Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Innovation and Supply Chain Management pp 321–343Cite as

Advanced Supply Chains: Visibility, Blockchain and Human Behaviour

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Contributions to Management Science ((MANAGEMENT SC.))

Abstract

Technological advances over the last decade saw the rise of ICT and IoT, paving the way for the Supply Chain of Things. Blockchain technology was one of the most recent and potentially most significant developments. Blockchain technology are secure by design and can enable decentralization and visibility, with application in cryptocurrency transactions, historical records, identity management, traceability, authentication, and many others. However, successful adoption of such technology requires that the people, process and technology are ready. We propose a conceptual framework where the concept and technology can balance between positive and negative manifestations depending on human behavior, therefore determining the success of Blockchain technology application in supply chains. While both the concept and technology are relatively ready, human behavior is a challenge as it is known that people suffer from habits and perform poorly when exposed to large volumes of data. Therefore, the development of advanced supply chains with much greater visibility enabled by Blockchain technology must take into consideration people in order to succeed.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Arthur C. Clarke

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See https://hubofallthings.com/

  2. 2.

    See https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=3years

  3. 3.

    See https://coinmarketcap.com/ for more recent figures.

  4. 4.

    See https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethereum/ for the latest figures.

  5. 5.

    See https://cryptopedia.wiki/Main_Page

  6. 6.

    https://zcoin.io

  7. 7.

    http://zerocoin.org/

  8. 8.

    http://www.potcoin.com/

  9. 9.

    https://www.sexcoin.info/

  10. 10.

    See for example https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/26/ibm-building-blockchain-for-seven-major-banks-trade-finance.html

  11. 11.

    See https://www.everledger.io/

  12. 12.

    See https://news.artnet.com/art-world/biggest-art-forgeries-2016-783464

  13. 13.

    See https://news.artnet.com/art-world/lee-ufan-verifies-denies-forgeries-540461

  14. 14.

    See http://koreabizwire.com/new-law-to-root-out-counterfeit-artwork-in-korea/67555

  15. 15.

    See http://www.artequesta.com/

  16. 16.

    See https://www.verisart.com/

  17. 17.

    See https://www.ascribe.io/

  18. 18.

    See http://uk.businessinsider.com

  19. 19.

    See https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2017/02/07/the-first-government-to-secure-land-titles-on-the-bitcoin-blockchain-expands-project/#296654334dcd

  20. 20.

    See https://hbr.org/2017/03/blockchain-will-help-us-prove-our-identities-in-a-digital-world

  21. 21.

    See https://followmyvote.com/

  22. 22.

    See https://bitnation.co/world-citizenship-id/

  23. 23.

    See https://cointelegraph.com/news/ripple-talks-with-peoples-bank-of-china-key-to-chinese-blockchain-market

  24. 24.

    See https://www.coindesk.com/central-bank-backed-group-plans-blockchain-platform-launch-india/

  25. 25.

    See for example https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2017/06/01/2189634/its-not-just-a-ponzi-its-a-smart-ponzi/

  26. 26.

    See: https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-truth-about-blockchain

  27. 27.

    See: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/02/german-reunification-25-years-on-how-different-are-east-and-west-really

References

  • Anderson CA (1980) Inoculation and counter-explanation: debiasing techniques in the perseverance of social theories. Soc Cogn 1(2):126–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson CA (1983) Abstract and concrete data in the perseverance of social theories: when weak data lead to unshakeable beliefs. J Exp Soc Psychol 19(2):93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams P, Adams J (1960) Confidence in the recognition and reproduction of words difficult to spell. Am J Psychol 73(4):544–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attneave F (1953) Psychological probability as a function of experienced frequency. J Exp Psychol 46(2):81–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkan R, Danziger S, Ben-Bashat G, Busemeyer JR (2005) Framing reference points: the effect of integration and segregation on dynamic inconsistency. J Behav Decis Mak 18(3):213–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayer D, Haber S, Stornetta WS (1993) Improving the efficiency and reliability of digital time-stamping. In: Capocelli R, De Santis A, Vaccaro U (eds) Sequences II: Methods in communication, security and computer science. Springer, New York, pp 329–334

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Boldrin M, Christiano L, Fisher J (2001) Habit persistence, asset returns, and the business cycle. Am Econ Rev 91(1):149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle B, Dahlstrom R, Kellaris J (1998) Points of reference and individual differences as sources of bias in ethical judgments. J Bus Ethics 17(5):517–525

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman GB, Johnson EJ (1994) The limits of anchoring. J Behav Decis Mak 7(4):223–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman G, Johnson E (1999) Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 79(2):115–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper WW (1964) New perspectives in organization research. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper AC, Woo CY, Dunkelberg WC (1988) Entrepreneurs’ perceived chances for success. J Bus Venturing 3(2):97–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(88)90020-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croskerry P, Singhal G, Mamede S (2013) Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. BMJ Qual Saf 22(Suppl 2):ii65–ii72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croson R, Donohue K (2006) Behavioral causes of the bullwhip effect and the observed value of inventory information. Manag Sci 52(3):323–336. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donkers B, Melenberg B, Van Soest A (2001) Estimating risk attitudes using lotteries: a large sample approach. J Risk Uncertainty 22(2):165–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuCharme W (1970) Response bias explanation of conservative human inference. J Exp Psychol 85(1):66–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards W (1968) Conservatism in human information processing. In: Kleinmuntz B (ed) Formal representation of human judgment. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Epley N, Gilovich T (2001) Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: differential processing of self-generated and experimenter-provided anchors. Psychol Sci 12(5):391–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epley N, Gilovich T (2005) When effortful thinking influences judgmental anchoring: differential effects of forewarning and incentives on self-generated and externally provided anchors. J Behav Decis Mak 18(3):199–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erev I, Wallsten TS, Budescu DV (1994) Simultaneous over- and underconfidence: the role of error in judgment processes. Psychol Rev 101(3):519–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faro D, Rottenstreich Y (2006) Affect, empathy, and regressive mispredictions of others’ preferences under risk. Manag Sci 52(4):529–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez R, Rodrik D (1991) Resistance to reform: status quo bias in the presence of individual-specific uncertainty. Am Econ Rev 81(5):1146–1155

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler K (1991) The tricky nature of skewed frequency tables: an information loss account of distinctiveness-based illusory correlations. J Pers Soc Psychol 60(1):24–36. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.60.1.24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer I, Budescu DV (2005) When do those who know more also know more about how much they know? The development of confidence and performance in categorical decision tasks. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 98(1):39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1977) Knowing with certainty: the appropriateness of extreme confidence. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 3(4):552–564. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.3.4.552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1982) Lay foibles and expert fables in judgments about risk. Am Stat 36(3b):240–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester JW (1958) Industrial dynamics: a major breakthrough for decision makers. Harv Bus Rev 36(4):37–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox C, Levav J (2000) Familiarity bias and belief reversal in relative likelihood judgment. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 82(2):268–292. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander ML, Phillips SD (1984) Preventing anchoring errors in clinical judgment. J Consult Clin Psychol 52(3):366–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geerts GL, O’Leary DE (2014) A supply chain of things: the EAGLET ontology for highly visible supply chains. Decis Support Syst 63:3–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer G (1991) How to make cognitive illusions disappear: beyond “heuristics and biases”. Eur Rev Soc Psychol 2(1):83–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779143000033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haber S, Stornetta WS (1990) How to time-stamp a digital document. In: Conference on the theory and application of cryptography. Springer, pp 437–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond JJS, Keeney RRL, Raiffa H (1998) The hidden traps in decision making. Harv Bus Rev 76(5):47–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilbert M (2012) Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: how noisy information processing can bias human decision making. Psychol Bull 138(2):211–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth RM (1987) Judgement and choice: the psychology of decision, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Idson L, Chugh D (2004) Overcoming focusing failures in competitive environments. J Behav Decis Mak 17(3):159–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce E, Biddle G (1981) Are auditors’ judgments sufficiently regressive? J Account Res 19(2):323–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juslin P, Winman A, Olsson H (2000) Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: a critical examination of the hard-easy effect. Psychol Rev 107(2):384–396. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.107.2.384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D (2012) Thinking, fast and slow. Studies in intelligence, vol 56. Penguin, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Knetsch J, Thaler R (1991) Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. J Econ Perspect 5(1):193–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S, Schoar A (2005) Private equity performance: returns, persistence, and capital flows. J Finance 60(4):1791–1823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman E, Lord M, Reese T, Volkmann J (1949) The discrimination of visual number. Am J Psychol 62(4):498–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann L, Michel A, Carter CR (2009) Debiasing strategies in supply management decision-making. J Bus Logist 30(1):85–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann L, Carter CR, Buhrmann C (2010) Debiasing the supplier selection decision: a taxonomy and conceptualization. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 40(10):792–821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keren G (1988) On the ability of monitoring non-veridical perceptions and uncertain knowledge: some calibration studies. Acta Psychol 67(2):95–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keren G (1990) Cognitive aids and debiasing methods: can cognitive pills cure cognitive ills? Adv Psychol 68:523–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keren G (1997) On the calibration of probability judgments: some critical comments and alternative perspectives. J Behav Decis Making 10(3):269–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199709)10:3<269::AID-BDM281>3.0.CO;2-L

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kharlamov AA (2016) Exploring the contribution of individual differences and planning policy parameters to demand planning performance. The University of Warwick

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruger J (1999) Lake Wobegon be gone! The “below-average effect” and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. J Pers Soc Psychol 77(2):221–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruger J, Dunning D (1999) Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J Pers Soc Psychol 77(6):1121–1134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamport L, Shostak R, Pease M (1982) The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 4(3):382–401. https://doi.org/10.1145/357172.357176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrick RP, Koehler DJ, Harvey N (2004) Debiasing. In: Koehler DJ, Harvey N (eds) Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making. Blackwell, Hoboken, pp 316–337

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lee HL, Padmanabhan V, Whang S (1997) The bullwhip effect in supply chains. Sloan Manag Rev 38(3):93

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B (1977) Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organ Behav Hum Perform 183(3052):159–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(77)90001-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord C, Lepper M, Preston E (1984) Considering the opposite: a corrective strategy for social judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol 47(6):1231–1243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacGregor D, Lichtenstein S, Slovic P (1988) Structuring knowledge retrieval: an analysis of decomposed quantitative judgments. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 42(3):303–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackinnon AJ, Wearing AJ (1991) Feedback and the forecasting of exponential change. Acta Psychol 76(2):177–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(91)90045-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason-Jones R, Towill DR (2000) Coping with uncertainty: reducing “Bullwhip” behaviour in global supply chains

    Google Scholar 

  • McCord M, de Neufville R (1986) “Lottery equivalents”: reduction of the certainty effect problem in utility assessment. Manag Sci 32(1):56–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden D (1999) Rationality for economists? J Risk Uncertainty 19(1):73–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney K, Sprecher S, Orbuch T (1987) A person perception experiment examining the effects of contraceptive behavior on first impressions. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 8(3):235–248. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkle EC (2009) The disutility of the hard-easy effect in choice confidence. Psychonomic Bull Rev 16(1):204–213. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.1.204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore DA, Cain DM (2007) Overconfidence and underconfidence: when and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 103(2):197–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psychol Rev 115(2):502–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mussweiler T, Strack F, Pfeiffer T (2000) Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 26(9):1142–1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamoto S (2008) Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system

    Google Scholar 

  • Neil Bearden J, Wallsten TS (2004) MINERVA-DM and subadditive frequency judgments. J Behav Decis Making 17(5):349–363. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson MW (1996) Context and the inverse base rate effect. J Behav Decis Making 9(1):23–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199603)9:1<23::AID-BDM210>3.0.CO;2-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niranjan TT, Metri BA, Aggarwal V (2009) Behavioral causes of bullwhip effect: breaking the mould. Int J Serv Oper Manag 5(3):350–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordstrom CR, Hall RJ, Bartels LK (1998) First impressions versus good impressions: the effect of self-regulation on interview evaluations. J Psychol 132(5):477–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989809599281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parry G, Brax SA, Maull R, Ng I (2016) Visibility of consumer context: improving reverse supply with internet of things data. Supply Chain Manag Int J 21(2):228–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson CR, Beach LR (1967) Man as an intuitive statistician. Psychol Bull 68(1):29–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips LD, Edwards W (1966) Conservatism in a simple probability inference task. J Exp Psychol 72(3):346–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips LD, Hays WL, Edwards W (1966) Conservatism in complex probabilistic inference. IEEE Trans Hum Factors Electron HFE-7(1):7–18. https://doi.org/10.1109/THFE.1966.231978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prodan M, Prodan A, Purcarea AA (2015) Three new dimensions to people, process, technology improvement model. In: Rocha A, Correia AM, Costanzo S, Reis LP (eds) New contributions in information systems and technologies, vol 1. Springer, Cham, pp 481–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16486-1_47

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rabin M, Schrag J (1999) First impressions matter: a model of confirmatory bias. Q J Econ 114(1):37–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sage AP (1981) Behaviour and organizational considerations in the design of information systems and processes for planning and decision support. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-11(9):640–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. J Risk Uncertainty 1:7–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1975) Choice between equally valued alternatives. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1(3):280–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.1.3.280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman JD, Dogan G (2015) “I’m not hoarding, I’m just stocking up before the hoarders get here.”: Behavioral causes of phantom ordering in supply chains. J Oper Manag 39–40:6–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack F, Mussweiler T (1997) Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: mechanisms of selective accessibility. J Pers Soc Psychol 73(3):437–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suantak L, Bolger F, Ferrell W (1996) The hard–easy effect in subjective probability calibration. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 67(2):201–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognit Psychol 5(2):207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Koehler DJ (1994) Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychol Rev 101(4):547–567. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar W, Keren G (1985) Calibration of probability assessments by professional blackjack dealers, statistical experts, and lay people. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 36(3):406–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar W, Timmers H (1979) The pond-and-duckweed problem; Three experiments on the misperception of exponential growth. Acta Psychol 43(1979):239–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber EU, Milliman RA (1997) Perceived risk attitudes: relating risk perception to risky choice. Manag Sci 43(2):123–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business Management, Bristol Business School, Faculty of Business and Law, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

    Alexander Kharlamov & Glenn Parry

Authors
  1. Alexander Kharlamov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Glenn Parry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Kharlamov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    António Carrizo Moreira

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

    Luís Miguel D. F. Ferreira

  3. Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    Ricardo A. Zimmermann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kharlamov, A., Parry, G. (2018). Advanced Supply Chains: Visibility, Blockchain and Human Behaviour. In: Moreira, A., Ferreira, L., Zimmermann, R. (eds) Innovation and Supply Chain Management. Contributions to Management Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74304-2_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation