Abstract
Following a disruption, organisations may choose to redesign aspects of their supply base to reduce the probability of reoccurrence, future impacts and/or improve recovery capabilities. However, we know very little about why and when firms choose to respond to some disruptions and not to others. Our study is particularly interested in understanding the underlying factors that shape such decision-making from a behavioural perspective. It utilises attribution theory from the field of social psychology to examine the extent to which the attribution of blame influences choices in the post disruption period. We test our hypotheses through two studies. First, data collected from a behavioural experiment with 140 global MBA students examines the antecedents of blame. Our findings suggest that controllability significantly influences the extent to which suppliers are blamed for a disruption, while severity has no significant effect. Second, data collected from a survey of 115 UK managers examines the impact of blame on supply base redesign. Our findings suggest that blame significantly impacts redesign, but only when the buyer’s prior trust in a supplier is low.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
