively generalizes the scope of knowledge about how supply chain risk affects the company's financial performance. In particular, previous studies (e.g., Bavarsad et al., 2014; Cao & Zhang, 2011; Tracey et al., 2005 & Zhao et al., 2013) focus on describing supply chain risk management performance and input characteristics that affect company performance. Few of them examine how supply chain risk affects the company's financial performance from the perspective of final financial performance using the combined method of surveys and financial reports. As shown in Table 5, for example, a one percent increase in industry-specific risk leads to a 22.0 and 78.0 percent increase in supply risk and demand risk, and causes a 16.0 percent decrease in the financial performance of companies. The results regarding the significant effects of industry-specific risk on supply and demand risk are consistent with previous research (e.g., Fynes et al., 2005; Jiang et al., 2009; Schoenherr et al., 2008; Selviaridis & Norman, 2014; Simangunsong et al., 2012). In the same way, 0.45 and 0.15 percent increase in supply risk and demand risk causes a 0.04 percent decrease in the company's financial performance. The results related to the importance of internal business process risk on supply and demand risk are consistent with previous research (e.g. Kache & Seuring, 2014; Rao & Goldsby, 2009; Stratton & Warburton, 2003). In addition, a one percent increase in demand risk causes a 0.20 percent decrease in the financial performance of companies, and this shows that demand risk has a final financial performance of -0.20 and has the highest negative effect among other variables. The specific risk of the industry has a final financial performance of -0.16, which has the second negative effect although it has no direct effect on the financial performance of companies. These findings show that the indirect risk of the supply chain may create multiple mutual effects that are more significant than the direct risk.
Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation management measurement: a review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(01), 21-47. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00119.x
Ahmadi, M. R., Jafaripour, M., Mazaheri, E., & Armen, Seyed A. (2022). The role of risk management in adjusting single and multi-factor pricing models of capital assets and their comparability with the GRS approach. Financial knowledge of securities analysis, 15(54), 135-148. http://sid.ir/paper/1063278/en
Bavarsad, B., Boshagh, M., & Kayedian, A. (2014). A study on supply chain risk factors and their impact on organizational performance. International Journal of Operations and Logistics Management, 3(03), 192-211. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301222276
Brindley, C. (2004). Supply Chain Risk, Ashgate Publishing, Farnham. https://www.routledge.com
Chan, F. T. S., & Qi, H. J. (2003). An innovative performance measurement method for supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 8(03) 209-223.doi:10.1108/13598540310484618
Cao, M., & Zhang, Q. (2011). Supply chain collaboration: impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29(03), 163-180. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2010.12.008
Chen, I. J., & Paulraj, A. (2004). Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs and measurements. Journal of Operations Management, 22(02), 119-150. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.007
Cohen, M. A., & Moon, S. (1990). Measuring supply chain performance. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(03), 275-292. doi:10.1108/01443579910249714
Codal site related to companies accepted in Tehran Stock Exchange, WWW.Codal.ir
Colicchia, C., & Strozzi, F. (2012). Supply chain risk management: a new methodology for a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(04), 403-418. doi:10.1108/13598541211246558
Esfahani Zanjani, M., Najafi, A., Naghiloo, A. & Mohammadi, N. A. (2019). Explanation of meta-analysis of supply chain sustainability and risk management issues. Journal of explorations of business management, 12(23), 217-245. doi:10.22034/bar.2020.11611.3008
Ellis, S. C., Henry, R. M., & Shockley, J. (2010). Buyer perceptions of supply disruption risk: a behavioral view and empirical assessment. Journal of Operations Management, 28(01),34-46.doi:10.1016/j.jom.2009.07.002
Finch, P. (2004). Supply chain risk management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9(02), 183-196. doi:10.1108/ 13598540410527079
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation model with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(01), 39-50. doi:10.2307/3151312
Fynes, B., De Burca, S., & Voss, C. (2005). Supply chain relationship quality, the competitive environment and performance. International Journal of Production Research, 43(16), 3303-3320.doi:10.1080/ 00207540500095894
Gaudenzi, B., & Borghesi, A. (2006). Managing risks in the supply chain using the AHP method. International Journal of Logistics Management, 17(01), 114-136. doi:10.1108/09574090610663464
Ghadge, A., Dani, S., Chester, M., & Kalawsky, R. (2013). A systems approach for modelling supply chain risks. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(05), 523-538. https://ssrn.com/abstract =2240340
Handfield, R. B., & Nichols, E. L. (1999). Supply Chain Management, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. https://books.google.com
Hora, M., & Klassen, R. D. (2013). Learning from others’ misfortune: Factors influencing knowledge acquisition to reduce operational risk. Journal of Operations Management, 31(Nos 1-2), 52-61. doi:10.1016/j.jcom.2021.100164
Harington, D. (2008). Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Oxford university press, New York.NY. https://books.google.com
Hamid, N., & Purbawangsa, I. (2022). Impact the board of directions on financial performance and company capital: Risk management as an intervening variable. journal of co-operative organization and management, 10(02). doi:10.1016/j.jcom.2021.100164
Jiang, B., Baker, R., & Frazier, G. (2009). An analysis of job dissatisfaction and turnover to reduce global supply chain risk: evidence from China. Journal of Operations Management, 27(02), 169-184. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.09.002
Kache, F., & Seuring, S. (2014). Linking collaboration and integration to risk and performance in supply chains via a review of literature reviews. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(Nos 5/6), 664-682. doi:10.1108/SCM-12-2013-0478
Kaplan, A. (1990). Evaluating and modifying covariance structure models: a review and recommendation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(02), 137-155. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_1
Kraljic, P. (1983). Purchasing must become supply management. Harvard business review, 61(05), 109-117. https://www.abaspro.com.ar
Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. The Guilford Press, New York, NY, 1-534. https://books.google.com
Lanier, D., Jr, Wempe, W. F., & Zacharia, Z. G. (2010). Concentrated supply chain membership and financial performance: chain- and firm-level perspectives. Journal of Operations Management, 28(01), 1-16. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1189324
Lau, C. M., & Sholihin, M. (2005). Financial and nonfinancial performance measures: how do they affect job satisfaction? The British Accounting Review, 37(04), 389-413. doi:10.1016/j.bar.2005.06.002
Lee, H., & Billington, C. (1993). Material management in decentralized supply chains. Operations Research, 41(05), 835-847. https://www.jstor.org/stable/171650
Lee, S. Y. (2007). Structural Equation Modeling: A Bayesian Approach, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex. “Cause, consequence and control: towards a theoretical and practical model of operational risk. Journal of Operations Management, 21(02), 205-224. https://www.wiley.com
Mahajan, P., & Singh, F. (2013). How do pre-slowdown financial characteristics impact the firms’ relative financial performance during economic recession? An empirical investigation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 9(04), 369-378. doi:10.1177/2319510X14523105
Miller, K. (1991). A framework for integrated risk management in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(02), 311-331. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490270
Pfohl, H. C., & Gomm, M. (2009). Supply chain finance: optimizing financial flows in supply chains. Logistics Research, 1(03), 149-161. doi:10.1007/s12159-009-0020-y
Pradhan, S. K., & Routroy, S. (2016). Supply management integration model for Indian manufacturing industries. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(07)781-802. doi:10.1108/ijopm-02-2015-0088
Rao, S., & Goldsby, T. J. (2009). Supply chain risks: a review and typology. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 20(01), 97-123. doi:10.1108/09574090910954864
Rehman, A., Jajja, M., & Farooq, S. (2022). Manufacturing Planning and Control driven Supply Chain Risk management: A dybamic capability perspective. Journal of transportation research part E: logistics and transportation review, Vol.167(3), 102933. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2022. 102933
Ritchie, B., & Brindley, C. (2007). Supply chain risk management and performance: a guiding framework for future development. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(03), 303-322. doi:10.1108/01443570710725563
Ritchie, B., & Marshall, D. (1993). Business Risk Management, Chapman & Hall, London, 1-365. https://books.google.com
Rotaru, K., Wilkin, C., & Ceglowski, A. (2014). Analysis of SCOR’s approach to supply chain risk management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(10), 1246-1268. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-09-2012-0385
Salehi, F. (2019). Presenting a model with the aim of reducing supply chain risk cost with a hybrid approach. Management Accounting, 13(45), 155-167. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/jma/Article/816789
Saklofske, D. H., & Zeidner, M. (1995). International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence, Plenum Press, New York, NY. https://books.google.com
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1980). The effects of ownership and performance on executive tenure in U.S. corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 23(04), 653-664. doi:10.2307/255554
Seyfi, F., & Erza, A. H. (2019). The effect of financial risks on the efficiency of Tehran Stock Exchange companies. Financial knowledge of securities analysis, 13(45),1-13.https://journals.srbiau.ac.ir/article _15406.html
Schoenherr, T., Tummala, V. M. R., & Harrison, T. P. (2008). Assessing supply chain risks with the analytic hierarchy process: providing decision support for the off-shoring decision by a U.S. manufacturing company. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 14(02), 100-111. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.008
Selviaridis, K., & Norrman, A. (2014). Performance-based contracting in service supply chains: a service provider risk perspective. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(02), 153-172. doi:10.1108/SCM-06-2013-0216
Shi, M., & Yu, W. (2013). Supply chain management and financial performance: literature review and future directions. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(10), 1283-1317. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-03-2012-0112
Simangunsong, E., Hendry, L. C., & Stevenson, M. (2012). Supply-chain uncertainty: a review and theoretical foundation for future research. International Journal of Production Research, 50(16), 4493-4523. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.613864
Stratton, R., & Warburton, R. D. H. (2003). The strategic integration of agile and lean supply. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(02), 183-198. doi:10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00109-9
Tang, C. S. (2006). Perspectives in supply chain risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(02), 451-488. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.12.006
Timme, S. G., & Wanberg, E. (2011). How supply chain finance can drive cash flow. Supply Chain Management Review, 15(01), 18-24. https://www.researchgate.net
Tracey, M., Lim, J. S., & Vonderembse, M. A. (2005). The impact of supply-chain management capabilities on business performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 10(03), 179-191. doi:10.1108/13598540510606232
Tranfield, D., Young, M., Partington, D., Bessant, J., & Sapsed, J. (2003). Knowledge management routines for innovation projects: developing a hierarchical process model. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(01), 27-49. doi:10.1142/S1363919603000726
Tsai, M., Liao, C., & Han, C. (2008). Risk perception on logistics outsourcing of retail chains: Model development and empirical verification in Taiwan. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 13(06), 415-424. doi:10.1108/13598540810905679
Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance: an investigation of the dimensions of risk and an exploratory model. Decision Sciences, 35(02), 289-321. doi:10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x
Wuttk, D. A., Blome, C., Foerst, K., & Henke, M. (2013). Managing the innovation adoption of supply chain finance: empirical evidence from six European case studies. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(02), 148-166. doi:10.1111/jbl.12016
Yousefi, N. (2015). Supply chain risk management. The second national conference on mathematics and its applications in engineering sciences, 10-27. https://civilica.com/doc/420674
Yi, Z., Zhoumin, Xie, T., & Li, F. (2023). Financial risk prediction in supply chain finance based on buyer transaction behavior. Elsivier,170(5), 113964. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2022.102611
Zhao, L., Huo, B., Sun, L., & Zhao, X. (2013). The impact of supply chain risk on supply chain integration and company performance: a global investigation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(02), 115-131. doi:10.1108/13598541311318773
Zsidisin, G. A. (2003). Managerial perceptions of supply risk. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39(04), 14-26. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2003.tb00146.x
Zsidisin, G. A., & Ellram, L. M. (2003). An agency theory investigation of supply risk management. Journal of supply chain management, 39(02), 15-27. doi:10.1111/J.1745-493X.2003.TB00156.X
