The
Internet of Things is one of the major enablers of SC cohesion. Ben-Daya et al. (2017) defined it as a network of physical
objects that are digitally connected to sense, monitor and interact within a
company and between the company and its supply chain enabling agility,
visibility, tracking and information sharing to facilitate timely planning,
control and coordination of the supply chain processes. Some authors like Tu
(2018) argues for the transparency that IoT brings to SCM due to the global
network of physical objects. Mainly devoted to the SC delivery processes,
transformation or even food SCs, IoT could help manage SC remotely, provide
more precise information and ensure better coordination between different
entities for effective decisions taken.
IoT
improve previous technologies in SC. As showed Tu et al., its outperforms
current barcode-based system regarding labor cost,
efficiency, and operational adaptiveness. Their potential favour exchanges
between SC members. Thus, Haddud et al. (2017)
confirm the significance impact of IoT potential benefits to individual organizations
and their entire supply chains. Its contribute to build critical success
factors for successful SCM. Cui et al. (2022) provide most important measures
of the IoT in improving SC. i.e. improving information transparency,
strengthening the integration of management information systems and improving
large data processing abilities.
Figure 4 : topics
developed in IoT papers
The
nine articles selected on IoT develop different topics: productivity, SC
sustainability and innovation or servitization. But,
by considering that some technologies like RFID or more widely IT in business,
are initial stage of IoT, 27 others papers must be considered. The figure 4
provides details for IoT specific papers.
Analysing
the impact of IoT in retail sector, De Vass et al. (2021) reveal that multiple
IoT forms provide additional capabilities in data auto-capture, visibility,
intelligence, and information sharing for greater integration of retail supply
chains. That, in turn, enhances supply chain performance in cost, quality,
delivery, and flexibility dimensions to improve firm financial, social, and
environmental sustainability. From purchasing side, IoT help to work with
dynamic and complex markets. Its also supports the
development of a more capable and efficient Purchasing and Supply Management
organisation (Legenvre et al., 2021).
Internet
of Things takes supply chain communications to another level: the possibility
of human to things communication and autonomous coordination among ‘things’
while being stored in a facility or being transported between different supply
chain entities (Ben-Daya et al., 2017). This
technology will allow the reduction in the time between data capture and
decision-making that enables supply chains to react to changes in real time
allowing levels of agility and responsiveness never experienced before (Ben-Daya et al., 2017, Ellis et al., 2015). With these
possibilities, IoT provides more capabilities to react when risks arise.
Prim
et al. (2021), present the IoT and Big Data as tools for real-time monitoring
of supply chain processes, supporting proactive decision-making, reducing
operational costs and improving product quality. They also claim that a
collaborative partnership would reduce the learning curve and barriers to
adoption, and increase the likelihood of successful implementation. Blockchain
bring more security to the above collaborative partnership.
Blockchain
is considered as a distributed database of common public/private records or
ledgers of all digital transactions that have been executed and shared between
agents participating in the chain (Benhayoun et Saikouk, 2022 ;Saberi et al.,
2019). Though Blockchain Technology (BT)–SCM integration is still in its
infancy (Queiroz et al., 2020), from Swan (2015) perspective, its enables
timely and more efficient business relationships. It mitigates risks and
reduces transaction costs. It overcomes currency fluctuations and speculation
between shipper and importers as well as other stakeholders. It verifies the
origin of a product by providing information on time, place and manufacturers,
and offers information on its journey from suppliers to consumers (Lesueur-Cazé et al., 2022; Benhayoun
et Saikouk, 2022). Decentralization bringing out by
Blockchains promotes security as it makes less likely to crash, be corrupted or
hacked (Benhayoun and Saikouk,
2022; Tian, 2016). The double spending and double-booking problems can also be
easily solved by the blockchain as there will only be one transaction related
to the previous and ongoing block in the chain that can be approved.
There
are other technologies such as Direct Digital Manufacturing (DDM), Cloud, Big
Data or Cyber-physical systems and they contribute to improve products or
improve their ability to meet customer demand. For example, in food industry,
Ali et al. (2021) noted that the main drivers for the adoption of Industry 4.0
technologies are cost optimization, food safety concern, facilitation of
regulatory compliance and the ability to better match supply and demand.
The
above figure 5 present topics addressed by Blockchain technology.
Most
of papers deal with BT adoption, its importance in SC efficiency or SC
sustainability in developed and emerging economies. Economies in which there are differences in
the variables that determine the BTs as well as their stage of diffusion (Wamba
and Queiroz, 2022).
Figure 5 :
topics developed in blockchain papers
Foremost,
while Queiroz et al. (2021) pointed out that, the most critical constructs that
directly affect BT adoption in emerging economy are facilitating conditions,
trust, social influence, and effort expectancy, Kamble
et al. (2019) found that the technology readiness index constructs-Insecurity
and discomfort have an insignificant effect on the perceived ease of use and
usefulness. For these authors, perceived usefulness, attitude, and perceived
behavioural control affect the behavioural intention. They found that,
subjective norm has a negligible impact on behavioural intention. Finally, Wong et al. (2020) revealed that
facilitating condition, technology readiness and technology affinity have a
positive influence on intention to use BT in SC and regulatory support
moderates the effect of Facilitating Condition.
While
most of papers on BT seek to understand its importance in SC, others provide
insight for its implementation within SC operations as well as in SC
sustainability. For Wang et al. (2019), the value of such technologies for
supply chain management lies in four areas: extended visibility and
traceability, supply chain digitalization and disintermediation, improved data
security and smart contracts.
Widely,
blockchain could transform practice, including enhancing product safety and
security, improving quality management, reducing illegal counterfeiting,
improving sustainable supply chain management, advancing inventory management
and replenishment, reducing the need for intermediaries, impacting new product
design and development, and reducing the cost of supply chain transactions
(Cole et al., 2019). The above efforts are more-oriented toward improving
operational-level capabilities (information sharing and coordination
capabilities) than strategic-level capabilities (integration and collaboration
capabilities) within SC (Nandi et al., 2020).
According
to the first group of authors, implementing Blockchain helps to fulfilling SC
goals of performance. Therefore, dealing with inefficiency within SC operations
Xue et al. (2021) find that blockchain is a helpful
tool to realize the goal of SC management to reduce cost, improve quality and
enhance the overall efficiency of the system. Blockchain improves the
efficiency of the process: it reduces the number of operations, reduces the
average time of orders in the system, reduces workload, shows traceability of
orders and improves visibility to various supply chain participants (Rogerson
et Parry, 2020; Martinez et al., 2019, Wang et al., 2019). Blockchain
technology (BT) increases the operational transparency of the Supply Chain and
the trust that is built between members of the Supply Chain, which improves
coordination (Dubey et al., 2020). BT largely contributes to the improvement of
demand forecasting in SCs (Benhayoun et Saikouk, 2022).
For Azzi et al. (2019), the BT is introduced to achieve the
supply chain’s objectives, by reducing the risk emerging from the tracking
system and data management. More, competitive performance is directly improved
through blockchain adoption and also indirectly through blockchain-enabled
process and relational innovation (Fosso Wamba and Guthrie, 2020). Kayikci
et al. (2022) admitted that BT resolving major challenges, such as
traceability, trust, and accountability in the food industry.
The
second group is focus on circular economy. Though BT adoption to boost circular
economy has been mostly at the demonstration and piloting stage (Kouhizadeh et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2019), Nandi et al.
(2021) show significant patterns on adoption levels of the BT-enabled circular
economy system (BCES) and localization, agility and digitization (L-A-D) capability
development. For these authors, the greater the BCES adoption capabilities, the
greater the L-A-D capabilities.
For
example, even Blockchain promotes cooperation between the main players in the
aviation industry and the air traffic controllers to reduce fragmentation,
inefficiency, and uncoordinated operations, or allows information and data
sharing, Di Vaio and Varriale
(2020) show that Blockchain it is still not possible to observe a high level of
sustainable performance.
Authors
use different methods to address the impact of digitalization on SC as
presented in the section below.
3.3 Methods
developed in papers on digitilization
These
researches are developed within several sectors. The most representative is
manufacturing industry (fashion, agribusiness, automotive, energy, …), service
industry (transport, logistic, tourism retailing, …), Healthcare…
Quantitative
methods are the most representative in research on digitalization over the
period studied (36,36%) followed by Qualitative methods (35,40%). Conceptual
researches represent about 24%. This result may explain the maturation path
followed by research on digitalization. The table below provides details of
methods used by authors in this review.
Table 4 : Methods developed
|
Methods
|
Method details
|
Number
|
|
Conceptual
|
Review/conceptual
framework
|
50
|
|
Qualitative methods
|
Case study
|
34
|
|
Delphi
|
8
|
|
Semi structured interview
|
32
|
|
Quantitative methods
|
SEM Methods
|
23
|
|
Mathematical/simulation
|
29
|
|
Others
(Multivariate analysis, regression, …)
|
24
|
|
Mixed methods
|
Interview-survey
|
9
|
|
Total
|
209
|
Even
if the importance of technology is highlighted in the SC, the remain many
reasons that prevent managers to adopt it. Section 3.4 presents some of them.
3.4 Barriers to the
implementation of digitalization
There
are numerous barriers on the adoption of digitalization and Industry 4.0. This
can overall be attributed to the stigmas left by previous technologies (ERP for
example), ignorance or fear of the unknown among some managers and their
perceived adoption costs (Papathanasiou et al.,
2020).
Lack
of transparency in information is one of most important barrier. As pointed out
Derrouiche (2022), information integrity, transparency, and security are
necessary requirements for Supply Chain 4.0 applications, especially when there
are several stakeholders sharing and processing sensitive data. Lesueur-Cazé et al. (2022) pointed out the governance
issues as the mayor difficulty in Blockchain adoption within SC.
For
some authors, the non-adoption of Industry 4.0 isofar
attributed to the reluctance of some stakeholders, or due to the lack of
standard architecture, to Internet access difficulties, contractual problems,
confidentiality and security issues and the underdevelopment issue (Chauhan et
al., 2021; Kamble et al., 2019). For example, in the
electronic marketplace, Benzidia (2014) found that,
the mayor challenge remains the security and technological reliability issue
for succeed in reverse auction. But there is also the matter of organizational
culture, process re-engineering and staff resistance to change that can hinder
the implementation of technology (Derrouiche, 2022). More, it can be the matter
of organizational inertia, financial constraints or lack of resources sharing
within the food supply chain (Ali et al., 2021).
For
others, factors such as : "no sense of urgency", lack of industry
specific guidelines, lack of digital skills and talents (Nguyen et al., 2015),
lack of an overall digitalization strategy and competing priorities (Kane et
al., 2015), lack of understanding and lack of top management commitment; lack
of support and absence of government policies; and poor level of research and
development, high implementation and running costs; fear of failure;
compatibility issues are the main obstacles to the adoption of Industry 4.0
(Agrawal et al., 2019; Majumdar et al., 2020). In the SMEs sector, Stentoft et al. (2020) found that it is the lack of
managers perception of Industry 4.0, and not their perception of the high
barriers of Industry 4.0, that hinders the SME development readiness for
technology. Finally, for Haddud et al. (2017), IoT
challenges are still perceived as major obstacles to their adoption.
From
the above developments, many implications can be drawn. Section 4 highlights some.
4. IMPLICATIONS
According
to Papathanasiou et al. (2020), ERP transformations
have left organisations fatigued and disinclined towards further systems
development and resistant to subsequent change. Yet they are well aware of the
positive contributions of technologies such as blockchain on business
practices. This therefore implies for managers to first and foremost carry out
a check-up of the company's current technology state before embarking on a new
one that would overlap the existing without, however, providing any real
perceived value.
For
Chauhan et al. (2021), intrinsic barriers (vs extrinsic) are more important and
relevant for the adoption of Industry 4.0. This assume that if we fail in
specifying the objectives of digitalization and in the clarifying process of its
potential benefits and costs, it will be difficult to remove reluctances and
take advantage of its prowess. Like these authors, and with the accordance of
the resource-based view theory, we urge managers to take into account the
availability of both material and human resources. They will better do this by
preparing the different stakeholders both through training and communication.
In
addition, industries in developing economies are still struggling to embrace
Industry 4.0. The actors are specifically interested in technologies that allow
them to strengthen their productivity in order to ensure their economies of
scale and therefore reduce costs to offer a price matching the customers
income. While, the implementation of technologies such as blockchain or IoT
would stimulate trust between partners and speed up the innovation process,
which are another source of competitiveness.
Although
represented in the papers analyzed, the
implementation of Industry 4.0 in retail chains does not interest researchers
as much as the upstream part of the chain or the firm internal process
management. Yet Piroth et al. (2020) find that
logistics issues and technological infrastructure are viewed as key drivers of
online grocery retailing. Retail chains should therefore take greater ownership
of these technologies to improve their services.
5. CONCLUSION
This
research aimed to analyze the papers dealing with the
impacts of digitalization and mainly of Industry 4.0, Blockchain and IoT on the
supply chain. It emerges that it is a new subject which is arousing more and
more the researchers’ interest in observing the ever-increasing number of
publications. The impacts observed are numerous and cover a wide spectrum of
themes specific to various types of industries and environments. Some barriers
are presented, but also some implications aimed at drawing attention both to vigilance
in choice of technology, but also to the unavoidable nature of this new
industrial revolution for the supply chain.
The
attempt to splitting the themes or technologies analyzed,
which is certainly interesting for understanding the research directions,
remains poorly realistic. For example, it is difficult to be able to clearly
distinguish between articles dealing with digitalization from those dealing with Industry 4.0. Future researches
must consider this. The choice made on the HCERES journals repository restricts
the scope of the literature review analysis initiated. We plan to expand this
field in our future research.
6. REFERENCES
Agrawal, P., Narain, R., &
Ullah, I. (2019). Analysis of barriers in implementation of digital
transformation of supply c²hain using interpretive structural modelling
approach. Journal of Modelling in
Management https://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-03-2019-0066
Ali, I., & Thai, V. V.
(2020). Adopting Industry 4. 0 Technologies in Agri-Food Supply Chains: An
Exploratory Investigation of Drivers and Barriers.
Azzi, R., Chamoun, R. K.,
& Sokhn, M. (2019). The power of a blockchain-based supply chain. Computers
& industrial engineering, 135, 582-592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.06.042
Ben-Daya, M., Hassini, E.,
& Bahroun, Z. (2019). Internet of things and supply chain management : a
literature review. International Journal of Production Research,
57(15-16),4719-4742. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1402140
Benhayoun, L., &
Saikouk, T. (2022). Distinction des facteurs critiques de succès pour
l’adoption de la blockchain en supply, Revue Française de gestion Industrielle,
2022, Vol. 36, No. 1, 27-59. https://doi.org/10.53102/2022.36.01.915
Benzidia, S. (2012). Les places de marché
électroniques: vers une e-supply chain coopérative. Revue française de gestion
industrielle, 31(1),59-82. https://doi.org/10.53102/2012.31.01.647
Benzidia, S. (2014). Les apports transactionnels
et relationnels des enchères inversées B2B. Revue française de gestion
industrielle, 33(1), 105-121. https://doi.org/10.53102/2014.33.01.720
Blanchet, M. 2016. Industrie 4.0. Nouvelle donne
industrielle, nouveau modèle économique. Lignes de Repères (éd.). Imprimé en
UE. https://doi.org/10.3917/oute1.046.0062
Bloomberg, J. (2018).
Digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation: confuse them at your
peril. Forbes. Retrieved on August, 28, 2019.
Chauhan, C., Singh, A.,
&Luthra, S. (2021). Barriers to industry 4.0 adoption and its performance
implications : An empirical investigation of emerging economy. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 285, 124809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124809
Cole, R., Stevenson, M.,
& Aitken, J. (2019). Blockchain technology: implications for operations and
supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,
24(4), 469-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-09-2018-0309
Colicchia, C., and F.
Strozzi. 2012. “Supply Chain Risk Management: A New Methodology for a
Systematic Literature Review.” Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
17 (4): 403–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541211246558
Couzineau-Zegwaard, E. (2020). L’impact de la
digitalisation sur l’écosystème d’affaires de la Supply chain. La Revue des
Sciences de Gestion, (1), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.3917/rsg.300.0086
Cui, L., Gao, M., Dai, J.,
& Mou, J. (2022). Improving supply chain collaboration through operational
excellence approaches: an IoT perspective. Industrial Management & Data
Systems, 122(3), 565-591. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-01-2020-0016
Daxböck, C., Kröber, J. and
Bergmann, M. (2019), “Digitized performance management along the supply chain”,
Performance Management in Retail and the Consumer GoodsIndustry, Springer,
Cham, pp. 405-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12730-5_26
de Oliveira, U. R.,
Espindola, L. S., da Silva, I. R., da Silva, I. N., & Rocha, H. M. (2018).
A systematic literature review on green supply chain management: Research
implications and future perspectives. Journal of cleaner production, 187,
537-561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.083
De Vass, T., Shee, H., &
Miah, S. J. (2021). Iot in supply chain management: a narrative on retail
sector sustainability. International Journal of Logistics Research and
Applications, 24(6), 605-624. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2020.1787970
Derrouiche, R. (2022).
Supply Chain 4.0: Improving supply chains with analytics and Industry 4.0
technologies, Emel Aktas, Michael Bourlakis, Ioannis Minis, Vasileios
Zeimpekis. Revue Française de Gestion Industrielle, 36(1), 124-129. https://doi.org/10.53102/2022.36.01.1111
Di Vaio, A., & Varriale, L. (2020). Blockchain technology in supply chain management for sustainable
performance: Evidence from the airport industry. International Journal of
Information Management, 52, 102014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.09.010
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A.,
Bryde, D. J., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Papadopoulos, T. (2020). Blockchain
technology for enhancing swift-trust, collaboration and resilience within a
humanitarian supply chain setting. International journal of Production
research, 58(11), 3381-3398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1722860
Ellis, S., Morris, H. D.,
& Santagate, J. (2015). IoT-enabled analytic applications revolutionize
supply chain planning and execution. International Data Corporation (IDC) White
Paper, 13, 259697.
Fel, F., Cayla, J., &
Carbone, V. (2020). L’industrie 4.0 peut-elle favoriser une
relocalisation de la production en France?. Logistique
& Management, 28(1), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/12507970.2019.1683477
Forrester Research (2008),
The Growth of Social Technology Adoption, Forrester Research, Cambridge, MA.
Fosso Wamba, S., &
Guthrie, C. (2020). The impact of blockchain adoption on competitive
performance: the mediating role of process and relational innovation. Logistique
& Management, 28(1), 88-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/12507970.2019.1679046
Gupta, H., Kumar, S., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Jabbour,
C. J. C., &Agyemang, M. (2020). Enablers to supply
chain performance on the basis of digitization technologies. Industrial
Management & Data Systems. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2020-0421
Haddud, A., DeSouza, A.,
Khare, A., & Lee, H. (2017). Examining potential benefits and challenges
associated with the Internet of Things integration in supply chains. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-05-2017-0094
Heavin, C., & Power, D.
J. (2018). Challenges for digital transformation–towards a conceptual decision
support guide for managers. Journal of Decision Systems, 27, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2018.1468697
Hennelly, P.A., Srai, J.S.,
Graham, G. and Fosso Wamba, S. (2020), “Rethinking supply chains in the age of
digitalization”, Production Planning and Control, Vol.31 Nos 2-3, pp. 93-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1631469
Hess, T., Benlian, A., Matt,
C., & Wiesb¨ock, F. (2016). Options for formulating a digital
transformation strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(2), 123–139.
Irannezhad, E. (2020). Is
blockchain a solution for logistics and freight transportation problems?
Transportation Research Procedia, 48,
290-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.20
20.08.023
Jabbour, C.J.C., Fiorini,
P.D.C., Ndubisi, N.O., de Queiroz, M.M. and Piato, E.L. (2020),
“Digitally-enabled sustainable supply chains in the 21st century : a review and
a research agenda”, The Science of the Total Environment, 138177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138177
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W.,
and Helbig, J., (2013), Recommendations for implementing the strategic
initiative Industrie 4.0 – Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group.
Frankfurt am Main : Communication Promoters Group of the Industry-Science
Research Alliance, acatech.
Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A.,
&Arha, H. (2019). Understanding the Blockchain technology adoption in
supply chains-Indian context. International Journal of Production Research,
57(7), 2009-2033. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00207543.2018.1518610
Kane, G. C., Palmer, D.,
Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology,
drives digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review.
Kayikci, Y., Subramanian, N., Dora, M., &
Bhatia, M. S. (2022). Food supply chain in the era
of Industry 4.0: Blockchain technology implementation opportunities and
impediments from the perspective of people, process, performance, and
technology. Production planning & control, 33(2-3), 301-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1810757
Kergroach, S. (2021). SMEs
Going Digital: Policy challenges and recommendations. Going Digital Toolkit
Note,15. https://doi.org/10.1787/c91088a4-en
Khin, S., & Ho, T. C.
(2019). Digital technology, digital capability and organizational performance.
International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijis-08-2018-0083
Kirtley, J., & O’Mahony,
S. (2020). What is a pivot? Explaining when and how entrepreneurial firms
decide to make strategic change and pivot. Strategic Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3131
Kouhizadeh, M., Zhu, Q.,
& Sarkis, J. (2020). Blockchain and the circular economy: potential
tensions and critical reflections from practice. Production Planning &
Control, 31(11-12), 950-966. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1695925
Kraus, S., Durst, S.,
Ferreira, J. J., Veiga, P., Kailer, N., & Weinmann, A. (2022). Digital
transformation in business and management research: An overview of the current
status quo. International Journal of Information Management, 63, 102466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466
Lasi, H., Fettke, P.,
Kemper, H. G., Feld, T., & Hoffmann, M. (2014). Industry 4.0. Business
& Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4
Lee H.L. etBillington C,
(1993), Material management in decentralized supply chain", Operations
Research, vol 41, n°5, p. 835-847. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.41.5.835
Legenvre, H., Henke, M.,
& Ruile, H. (2020). Making sense of the impact of the internet of things on
Purchasing and Supply Management: A tension perspective. Journal of Purchasing
and Supply Management, 26(1), 100596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2019.100596
Lesueur-Cazé, M., Bironneau, L., Lux, G., &
Morvan, T. (2022). Réflexions sur les usages de la blockchain pour la
logistique et le Supply Chain Management: une approche prospective. Revue
française de gestion industrielle, 36(1), 60-82. https://doi.org/10.53102/2022.36.01.917
Li, F. (2020bbb). The
digital transformation of business models in the creative industries: A
holistic framework and emerging trends. Technovation, 92–93, Article
102012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.12.004
Majumdar, A., Garg, H., & Jain, R. (2020). Managing the barriers of Industry 4.0 adoption and implementation in
textile and clothing industry: Interpretive structural model and triple helix
framework. Computers in Industry, 103372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.
2020.103372
Martinez, V., Zhao, M.,
Blujdea, C., Han, X., Neely, A., & Albores, P. (2019). Blockchain-driven
customer order management. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 39(6/7/8), 993-1022. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-01-2019-0100
Müller, J. M., Buliga, O., & Voigt, K.-I.
(2021). The role of absorptive capacity and innovation
strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business models - A comparison between
SMEs and large enterprises. European Management Journal, 39(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.01.002
Nandi, M. L., Nandi, S.,
Moya, H., & Kaynak, H. (2020). Blockchain technology-enabled supply chain
systems and supply chain performance: a resource-based view. Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, 25(6), 841-862. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-12-2019-0444
Nandi, S., Sarkis, J.,
Hervani, A., & Helms, M. (2021). Do blockchain and circular economy
practices improve post COVID-19 supply chains? A resource-based and resource
dependence perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 121(2),
333-363. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2020-0560
Nguyen, T. H., Newby, M.,
& Macaulay, M. J. (2015). Information technology adoption in small
business: Confirmation of a proposed framework. Journal of Small Business
Management, 53(1), 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12058
Papathanasiou, A., Cole, R.,
& Murray, P. (2020). The (non-) application of blockchain technology in the
Greek shipping industry. European Management Journal, 38(6), 927-938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2 020.04.007
Parviainen, P., Tihinen, M.,
Kääriäinen, J., & Teppola, S. (2017). Tackling the digitalization
challenge: how to benefit from digitalization in practice. International
journal of information systems and project management, 5(1), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.12821/ijispm050104
Piroth, P., Rüger-Muck, E.,
& Bruwer, J. (2020). Digitalisation in grocery retailing in Germany: an
exploratory study. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research, 30(5), 479-497. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2020.1738260
PRIM, A. L., NICCHELLATTI, T. P., & MENDES, R.
G. (2021). Improving cold-food quality control through the
Internet of Things and big data. Supply Chain 4.0: Improving Supply Chains with
Analytics and Industry 4.0 Technologies, 171.
Queiroz, M. M., Fosso Wamba, S., De Bourmont, M.,
& Telles, R. (2021). Blockchain adoption in
operations and supply chain management: empirical evidence from an emerging
economy. International Journal of Production Research, 59(20), 6087-6103. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1803511
Queiroz, M. M., Telles, R.,
& Bonilla, S. H. (2020). Blockchain and supply chain management
integration: a systematic review of the literature. Supply chain management: An
international journal, 25(2), 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0143
Reinhardt, I. C., Oliveira,
J. C., & Ring, D. T. (2020). Current perspectives on the development of
Industry 4.0 in the pharmaceutical sector. Journal of Industrial Information
Integration, 18, 100131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2020.10013
Rogerson, M., & Parry,
G. C. (2020). Blockchain: case studies in food supply chain visibility. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, 25(5), 601-614. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-08-2019-0300
Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M.,
Sarkis, J., & Shen, L. (2019). Blockchain techn²ology and its relationships
to sustainable supply chain management. International Journal of Production
Research, 57(7), 2117–2135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261
Skare, M., de Obesso, M. D.
L. M., & Ribeiro-Navarrete, S. (2023). Digital transformation and European
small and medium enterprises (SMEs): A comparative study using digital economy
and society index data. International Journal of Information Management, 68,
102594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102594
Stentoft, J., Adsbøll Wickstrøm,
K., Philipsen, K., & Haug, A. (2020). Drivers and barriers for Industry 4.0
readiness and practice :empirical evidence from small and medium-sized
manufacturers. Production Planning & Control, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1768318
Swan, M., 2015. Blockchain
:Blueprint for a New Economy, " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".ISBN:
1491920475.
Swanson, D. (2017, January).
The impact of digitization on product offerings: using direct digital
manufacturing in the supplychain. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.508
Taiminen, H. M.,
&Karjaluoto, H. (2015). The usage of digital marketing channels in SMEs.
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. https://doi.org/10.11
08/JS BED-05-2013-0073
Tian, F. (2016). An
agri-food supply chain traceability system for China based on RFID &
blockchain technology. 2016 13th International Conference on Service Systems
and Service Management, ICSSSM 2016, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSSM.2016.7538424
Tu, M. (2018), “An
exploratory study of Internet of Things (IoT) adoption intention in logistics
and supply chain management”, International Journal of Logistics Management,
Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 131-151. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-11-2016-0274
Tu, M., K. Lim, M., & Yang, M. F. (2018). IoT-based production logistics and supply chain system–Part 2: IoT-based
cyber-physical system: a framework and evaluation. Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 118(1), 96-125. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-11-2016-0503
Vétois, P., & Raimbault,
N. (2017). L’« uberisation» de la logistique: disruption ou
continuité? Le cas de l’Île-de-France. Technologie et innovation, 17(3), 22.
Wamba, S. F., & Queiroz, M. M. (2022). Industry 4.0 and the supply chain digitalisation: a blockchain diffusion
perspective. Production Planning & Control, 33(2-3), 193-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1810756
Wang, Y., Han, J. H., &
Beynon-Davies, P. (2019). Understanding blockchain technology for future supply
chains: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, 24(1), 62-84. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0148
Wang, Y., Singgih, M., Wang,
J., & Rit, M. (2019). Making sense of blockchain technology: How will it
transform supply chains?. International Journal of Production Economics, 211,
221-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.02.002
Wong, L. W., Tan, G. W. H.,
Lee, V. H., Ooi, K. B., & Sohal, A. (2020). Unearthing the determinants of
Blockchain adoption in supply chain management. International Journal of
Production Research, 58(7), 2100-2123. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1730463
Wu, L., Yue, X., Jin, A.,
& Yen, D. C. (2016). Smart supply chain management : a review and
implications for future research. The International Journal of Logistics
Management, 27(2), 395-417. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-02-2014-0035
7.
BIOGRAPHIE
Célestin ELOCK SON is a
researcher at CEREFIGE. He is a senior lecturer in Management Sciences at the
University of Lorraine at the Transport and Logistics Management department of
IUT de Moselle-Est. Holder of a PhD from the Université d'Artois, his research
focuses on retail logistics. In particular, it analyzes retailers and consumers
behaviors, study the risks associated with the distribution of food product. He
is also interested in new distribution methods brought about by the
digitization of the supply chain.
Jean
Noel BREKA is a
researcher at CEREFIGE. He is a senior lecturer in Management Sciences at the
University of Lorraine at the Transport and Logistics Management department of
IUT de Moselle-Est. He holds a PhD from the University of Paris 1 - Panthéon
Sorbonne. He specializes in Operations Management and Supply Chain. His
research focuses on industry 4.0, green logistics, CSR, functional economy and
circular economy