Coping Strategies for Supply Chain Disruption Risks and Pathways to Enhance Resilience: A Case Study of CATL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/91rjbm17Keywords:
Supply Chain Resilience, Disruption Management, Structural Dependency, Internal Coordination, Contingency Plan Failure, Dynamic Response.Abstract
This study investigates the underlying causes of response failures in supply chain disruption management, despite the widespread adoption of formal contingency plans by manufacturing enterprises. Through a comparative case analysis of Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL) and LG Electronics, we identify two critical dimensions contributing to such failures: external structural dependencies and internal coordination barriers. CATL’s vulnerability stems from deep reliance on upstream critical raw materials, illustrating that supplier diversification alone cannot eliminate structural fragility when control over key resources is lacking. In contrast, LG Electronics faces challenges rooted in insufficient multi-tier supplier visibility and inefficient logistics integration. Both cases further reveal significant internal coordination barriers, including delayed information flows and rigid cross-functional decision-making, which hinder dynamic response during disruptions. Grounded in information processing theory, this study emphasizes that resilience depends not only on structural design but also on organizational agility. We propose a shift from “diversified layout” to “critical control” in structural strategy and stress the need to break “dynamic response barriers” through enhanced information architectures and collaborative mechanisms. Our findings offer actionable pathways for enterprises to bridge the gap between static contingency planning and dynamic response execution.
Downloads
References
[1] Sheffi Y. The resilient enterprise: overcoming vulnerability for competitive advantage [M]. MIT press, 2007.
[2] Christopher M, Peck H. Building the resilient supply chain [J]. 2004.
[3] Soni U, Jain V, Kumar S. Measuring supply chain resilience using a deterministic modeling approach [J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2014, 74: 11 - 25.
[4] Ambulkar S, Blackhurst J, Grawe S. Firm's resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination [J]. Journal of operations management, 2015, 33: 111 - 122.
[5] Craighead C W, Blackhurst J, Rungtusanatham M J, et al. The severity of supply chain disruptions: design characteristics and mitigation capabilities [J]. Decision sciences, 2007, 38 (1): 131 - 156.
[6] Farohiddin Z M, Kim H J. Sustainable Supply Chain Management in the Korean Electronics Industry [J]. 2024.
[7] Nikookar E, Ali I, Stevenson M, et al. Necessary Antecedents of Supply Chain Resilience: The Nonnegotiable Influence of Supply Chain Responsiveness and Collaboration [J]. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2025.
[8] Zhou Jinguo. Research on the Integration of Logistics Capabilities of LG's Chinese Mobile Phone Factory Supply Chain [D]. Ocean University of China, 2010.
[9] Song Hua. China's supply chain resilience construction and high-quality development: connotation, mechanism and path [J]. Supply Chain Management, 2023, 4 (9): 5 - 24.
[10] Bode C, Wagner S M, Petersen K J, et al. Understanding responses to supply chain disruptions: Insights from information processing and resource dependence perspectives [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, 54 (4): 833 - 856.
[11] Hamidu Z, Boachie-Mensah F O, Issau K. Supply chain resilience and performance of manufacturing firms: role of supply chain disruption [J]. Journal of manufacturing technology management, 2023, 34 (3): 361 - 382.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

