Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 韌性動態：艾司摩爾的供應鏈創新
Resilience Dynamics: ASML’s Supply Chain Innovation作者 李家安
Lee, Chia-An貢獻者 蕭瑞麟
Hsiao, Ruey-Lin
李家安
Lee, Chia-An關鍵詞 供應鏈韌性
動態資源重組
風險辨識
敏捷回應
半導體產業
Supply Chain Resilience
Dynamic Resource
Risk identification
Agile Response
Semiconductor Industry日期 2025 上傳時間 1-Sep-2025 16:06:11 (UTC+8) 摘要 在全球供應鏈面臨愈趨頻繁且複雜的破壞性衝擊之際，韌性已成為企業維持營運與競爭優勢的核心能力。然而，過往學術與實務討論多聚焦於穩定性或敏捷性兩種典型策略，未能有效解釋企業如何在資源受限的現實情境中，進行創造性重組以應對連鎖性危機。本研究以半導體設備製造商艾司摩爾（ASML, Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography）為研究對象，藉由質性研究方法，深入分析其在COVID-19疫情、柏林工廠火災以及地緣政治出口限制三大危機下的韌性展現。本研究設計採取「風險辨識－資源重組－動態回應」之分析架構，解釋艾司摩爾如何超越靜態防禦，轉向動態重組的韌性策略。研究結果指出，艾司摩爾展現三種不同的風險感知模式：面對出口限制的預警型感知、柏林火災的反射型感知，以及疫情的轉化型感知。在資源重組層面，企業透過差異化調度、轉移型備援與跨部門整合，將危機壓力轉化為組織能力升級的動力。在動態回應方面，艾司摩爾建立制度內嵌型、制度轉化型與分散式應變三種回應機制，將臨時應變升級為組織的日常能力。本研究的核心貢獻在於提出供應鏈韌性的另一路徑：「動態重組韌性」，超越傳統穩定導向與調適導向的思維框架，強調企業應將危機視為制度創新的觸媒，透過預判式風險感知、模組化資源配置與跨域動態整合，實現從「撐過危機」到「借力危機」的典範轉移。此研究發現不僅為供應鏈韌性理論提供新的分析視角，也為高科技產業提供可行的管理啟發：競爭優勢不在於擁有更多資源，而在於能夠比別人更快、更準確地重新安排有限資源，在不確定中創造秩序。
As global supply chains confront increasingly complex disruptive shocks, resilience has emerged as a core capability for enterprises to maintain operations and competitive advantage. However, previous academic and practical discussions have predominantly focused on stability or agility as two archetypal strategies, failing to adequately explain how enterprises conduct creative reorganization under resource-constrained circumstances to address cascading crises. This study examines ASML (Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography), a semiconductor equipment manufacturer, through qualitative research methods to analyze its resilience performance during three major crises: the COVID-19 pandemic, the Berlin factory fire, and geopolitical export restrictions. The research design employs a “risk identification–resource reorganization–dynamic response” analytical framework to explain how ASML transcends static defense mechanisms and adopts dynamic resilience strategies. The findings reveal that ASML demonstrates three distinct risk perception modes: anticipatory sensing for export restrictions, reflective sensing for the Berlin fire, and transformative sensing for the pandemic. In resource reconfiguration, the company transforms crisis pressure into organizational capability enhancement through differentiated deployment, transferable redundancy, and cross-departmental integration. Regarding dynamic responses, ASML establishes three response mechanisms: institutionally embedded, institutionally transformative, and distributed emergency responses, upgrading temporary adaptations into routine organizational capabilities. The core contribution of this study lies in proposing an alternative pathway for supply chain resilience: “dynamic reconfiguration resilience.” This approach transcends traditional stability-oriented and adaptation-oriented frameworks by emphasizing that enterprises should view crises as catalysts for institutional innovation. Through anticipatory risk sensing, modularized resource allocation, and cross-domain dynamic integration, companies can achieve a paradigm shift from surviving crises to leveraging crises. These findings not only provide new analytical perspectives for supply chain resilience theory but also offer actionable insights for firms in general. Competitive advantage no longer depends on possessing more resources but on the ability to redeploy limited resources faster and more accurately than competitors, creating order within uncertainty.參考文獻 中文文獻 林福仁、林煜基，2003，「資訊分享以強化時基競爭力：臺灣半導體產業供應鏈資訊整合之研究」，《中山管理評論》，第 11 卷，第 3 期，第 533–570 頁。 屠益民、侯君溥、鄧祖漢，2006，「供應商代管庫存與跨國供應鏈模式之探討：以緊固件產業為例」，《中山管理評論》，第 14 卷，第 1 期，第 271–296 頁 姚成彥，2015，「虛實整合：特力屋電子商務的服務創新」，《中山管理評論》，第 23 期，第 1 卷，第 377-409 頁 陳信宏，2011，「科技採用的吸收困難：組織實務對制度環境的依存性」，《資訊管理學報》，第 18 卷，第 1 期，第 105–131 頁 英文文獻 Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. 2015. Firm's resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, 33-34: 111-122. Bode, C., & Wagner, S. M. 2015. Structural drivers of upstream supply chain complexity and the frequency of supply chain disruptions. Journal of Operations Management, 36: 215-228. Brusset, X., Ivanov, D., Jebali, A., La Torre, D., & Repetto, M. 2023. A dynamic approach to supply chain reconfiguration and ripple effect analysis in an epidemic. International Journal of Production Economics, 263: 108935. Chopra, S., & Sodhi, M. S. 2004. Managing risk to avoid supply-chain breakdown. Sloan Management Review, 46(1): 53-61. Christopher, M., Lowson, R., & Peck, H. 2004. Creating agile supply chains in the fashion industry. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(8): 367-376. Christopher, M., & Peck, H. 2004. Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2): 1-13. Craighead, C. W., Blackhurst, J., Rungtusanatham, M. J., & Handfield, R. B. 2007. The severity of supply chain disruptions: Design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sciences, 38(1): 131-156. Duchek, S. 2020. Organizational resilience: A capability-based conceptualization. Business Research, 13(1): 215-246. Eckstein, D., Goellner, M., Blome, C., & Henke, M. 2015. The performance impact of supply chain agility and supply chain adaptability: The moderating effect of product complexity. International Journal of Production Research, 53(10): 3028-3046. Fischer, T., Geissdoerfer, M., & Güldenberg, S. 2020. Combining agility and standardization in crisis response: A paradox perspective on organizational resilience. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(3): 336-360. Goumagias, N., Fernandes, K. J., Nucciarelli, A., & Li, F. 2022. How to overcome path dependency through resource reconfiguration. Journal of Business Research, 145: 78-91. Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. 2020. Viability of intertwined supply networks: Extending the supply chain resilience angles towards survivability. International Journal of Production Research, 58(10): 2904-2915. Kim, Y., Chen, Y., & Linderman, K. 2015. Supply network disruption and resilience: A network structural perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 33-34: 43-59. Klueter, T., Monteiro, F., & Dunlap, D. 2023. How firms contribute to collective resilience: Evidence from open innovation responses to the COVID-19 crisis. Academy of Management Journal. Lee, H. L. 2004. The triple-A supply chain. Harvard Business Review, 82(10): 102-112. Lee, N. 2021. Reconciling integration and reconfiguration management approaches in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 242(1): 108288. Malhotra, A., Gosain, S., & El Sawy, O. A. 2007. Leveraging standard electronic business interfaces to enable adaptive supply chain partnerships. Information Systems Research, 18(3): 260-279. Müller, M., & Fransoo, J. C. 2022. Ad-hoc supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cases, challenges and future directions. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(13): 1-25. Paul, S. K., & Saad, S. M. 2005. A strategic approach to managing supply chain risks. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(6): 682-695. Rha, J. 2013. Ambidextrous supply chain Management as a dynamic capability: Building a resilient supply chain. Management Decision, 54(1): 2-23. Sheffi, Y. 2005. The Resilient Enterprise: Overcoming Vulnerability for Competitive Advantage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Sheffi, Y., & Rice, J. J. 2005. A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. Sloan Management Review, 47(1): 41-48. Shen, Z., & Sun, Y. 2021. Strengthening supply chain resilience during COVID ‐19: A case study of JD .com. Journal of Operations Management, 69: 359–383. Sonenshein, S., & Nault, K. 2023. When the symphony does jazz: How resourcefulness fosters organizational resilience during adversity. Academy of Management Journal, 67(3). Tang, C. S. 2006. Perspectives in supply chain risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(2): 451-488. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509–533. Thomas, D. C., & Douglas, A. 2021. Resource orchestration under network failure: Adaptive responses in supply chain resilience. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 57(3): 3-18. Wong, K. K. F., Tan, K. H., Ooi, K. B., Lin, B., & Dwivedi, Y. K. 2022. The rise of artificial intelligence in supply chains: A digital resilience perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 245: 108391. Xiong, W., Wu, D. D., & Yeung, J. H. Y. 2024. Semiconductor supply chain resilience and disruption: Insights, mitigation and future directions. International Journal of Production Research. Zhao, X., Huo, B., Sun, L., & Zhao, X. 2013. The impact of supply chain risk on supply chain integration and company performance: A global investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 31(5): 306-318. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
112364109資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112364109 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 蕭瑞麟 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Hsiao, Ruey-Lin en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 李家安 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lee, Chia-An en_US dc.creator (作者) 李家安 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lee, Chia-An en_US dc.date (日期) 2025 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2025 16:06:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2025 16:06:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2025 16:06:11 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0112364109 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159247 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 112364109 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在全球供應鏈面臨愈趨頻繁且複雜的破壞性衝擊之際，韌性已成為企業維持營運與競爭優勢的核心能力。然而，過往學術與實務討論多聚焦於穩定性或敏捷性兩種典型策略，未能有效解釋企業如何在資源受限的現實情境中，進行創造性重組以應對連鎖性危機。本研究以半導體設備製造商艾司摩爾（ASML, Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography）為研究對象，藉由質性研究方法，深入分析其在COVID-19疫情、柏林工廠火災以及地緣政治出口限制三大危機下的韌性展現。本研究設計採取「風險辨識－資源重組－動態回應」之分析架構，解釋艾司摩爾如何超越靜態防禦，轉向動態重組的韌性策略。研究結果指出，艾司摩爾展現三種不同的風險感知模式：面對出口限制的預警型感知、柏林火災的反射型感知，以及疫情的轉化型感知。在資源重組層面，企業透過差異化調度、轉移型備援與跨部門整合，將危機壓力轉化為組織能力升級的動力。在動態回應方面，艾司摩爾建立制度內嵌型、制度轉化型與分散式應變三種回應機制，將臨時應變升級為組織的日常能力。本研究的核心貢獻在於提出供應鏈韌性的另一路徑：「動態重組韌性」，超越傳統穩定導向與調適導向的思維框架，強調企業應將危機視為制度創新的觸媒，透過預判式風險感知、模組化資源配置與跨域動態整合，實現從「撐過危機」到「借力危機」的典範轉移。此研究發現不僅為供應鏈韌性理論提供新的分析視角，也為高科技產業提供可行的管理啟發：競爭優勢不在於擁有更多資源，而在於能夠比別人更快、更準確地重新安排有限資源，在不確定中創造秩序。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As global supply chains confront increasingly complex disruptive shocks, resilience has emerged as a core capability for enterprises to maintain operations and competitive advantage. However, previous academic and practical discussions have predominantly focused on stability or agility as two archetypal strategies, failing to adequately explain how enterprises conduct creative reorganization under resource-constrained circumstances to address cascading crises. This study examines ASML (Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography), a semiconductor equipment manufacturer, through qualitative research methods to analyze its resilience performance during three major crises: the COVID-19 pandemic, the Berlin factory fire, and geopolitical export restrictions. The research design employs a “risk identification–resource reorganization–dynamic response” analytical framework to explain how ASML transcends static defense mechanisms and adopts dynamic resilience strategies. The findings reveal that ASML demonstrates three distinct risk perception modes: anticipatory sensing for export restrictions, reflective sensing for the Berlin fire, and transformative sensing for the pandemic. In resource reconfiguration, the company transforms crisis pressure into organizational capability enhancement through differentiated deployment, transferable redundancy, and cross-departmental integration. Regarding dynamic responses, ASML establishes three response mechanisms: institutionally embedded, institutionally transformative, and distributed emergency responses, upgrading temporary adaptations into routine organizational capabilities. The core contribution of this study lies in proposing an alternative pathway for supply chain resilience: “dynamic reconfiguration resilience.” This approach transcends traditional stability-oriented and adaptation-oriented frameworks by emphasizing that enterprises should view crises as catalysts for institutional innovation. Through anticipatory risk sensing, modularized resource allocation, and cross-domain dynamic integration, companies can achieve a paradigm shift from surviving crises to leveraging crises. These findings not only provide new analytical perspectives for supply chain resilience theory but also offer actionable insights for firms in general. Competitive advantage no longer depends on possessing more resources but on the ability to redeploy limited resources faster and more accurately than competitors, creating order within uncertainty. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 聲明頁 I 中文摘要 III 英文摘要 IV 表目錄 X 圖目錄 XI 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 一、實務動機 1 （一）從局部衝擊走向系統性震盪 1 （二）亞洲供應鏈格局重塑 2 （三）技術迭代與生命週期縮短 2 二、理論動機 3 （一）穩定性思維的局限 3 （二）敏捷的迷思4 （三）在穩定與敏捷之間找到平衡 4 第二節 研究目的 5 一、辨識供應鏈中斷風險 5 二、分析動態資源重組策略 6 三、分析敏捷應變的實踐 7 第三節 預期效益 8 一、理論貢獻 9 二、實務啟發 10 三、章節佈局 11 第二章 文獻回顧 13 第一節 供應鏈韌性的發展 13 一、發展背景 13 二、穩定性導向與適應性導向理論 14 三、釐清動態資源重組 16 第二節 穩定導向的韌性 17 一、冗餘型韌性 18 二、標準化型韌性 19 三、分散型韌性 20 第三節 調適導向的韌性 22 一、結構性調適：前置敏捷性 22 二、行動性調適：即時敏捷性 23 第四節 動態資源重組的韌性 25 一、超越穩定與敏捷 26 二、從靜態復原到動態演化 27 三、研究定位：動態資源組合 28 第三章 研究方法 32 第一節 案例選擇與理論代表性 32 一、供應鏈復原力展現32 二、動態資源重組能力 34 三、制約中的敏捷應變 35 第二節 分析架構 37 一、風險辨識 38 二、資源重組 40 三、動態回應 41 第三節 資料蒐集與分析 42 一、資料來源 43 二、資料蒐集 44 三、資料分析 45 第四章 研究發現 48 第一節艾司摩爾三大供應鏈危機 48 第二節 COVID-19疫情衝擊——回應天災 49 一、風險辨識：全球性供應鏈危機 51 二、資源重組：緊急採購與資訊共享 52 三、動態回應：現場安排與交付的機動調整 54 實踐一：從派遣轉為賦權——從總部派遣轉為區域裝機 54 實踐二：擴建支援節點網絡——以區域備援突破物流斷鏈 55 實踐三：交付拆解與時區接力——建構模組化的彈性作業 55 第三節 柏林工廠火災事件——回應突發事件 57 一、風險辨識：產能中斷與製程空窗 58 二、資源重組：跨區調度與零件備援 60 三、動態回應：快速復原與內建韌性機制 62 實踐一：即時盤點系統——資訊回饋同步 62 實踐二：拆分流程節奏——打造模組化韌性設計 63 實踐三：建立標準語言——讓技術流動不再卡關 63 實踐四：從供應管理走向韌性治理 64 第四節 出口限制危機——回應地緣政治 66 一、風險辨識：地緣政治下的市場緊縮與技術隔離 68 二、資源重組：分散化與模組化 69 三、動態回應：系統化的敏捷實踐 72 實踐一：即時預警式調度——將政策風險轉化為排程策略72 實踐二：地理備援式安排——讓交付不被國界打斷 72 實踐三：雙層支援式調度——用在地能力承接全球風險 73 第五章 討論 76 第一節 學術貢獻 76 一、動態重組作為韌性的新觀念 76 二、面向未來的重塑過程 78 三、韌性的互動循環 79 第二節 實務啟發 83 一、重塑供應鏈韌性 84 二、建立危機應對策略 85 三、因應跨國供應鏈風險 86 第三節 研究限制與未來方向 87 一、探索時間序列資料 87 二、評估韌性之績效 88 三、分析科技賦能的韌性 89 第六章 結論 90 參考文獻 92 中文文獻 92 英文文獻 92 zh_TW dc.format.extent 4000601 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112364109 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 供應鏈韌性 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 動態資源重組 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 風險辨識 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 敏捷回應 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 半導體產業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Supply Chain Resilience en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Dynamic Resource en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Risk identification en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Agile Response en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Semiconductor Industry en_US dc.title (題名) 韌性動態：艾司摩爾的供應鏈創新 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Resilience Dynamics: ASML’s Supply Chain Innovation en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文文獻 林福仁、林煜基，2003，「資訊分享以強化時基競爭力：臺灣半導體產業供應鏈資訊整合之研究」，《中山管理評論》，第 11 卷，第 3 期，第 533–570 頁。 屠益民、侯君溥、鄧祖漢，2006，「供應商代管庫存與跨國供應鏈模式之探討：以緊固件產業為例」，《中山管理評論》，第 14 卷，第 1 期，第 271–296 頁 姚成彥，2015，「虛實整合：特力屋電子商務的服務創新」，《中山管理評論》，第 23 期，第 1 卷，第 377-409 頁 陳信宏，2011，「科技採用的吸收困難：組織實務對制度環境的依存性」，《資訊管理學報》，第 18 卷，第 1 期，第 105–131 頁 英文文獻 Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. 2015. Firm's resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, 33-34: 111-122. Bode, C., & Wagner, S. M. 2015. Structural drivers of upstream supply chain complexity and the frequency of supply chain disruptions. Journal of Operations Management, 36: 215-228. Brusset, X., Ivanov, D., Jebali, A., La Torre, D., & Repetto, M. 2023. A dynamic approach to supply chain reconfiguration and ripple effect analysis in an epidemic. International Journal of Production Economics, 263: 108935. Chopra, S., & Sodhi, M. S. 2004. Managing risk to avoid supply-chain breakdown. Sloan Management Review, 46(1): 53-61. Christopher, M., Lowson, R., & Peck, H. 2004. Creating agile supply chains in the fashion industry. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(8): 367-376. Christopher, M., & Peck, H. 2004. Building the resilient supply chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2): 1-13. Craighead, C. W., Blackhurst, J., Rungtusanatham, M. J., & Handfield, R. B. 2007. The severity of supply chain disruptions: Design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sciences, 38(1): 131-156. Duchek, S. 2020. Organizational resilience: A capability-based conceptualization. Business Research, 13(1): 215-246. Eckstein, D., Goellner, M., Blome, C., & Henke, M. 2015. The performance impact of supply chain agility and supply chain adaptability: The moderating effect of product complexity. International Journal of Production Research, 53(10): 3028-3046. Fischer, T., Geissdoerfer, M., & Güldenberg, S. 2020. Combining agility and standardization in crisis response: A paradox perspective on organizational resilience. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(3): 336-360. Goumagias, N., Fernandes, K. J., Nucciarelli, A., & Li, F. 2022. How to overcome path dependency through resource reconfiguration. Journal of Business Research, 145: 78-91. Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. 2020. Viability of intertwined supply networks: Extending the supply chain resilience angles towards survivability. International Journal of Production Research, 58(10): 2904-2915. Kim, Y., Chen, Y., & Linderman, K. 2015. Supply network disruption and resilience: A network structural perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 33-34: 43-59. Klueter, T., Monteiro, F., & Dunlap, D. 2023. How firms contribute to collective resilience: Evidence from open innovation responses to the COVID-19 crisis. Academy of Management Journal. Lee, H. L. 2004. The triple-A supply chain. Harvard Business Review, 82(10): 102-112. Lee, N. 2021. Reconciling integration and reconfiguration management approaches in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 242(1): 108288. Malhotra, A., Gosain, S., & El Sawy, O. A. 2007. Leveraging standard electronic business interfaces to enable adaptive supply chain partnerships. Information Systems Research, 18(3): 260-279. Müller, M., & Fransoo, J. C. 2022. Ad-hoc supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cases, challenges and future directions. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(13): 1-25. Paul, S. K., & Saad, S. M. 2005. A strategic approach to managing supply chain risks. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(6): 682-695. Rha, J. 2013. Ambidextrous supply chain Management as a dynamic capability: Building a resilient supply chain. Management Decision, 54(1): 2-23. Sheffi, Y. 2005. The Resilient Enterprise: Overcoming Vulnerability for Competitive Advantage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Sheffi, Y., & Rice, J. J. 2005. A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. Sloan Management Review, 47(1): 41-48. Shen, Z., & Sun, Y. 2021. Strengthening supply chain resilience during COVID ‐19: A case study of JD .com. Journal of Operations Management, 69: 359–383. Sonenshein, S., & Nault, K. 2023. When the symphony does jazz: How resourcefulness fosters organizational resilience during adversity. Academy of Management Journal, 67(3). Tang, C. S. 2006. Perspectives in supply chain risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(2): 451-488. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509–533. Thomas, D. C., & Douglas, A. 2021. Resource orchestration under network failure: Adaptive responses in supply chain resilience. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 57(3): 3-18. Wong, K. K. F., Tan, K. H., Ooi, K. B., Lin, B., & Dwivedi, Y. K. 2022. The rise of artificial intelligence in supply chains: A digital resilience perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 245: 108391. Xiong, W., Wu, D. D., & Yeung, J. H. Y. 2024. Semiconductor supply chain resilience and disruption: Insights, mitigation and future directions. International Journal of Production Research. Zhao, X., Huo, B., Sun, L., & Zhao, X. 2013. The impact of supply chain risk on supply chain integration and company performance: A global investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 31(5): 306-318. zh_TW
