Theodore P. Stank

Theories developed for understanding the general management or economic phenomena are increasingly ineffective for explaining logistics/SCM‐specific phenomena, despite the best efforts of LSCM researchers to utilize them for those purposes. Unfortunately, the hierarchies and infrastructure in place to ensure LSCM research is theoretically grounded and conducted with scholarly rigor have not advanced to a point where the use of alternative methods to explore such questions is common. The key objective of this paper is to guide where empirical LSCM research could evolve if it took its relationship with theory a step further. Our thesis is that inductive research using empirical data can yield additional insightful answers to relevant questions. We hope that discussion of these topics from a 2024 perspective can spur more research that uses empirical analysis as a starting point to create new theory in LSCM and, importantly, to persuade members working in our field to respect and accept rigorous empirical research conducted outside the traditional deductive, logical positivist paradigm.

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to extend existing knowledge of supply chain agility by identifying the interrelationships among key elements of agility that may impact customer performance improvement when conditions of demand and supply vary from the core assumptions used to design supply chain networks.Design/methodology/approach: The research employs the principles of middle range theorizing (Merton, 1968) to incorporate observations from field interviews and data collected from executives, managers, and analysts from six global manufacturing firms across a range of industries to form research propositions about the nature of relationships among cognitive agility dimensions, antecedent impediments to cognitive agility, and the relationships between cognitive and physical agility to improve performance that can later be subjected to deductive testing.Findings: The supply chain designs used by the participating firms to deliver value for core products were not sufficiently agile to meet desired customer performance levels when certain supply or demand conditions varied significantly from the norm. In collaboration with partner firms, the findings suggest that improving cognitive abilities to see, think and act by deploying information-based tactical initiatives in planning, inventory positioning, and supplier lead time performance monitoring enable improved physical agility that enable a firm to respond to changes swiftly and flexibly in the demand and supply environment. Importantly, the findings also suggest that the dimensions of cognitive agility are correlated and are formative elements of the latent construct of cognitive agility, which is antecedent to physical agility.Research limitations/implications: These findings are limited in scope to the six companies that participated in this research. Future explorations should generalize to a broader population of firms and conditions. The results do provide evidence of the relationships between the dimensions of agility that are both a contribution and should guide future research on the subject.Practical implications: From a managerial standpoint, the research findings provide insight into how firms might manage agility to improve performance when demand and supply conditions vary from those for which the core supply chain was originally designed. The findings suggest that improving the ability to capture, process, and disseminate information, i.e. cognitive agility dimensions of alertness, accessibility, and decisiveness, facilitates improved information-based initiatives in planning, inventory positioning, and supplier lead time performance monitoring, which in turn enables improved physical initiatives to swiftly and flexibly respond to changes in the demand and supply environment. Such improvements ultimately result in heightened customer service and inventory performance.Originality/value: Previous research is mute regarding the interrelationships among the identified dimensions of supply chain agility, specifically those considered to be “cognitive” elements and those that involve physical actions. The finding suggesting that the dimensions of cognitive agility are correlated and are formative elements of the latent construct of cognitive agility provides an important theoretical insight that contributes to enhanced understanding of the nature of supply chain agility to foster future quantitative explorations to better understand the phenomena.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how a systematic application of middle-range theorizing, which pays particular attention to contexts and mechanisms, can be used to extend current knowledge on logistics customer service (LCS) in a number of critical areas.Design/methodology/approach: The paper applies Stanket al.’s (2017) framework for middle-ranging theorizing in logistics to develop a research framework and agenda that can guide future LCS research. Results are generated through a review of the LCS literature and an application of the main concepts of middle-range theorizing.Findings: The paper outlines opportunities for middle-range research that would extend LCS knowledge in the areas of human and behavioral factors, time-based competition, supply chain complexity, and digitization and technological innovation.Research limitations/implications: Describing the main characteristics of middle-range theorizing and how middle-range theorizing can be fruitfully applied to LCS research should help to stimulate new knowledge creation in this important area of supply chain logistics management.Practical implications: By focusing on why and when questions, middle-range theorizing engages with the practical realities of LCS that interest managers and students. Middle-range theorizing moves researchers toward developing a detailed understanding of what actually has to change in order for desired LCS-related outcomes to occur and the contextual factors likely impacting the change process. The paper should, therefore, allow managers to better translate LCS theory into action.Originality/value: Middle-range theorizing remains new to the supply chain logistics field. The application of middle-range theorizing to LCS research, and logistics research more generally, demands new perspectives on established relationships with the potential to drive original research in areas most relevant to managers.

Logistics has evolved from a description‐based discipline to one based upon theoretical grounding from other business disciplines to define, explain, and understand complex interrelationships, resulting in the identification of the discipline's primary domain and major concepts—the “what's” of logistics. General theories, however, lack the domain specificity critical to understanding the inner workings within key relationships—the how's, why's, and when's—that drive actual outcomes. Middle‐range theorizing (MRT) enables researchers to focus on these inner workings to develop a deeper understanding of the degree to and conditions under which logistics phenomena impact outcomes as well as the mechanisms through which such outcomes are manifested. This study seeks to spur logistics research at the middle‐range level by presenting a context and mechanism‐based approach to MRT, outlining a process with guidelines for how to theorize at the middle range, and providing a template and examples of deductive and inductive MRT.