Week 3 Discussion: Strategic Risks and Hazard Risks
CO3:Differentiate risk among components including strategic, hazard, financial, and operations
Discussion Prompt:
We learned of multiple perspectives on the meaning and application of strategic risk. An example of a strategic risk event occurred on March 17, 2000, when a ten-minute fire at a Royal Philips Electronics semiconductor plant in Albuquerque, New Mexico, “touched off a corporate crisis that shifted the balance of power between two of Europe’s biggest electronics companies…” (Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2001).
This occurred because, besides directly destroying several thousand chips for mobile phones, the fire contaminated the clean room environment in the semiconductor plant, effectively shutting it down for weeks. At the time, both Nokia and Ericsson were sourcing microchips from the Philips plant.
However, while Nokia was able to quickly shift production to other Philips plants and some Japanese and American suppliers, Ericsson was trapped by its sole source dependence on the Philips plant (Strategic Risk from Supply Chain Disruptions, Hopp, et al.)
Using perspectives from Ch. 4, how do you think these two companies viewed strategic risk, before the fire?
Based on the information provided in the scenario, it can be inferred that Nokia and Ericsson had different views on strategic risk prior to the fire incident.
Nokia seemed to have a more diversified approach to its supply chain, while Ericsson had a single source dependence on the Philips plant.
According to the book “Strategic Risk Management: A Practical Guide to Portfolio Management and Decision Making,” by David Iverson, companies that have a diversified supply chain are better equipped to manage risks.
They can spread their sourcing across multiple suppliers and locations, reducing the impact of any disruption in any single location.
On the other hand, companies that rely on a single supplier or location are more vulnerable to disruptions, which can have significant negative consequences.
In the case of Nokia, they were able to quickly shift production to other Philips plants and some Japanese and American suppliers, indicating that they had a diversified approach to their supply chain.
However, Ericsson’s dependence on the Philips plant suggests that they may have had a more narrow view of strategic risk and may have overlooked the potential for a supply chain disruption.
Additionally, in the book “Strategic Risk from Supply Chain Disruptions,” by Hopp et al., the authors discuss the importance of assessing and managing risks in the supply chain. They argue that companies need to proactively identify potential risks and develop contingency plans to mitigate the impact of any disruptions.
It is possible that Nokia had a more proactive approach to managing strategic risk than Ericsson, which allowed them to quickly respond to the fire incident.
Overall, it can be inferred that Nokia had a more diversified and proactive approach to managing strategic risk, while Ericsson may have had a more narrow view of strategic risk and was more vulnerable to supply chain disruptions.
Nokia and Ericsson likely considered strategic risk a potential threat to achieving their objectives. However, their perspectives on strategic risk may have differed based on their respective supply chain strategies.
For example, the fire at the Philips plant affected both companies. However, Nokia responded more quickly to the supply chain disruption and shifted production to other plants and suppliers due to its diversified supply chain strategy.
In contrast, Ericsson’s reliance on a single supplier made the company more vulnerable to supply chain disruptions and affected its ability to meet customer demand and maintain its competitive position.
Nokia, which had a more diversified supply chain, may have viewed strategic risk as a factor in ensuring operational resilience and flexibility. By having multiple suppliers and manufacturing sites, Nokia likely aimed to mitigate the impact of any potential supply chain disruptions.
This approach may have allowed Nokia to respond more quickly to the semiconductor plant fire and shift production to other plants and suppliers.
On the other hand, Ericsson, which depended solely on the Philips plant for microchips, may have viewed strategic risk as a significant threat to its ability to meet customer demand and maintain its competitive position.
Ericsson’s supply chain strategy likely focused on cost savings through economies of scale, and its reliance on a single supplier may have been a strategic decision to achieve this goal.
However, this approach may have made the company more vulnerable to supply chain disruptions, such as the fire at the Philips plant. Therefore, before the fire, Nokia may have viewed strategic risk as a factor in ensuring operational resilience and flexibility.
In contrast, Ericsson may have viewed strategic risk as a significant threat to its ability to meet customer demand and maintain its competitive position.
In addition, companies with diversified supply chains may be better positioned to mitigate the impact of supply chain disruptions. At the same time, those with a singlesource strategy may be more vulnerable to such disruptions.
Schlegel, G. L., & Trent, R. J. (2014). Supply Chain Risk Management: An Emerging Discipline. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group.
Get fast, affordable, custom assignments from expert writers. Click here to have original content crafted for you now!(20% Discount Available)Before the fire at the Philips plant, it is likely that Nokia and Ericsson viewed strategic risk from different perspectives. Nokia, which had a more diversified and flexible supply chain strategy in place, probably viewed strategic risk as an opportunity to gain a competitive advantage by having a more resilient and adaptable supply chain (Schlegel & Trent, 2018).
By having multiple sources of supply, Nokia was better prepared to respond to unexpected events and mitigate the risk of any single source of supply being disrupted.
On the other hand, Ericsson, which was solely dependent on the Philips plant for microchips, likely viewed strategic risk as a potential threat to its operations.
Ericsson’s supply chain strategy may have been focused on cost savings rather than diversification and flexibility, which left the company vulnerable to supply chain disruptions.
Ericsson may have viewed strategic risk as a necessary trade-off for cost savings, rather than as an
opportunity to gain a competitive advantage (Hopp et al., 2004). The fire at the Philips plant highlighted the importance of strategic risk management in supply chain management.
Companies need to have a comprehensive understanding of their supply chain risks and develop strategies to mitigate them. This includes identifying critical suppliers, developing alternative sources of supply, and implementing contingency plans to respond to unexpected events (Schlegel & Trent, 2018).
Companies that view strategic risk as an opportunity to gain a competitive advantage by building a more resilient and adaptable supply chain are better prepared to navigate supply chain disruptions and emerge stronger from unexpected events.
Hopp, W. J., Lovejoy, W. S., & Spearman, M. L. (2004). Strategic risk from supply chain disruptions. Journal of Operations Management, 22(4), 523-544.
Schlegel, G. L., & Trent, R. J. (2018). Supply chain risk management: An emerging discipline.
CRC Press.
Nokia and Ericsson had different views on strategic risk before the fire in the Philips plant. Nokia had a more proactive and comprehensive approach to risk management, while Ericsson had a more reactive and narrow approach.
Nokia had installed a monitoring process that allowed them to identify the disruption quickly, even before Philips officially informed them of the issue. They also had a contingency plan to switch to alternative suppliers and sources of chips in case of a supply chain disruption.
Nokia’s cross-functional team coordinated their response and communicated with Philips and other stakeholders. Nokia was able to minimize the impact of the fire on its production and market share.
On the other hand, Ericsson relied solely on Philips as their supplier of chips and needed a backup plan. They were caught unawares by the fire and lacked a clear strategy to mitigate it.
They also needed help with Philips and within their organization. Ericsson suffered significant delays, losses, and damage to their reputation due to the fire.
Therefore, Nokia viewed strategic risk as something that could be anticipated, mitigated, and managed through effective processes, systems, and teams. Ericsson viewed strategic risk as
Related Assignments
(Answered) The Use of Big Data and Mapping Supply Chains SCMG301
(Answered) Financial Risks and Operational Risks SCMG301
(Answered) Risk Management Frameworks
(Answered) Key Enablers To Manage SCRM and Enhance Profitability SCMG301
(Answered) The Role of Managing Risk in Our Supply Chains SCMG301
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more