Implications of digitalization for value chains


The primary goal of the article is to cover the implications of digital technologies for value chains. The hypothesis of the article is as follow digital technologies driving exponential growth translate into companies’ efforts to be both lean and agile. The problem raised in the study is of being both lean and agile facing the digital disruption. The topic of the impact of digital technologies on value chains has gained an increasing attention from business practitioners. Scholars also have heavily discussed capabilities required for adaptation to technologies driving nonlinear growth. The applied methods encompasses the literature review combined with diagnostic participant action research. The understanding of lean and agile practices was a starting point to build a tool for covering impact of digital technologies on value chains. The literature review allows us to explain reasons for the fast progress in digitalization, defining the digital technologies driving the exponential growth, providing explanation of what is lean, agile and leagile supply chain. Building on the literature review the diagnostic participant action research was applied. The latter allows to verify the assumed hypothesis. While technology and the digital world grow exponentially, the manner in which we operate and organize ourselves is still based on linear models, hierarchical structures and bureaucratic processes. For a reason of this, the deployment of the lean and agile practices would be of benefit to build customer centric solutions. The article provides contribution to models of adaptation of multinationals supply chains towards digital technologies. Whilst the practical study proved that absorption of digital technology is in its infancy, the built diagnostic tool allows us to map the absorption of digital technologies with regards to logistics needs of customers. The conducted study proved existing more than two practices defined by covering logistics customers’ requirements. As a recommendation for the further work would be covering transformation from linear to exponential organization

Akkermans, H., Bogerd, P., & Vos, B. (1999). Virtuous and vicious cycles on the road towards international supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(5/6), 565-582.

Baskerville, R. L. (1997). Distinguishing Action Research from Participative Case Studies. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 1(1), 24-43.

Bruce, M., Daly, L., & Towers, N. (2004). Lean or agile: a solution for supply chain management in the textiles and clothing industry? International Journal Of Operations & Production Management, 24(2), 151-170.

Christopher, M. (2000). The Agile Supply Chain: Competing in Volatile Markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(1), 37-44.

Christopher, M. (2011), Logistics and Supply Chain Management. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics & Supply Chain Management. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2014). Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management. International journal of operations & production management, 22(2), 220-240.

Gattorna, J. (2010), Dynamic Supply Chains: delivering value through people. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Gattorna, J.L., & Walters, D.W. (1996). Managing the Supply Chain: A Strategic Perspective. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Gaudenzi, B., & Christopher, M. (2016). Achieving supply chain ‘Leagility’ through a project management orientation. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(1), 3-18.

Goldsby, T.J., Griffis, S.E., & Roath, A.S. (2006). Modeling lean, agile, and leagile supply chain strategies. Journal of Business Logistics, 27(1), 57-80.

Helfat, C.E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., & Winter, S.G. (2009). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change In Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Ismail, S. (2014). Exponential Organizations: Why new organizations are ten times better, faster and cheaper than yours (and what to do about it). New York: Diversion Books.

Jadeja, Y., & Modi, K. (2012). Cloud Computing-Concepts, Architecture and Challenges. 2012 International Conference on Computing. Electronics and Electrical Technologies (ICCEET), Kumaracoil, 21-22 March 2012, 877-880.

Jain, V., Benyoucef, L., & Deshmukh, S.G. (2008). A new approach for evaluating agility in supply chains using fuzzy association rules mining. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 21(3), 367-385.

Ketchen, D.J., & Hult, G.T.M. (2007). Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: The case of best value supply chains. Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 573-580.

Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organisations: a dynamic capabilities approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(03), 377-400.

Manners-Bell, J., & Lyon, K. (2012). The implications of 3D printing for the global logistics industry. Transport Intelligence, 1-5.

Mason-Jones, R., Naylor, B., & Towill, D.R. (2000). Engineering the leagile supply chain. International Journal of Agile Management Systems, 2(1), 54-61.

Narasimhan, R., Swink, M., & Kim, S.W. (2006). Disentangling leanness and agility: an empirical investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 24(5), 440-457.

Olhager, J. (2003). Strategic Positioning of the Order Penetration Point. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(3), 319-329.

Olhager, J., Selldin, E., & Wikner, J. (2006). Decoupling the value chain. International Journal of Value Chain Management, 1(1), 19-32.

Pfohl, H.C., Yahsi, B., & Kurnaz, T. (2016). Concept and Diffusion-Factors of Industry 4.0 in the Supply Chain. In: Freitag, M., Kotzab, H., Pannek, J. (eds.), Dynamics in Logistics. Lecture Notes in Logistics, 381-390. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Rapoport, R. N. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research: with special reference to the Tavistock experience. Human relations, 23(6), 499-513.

Rindova, V.P., & Kotha, S. (2001). Continuous “morphing”: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form, and function. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1263-1280.

Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263.

Schmalstieg, D., Langlotz, T., & Billinghurst, M. (2011). Augmented Reality 2.0. In: Coquillart, S. et al. (eds.), Virtual Realities, 13-37. Wien: Springer-Verlag.

Sodhi, M.S., Son, B.G., & Tang, C.S. (2012). Researchers’ perspectives on supply chain risk management. Production and Operations Management, 21(1), 1-13.

Vermesan, O., Friess, P., Guillemin, P., Gusmeroli, S., Sundmaeker, H., Bassi, A., ... & Doody, P. (2011). Internet of things strategic research roadmap. In: Vermesan, O., Friess, P. (eds.), Internet of Things: Global Technological and Societal Trends, 9-52. Aalborg: River Publishers.

Wikner, J., & Tang, O. (2008). A structural framework for closed-loop supply chains. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 19(3), 344-366.

Zhang, Y., & Wen, J. (2016). The IoT electric business model: Using blockchain technology for the internet of things. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 1-12.

Published : 2017-09-01

WyciślakS. (2017). Implications of digitalization for value chains. International Entrepreneurship Review, 3(2), 37-48.

Sławomir Wyciślak
Jagiellonian University  Poland

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

1. The author agrees to publish his article free of charge in the journal "International Entrepreneurship Review" (IER) in the language of the above publication (English). The editorial staff reserves the right to shorten texts and to change titles.

2. The journal allows the authors to keep their copyrights (the copyright) in accordance with the license: Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 from 2023 (since vol. 9, no 1). By the end of 2022 we published under Creative Commons CC BY-ND 4.0.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) only the final version of the article, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). We advise to use any of the following research society portals:

- ResearchGate
- Selected Works
- Academic Search

Most read articles by the same author(s)