Roadmap to digital supply chain resilience under investment constraints

ABSTRACT In a world bombarded with unprecedented challenges, it is paramount for organizations to embrace resilience in all their processes, albeit supply chain management. In the wake of ever-intensifying race for digital transformation, it is crucial for organizations to follow structured roadmaps towards building digital supply chain resilience (DSCR) through striking a balance between supply chain resilience (SCR) and supply chain vulnerabilities (SCV), in a manner that does not erode profits, neither expose the organization to increasing vulnerabilities. The paper addresses the evolution of SCR, the SCR and SCV drivers, and recommends investment in particular Industry 4.0 (I4.0) enablers. The outcomes of this paper are (a) a discussion of the complementary relationship between SCR and SCV drivers; (b) a thorough understanding of the possible contributions of I4.0 technologies towards DSCR; and (c) a roadmap for future research into the integration of SCR drivers and SCV constrained by the resilience fitness space (RFS).


Introduction
Unlike digital supply chain resilience (DSCR), the concepts of supply chain (SC) and supply chain management (SCM) have existed for several decades.Some research acknowledged that references were made to supply chain and logistics more than five hundred years before Christ in the Art of War for Sun Tzu found in Lee et al. (1998).Quotes from the book state 'Make forays in fertile country in order to supply your army with food.'And 'We may take it then that an army without its baggage-train is lost; without provisions it is lost; without bases of supply, it is lost.'Hence, it is value adding to first address these two definitions before diving deeper towards the supply chain resilience (SCR) and eventually the DSCR spheres.

Supply chain
According to Beamon (1998), SC is a structured manufacturing process wherein raw materials are transformed into finished goods and then delivered to end customers.Similarly, Pienaar & Vogt (2009) define SC as a general description of the process integration involving organizations to transform raw materials into finished goods and to transport them to the end-user.Most SC definitions orbit in the same sphere of the abovementioned definitions, while others include an extended view of the SC and its integration with additional relevant activities.For example, Chow & Heaver (1999) define SC as the group of manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, retailers and transportation, information and other logistics management service providers that are engaged in providing goods to consumers, whereby novel synchromodality definitions, under the DSCR domain, creating the perfect match in time and space for the building blocks of the SC (Giusti et al., 2021;Y. Zhang et al., 2022).This synchronization of the intermodal transporation goes beyond simply SCM and aims to reach the virtualization of the activities in a precise coordination way towards a lean design and operation of the SC elements and their connections.
Similarly, Chopra & Meindl (2016) define SC as the network of facilities and distribution centres that performs the functions of procurement of materials, transformation of these materials into intermediate and finished products, and the distribution of these finished products to customers.Ayers (2001) defines SC as life cycle processes involving physical goods, information, and financial flows whose objective is to satisfy end consumer requisites with goods and services from diverse and connected suppliers.The same is sketched in Figure 1, as it illustrates the three distinct flows of supply chain: the information, the material, and the financial flows.A typical SC involves a variety of stages that includes but are not limited to customers, retailers, wholesalers and distributers, manufacturers, components, and raw material suppliers.

Supply chain management
The next evolution of the SC field is the emergence of SCM.According to Kundu et al. (2015) the creation of the SCM term is credited to a Booz Allen consultant, Keith Oliver, who mentioned it during an interview with the Financial Times in 1982.SCM is defined as the discipline where organizations and stakeholders involve themselves in a supply chain with the objective of managing its complex network in the most efficient manner.SCM has been theorized over the last forty years (Chopra & Meindl, 2016); such management involves different and interdependent approaches for interorganizational interplay, namely cooperation, coordination, and collaboration.Finkenstadt & Handfield (2021) explain that SCM is the active management of supply chain activities with the objective to maximize customer value and achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.For the author, SCM represents a conscious effort made by supply chain firms to develop and run supply chains towards the optimal level of service at the minimal cost.In other words, SCM is a set of interdependent processes that manage information, material, and financial flows among stakeholders of the SC network, effectively and efficiently.
Nevertheless, operating in a world that is bombarded with continuous disruptions and unprecedented challenges, considering the elements of the SCM.It become a major challenge to attain to a proper design and operation of the SC.The evolution of technologies in the past decade, since the advent of the I4.0 age, shows that global economies and industries evolved from local trading entities into globalized physical and virtual markets.Since then, these players have been experiencing unprecedented opportunities of increasing resilience, efficiency, and sustainability, to name a few.This comes along with challenges linked to vulnerability and acceptance of new paradigms in the workforce, diverse cultures with contradicting organizational behaviors, conflicting priorities, among others.

Supply chain resilience
Supply chain disruptions and vulnerabilities have had various forms that ranged from a) natural disasters, like tsunamis and earthquakes, b) man-made disruptions, like economic recessions, geopolitical risks, and wars, and c) local epidemics, like SARS and MARS, and global pandemic as the recent black swan of the COVID-19 outbreak.Namdar et al. (2017) offered a structured classification of SC disruptions, where they are classified as either high impact, low frequency (HILF), like COVID-19, SARS, Tsunami, or low impact, high frequency (LIHF) like labor strike, supplier bankruptcy, staff strikes, among others.In the same connection, Chopra & Meindl (2016) have proposed a direct correlation between SCR and an organization's ability to manage risks and disruptions.
Given the above, it is of paramount importance for organizations to embrace resilience or more precisely SCR in all its critical processes since the strategic macro-level plans to the operational micro-level jobs.Multiple researchers addressed the concept of SCR, its definitions, applications, key drivers, and its sub-categories, among others (Pettit et al., 2019).Most research addressed the conventional SCR, mainly built on partial suppliers' allocation, higher levels of inventory safety stocks, alternatives routes and products, to name a few.However, minimum focus was directed towards digital supply chain resilience (DSCR).
In the current augmented information age, in an economic, financial, and marketing perspective, businesses have progressed from local barter trading to global cyber-markets and blockchains, and hence organizations realized increasing opportunities as well as abundance of threats.Such high-performance trading and its inherent consequences came along in consonance with the evolution of the industry 3.0 (I3.0) -the digital one of the computational programmed controls -to the industry 4.0 (I4.0) revolution of the digitalization of everything and the industrial internet of things (IIoT).Hence, this exponential speed of market growth and digitalization must be accompanied with increased resilience to combat the aforementioned associated risks and uncertainties.
Most researchers' definitions of SCR seem to orbit around that is of Melnyk et al. (2014), that SCR is the organization's ability to predict, avoid, contain, manage, recover from, and ultimately overcome the disruptions and uncertainties impacts.In the same connection, this research acknowledges the significant evolution in the supply chain research literature over the recent decades, which could be attributed to the fast expansion of global markets and their associated opportunities and threats along with the everintensifying race of communications services adoption as well as the evolution of I4.0 enablers.Nevertheless, digital supply chain efficiency (DSCE) and DSCR remain to be premature research areas where significant opportunities exist.In this connection, researchers have had an increasing interest in the supply chain efficiency (SCE) topic and that is demonstrated into almost an exponentially growing line of SCE-related publications over the last two decades.A similar interest is witnessed in the SCR topic starting from around 2010.However, the topics of DSCE and DSCR remain to be incipient in comparison the previous SCE and SCR as seen in Figure 2.
Among the mentioned literature, Melnyk et al. (2014) key contribution is identifying the resilience into two distinct stages, namely: resistance and recovery.Where the former further splits into avoidance and containment, while the latter further is decomposed into stabilization and return, as Figure 3  the recent COVID-19 pandemic effects in the workplace environment, to resist, organizations can (1) avoid the spread of the virus by closing offices and encouraging staff to work from home, and (2) contain it by restricting entry and exit from a particular organization, airport, or a city.Furthermore, after being hit with the virus, the recovery stage can be addressed by (1) stabilization measures in the attempt to minimize the damage when providing enough medical supplies and healthcare, and (2) return policies to assess the right time to ease the avoidance and containment controls and restrictions and gradually restore to normal life if the situation permits based on availability of vaccines, reduced positive cases below alarming threshold and into controlled levels, among others.
It is noteworthy to highlight that most literature has predominantly addressed the conventional SCE strategies involving multiple sourcing, partial order allocation, and extra inventory stocks (Tang, 2006;Vanany et al., 2009), while recent researchers, like Schreckling & Steiger (2017) accentuate that for most industries, regardless of the field, location, and application, it is fundamental to march towards enhanced digital transformation capabilities to ensure higher levels of interconnectedness between entities and stakeholders of the supply chain network.
Similarly, Agrawal & Narain (2018) emphasize that digital transformation is not a choice in the current world of globalization, but a mere necessity.In this domain, Dolgui & Ivanov (2020) research stands out as it provides a concise differentiation of SCE and SCR and elaborates on their interconnections with digital supply chain (DSC) and sustainable supply chain (SSC), as illustrated in Figure 4, which shows the main strategies of the DSC, SCR, SSC, and SCE interplays.Although Dolgui & Ivanov (2020) offer an efficient representation of the interconnectedness of these SC frameworks, the authors seem to have made a heterogeneous bundling of I4.0 together with the I4.0 technology enablers in the same sphere, where I4.0 is mentioned along with data analytics, additive manufacturing, and digital twin.Nevertheless, a key contribution of Dolgui & Ivanov (2020) research is linking the DSC enablers with the resilience concept that paves the way for further elaboration and future work in this field of study.
Due to the relatively growing ubiquity of these notions, the relationship between SCR and SCV has not yet been adequately examined in the state-of-the-art literature, and the two concepts have been primarily studied independently.Gaps in the market that prevent innovative technologies from being widely adopted can be illustrated in externalities and inefficiencies since some technologies have repercussions for others.These spillovers may lead to less widespread adoption of technologies that benefit others while leading to over-adoption of innovations that impose costs on others.In addition, many businesses lack access to input and output markets, making it difficult for them to gain the advantages of investment in technologies.Additionally, businesses with poor levels of financial literacy have had difficulty making smart financial choices and have been demotivated to invest in technology as a result of inefficiencies in the trade, labor, and loan sectors.These significant assumptions may be bolstered by a comprehensive investigation into these relationships.This paper argues for the integration of these developing topics via an awareness of the I4 capabilities and tools that might further promote resilience under investment restrictions by: (1) Identifying the SCV drivers that are disrupting the SC and require a solution.
(2) Identifying the appropriate SCR driver that combats the SCV.
(3) Identifying the link between the SCR and SCV drivers.(4) Contributing to the state-of-the-art literature by developing a pioneering roadmap to promote the implementation of SCR by utilizing I4.0 technologies.
This study fills a significant gap in the existing literature by illuminating the overlapping and mutually reinforcing tenets of SCR and SCV perspectives.Although research has looked at how SCR and I4.0 technologies are related, few studies have examined the connection between investment and DSCR, like Pettit et al. (2010), Ioannou et al. (2018), Berawi et al. (2020), andSpieske &Birkel (2021).This paper is organized as follows: the main SCR's and SCV's drivers are defined in Section 2. In Section 3, the rationale and methodology behind the SCVD and SCRD mutually beneficial interplay is addressed, in addition, an innovative DSCR-Investment equilibrium roadmap analyzing the connection between SCV and SCR is developed and explored.In Section 4, the paper findings and discussions are presented.In Section 5, the managerial and practical implications of the paper is addressed.In Section 6, the paper conclusions are presented.

Supply chain resilience drivers and vulnerabilities
SCR drivers are the factors that need to be considered and augmented to flourish SCR in organizations.Many factors could be argued to be critical SCR drivers; however in this paper, Zhang et al. (2021) research is considered, where the SCR drivers are categorized into seven categories, namely: SC agility, SC structure, SC visibility, information sharing, risk and revenue sharing, geographical distribution, and collaboration with SC partners (as seen in Figure 5).The main dimensions of SCR drivers are: • Supply chain agility refers to the organization's ability to quickly respond to changes in an uncertain and changing environment within a certain timeframe (Prater et al., 2001).
• Supply chain structure refers to the simplicity and/or the complexity of an organization's supply network and its over reliance on a network of interdependent and multiple suppliers (Dixit et al., 2020;Ivanov, 2018).• Supply chain visibility encompasses the information and data sharing, displaying, and processing throughout the entire supply chain, which spans across all the relevant stakeholders and events including -but not limited to -the design, production, inventory, transportation, distribution, return, i.e. logistics and reverse logistics of materials and products and any event occurring in the supply chain (Wei et al., 2010).• Information sharing, where the visibility mainly pertains to the organization degree of visibility on its own information and that of its critical suppliers.The information sharing addresses the level of information sharing between upstream and downstream organizations. Lee et al. (1998) emphasized that timely exchange of accurate information between upstream and downstream organizations can create a strong immunity against bullwhip effect, which dampens the effect of inaccurate predictions to market behavior and demands.On the other hand, unlike supply chain visibility, information sharing is not only about the process information of physical orders, but it is also about other more important information, such as new product research sales information, product strategy and development, among others.
• Risk and revenue sharing, where its importance lies in its unique ability to enhance the degree of cooperation and trust among supply chain partners so that they can cope with sudden changes together.Although this is much easier considered in theory than practiced, as in some industries like the aviation for example, law forbids such sharing.Undoubtedly, risk and revenue sharing are vital ingredients for long-term collaboration between relevant supply chain partners.• Geographical distribution, which is the organization's degree of reliance on a set of suppliers from a particular region.It is argued that over reliance on one geographical region could bring higher vulnerabilities and risks, although the geographical location brings benefits from economy of scale.This was proven during the recent COVID-19 pandemic starting from China.The total lockdown created huge ripple effects that affected various giant industries worldwide not only because the materials were not sourced on time, but also the key ports in China in Shanghai and Guangzhou were under locked-down.A similar impact is addressed by Hosseini et al. (2019) about the Japanese tsunami and earthquake in 2011 that effected local and global automobiles industries, where Toyota's parts suppliers were unable to deliver their products at the expected volume and time, eventually forcing the automobile manufacturer to halt production for several days.Not only Japanese automobile manufacturers were affected, but even the American automobile manufacturer, General Motors was forced to stop production due to the acute shortage of the required raw materials and parts from their Japanese partners and suppliers.
In other words, geographic dispersion prevents a single disruptive event to affect all the entities at the same time and magnitude (Manuj et al., 2008).However, geographic dispersion may also bring more risks, in the forms of longer lead times, higher transportation and logistics costs and delays, increasing supply chain disruption risks (Christopher et al., 2004).• Collaboration between supply chain partners has a direct positive correlation to increasing SCR (Scholten et al., 2015), as it augments increased visibility, velocity, and flexibility.In the same connection, Dubey et al. (2020) emphasized that collaboration is a strong prerequisite to SCR in the humanitarian relief supply chain.It is argued that strong collaboration between supply chain partners can bond all stakeholders to exchange information quickly, yielding to higher visibility and hence higher propensity to resist and recover from disruptions (Jüttner et al., 2011).
On the other hand, supply chain vulnerability (SCV) has its own drivers, which are the factors that if ignored, an organization will be exposed to increasing risks and threats that will put the organization in adverse situations.This paper upholds Zhang et al. (2021) classification of the SCV drivers, which categorizes them into four main groups, as seen in Figure 6.Where the supply side risk is further categorized into quality risk, delivery risk, and supplier's dependency, in which the quality risk refers to the nonconformance of the supplied materials and/or products with the pre-specified quality requirements.Such nonconformance may result from the buyer's poorly specified quality requirements and specification, or it could be stemmed from the suppliers' inability to provide the required products, another reason could be the poor packaging, delivery, and/or logistics processes (Samvedi et al., 2013).Next, the delivery risk describes the vulnerabilities that may arise from the late delivery of the purchased materials and/or products leading to either delaying or disrupting the material flow of the supply chain (Vilko & Hallikas, 2012).Another aspect of supply side risk vulnerability is when the buyer's falls into the single-source supplier, this dependency creates a captive customer situation that brings the buyer's needs or manufacturing plant to absolute halt whenever the supplier fails to meet the pre-agreed commitment (Hallikas et al., 2005).The same situation could encourage the supplier to increase its prices beyond reasonable limits given this unique situation (Wagner & Neshat, 2010).Zhang et al. (2021) identified the second category of SCV drivers to be the operational process risks, which include worker strikes, machine failures, and global logistics network risks.Given the interdependencies between various elements in the supply chain, vulnerabilities in this category can vary from an airline staff strike to customs delays as well as blockage of international waters like the recent case of Suez Canal by the giant container Evergiven in March 2021 (Reuters, 2021).
The third category of SCV drivers is the demand side, which pertains to the vulnerabilities arising from sudden demand fluctuation and forecasting error (Samvedi et al., 2013).Demand rates instability leads to sudden fluctuations that could either leads to stock-outs or underserving the market and lost opportunities.Such fluctuations could arise from multiple situations, like changing market competition dynamics, financial situations, demographics changes, and shopping seasons, among others.The sudden demand fluctuation creates a gap between demand and supply, thus inducing a disrupted supply chain.Furthermore, another SCV driver resides in the process of forecasting customers' demands.Christopher & Peck (2004) highlight the important role of accurate forecasting of demands to harness this SCV driver.
The fourth category of Zhang et al. (2021) SCV drivers is the environment risks, which pertains to natural and man-made disruptions, (as example, the Suez Canal blockade by a ship), tariff policy, and exchange rate fluctuation.Craighead et al. (2007)   this vulnerability and encouraged organizations to be conscious of its critical role.An example, such vulnerabilities come from the communications environment, where the recent tech-war between United States and China lead the United States to blocking Huawei from using Google Apps forcing the mobile company to expedite developing its own Huawei applications store.This case demonstrates the impact of such vulnerabilities and its potential impact on consumers' behavior and eventually on the product viability and the supplier and product success or failure.

Methodology: connecting SCR with SCV
The process of interwinding SCV with SCR drivers through I4.0 technology enablers needs to be carefully managed in a manner that adopts clear and structured methodologies for organizations to reap the rewards of the target investment (Yaqot et al., 2022).
Multiple organizations are cognizant of the fact that digital transformation is imminent and critical to their current survival and future growth; however, they seem to be myopic towards how to achieve such a viable decision and optimized investment.
In this connection, it is noteworthy to mention that Gartner (2018) predictions expect that 85% of all artificial intelligence projects in 2022 may fail due to multiple reasons, including data inconsistencies, inappropriate algorithms, inefficient human capital.In addition, factors like lack of alignment among leadership team, micromanagement versus mismanagement, lack of control over vendors, lack of relevant training and competencies, insufficient of the technologies and its capabilities, among others are critical risks to be harnessed to ensure higher levels of success rates.Hence, there is a fundamental need for a robust roadmap of digital transformation towards a digital supply chain resilient state.A distinct novelty of this research is that it interweaves the two critical factors of SCR with SCV drivers through the dimension of I4.0 technology enablers using the research and concepts addressed by Pettit et al. (2010) and Zhang et al. (2021).Pettit et al. (2010) stress the importance of investing in resilience within a balanced zone between increasing capabilities and increasing vulnerabilities.As Figure 7  illustrates, while excessive investment in increasing capabilities beyond the ideal threshold causes erosion of the organization's profits, reduced investments in the needed capabilities in the wake of increasing vulnerabilities lead to exposure to risks.2021) linking the SCR and SCV through adding the dimension of the I4.0 technology enablers, as seen in Figure 8.In this connection, it is important to highlight that despite the fact that some previous researchers have addressed the SCR and SCV drivers separately, one of this paper's originality is that it interconnects these two domains through the critical domain of I4.0.The is made in careful consideration of the resilience fitness space.An approach that is unique to this paper.
Having addressed the SCR and SCV, the next step is to study their interrelatedness.It is remarkable to highlight that although these two critical sides of the RFS were studied for more than a decade by Pettit et al. (2010) and Zhang et al. (2021) and a number of researchers during this period, the association between these two authors classifications on SC with respect to I4.0 enablers is yet to be established.The researchers suggest creating structured and well-designed linkages between the SCR and SCV through employing the I4.0 technology enablers (Karnik et al., 2022) aforementioned.Among the main deliverable of this research is interwinding the critical elements of SCR drivers with their corresponding elements from the SCV drivers from Zhang et al. (2021) as seen in Table 1.This process is conducted through the I4.0 domain.The objective is to suggest the best I4.0 enabler that enhances a particular SCR driver and augment its capability to combat the associated SCV driver.It is noteworthy to highlight that almost all I4.0 technology enablers could serve as a critical instrument to augment a particular SCR driver with the objective to address an associated SCV driver.However, as seen in Table 1, this research proposes the most important I4.0 technology enablers interconnecting the SCR and SCV that is perceived to provide the most efficient results and yield the highest returns on the investment.
We correlate SCV drivers (supply side risks, operation process risks, demand side risk, and environmental risk) to the SCR drivers defined by Zhang et al. (2021) by developing the matrix that shows the I4.0 elements that can be applied to each connection, as delivered in Table 1.This table represents a possible potential matrix that encompasses SCR, SCV, and I4.0 technologies.The actual matrix will vary based on the organization, the industry, and the operating environment, among others.The detailed methodology of how to arrive in such a matrix is addressed in the next chapter.Evolving in the SCR-SCV interconnections, the following discussion on the effects of the SCV inside each element of the SCR is given: The supply chain agility: as defined by Prater et al. (2001) is the organization ability to quickly respond to changes and consider the two predominant foundations to be speed and flexibility.Where speed is a measure of the time it takes to ship or receive a good, while flexibility is the degree to which the firm is able to adjust the time in which it can ship or receive goods.Prater et al. (2001) elaborate that SC agility is encompassed by an organization ability and speed in managing the three basic segments of SC: sourcing, manufacturing, and delivery.In this context, recent history illustrates that supply side risks put the buying organization in critical situation that can reach full plant shutdown, as in the case of the automation plants in Europe and the United States post Japan's Tsunami in 2011 (Hosseini et al., 2019).Hence, to combat such supply side risk and operation process risk, the I4.0 technology enabler of additive manufacturing is perceived to be the ideal solution for organizations to be agile and print its own required spare parts instead of closing the manufacturing plant.In the same connection, SC agility can be enhanced with respect to demand and environmental side risks via adopting higher levels The supply chain structure: This SCR driver have been attracting increasing numbers of researchers lately, as it proves to be of critical importance to an organization's resilience capability.Gross et al. (2018) argue that SC structures are complex, dynamic network systems that evolve over time and change their size, shape, and configurations.In the same context, Dolgui & Ivanov (2020) explained that SC structures can have positive changes to adapt to new technologies and enhancements and can be negative in response to risks and disruptions.Furthermore, Choi (2020) and Dixit et al. (2020) allude two critical characteristics of a positive SC structure, SC visibility and SC reconfigurability.Dolgui & Ivanov (2020) classified SC multi-structural dynamics into six categories: organizational, functional, information, financial, product, and technical.Hence, it is recommended to augment organizations with artificial intelligence capabilities since they provide higher visibility on supplier's reliability and provide the ability to restructure the SC network and switch to different suppliers.Similarly, it is recommended for the organization to adopt big data analytics to combat vulnerabilities with respect to demand and environmental side risk, as with the big data, the organization will be able to convert the abundance of data into decisions and sensible recommendations.
The supply chain visibility: This SCR driver the organization's ability to information processing and display throughout the whole supply chain, which involves all the entities and events that include, -but not limited to -the design, production, inventory, transportation, distribution, return, and any events occurring in the supply chain (Wei & Wang, 2010).For organizations to augment this SCR driver against supply side and operation process risk, the recommended I4.0 enabler is IoT, as it could be placed in various locations of the SC, and it transmits real-time information and updates about the item.In the same connection, the organization is recommended to adopt big data analytics to address the demand and environment risks, given its abilities to process the available volumes of data and convert them into effective recommendations to the organization (Menezes et al., 2019).
Information sharing: This SCR driver is critical to the cluster of a particular industry from upstream to downstream, as it provides the various stakeholders with the necessary information upon which critical decisions are to be taken and actions must be implemented.The faster such information is shared with the higher level of accuracy the better, hence the recommended I4.0 enablers for this SCR drivers are cloud computing for the supply and operation process side risks and blockchain for the demand and environment side risks.Nevertheless, despite the big impact of this important driver, it continues to suffer from certain barriers, like data confidentiality, incentive issues, reliability, cost of information technology, anti-trust regulations, the timeliness and accuracy of the shared information, and finally the development of capabilities that allow companies to utilize the shared information in an effective way (Lotfi et al., 2013).
Risk and revenue sharing: Capitalizing on information sharing, risk and revenue sharing among supply chain stakeholders is perceived as a key ingredient of SCR, as it augments the level of collaboration, cooperation, and trust among the partners and their associated competencies and capabilities to cope with and overcome risks and vulnerabilities.Like in the case of information sharing, this SCR drive suffers higher levels of resistance as it demands disclosing further details pertaining to suppliers network, financials and costs, and certain organizational vulnerabilities, which limits supply chain stakeholders from reaping the aspired benefits of this SCR driver (Narayanan & Raman, 2004).The recommended I4.0 enablers for these SCR drivers are similar to information sharing, that is cloud computing for the supply and operation process side risks, and blockchain for the demand and environment side risks.
Geographical distribution: This SCR driver recommends constructing an optimized and dispersed network in a manner that immunes the SC network to localized risks and vulnerabilities, like natural disasters, and local pandemics, among others.This geographic distribution of supply chain stakeholders may enhance the supply chain's capability to cope with disruptions as it prevents a single disruptive event from affecting all the entities at the same time and/or with the same magnitude (Manuj & Mentzer, 2008).Nevertheless, geographic distribution may also invite new risks, such as longer leadtimes, transportation delays, and increasing supply chain disruption risk (Chopra & Meindl, 2016).The recommended I4.0 enablers for geographical distribution are cloud computing as it allows for vast amounts of data to be stored, accessed, and distributed among the various stakeholders regardless of their geographical location.
Collaboration with supply chain partners: Collaboration among supply chain partners is a key SCR driver that is perceived to be similar but of higher importance and impact than information sharing, and revenue and risk sharing.It requires stakeholders to agree on the information sharing protocol and the specifics of details shared, as well as platforms to be used for the data exchange and collaboration, as to how those platforms will be used, align on standards for data exchange, agree on rights over data access and ownership, and establish common conventions for the naming of objects, products, and events in the supply chain.Moreover, since in many industries' suppliers serve several customers, these standards and conventions should be as open as possible, so companies can easily integrate their own systems with those of multiple partners, in this aspect it is always recommended to refer to ISO9000 standards and incoterms.Defining open standards for data exchange, as well as a joint ontology for data, is only the beginning and will mean close collaboration with technology and cloud providers, which will have a major influence towards establishing collaborative activities between supply chain partners that pave ways for augmented SCR via increased visibility, velocity, and flexibility (Scholten & Schilder, 2015).The recommended I4.0 enabler for collaboration with SC partners, is blockchain as it allows for high levels of collaboration, transparency, immutable records, and trustworthiness, among others (Sharma et al., 2020).

Findings and discussion
The proposed roadmap to digital supply chain resilience under investment constraints and SC vulnerabilities in this paper can be illustrated in Figure 9.This figure explains the methodological and step-by-step approach through which an organization can arrive at establishing the optimum SCR-SCV-I4.0 matrix that respects the particular organization, its industry, and its operating environment, among others.A potential example of such a matrix is illustrated in Table 1.The methodology consists of the following steps: (1) The first step is to identify the SCV driver that is disrupting the SC and requires solution.It is believed that before SCR is enhanced, organizations are strongly encouraged to conduct a thorough self-assessment with the objective to identify the real pain points and root causes of vulnerabilities before moving to advanced stages of digital transformation or any sort of SCR capabilities enhancements.
(2) The second step is to identify the appropriate SCR driver that combats the aforementioned SCV.It is critical that the identified vulnerability is addressed using the ideal and efficient SCR driver, which is not too weak to address the issue, nor too strong to over address it.A supervised and controlled (or balanced) approach is ideal.(3) The third step is to identify the I4.0 technology enabler that fits the intersection in between the SCR and SCV drivers.In this step, a thorough analysis is to be conducted with the objective of identifying the best possible I4.0 solution to be considered, as in today's technological age, almost all technologies are value adding and will yield benefits to the organization.However, they will not all yield equal levels of returns on investment, hence a careful and thorough evaluation process is to be carried out.(4) The fourth step is to verify the fitness of the identified I4.0 in the previous step through applying the verification channels.In this step, the paper provides a robust yet simple methodology for organizations to consider while conducting this important step of their digital transformation journey.The paper provides a robust verification channel that is abbreviated in the acronym GRACIAS that has the unique ability to filter out ineffective technologies and guides organizations to focus on the ideal I4.0 technologies that have the potential to reap the best results.
The acronym GRACIAS encompasses the following: • G: Golden Triangle: it is believed that for digital transformation projects to succeed, an organization must have the right people, the right processes, and the right technologies.By missing one of these fundamental stones, it will lead to the project failure (AlBanna et al., 2022).• R: Regulatory Environment: This is the filter that considers an organization's operating environment.For example, although a company might consider blockchain to be an ideal I4.0 technology enabler, but while operating in an environment that does not considers digital signatures and crypto currencies as legitimate and legal tools, then blockchain may not be the ideal solution to be considered.
• A: Age of the asset: It is critical to consider an asset life span prior to investing in such asset.Investing timelines in an asset is to be carefully determined in a manner that considers multiple factors that includes the investment amount, the expected payback period of this investment and the asset life span which is different to its economic life and its service life (Philipps, 2015).• C: Cybersecurity: As data creation, sharing, and storing are increasing in an unprecedented rate, the same is accompanied by increasing rates of data hacking and cyber-attacks.Hence, well-considered solutions and software and solutions providers are required to maintain a high standard of robustness and cybersecurity standards that at least meet ISO 27,001 (Lukehart, 2022).• I: Investment: considering the RFS, investing in enhancing the SCR capabilities has to be carefully balanced in terms of the targeted vulnerability, the available budget, the expected returns, etc. Over-or under-investment will have adverse impacts on the organization.• A: Agnosticism: This refers to the solution's ability to interact, exchange data and information, and operate seamlessly with the organization enterprise resources planning (ERP) system.Without such a capability, the solution will be used in isolation, and this will lower its adoption and utilization rates and thus its added value.It is ideal to target agnostic solutions that always keep the organization's bargaining powers high and high propensity to explore potential solutions without being a captive customer to a particular supplier or group of suppliers.
• S: Scalability: This refers to the importance of building future expansion capability in the soon-to-be-acquired digital eco-system.This could be in the form of data center future expansion, or cloud migration capability, or increasing blockchain connections, among others.This scalability is key to providing the digital eco-system with the required freedom to grow and scale-up.
The findings suggest that making digital transformation decisions without taking in considerations these verification channels risk an organization of directly falling into profits erosions and getting exposed to increased risks.5) The fifth step is to implement the selected and verified I4.0 enabler, which creates the necessary DSCR and set key performance indicator (KPI) and returns on investment (ROI) targets to ensure obtaining best possible results.This step is critical for the success and continuous evolution of the achieved digital transformation.As it is built upon a) ensuring high adoption rates of the purchased, implemented, and distributed I4.0 technologies and b) maintaining a strong focus on continuous enhancement and technologies evolutions, as today's innovations are tomorrow's obsolete and outdated technologies.
Given the abovementioned review, categorization, and the discussed ambiguity in the business and academic fields about DSCR, the findings presented as a roadmap in Figure 9 represents an indispensable blueprint for organizations marching towards augmenting their DSCR.This methodological approach constitutes a value-adding manual that represents a well-sought after managerial insights, because it encompasses the critical drivers of SCR drivers together with SCV drivers in a cohesive and significant way as they are intertwined through the I4.0 technology dimension.In the time that its anonymously agreed that most I4.0 enablers are critical to all organizations, many organizations still seem myopic to the fact that not all I4.0 enablers are suitable for all organizations, nor will they yield similar ROI for different organizations in different industries.Hence, it is paramount for decision-makers, whether board of directors or executive management of various organizations, to be cognizant and confident about their own business requirements and be cognizant about the DSCR gap under assessment.It is crucial to build a roadmap on clear understanding of current status and the desired future status.Consequently, the presented recipe is a valuable tool that provides insights of structure and simplification to the task of organizations in their quest for identifying the ideal I4.0 to invest.

Managerial and practical implications
Overall, digital supply chain resilience has several managerial and practical implications for organizations.First and foremost, it requires a shift in mindset from reactive measures to proactive strategies.This involves investing in I4.0 technologies such as Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, and blockchain to enhance visibility, agility, and collaboration across the supply chain network.Second, it requires a culture of risk management and continuous improvement.Organizations need to identify potential vulnerabilities and build a robust risk management framework to mitigate them.This may involve partnering with third-party logistics providers, investing in redundant systems, and diversifying supplier base to mitigate risks.Third, it requires a commitment to stakeholder engagement and transparency.Organizations need to collaborate with customers, suppliers, regulators, and other stakeholders to identify emerging risks, share best practices, and foster a culture of trust and transparency.Fourth, it implies a focus on talent development and reskilling.Organizations need to equip their workforce with digital skills such as data analytics, cybersecurity, and supply chain automation to effectively navigate the digital supply chain landscape.Finally, it demands a long-term perspective and investment.Digital supply chain resilience is not a one-time investment but an ongoing and evolving journey that requires continuous monitoring, evaluation, and improvement.Organizations that successfully adopt a digital supply chain resilience strategy can enhance their competitive advantage, improve customer satisfaction, and achieve sustainable growth in a rapidly changing business environment.
This topic is of paramount importance to decision makers due to multiple reasons, a) the complex and costly nature of digital transformation, b) the abovementioned Gartner (2018) prediction that 85% of all artificial intelligence projects will fail, and c) the expected increasing investment on Industry 4.0 worldwide.To put this into perspective, it is predicted for the global digital transformation spending in the year 2026 to reach US $ 3.4 trillion (Sava, 2022).Given the current global trend on cost control and credit crunch, all decision makers are on the hunt for optimum invest that builds digital resilience yet limits their investment to just-in-time and fit-for-purpose investment.This practical implication makes the presented methodology and the step-by-step roadmap a value-adding knowledge for decision makers that are marching towards digital transformation and creates a guiding manual for selecting the optimum I4.0 technologies to invest in.For the most advantageous use of the roadmap to DSCR under SCR and SCV domains, it is crucial to highlight that attaining ideal DSCR levels through I4.0 under vulnerability constraints appears to be underpinned by harnessing a number of critical topics that requires well-structured and adequate evaluation.These critical topics are to be used carefully as verification channels to confirm the identified I4.0 technology enabler choice.
The decision of investments to increase resilience and reduce vulnerabilities cannot be limited to only investing in DSCR, albeit it is uncommon that organizations keen to survive and flourish in the wake of various disruptions are encouraged to conduct a self-assessment internally and externally adopting Porter (1979) model and its five forces business competitiveness.It is crucial to invest time and money and assess the organization status with respect to industry rivalry, threat of new entrants, threat of substitutes, bargaining power of suppliers, and the bargaining power of buyers.Moreover, organizations need to be aware of their operating environment and regulatory affairs prior to identifying the type of I4.0 technology enabler to be employed.For example, supply chain stakeholders are expected to benefit from blockchain technologies due to its multiple benefits that include the decentralized data repository, the ease of information sharing, the immutable records and history, the on-boarding convenience, and the collaboration with entities and networks, among others.However, if the organization resides in a regulatory environment that neither recognizes the blockchain nor legalizes cryptocurrencies, then blockchain automatically becomes an unviable I4.0 technologies to be considered and the organization is advised to consider different I4.0 technologies and solutions to consider, which warrants higher levels of success rates and optimum returns on investment.In the same connection, if such I4.0 technologies promise high business returns, decision makers are encouraged to coordinate with policy makers to expedite the review and issuance of appropriate legislation that facilitate its investment and implementation.Same can be argued for delivery companies who wish to deploy drones on their last-mile missions and weather the local authorities allow the use of drones or not.Hence, the country in which an organization operates and its regulatory environment as well as the type of industry it belongs to plays a major role in identifying the best possible I4.0 technology enabler to be deployed where the organization can reap the highest potential ROI.

Conclusions
This work adopted an evolutionary approach in which critical terminologies and concepts are addressed starting from SC towards DSCR while elaborating on SCR and SCV drivers.Also, it did not stop at providing definitions.Instead, it addresses critical topics of the various interconnected domains by pointing the convergence and divergence in an approach that led to intertwining the SCR and SCV drivers through the I4.0 technology enablers in a distinctive framework (that presents an indispensable roadmap for organizations exploring digital transformation projects).Each intersected cell of the abovementioned blueprint represents a significant recommendation that needs to be tested and verified through the seven verification channels of the GRACIAS proposed in this work.These underlying principles and their associated verification channels may take into consideration multiple factors including the budgeted investment, the organizational resilience gap analysis between the current and desired status, the organizational location on the resilience fitness space, the type of industry, the desired process to be augmented, the targeted stage of resilience to be augmented, resistance or recovery, to name a few.Each factor among the previously mentioned ones will dictate the use of a specific I4.0 enabler in order to optimize the return on investment.In this context, a successful I4.0 technology adoption cannot be considered complete without establishing a robust and structured approach that enables the organization to continuously review and upgrade its digital state.This is critical because whatever seems to be the advanced innovations of today shall soon be yesterday's obsolete ones.Accordingly, organizations are urged to constantly transform and evolve digitally in order to avoid being among the 40% that Schreckling & Steiger (2017) expected to be vanished.
The continuous evolution of DSCR is essential for today's organizations survival and success.Organizations are encouraged to be cognizant of fact that the successful digital transformation projects have numerous pre-requisites, albeit establishing the foundational golden triangle with its three cornerstones pertaining to a) the right human capital, b) the right business processes, and c) the right technologies.In the same connection, it is recommended to adopt an agnostic approach, review all potential solutions, and eventually undergo a robust filtration methodology using the above-described blueprint model and its associated verification channels with the objective to select the optimum solutions that are, a) fit-for-purpose for today's technological requirements, required scalability and capability for tomorrow's demands; b) supporting the organizational macro-level blue ocean strategies as well as meeting the micro-level business processes; and c) alignment with the organizations and people competencies and offers enough challenge and stretch their competencies so it remains engaging and evolving to ensure continuously increasing rates of acceptance, adoptions and utilization, without creating fear and redundancies.
Following Pettit et al. (2010)  research,Zhang et al. (2021) attempt to address the importance of striking an effective balance between SCR and SCV in the domain of crossborder e-commerce enterprises.The authors conclude that organizations should maintain (high) resilience and (low) vulnerability in an appropriate balance state instead of pursuing either resilience or vulnerability without considering the other.The research highlights the aforementioned resilience fitness space (RFS) ofPettit et al. (2010) through the parameters outlined inZhang et al. (

Figure 8 .
Figure 8. Integrating SCR with SCV through I4.0 technologies dimension.Linking the targeted SCV with the desired SCR drivers through the optimum I4.0 technology enablers.
illustrates.Using this categorization in a parallel with elaborate on

Table 1 .
Roadmap for DSCR with SCR and SCV drivers linked via I4.0 drivers. .A critical vulnerability of the demand and environmental side risks is the inaccurate estimation of demand size and environment forces and hence organization may over stock or under stock based on false or misleading understanding of the demand side parameters and environment influences.