supply chain resilience: supply chain performance

Source literature boundary memo

Research question

Does supply chain resilience show a consistent direction-bearing association in the selected source bundle, and where do null/mixed or context-only receipts bound the claim?

Selection criteria

The source-literature selector kept supply chain resilience because the candidate bundle met the public source rule: 5 citable papers, 5 distinct fact-backed source identities, topic-overlapping source facts, and enough shared scope to compare metric/context disagreement. It excludes duplicate reports, metadata-only title matches, off-topic papers, and sources without fact-level extraction before treating the bundle as a coherent scoping front rather than proof of a policy or market conclusion.

Plain-language synthesis

Outcome-family boundary: direction-bearing receipts concern supply chain performance, while null/mixed receipts concern firm performance; context/model receipts do not test performance effects.

Boundary map

• Evaluating Supply Resilience Performance of an Automotive Industry during Operational Shocks: A Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP-VIKOR-Based Approach [primary; 2023] doi:10.3390/systems11080396
  • Bounded source claim: The results of the hybrid approach revealed that flexibility is the most important criterion among resilience criteria that constitute the most significant dimensions for RSS
  • Claim bounds: setting=automotive firms; exposure=Pythagorean fuzzy AHP-VIKOR modelling; metric=business outcome
  • Effect accounting: descriptive/modeling context only; this receipt does not test an effect of supply chain resilience on a performance endpoint.
  • Population/setting: automotive firms
  • Policy/exposure/practice: Pythagorean fuzzy AHP-VIKOR modelling
  • Endpoint/metric: business outcome
• The Impacts of Supply Chain Capabilities, Visibility, Resilience on Supply Chain Performance and Firm Performance [primary; 2023] doi:10.3390/admsci13100225
  • Bounded source claim: The research findings reveal that visibility significantly influences supply chain resilience; while the hypotheses of a positive impact of supply chain visibility and supply chain resilience on firm performance have been rejected
  • Claim bounds: setting=firms; exposure=supply chain visibility and capability antecedents; metric=firm performance
  • Population/setting: firms
  • Policy/exposure/practice: supply chain visibility and capability antecedents
  • Endpoint/metric: firm performance
• Factors Affecting the Supply Chain Resilience and Supply Chain Performance [primary; 2022] doi:10.57044/sajol.2022.1.2.2212
  • Bounded source claim: It was concluded that supply chain artificial intelligence, adaptive capability, and supply chain collaboration have a positive and significant influence on supply chain resilience and supply chain performance
  • Claim bounds: setting=firms; exposure=AI, adaptive capability, and collaboration antecedents; metric=supply chain performance
  • Population/setting: firms
  • Policy/exposure/practice: AI, adaptive capability, and collaboration antecedents
  • Endpoint/metric: supply chain performance
• The effect of supply chain resilience on supply chain performance of chemical industrial companies [primary; 2022] doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2022.8.001
  • Bounded source claim: Analyzing data via SmartPLS 3.0, the results showed that supply chain collaboration and supply chain agility as key dimensions of supply chain resilience had significant effects on supply chain performance, while supply chain flexibility exerted insignificant effect on supply chain performance
  • Claim bounds: setting=chemical industrial companies; exposure=flexibility, collaboration, and agility antecedents; metric=supply chain performance
  • Within-source caveat: significant dimensions drive the directional role, but the same receipt includes a null/mixed subdimension (Analyzing data via SmartPLS 3.0, the results showed that supply chain collaboration and supply chain agility as key dimensions of supply...).
  • Population/setting: chemical industrial companies
  • Policy/exposure/practice: flexibility, collaboration, and agility antecedents
  • Endpoint/metric: supply chain performance
• Supply chain resilience and performance of manufacturing firms: role of supply chain disruption [primary; 2023] doi:10.1108/jmtm-08-2022-0307
  • Bounded source claim: Findings First, the study revealed that SCR has a significant positive effect on SCP
  • Claim bounds: setting=manufacturing firms; exposure=supply chain disruption context; metric=supply chain performance
  • Population/setting: manufacturing firms
  • Policy/exposure/practice: supply chain disruption context
  • Endpoint/metric: supply chain performance

Source synthesis

Bounded signal: supply chain resilience has direction-bearing receipts for supply chain performance; firm performance is null/mixed in separate receipt(s), not softened scope caveats across business-outcome, chain-level, and firm-level. That supports only a narrow scoping contrast, not uniform support for the topic.

This receipt-backed scoping note is a multi-outcome boundary map for supply chain resilience: policy/exposure estimates plus separate descriptive evidence across this 5-source primary bundle (2022-2023). Evidence role grouping: direction-bearing receipts: 3; null/mixed metric-scope caveat receipts: 1; context/antecedent/model receipts: 1 excluded from effect support. The source facts cover 4 population/setting context(s) and 1 policy/exposure/practice context(s), so this is a multi-outcome scoping map about where outcomes/metrics diverge, without establishing a causal, policy-prescriptive, market-generalized, or pooled econometric claim. The listed estimates remain source-specific across metrics and settings; they are not pooled or averaged. This is a separated policy/setting map, not a unified pooled economics claim. Named setting scope includes automotive firms, chemical industrial companies, firms, and manufacturing firms. Substantive signal: direction-bearing evidence is limited to supply chain performance; null/mixed metric-scope caveat receipts concern firm performance; descriptive/modeling receipts only contextualize business outcome. Coverage balance: supply chain performance (3 of 3 direction-bearing receipts) is represented more than once; that is a scope imbalance to disclose, not stronger evidence for the topic.

Role definitions: direction-bearing rows carry metric-specific effect or association text; null/mixed rows carry rejected or non-convergent metric evidence; context/model rows rank, model, or contextualize adjacent constructs. Interpretation: keep these rows separate; do not pool them or treat antecedent/modeling rows as the same estimand. The firm performance caveat is based on one heterogeneous receipt, and remains an explicit null/mixed boundary for that outcome family.

Design heterogeneity: selected receipts span AHP-VIKOR and PLS-SEM; treat this as a boundary map, not pooled evidence.

Evidence matrix

Matrix guard: effect-bearing rows below are metric-specific source facts, not a pooled comparison; context-only rows are excluded from effect support.

Effect-bearing comparison

Outcome family	Receipt	Evidence role	Population/setting	Metric	Extracted finding
firm-level	The Impacts of Supply Chain Capabilities, Visibility, Resilience on...	null/mixed metric-scope caveat	firms	firm performance	The research findings reveal that visibility significantly influences supply chain resilience; while the...
chain-level	Factors Affecting the Supply Chain Resilience and Supply Chain...	directional association	firms	supply chain performance	It was concluded that supply chain artificial intelligence, adaptive capability, and supply chain...
chain-level	The effect of supply chain resilience on supply chain performance of...	directional association	chemical industrial companies	supply chain performance	Analyzing data via SmartPLS 3.0, the results showed that supply chain collaboration and supply chain agility...
chain-level	Supply chain resilience and performance of manufacturing firms: role of...	directional association	manufacturing firms	supply chain performance	Findings First, the study revealed that SCR has a significant positive effect on SCP

Context-only receipts

Outcome family	Receipt	Evidence role	Population/setting	Metric	Extracted finding
modeling-context	Evaluating Supply Resilience Performance of an Automotive Industry...	descriptive/modeling	automotive firms	business outcome	The results of the hybrid approach revealed that flexibility is the most important criterion among resilience...

Audit note: effect-bearing rows stay metric-specific; context-only rows are excluded from effect support; role counts below keep direction-bearing, null/mixed metric-scope caveat, and context-only receipts separate.

Evidence role definitions

• directional association: source-level direction with design caveat; supply_chain_resilience_value is the policy, exposure, method, or practice linked to the named metric, not a pooled effect-size estimate or efficacy verdict.
• descriptive/modeling: the receipt reports modelling or prediction rather than a policy-effect estimate.
• null/mixed metric-scope caveat: the receipt reports null, mixed, or rejected findings for the named metric/outcome and must not be softened into directional support.

Evidence role summary: direction-bearing receipts: 3; null/mixed metric-scope caveat receipts: 1; context/antecedent/model receipts: 1 excluded from effect support. Direction labels for audit: descriptive/modeling: 1 receipt(s) | null/mixed metric-scope caveat: 1 receipt(s) | directional association: 3 receipt(s).

Specific moderators in this bundle are outcome type (business outcome; firm performance; scp; supply chain performance), population/indication (firms), study design/evidence type (primary).

Context separation

Population/settings are separated as receipt context: automotive firms, chemical industrial companies, firms, and manufacturing firms. The selected receipts group because each carries a fact-level extraction for supply chain resilience; they separate by context (other source context) and metric, so they are not interchangeable evidence for one pooled claim.

Boundary limits

Source-literature boundary for supply chain resilience: the listed sources define separate outcome-specific signals across multiple metric families. This memo does not claim causality, policy prescription, a pooled elasticity estimate, or a market-generalized effect across the sources. Material limitations: small 5-source bundle; no pooled estimate is possible; outlet/tier heterogeneity is scope, not weight; method/model receipts without direct effect estimates are context only; outcomes are not harmonized across studies. The signal is purely descriptive of source-level direction and scope; it cannot support a causal, policy-prescriptive, or pooled elasticity inference, and pooling across these designs would be inappropriate. Effect-support accounting: 1 of 5 receipt(s) is context/modeling-only and contributes no effect estimate; 3 receipt(s) are direction-bearing and 1 receipt(s) are null/mixed metric-scope caveats.

What would weaken this

• This scoping signal would weaken if the null/mixed metric replicates in matched designs, if direction-bearing rows fail to reproduce within their named metric family, or if context/model rows become the only topic-overlapping receipts.

Next gaps

Resolve the coverage imbalance by adding or swapping receipts so supply chain performance is not over-represented relative to the other named metrics inside the same scoping map. Resolve the null/mixed metric-scope caveat by retesting supply chain performance and firm performance inside one matched industry, comparator, and metric frame before generalizing the directional receipts. A stronger memo needs one matched design: one setting, one policy/exposure, one comparator/reference group, and one named metric.