管理上游供應鏈風險與危機之研究-以在大陸地區從事採購的小型外商為例

Abstract

大陸自1970年代末期開始改革開放後，一步步邁向世界工廠，外商向大陸採購商品的金額、數量及品項都呈現上漲的趨勢。在中美貿易戰、勞工薪資上漲和新冠肺炎疫情影響下，全球都意識到供應鏈過度集中的風險，但短期內大陸 地位仍無法取代。\n實務顯示，小型外商公司傾向與中小型工廠合作以取得採購優勢或至少對等地位，但體質不佳的中小型工廠在發生危機時處理和復原能力較弱，嚴重時 就走上倒閉一途；有的企業主甚至根本沒有處理的意願，而選擇另起爐灶。任一 狀況，都會直接危及在大陸採購的小型外商公司的營運。\n固然供應鏈危機的發生機率高低與小型外商的供應鏈規劃有關，但代工廠 不一定有足夠的供應鏈專業，又即便做了事前的供應鏈規劃並不代表是合宜並有 風險管理考量的規劃，更不必然就不會發生供應鏈危機。再者，代工廠並非擁有完全的供應鏈主導權，或受客戶關係人的影響，但在供應鏈出事後卻仍必須承擔責任。\n一旦供應鏈出現危機，其影響可能涵蓋到公司內部員工、股東、上游供應商、地方政府相關局處、銀行團和下游客戶等重要關係人，而上述重要關係人因立場不同並非一定存在有共同利益與目標，甚至存在諸多的利益衝突與矛盾，這些 因素與企業在發生供應鏈危機後的處理心態、速度、方法、層級、成本和取捨，與能否有效解決供應鏈危機，有相當程度的關聯。\n本研究採用個案研究法，針對非天災或政府重大政策影響下，以一家台灣 企業為研究對象，針對在大陸所發生的四個供應鏈風險與危機相關的個案進行 深度研究，分別以烤爐和藍芽產品兩個特性不同的產業為取樣的標的，藉以作為機械類產品和電子類產品的代表。\n個案涵蓋了數十家的產地上游供應商、代工廠、產地出口商及市場端進口商和品牌商，出口商包含荷蘭、瑞典和台灣的小型外商。個案分析發現，在常見的供應鏈管理與供應鏈風險管理外，「處理供應鏈重大危機」乃至於「處理危機事件的二次風險防範」，是支持供應鏈運轉流暢而不斷鏈的重要補強能力，此能力的體現與「信任」、「資源」及「風險意識」有密不可分的關聯。根據分析結果，本研究提出供應鏈風險與危機處理之完整架構，輔以所列出之研究發現，有助於小型外商公司在大陸管理上游供應鏈之風險與危機。

China opens its door to the West in late 1970s and has become the world factory, illustrated by the increasing items, volume and value of procurement by foreign firms from China. Due to the trade war between China and the United States, rising wages and COVID-19, the risks of totally relying on the supply chain in China have been well recognized, but, in the short-run, to replace the role of China is not easy.\nIn China, small foreign firms prefer to do business with small or medium-sized local suppliers in order to obtain advantage in purchasing or maintain relatively favorable position. However, these local firms are less able to handle and recover from crises and even go bankruptcy in worse situations. Sometimes the owners of these firms would rather to restart a new business instead of putting efforts to deal with crises. These problematic situations can cause foreign firm’s operations in jeopardy.\nAlthough the probability of supply chain crises is related to the supply chain planning of small foreign firms, subcontractors may not possess the knowledge and expertise of supply chain management. Further, even with these capabilities, a plan by a subcontractor may not take into the risks involved and avoid the occurrence of crises. Practices also show that firms still bear responsibilities even when they do not have total control of supply chain or take suppliers with the suggestions of their clients.\nOnce a supply chain crisis is formed, all stakeholders – employees, shareholders, upstream suppliers, local government agencies, banks and clients – are involved and affected. These stakeholders may not share common interests and similar objectives; on the contrary, among them, there may exist contradictions and conflicts. These factors affect the mindset, speed, methods, level of managers involved, cost, and tradeoff of the solution to a supply chain crisis for the firm facing the crisis.\nExcluding nature disasters and significant changes of government policies, using a Taiwanese firm as the research object and taking a case study approach, this study examined four cases related to supply chain risks and crises in China. These cases covered two different products (i.e., BBQ grills for mechanical products and Bluetooth devices for electronics products) and many firms in China, the Netherland, Sweden and Taiwan, serving as subcontractors, suppliers, exporters, importers and branding buyers.\nIn addition to the often-mentioned practices and mechanisms of supply chain management and supply chain risk management, the cases findings reveal that dealing with critical supply chain crises as well as preventing secondary crises during the process of handling the first supply chain crisis can strengthen the capability to avoid the disruption of supply chain. Further, the essence to a firm’s capability of handling supply chain crises is trust, resources and awareness of risks. The research findings are summarized in a framework and stated as lessons which are helpful to small foreign firms coping with supply chain risk and crises in China, or in an environment with high uncertainly.