Untangling the Organizational Ambiguities in Supply Chain Risk Recognition, Assessment, and Response: The Role of Network Embeddedness

In this thesis, I focus on supply chain risk related ambiguity, which represents the ambiguities firms exhibit in recognizing, assessing, and responding to supply chain disruptions. I, primarily, argue that ambiguities associated with recognizing and responding to supply chain risk are information gathering and processing problems. Guided by the theoretical perspective of bounded rationality, I propose a typology of supply chain risk related ambiguity with four distinct dimensions. I, also, argue that the major contributor to risk related ambiguity is often the environment, specifically the web of suppliers. Hence, I focus on the characteristics of these supplier networks to examine the sources of ambiguity. I define three distinct elements of network embeddedness – relational, structural, and positional embeddedness – and argue that the ambiguity faced by a firm in appropriately identifying the nature or impacts of major disruptions is a function of these network properties. Based on a survey of large North American manufacturing firms, I found that the extent of the relational ties a firm has and its position in the network are significantly related to supply chain risk related ambiguity. However, this study did not provide any significant support for the hypothesized relationship between structural embeddedness and ambiguity. My research contributes towards the study of supply chain disruptions by using the idea of bounded rationality to understand supply chain risk related ambiguity and by providing evidence that the structure of supply chain networks influences the organizational understanding of and responses to supply chain disruptions.

University Faculty Members’ Understanding of Their Role: Identity, Power, and Silence

This qualitative study was conducted to explore tenured faculty members’ understandings of their roles as professors. Tenure is an institutional means to enact academic freedom, which allows tenured faculty members to investigate topics of their choosing free from external influence. Academic freedom also enables faculty members to be public intellectuals who shape and critique social policies and make knowledge assertions. In effect, the faculty members are institutionally protected to speak truth to power. Purposeful sampling of 9 participants from 2 universities yielded 3 major themes: professorial identity (shaped by such factors as career stage, university culture, and faculty affiliation), professorial power (powers that participants experienced as well as the ways in which they exercised power), and professorial silencing (as a response to fiscal realities coupled with numerous governance issues). While participants were cognizant of the powers that affected their freedoms, they were less aware of the ways in which their position afforded them powers. Subtle but more potent forms of power were at play for tenured professors, but the participants saw themselves as having to work within institutional and financial constraints that limited their freedom to speak out on controversial issues. Faculty members were, thus, silenced and at times chose to self-silence. The context of the present-day university, governance models, and the financial issues affecting universities and departments worked in concert to silence this critical voice in society.