供应链数字化与制造企业竞争优势的关系研究

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2022.1240

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

数字技术正在重塑制造企业供应链管理的过程与方式，实现供应链数字化是制造企业构筑可持续竞争优势的重要议题。为探讨供应链数字化与制造企业竞争优势的互动机理，本文基于资源基础观与技术可供性理论，设计供应链数字化通过供应链弹性驱动制造企业竞争优势的概念模型，并从供应链的关系治理视角考察影响上述关系的边界条件。利用226家中国制造企业的调查数据，采用回归分析方法，检验概念模型的研究假设，结果表明：供应链数字化不但有助于提升制造企业竞争优势，而且通过供应链弹性的中介效应对后者产生间接作用；供应链成员间高效的关系治理会增强供应链弹性对制造企业竞争优势的正向促进作用，并进一步提高供应链弹性在供应链数字化与制造企业竞争优势之间的中介效应。研究结论有助于深入认识供应链数字化对制造企业竞争优势的作用机制，并为制造企业供应链管理与竞争战略提供决策参考。

关键词: 供应链数字化, 竞争优势, 供应链弹性

Abstract:

The global economy remains in a precarious state， increasing risks and uncertainties in supply chain management. Many unpredictable disturbances outside the organization may induce supply chain disruption， threatening the survival and development of manufacturing firms. To adapt to the new competitive environment， novel technologies are urgently needed by manufacturing firms to optimize the process and paradigm of supply chain management. In recent years， the rise of digital technologies （e.g.， big data， cloud computing， artificial intelligence， etc.） has injected new impetus into supply chain management. As an important activity in the application of digital technologies， supply chain digitalization is gaining an increasing amount of attention in both practice and research. Many studies have shown that supply chain digitalization is conducive to the establishment of end-to-end digital connections among supply chain members （e.g.， manufacturers， suppliers， retailers， customers， etc.） and improves the efficiency of supply chain operations in demand forecasting， product design， manufacturing， logistics， and product delivery. Although supply chain digitization has attracted extensive attention from academics， few studies have focused on the impact of supply chain digitization on the survival and development of manufacturing firms from the market competition perspective. How to improve supply chain resilience and shape manufacturing firms' competitive advantage through supply chain digitization has become an important issue to be further discussed in supply chain management literature.Building on the theories of resource-based view and technology affordance， the survey data of 226 Chinese manufacturing firms are used to explore the interplay of supply chain digitalization， supply chain resilience， and competitive advantage. Moreover， considering the multi-agent feature of supply chain management， relational governance among supply chain members is also taken as a contextual factor to analyze its moderating effect on the above-mentioned relationship. Three key conclusions can be drawn from our research. First， supply chain digitization is positively related to the competitive advantage of manufacturing firms. As a management practice of digital technology application， supply chain digitization can enhance the visibility and transparency of the supply chain， improve the efficiency of business processes and value creation， and help manufacturing firms shape their competitive advantages. Second， supply chain resilience mediates the relationship between supply chain digitization and the competitive advantage of manufacturing firms. Supply chain resilience is an effective way for the supply chain to cope with disruption risks， which combines the functions of agility and robustness. Supply chain digitalization can improve the strategic coordination of the supply chain， transform the independent tasks among supply chain members into collaborative， synchronous， and integrated business processes， and respond to various potential and real disruption risks with a high degree of supply chain resilience， thus enabling manufacturing firms to occupy a dominant position in the market competition. Third， relational governance positively moderates the mediating effect of supply chain resilience between supply chain digitization and manufacturing firms' competitive advantage. Relational governance （e.g.， trust and relational norms） is a safeguard mechanism for manufacturing firms to build competitive advantages， which will promote close cooperation among supply chain members. Under the influence of relational governance， digital technology can fully empower supply chain management， enable supply chain members to effectively integrate and utilize data resources， improve the supply chain's capability to deal with disruption risks， and promote manufacturing firms to achieve higher performance than competitors.

Key words: supply chain digitalization, competitive advantage, supply chain resilience

中图分类号:

F272.3

张华, 顾新. 供应链数字化与制造企业竞争优势的关系研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2025, 33(4): 285-298.

Hua Zhang, Xin Gu. The Interplay of Supply Chain Digitalization and Manufacturing Firms' Competitive Advantage: The Moderating Effect of Supply Chain Resilience[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2025, 33(4): 285-298.

图/表 8

图1

表1

量表构成及信度分析"

变量	因子载荷
业务流程数字化（BD），Cronbach's α=0.882，CR=0.882，AVE=0.652
BD1数字技术使供应链的动态、安全与交互实时可见	0.786
BD2数字技术促进销售预测与生产数据的信息共享	0.813
BD3数字技术促进业务、人员与技术的无缝集成	0.780
BD4数据驱动的决策支持系统增强供应链适应性和可靠性	0.848
价值创造数字化（VD），Cronbach's α=0.851，CR=0.851，AVE=0.534
VD1数字技术促进供应链成员跨边界合作	0.737
VD2数字技术支持定制化产品和服务的生成	0.749
VD3易于改变产品功能以满足不断变化的用户需求	0.768
VD4数字技术促进设计、运营与用户关系的数字创新	0.701
VD5快速响应竞争对手的行动、技术更新与用户需求变化	0.697
供应链敏捷性（SA），Cronbach's α=0.904，CR=0.904，AVE=0.653
SA1供应链可快速适应生产周期变化	0.779
SA2供应链可迅速适应用户服务水平变化	0.800
SA3供应链可快速适应产品交付时间变化	0.817
SA4供应链可快速适应市场需求变化	0.824
SA5供应链可快速适应新的商业模式	0.820
供应链稳健性（SR），Cronbach's α=0.874，CR=0.874，AVE=0.582
SR1供应链可保持与变化发生之前相同的稳定状态	0.779
SR2供应链在应对变化时可做出合理反应	0.764
SR3供应链在各种可能的应用场景中表现良好	0.786
SR4供应链在压力中仍然能够正常运作	0.748
SR5供应链在风险中有良好的恢复能力	0.735
关系治理（RG），Cronbach’s α=0.885，CR=0.885，AVE=0.606
RG1合作各方认同彼此的角色和责任	0.745
RG2合作各方能够有效处理突发事件	0.810
RG3合作各方相互信任并弥补契约的未尽事宜	0.754
RG4合作各方能够保持互利互惠关系	0.768
RG5合作各方依靠相互理解来实现彼此利益最大化	0.813
竞争优势（CA），Cronbach’s α=0.895，CR=0.895，AVE=0.630
CA1用户满意我们的产品质量	0.812
CA2我们有能力获得新用户	0.778
CA3我们及时交付用户所需产品	0.770
CA4我们的市场份额增长显著	0.803
CA5我们已经达到了财务目标	0.805

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 41

1	陈金晓，陈剑. 从优化到重塑——大变局中的供应链高质量发展［J］. 系统工程理论与实践， 2022， 42（3）： 545-558.
	Chen J X， Chen J. From optimization to reinvention： High-quality development of supply chains in great changes［J］. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice， 2022， 42（3）： 545-558.
2	Seyedghorban Z， Tahernejad H， Meriton R， et al. Supply chain digitalization： Past， present and future［J］. Production Planning & Control， 2020， 31（2）： 96-114.
3	德勤. MHI2020年度行业报告［EB/OL］（2020-11-12）［2023-7-8］. .
	Deloitte. MHI industry report 2020［EB/OL］（2020-11-12）［2023-7-8］.
	-industry-report.html.
4	Büyüközkan G， Göçer F. Digital supply chain： Literature review and a proposed framework for future research［J］. Computers in Industry， 2018， 97： 157-177.
5	Wang G， Gunasekaran A， Ngai E W T， et al. Big data analytics in logistics and supply chain management： Certain investigations for research and applications［J］. International Journal of Production Economics， 2016， 176： 98-110.
6	张李浩，范体军，杨惠霄. 基于RFID技术的供应链投资决策及协调策略研究［J］. 中国管理科学， 2015， 23（8）： 112-121.
	Zhang L H， Fan T J， Yang H X. Decision-making and coordination of supply chain with an investment on RFID technology［J］. Chinese Journal of Management Science， 2015， 23（8）： 112-121.
7	Wamba S F， Queiroz M M. Industry 4.0 and the supply chain digitalisation： A blockchain diffusion perspective［J］. Production Planning & Control， 2022， 33（2）： 193-210.
8	Helo P， Hao Y. Artificial intelligence in operations management and supply chain management： An exploratory case study［J］. Production Planning & Control， 2022， 33（16）： 1573-1590.
9	Zhao N Y， Hong J T， Lau K H. Impact of supply chain digitalization on supply chain resilience and performance： A multi-mediation model［J］. International Journal of Production Economics， 2023， 259： 108817.
10	Stank T， Esper T， Goldsby T J， et al. Toward a digitally dominant paradigm for twenty-first century supply chain scholarship［J］. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management， 2019， 49（10）： 956-971.
11	Ye F， Liu K， Li L X， et al. Digital supply chain management in the COVID-19 crisis： An asset orchestration perspective［J］. International Journal of Production Economics， 2022， 245： 108396.
12	Barney J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage［J］. Journal of Management， 1991， 17（1）： 99-120.
13	陈冬梅，王俐珍，陈安霓. 数字化与战略管理理论——回顾、挑战与展望［J］. 管理世界， 2020， 36（5）： 220-236.
	Chen D M， Wang L Z， Chen A N. Digitalization and strategic management theory： Review， challenges and prospects［J］. Journal of Management World， 2020， 36（5）： 220-236.
14	Fayard A L， Weeks J. Affordances for practice［J］. Information and Organization， 2014， 24（4）： 236-249.
15	罗均梅，孟朝月，姜忠辉. 可供性驱动下大企业新事业竞争优势的形成与演化——基于特锐德的纵向案例研究［J］. 研究与发展管理， 2022， 34（5）： 164-178.
	Luo J M， Meng C Y， Jiang Z H. Formation and evolution of competitive advantage in new business development of large enterprises driven by affordance： A longitudinal case study based on TGOOD［J］. R&D Management， 2022， 34（5）： 164-178.
16	Katsaliaki K， Galetsi P， Kumar S. Supply chain disruptions and resilience： A major review and future research agenda［J］. Annals of Operations Research， 2022， 319： 965-1002.
17	Tukamuhabwa B R， Stevenson M， Busby J， et al. Supply chain resilience： Definition， review and theoretical foundations for further study［J］. International Journal of Production Research， 2015， 53（18）： 5592-5623.
18	Pettit T J， Croxton K L， Fiksel J. Ensuring supply chain resilience： Development and implementation of an assessment tool［J］. Journal of Business Logistics， 2013， 34（1）： 46-76.
19	Wieland A， Wallenburg C M. The influence of relational competencies on supply chain resilience： A relational view［J］. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management， 2013， 43（4）： 300-320.
20	Ji L， Yuan C L， Feng T W， et al. Achieving the environmental profits of green supplier integration： The roles of supply chain resilience and knowledge combination［J］. Sustainable Development， 2020， 28（4）： 978-989.
21	王海军，谭洁，王天雨. 供应链复原能力与供应链竞争力关系研究：基于动态能力的视角［J］. 管理评论， 2018， 30（11）： 223-233.
	Wang H J， Tian J， Wang T Y. Study on the relationship between supply chain resilience and supply chain competitiveness： Based on the perspective of dynamic capability ［J］. Management Review， 2018， 30（11）： 223-233.
22	Faruquee M， Paulraj A， Irawan C A. Strategic supplier relationships and supply chain resilience： Is digital transformation that precludes trust beneficial？［J］. International Journal of Operations & Production Management， 2021， 41（7）： 1192-1219.
23	Gölgeci I Y， Ponomarov S. Does firm innovativeness enable effective responses to supply chain disruptions？ An empirical study［J］. Supply Chain Management： An International Journal， 2013， 18（6）： 604-617.
24	Gölgeci I， Kuivalainen O. Does social capital matter for supply chain resilience？ The role of absorptive capacity and marketing-supply chain management alignment［J］. Industrial Marketing Management， 2020， 84： 63-74.
25	Spieske A， Birkel H. Improving supply chain resilience through industry 4.0： A systematic literature review under the impressions of the COVID-19 pandemic［J］. Computers & Industrial Engineering， 2021， 158： 107452.
26	Modgil S， Singh R K， Hannibal C. Artificial intelligence for supply chain resilience：Learning from COVID-19［J］. The International Journal of Logistics Management， 2022， 33（4）： 1246-1268.
27	Qader G， Junaid M， Abbas Q， et al. Industry 4.0 enables supply chain resilience and supply chain performance［J］. Technological Forecasting and Social Change， 2022， 185： 122026.
28	Yang L， Huo B F， Tian M Y， et al. The impact of digitalization and inter-organizational technological activities on supplier opportunism： The moderating role of relational ties［J］. International Journal of Operations & Production Management， 2021， 41（7）： 1085-1118.
29	Attaran M. Digital technology enablers and their implications for supply chain management［J］. Supply Chain Forum： An International Journal， 2020， 21（3）： 158-172.
30	Yang M Y， Fu M T， Zhang Z H. The adoption of digital technologies in supply chains： Drivers， process and impact［J］. Technological Forecasting and Social Change， 2021， 169： 120795.
31	Zouari D， Ruel S， Viale L. Does digitalising the supply chain contribute to its resilience？［J］. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management， 2021， 51（2）： 149-180.
32	Dubey R， Gunasekaran A， Childe S J， et al. Empirical investigation of data analytics capability and organizational flexibility as complements to supply chain resilience［J］. International Journal of Production Research， 2021， 59（1）： 110-128.
33	Parjapatis S， Centobelli P， Cerchione R， et al. Agile supply chain management： Where did it come from and where will it go in the era of digital transformation？［J］. Industrial Marketing Management，2020，90：324-345.
34	刘璠，刘家国. 供应链中断应对策略研究评述［J］. 中南财经政法大学学报， 2019（3）： 148-156.
	Liu F， Liu J G. A review of supply chain disruption response［J］. Journal of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law， 2019（3）： 148-156.
35	Bonatto F， De Resende L M M， Pontes J. Relational governance in supply chain： A systematic literature review［J］. Benchmarking： An International Journal， 2020， 27（6）： 1711-1741.
36	Cao Z， Lumineau F. Revisiting the interplay between contractual and relational governance： A qualitative and meta-analytic investigation［J］. Journal of Operations Management， 2015， 33： 15-42.
37	Lumineau F， Oliveira N. Reinvigorating the study of opportunism in supply chain management［J］. Journal of Supply Chain Management， 2020， 56（1）： 73-87.
38	Son B G， Kim H， Hur D， et al. The dark side of supply chain digitalisation： Supplier-perceived digital capability asymmetry， buyer opportunism and governance［J］. International Journal of Operations & Production Management， 2021， 41（7）： 1220-1247.
39	Joshi A W， Campbell A J. Effect of environmental dynamism on relational governance in manufacturer-supplier relationships： A contingency framework and an empirical test［J］. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science， 2003， 31（2）： 176-188.
40	冯华，聂蕾，施雨玲. 供应链治理机制与供应链绩效之间的相互作用关系——基于信息共享的中介效应和信息技术水平的调节效应［J］. 中国管理科学， 2020， 28（2）： 104-114.
	Feng H， Nie L， Shi Y L. The interaction between supply chain governance mechanisms and supply chain performance： Based on the mediating effects of information sharing and the moderating effects of information technology level［J］. Chinese Journal of Management Science， 2020， 28（2）： 104-114.
41	Hayes A F. Introduction to mediation， moderation， and conditional process analysis： A regression-based approach［M］. New York： Guilford Press， 2017.

测量题项	因子载荷
测量题项	BD	VD	SA	SR	RG	CA
BD1	0.810	0.079	0.071	0.122	-0.001	0.198
BD2	0.838	0.116	0.125	0.059	0.103	0.101
BD3	0.820	0.024	0.028	0.071	0.150	0.163
BD4	0.828	0.067	0.174	0.166	0.082	0.159
VD1	0.003	0.746	0.116	0.226	0.125	0.074
VD2	0.173	0.724	0.120	0.179	0.044	0.191
VD3	0.072	0.766	0.118	0.122	0.158	0.144
VD4	0.066	0.773	0.115	0.134	-0.031	0.065
VD5	0.010	0.720	0.062	0.174	0.183	0.151
SA1	0.146	0.015	0.777	0.163	0.168	0.130
SA2	0.093	0.063	0.812	0.121	0.047	0.176
SA3	0.073	0.210	0.818	0.110	0.118	0.095
SA4	0.120	0.103	0.818	0.106	0.135	0.119
SA5	0.119	0.054	0.824	0.130	0.048	0.165
SR1	0.202	0.056	0.063	0.787	0.101	0.158
SR2	0.269	0.079	0.121	0.746	0.076	0.113
SR3	0.209	0.136	0.108	0.785	0.054	0.074
SR4	0.094	0.081	0.196	0.766	0.137	0.086
SR5	0.118	0.118	0.162	0.712	0.197	0.194
RG1	0.150	0.094	0.023	0.076	0.764	0.198
RG2	0.110	0.088	0.107	0.047	0.829	0.089
RG3	0.042	0.050	0.157	0.237	0.759	0.148
RG4	0.052	0.009	0.112	0.100	0.784	0.209
RG5	0.106	0.125	0.103	0.096	0.801	0.159
CA1	0.092	0.091	0.147	0.106	0.235	0.797
CA2	0.164	0.215	0.153	0.042	0.178	0.759
CA3	0.196	0.159	0.191	0.124	0.111	0.747
CA4	0.170	0.170	0.125	0.208	0.202	0.743
CA5	0.086	0.138	0.148	0.198	0.186	0.773

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1.企业规模	-
2.企业年龄	-0.023	-
3.关系长度	0.163^*	0.008	-
4.价值创造数字化	0.020	-0.065	0.088	0.731
5.业务流程数字化	0.018	0.018	-0.083	0.241^**	0.807
6.供应链敏捷性	0.023	-0.015	0.064	0.330^**	0.283^**	0.808
7.供应链稳健性	0.084	-0.099	0.155^*	0.473^**	0.301^**	0.371^**	0.763
8.关系治理	0.093	-0.097	0.061	0.300^**	0.251^**	0.305^**	0.339^**	0.778
9.竞争优势	0.054	0.004	0.050	0.401^**	0.415^**	0.411^**	0.407^**	0.462^**	0.794
均值	2.208	2.177	2.226	3.204	3.290	3.473	3.418	3.179	3.368
标准差	0.709	0.643	0.821	0.699	0.932	0.800	0.732	0.914	0.828

变量	竞争优势				供应链敏捷性
变量	模型1-1	模型1-2	模型1-3	模型1-4	模型1-5	模型1-6
企业规模	0.055	0.049	0.040	0.039	0.015	0.005
企业年龄	0.006	0.014	0.024	0.025	-0.019	-0.002
关系长度	0.043	0.017	0.045	0.031	0.061	0.057
业务流程数字化			0.304^***	0.255^***		0.191^**
价值创造数字化			0.374^***	0.295^***		0.310^***
供应链敏捷性		0.423^***		0.253^***
R²	0.005	0.171	0.273	0.323	0.005	0.156
ΔR²	0.005	0.166	0.268	0.050	0.005	0.151
F值	0.345	11.386^***	16.508^***	17.431^***	0.336	8.150^***

变量	竞争优势				供应链稳健性
变量	模型2-1	模型2-2	模型2-3	模型2-4	模型2-5	模型2-6
企业规模	0.055	0.027	0.040	0.029	0.059	0.051
企业年龄	0.006	0.059	0.024	0.045	-0.113	-0.087
关系长度	0.043	-0.018	0.045	0.018	0.130^*	0.116^*
业务流程数字化			0.304^***	0.264^***		0.169^***
价值创造数字化			0.374^***	0.275^***		0.423^***
供应链稳健性		0.466^***		0.233^**
R²	0.005	0.168	0.273	0.303	0.037	0.288
ΔR²	0.005	0.163	0.268	0.030	0.037	0.251
F值	0.345	11.194^***	16.508^***	15.875^***	2.860^*	17.781^***

变量	竞争优势
变量	模型3-1	模型3-2	模型3-3	模型3-4	模型3-5
企业规模	0.055	0.005	0.048	0.040	0.028
企业年龄	0.006	0.078	0.065	0.024	0.065
关系长度	0.043	-0.020	-0.054	0.045	0.023
业务流程数字化				0.304^***	0.242^***
价值创造数字化				0.374^***	0.249**
供应链敏捷性		0.240^***	0.259^***
供应链稳健性		0.249^***	0.236^***
关系治理		0.292^***	0.265^***	0.292^***	0.284^***
业务流程数字化×关系治理					0.089
价值创造数字化×关系治理					0.071
供应链敏捷性×关系治理			0.148^*
供应链稳健性×关系治理			0.165^*
R²	0.005	0.333	0.376	0.273	0.375
ΔR²	0.005	0.328	0.043	0.268	0.102
F值	0.345	18.261^***	16.372^***	16.508^***	16.299^***