Abstract

Purpose: Majority of times, it is argued that firm could face difficulty to reconfigure its processes and capture opportunities within the marketplace, without even suspecting such opportunities earlier.

Methodology: Market sensing shows the routines of organization which are associated with quick learning about competitors, customers, business environment, and SC members, enabling to understand market conditions for the purpose of forecasting.

Results: This study is interested in examining the relationship between supply chain performance and firm performance in the presence of firm performance. To test the hypotheses we have used the SEM-AMOS statistical technique. The findings of the study have provided support to the theoretical foundation and proposed hypothesis of the current study. Current study will be helpful for policymakers and practitioners in understanding the issues related to supply chain risk, supply chain integration and supply chain performance. In the author's knowledge this is among very few pioneering studies on this issue.

References

  1. Altay, N., A. Gunasekaran, R. Dubey and S.J. Childe, 2018. Agility and resilience as antecedents of supply chain performance under moderating effects of organizational culture within the humanitarian setting: A dynamic capability view. Production Planning & Control, 29(14): 1158-1174.https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1542174
  2. Aslam, H., C. Blome, S. Roscoe and T.M. Azhar, 2018. Dynamic supply chain capabilities: How market sensing, supply chain agility and adaptability affect supply chain ambidexterity. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(12): 2266-2285.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-09-2017-0555
  3. Basheer, M., M. Siam, A. Awn and S. Hassan, 2019. Exploring the role of tqm and supply chain practices for firm supply performance in the presence of information technology capabilities and supply chain technology adoption: A case of textile firms in pakistan. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 7(2): 275-288.https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2018.9.001
  4. Chowdhury, M.M.H. and M. Quaddus, 2017. Supply chain resilience: Conceptualization and scale development using dynamic capability theory. International Journal of Production Economics, 188: 185-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.03.020
  5. Christopher, M. and M. Holweg, 2011. "Supply chain 2.0": Managing supply chains in the era of turbulence. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(1): 63-82.https://doi.org/10.1108/09600031111101439
  6. 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
  7. Dhaigude, A. and R. Kapoor, 2017. The mediation role of supply chain agility on supply chain orientation-supply chain performance link. Journal of Decision Systems, 26(3): 275-293.https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2017.1351862
  8. Dubey, R., N. Altay, A. Gunasekaran, C. Blome, T. Papadopoulos and S.J. Childe, 2018. Supply chain agility, adaptability and alignment: Empirical evidence from the indian auto components industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(1): 129-148.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-04-2016-0173
  9. Eckstein, D., M. Goellner, C. Blome and M. Henke, 2015. The performance impact of supply chain agility and supply chain adaptability: The moderating effect of product complexity. International Journal of Production Research, 53(10): 3028-3046.https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.970707
  10. Eltantawy, R.A., 2016. The role of supply management resilience in attaining ambidexterity: A dynamic capabilities approach. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(1): 123-134.https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-05-2014-0091
  11. Ghozali, I., 2005. Analisis multivariate dengan program spss. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
  12. Gligor, D.M., C.L. Esmark and M.C. Holcomb, 2015. Performance outcomes of supply chain agility: When should you be agile? Journal of Operations Management, 33: 71-82.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.008
  13. Gligor, D.M., M.C. Holcomb and T.P. Stank, 2013. A multidisciplinary approach to supply chain agility: onceptualization and scale development. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(2): 94-108.https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12012
  14. Hafeez, M.H., M.F. Basheer, M. Rafique and S.H. Siddiqui, 2018. Exploring the links between tqm practices, business innovativeness and firm performance: An emerging market perspective. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 38(2): 485-500.
  15. Hair, J.F., C.M. Ringle and M. Sarstedt, 2011. Pls-sem: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2): 139-152.https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
  16. Hair Jr, J., M. Sarstedt, L. Hopkins and V. G. Kuppelwieser, 2014. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (pls-sem) an emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2): 106-121.https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
  17. Handfield, R.B., P.D. Cousins, B. Lawson and K.J. Petersen, 2015. How can supply management really improve performance? A knowledge‐based model of alignment capabilities. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 51(3): 3-17.https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12066
  18. Hong, J., Y. Zhang and M. Ding, 2018. Sustainable supply chain management practices, supply chain dynamic capabilities, and enterprise performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172: 3508-3519.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.093
  19. Hoyle, R.H., 1995. The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues.
  20. Juffe-Bignoli, D., N.D. Burgess, H. Bingham, E. Belle, M. De Lima, M. Deguignet, B. Bertzky, A. Milam, J. Martinez-Lopez and E. Lewis, 2014. Protected planet report 2014. UNEP-WCMC: Cambridge, UK, 11.
  21. Keskin, Ö. and H. Akdeniz, 2018. Investigation of aggression levels of university students (kocaeli university case). Asian Journal of Education and Training, 4(3): 186-196.https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.522.2018.43.186.196
  22. Khan, N., K. Ali, A. Kiran, R. Mubeen, Z. Khan and N. Ali, 2016. Factors that affect the derivatives usage of non-financial listed firms of pakistan to hedge foreign exchange exposure. Journal of Banking and Financial Dynamics, 1(1): 9-20.https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.525/2017.1.1/525.1.9.20
  23. Khan, Y. and W. Mingyi, 2018. How the gcc economic crises affect labor migration: Evidence from pakistan. Asian Journal of Economics and Empirical Research, 5(2): 139-146.
  24. Khemili, H. and M. Belloumi, 2018. Cointegration relationship between growth, inequality and poverty in tunisia. International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, 2(1): 8-18. https://doi.org/10.33094/8.2017.2018.21.8.18
  25. Kip'ngetich, K.J., A.A. Osman and M.M. Ali, 2018. John dewey 's experimentalism philosophy and its claim to the kenyan education system. Global Journal of Social Sciences Studies, 4(1): 30-38.https://doi.org/10.20448/807.4.1.30.38
  26. Kojo, R. and N. Paschal, 2018. Urban population growth and environmental sustainability in nigeria. Journal of Empirical Studies, 5(1): 12-19.https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.66.2018.51.12.19
  27. Köse, B., 2018. Does motivational music influence maximal bench press strength and strength endurance? Asian Journal of Education and Training, 4(3): 197-200.https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.522.2018.43.197.200
  28. Kιrcι, M. and R. Seifert, 2015. Dynamic capabilities in sustainable supply chain management: A theoretical framework. In: Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal. Taylor & Francis: pp: 2-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2015.11728690
  29. Li, Y. and K. Mathiyazhagan, 2018. Application of dematel approach to identify the influential indicators towards sustainable supply chain adoption in the auto components manufacturing sector. Journal of cleaner production, 172: 2931-2941.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.120
  30. Masteika, I. and J. Čepinskis, 2015. Dynamic capabilities in supply chain management. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213: 830-835.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.485
  31. McAdam, R., S.-A. Hazlett and B. Galbraith, 2014. The role of performance measurement models in multi level alignment: An exploratory case analysis in the utilities sector. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(9): 1153-1183.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-09-2011-0313
  32. McAdam, R., P. Humphreys, B. Galbraith and K. Miller, 2017. Developing management capability within a horizontal supply chain performance measurement deployment and evolution: A dynamic capabilities and goal theory perspective. Production Planning & Control, 28(6-8): 610-628.
  33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1309706
  34. Prajogo, D., A. Oke and J. Olhager, 2016. Supply chain processes: Linking supply logistics integration, supply performance, lean processes and competitive performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(2): 220-238.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2014-0129
  35. Song, H., K. Yu, A. Ganguly and R. Turson, 2016. Supply chain network, information sharing and sme credit quality. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(4): 740-758.https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0375
  36. Tabachnick, B.G., L.S. Fidell and J.B. Ullman, 2007. Using multivariate statistics. Pearson Boston, MA.
  37. Teece, D.J., 2007. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13): 1319-1350.https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  38. Thornton, L.M., T.L. Esper and C.W. Autry, 2016. Leader or lobbyist? How organizational politics and top supply chain manager political skill impacts supply chain orientation and internal integration. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 52(4): 42-62.https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12119
  39. Tuan, L.T., 2016. Organisational ambidexterity and supply chain agility: The mediating role of external knowledge sharing and moderating role of competitive intelligence. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(6): 583-603.https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2015.1137278
  40. Williams, B.D., J. Roh, T. Tokar and M. Swink, 2013. Leveraging supply chain visibility for responsiveness: The moderating role of internal integration. Journal of Operations Management, 31(7-8): 543-554.
  41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2013.09.003
  42. Williams, J. and D.P. MacKinnon, 2008. Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 15(1): 23-51.
  43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701758166
  44. Zhan, J., S. Li and X. Chen, 2018. The impact of financing mechanism on supply chain sustainability and efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 205: 407-418.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.347