Volume 11, Issue 1 (1-2019)
jorar 2019, 11(1): 49-62 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Talaie H, Hajian M. Trust Building in Humanitarian Services Supply Network. jorar 2019; 11 (1) :49-62
URL: http://jorar.ir/article-1-499-en.html
URL: http://jorar.ir/article-1-499-en.html
Assistant Professor, Shahid Ashrafi Isfahani University
Abstract: (2067 Views)
INTRODUCTION: Due to the increasing trend of natural and manmade disasters in the contemporary world, especially in Iran, as well as the variety and high number of disasters in recent years, the issue of managing the humanitarian services supply network has become very important. The purpose of this study is to design and evaluate the model of trust building in the humanitarian services supply network, considering the importance of building trust in these networks and theoretical poverty in this field.
METHODS: For doing this study, three recent major disasters in Tehran province, Iran, (Plasco accident, city explosion and metro flood) were selected and had been studied and the trust building model in humanitarian service supply network is designed using Corbin and Strauss grounded theory version 2015 based on interviews with 8 humanitarian experts in that three disasters. Then, the relationships between the model components were investigated by Structural Equation Modeling with a researcher-made questionnaire distributed among 128 individuals participating in the above events.
FINDINGS: The final model is designed in three phases of conditions, actions, and consequences based on grounded theory. Poor community structures and community management systems are a major obstacle to trust building and political power interventions, insufficient funding, uncertainty of the responsible person, unsuccessful performance, lack of coordination and cooperation of the responsible working groups, and lack of readiness are the main factors of distrust. The main components of the model are highly correlated and the components have significant relationships.
CONCLUSION: The research final model can solve the existing problems in Iran's humanitarian services supply network by building trust among organizations, members of the network and finally among the public. Building trust enhances intra-network collaboration, and achieves the success and goals of the relief network through establishing greater coordination and cohesion. The dominance of the political factors in the relief network is also a major obstacle to obtaining the needed information and making good cooperation by those present in the network and thus, the involvement of political actors in the humanitarian supply network should be prevented.
METHODS: For doing this study, three recent major disasters in Tehran province, Iran, (Plasco accident, city explosion and metro flood) were selected and had been studied and the trust building model in humanitarian service supply network is designed using Corbin and Strauss grounded theory version 2015 based on interviews with 8 humanitarian experts in that three disasters. Then, the relationships between the model components were investigated by Structural Equation Modeling with a researcher-made questionnaire distributed among 128 individuals participating in the above events.
FINDINGS: The final model is designed in three phases of conditions, actions, and consequences based on grounded theory. Poor community structures and community management systems are a major obstacle to trust building and political power interventions, insufficient funding, uncertainty of the responsible person, unsuccessful performance, lack of coordination and cooperation of the responsible working groups, and lack of readiness are the main factors of distrust. The main components of the model are highly correlated and the components have significant relationships.
CONCLUSION: The research final model can solve the existing problems in Iran's humanitarian services supply network by building trust among organizations, members of the network and finally among the public. Building trust enhances intra-network collaboration, and achieves the success and goals of the relief network through establishing greater coordination and cohesion. The dominance of the political factors in the relief network is also a major obstacle to obtaining the needed information and making good cooperation by those present in the network and thus, the involvement of political actors in the humanitarian supply network should be prevented.
Keywords: Trust, Humanitarian Services Supply Network, Grounded Theory, Structural Equation Modeling
Short Reports or Letters: Research Article |
Subject:
اپیدمی در بحران ها
References
1. Mentzer JT, Dewitt W, Keebler JS, Min S, Nix NW, Smith CD, et al. Defining supply chain management. J Bus Logist 2001; 22(2): 1-25. [DOI:10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00001.x]
2. Barratt M. Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Manage 2004; 9(1): 30-42. [DOI:10.1108/13598540410517566]
3. Skjott-Larsen T, Thernoe C, Andresen C. Supply chain collaboration: Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 2003; 33(6): 531-49. [DOI:10.1108/09600030310492788]
4. Fawcett S, Magnan G, McCarter M. Benefits, barriers, and bridges to effective supply chain management. Supply Chain Manage 2008; 13(1): 35-48. [DOI:10.1108/13598540810850300]
5. Van Wassenhove LN. Blackett memorial lecture humanitarian aid logistics: Supply chain management in high gear. J Oper Res Soc 2006; 57(5): 475-90. [DOI:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602125]
6. Tatham P, Kovacs G. The application of "swift trust" to humanitarian logistics. Int J Prod Econ 2010; 126(1): 35-45. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.10.006]
7. Maguire S, Hardy C. Identity and collaborative strategy in the Canadian HIV/AIDS treatment domain. Strateg Organ 2005; 3(1): 11-45. [DOI:10.1177/1476127005050112]
8. Jafarnejad A, Hashemi S, Talaie HR. New approaches In Supply Chain Management: Sustainable, Resilient, Humanitarian, and Service. Tehran, Iran: Negahe Danesh Publications; 2014. [In Persian].
9. Balcik B, Beamon BM, Krejci CC, Muramatsu KM, Ramirez M. Coordination in humanitarian relief chains: Practices, challenges and opportunities. Int J Prod Econ 2010; 126(1): 22-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.09.008]
10. Andert D, Wakefield R, Weise J. Trust modeling for security architecture development. Santa Clara, CA: Sun Microsystems, Inc.; 2002.
11. Ring PS, van de Ven AH. Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad Manage Rev 1994; 19(1): 90-118. [DOI:10.5465/amr.1994.9410122009]
12. Castellini A, Disegna M, Mauracher C, Procidano I. Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Quality and Safety in Clams. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing 2014; 26(3): 189-208. [DOI:10.1080/08974438.2014.897668]
13. Hsu CL, Chen MC. Explaining consumer attitudes and purchase intentions toward organic food: Contributions from regulatory fit and consumer characteristics. Food Qual Prefer 2014; 35: 6-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.01.005]
14. Ariyawardana A, Ganegodage K, Mortlock MY. Consumers' trust in vegetable supply chain members and their behavioral responses: A study based in Queensland, Australia. Food Control 2017; 73: 193-201. [DOI:10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.08.006]
15. Corbin J, Strauss AL, Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2015.
16. Paparoidamis NG, Katsikeas CS, Chumpitaz R. The role of supplier performance in building customer trust and loyalty: A cross-country examination. Industrial Marketing Management 2019; 78: 183-97. [DOI:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.02.005]
17. Holtgrave M, Nienaber AM, Ferreira C. Untangling the trust-control nexus in international buyer-supplier exchange relationships: An investigation of the changing world regarding relationship length. Eur Manag J 2017; 35(4): 523-37. [DOI:10.1016/j.emj.2016.09.005]
18. Ojha D, Shockley J, Acharya C. Supply chain organizational infrastructure for promoting entrepreneurial emphasis and innovativeness: The role of trust and learning. Int J Prod Econ 2016; 179: 212-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.06.011]
19. De Almeida MN, Silva Marins FA, Pedro Salgado AM, Almada Santos FC, da Silva SL. Mitigation of the bullwhip effect considering trust and collaboration in supply chain management: a literature review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2015; 77(1-4): 495-513. [DOI:10.1007/s00170-014-6444-9]
20. Wang Q, Craighead CW, Li JJ. Justice served: Mitigating damaged trust stemming from supply chain disruptions. J Oper Manag 2014; 32(6): 374-86. [DOI:10.1016/j.jom.2014.07.001]
21. Nyaga GN, Whipple JM, Lynch DF. Examining supply chain relationships: Do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ? J Oper Manag 2010; 28(2): 101-14. [DOI:10.1016/j.jom.2009.07.005]
22. Hua S, Ranjan Chatterjee S, Kang-kang Y. Access flexibility, trust and performance in achieving competitiveness. Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies 2009; 2(1): 31-46. [DOI:10.1108/17544400910934333]
23. Cheng J, Yeh C, Tu C. Trust and knowledge sharing in green supply chains. Supply Chain Manag 2008; 13(4): 283-95. [DOI:10.1108/13598540810882170]
24. Lin F, Sung YW, Lo YP. Effects of trust mechanisms on supply-chain performance: A multi-agent simulation study. Int J Electron Comm 2005; 9(4): 9-112. [DOI:10.1080/10864415.2003.11044342]
25. Davari A, Rezazadeh A. Structural equation modeling with PLS. Tehran, Iran: Iranian Student Book Agency; 2014. [In Persian].
26. Hossain SA, Ouzrout Y. Trust model simulation for supply chain management. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT); 2012 Dec. 22-24; Chittagong, Bangladesh. [DOI:10.1109/ICCITechn.2012.6509744]
27. Halil FM, Mohammed MF, Mahbub R, Shukur AS. Trust attributes to supply chain partnering in industrialized building system. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2016; 222: 46-55. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.174]
28. Tejpal G, Garg R, Sachdeva A. Trust among supply chain partners: A review. Meas Bus Excell 2013; 17(1): 51-71. [DOI:10.1108/13683041311311365]
29. Delbufalo E. Outcomes of inter? Organizational trust in supply chain relationships: A systematic literature review and a Meta? Analysis of the
30. empirical evidence. Supply Chain Manag 2012; 17(4): 377-402. [DOI:10.1108/13598541211246549]
31. Wu J, Dai L, Chiclana F, Fujita H, Herrera-Viedma E. A minimum adjustment cost feedback mechanism based consensus model for group decision making under social network with distributed linguistic trust. Inf Fusion 2018; 41: 232-42. [DOI:10.1016/j.inffus.2017.09.012]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
