Title: Adopting security practices for transport logistics: institutional effects and performance drivers

Authors: Guanyi Lu; Xenophon A. Koufteros

Addresses: Department of Global Business Analysis, College of Business at Oregon State University, 309 Bexell Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA ' Department of Information and Operations Management, Mays Business School at Texas A&M University, 320 Wehner Building, 4217 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-4217, USA

Abstract: The field of transport logistics security has garnered extensive attention by both academics and practitioners due to the adverse effects that security related breaches can have on the global supply chains. Organisational responses to such incidents vary; some companies are proactive while other companies are reactive. Many companies find it difficult to invest in transport logistics security because justifying investments on a pure financial basis may be untenable. Demonstrating the financial implications is cumbersome because estimating the probability that a security related incident of a specific magnitude will occur at a certain time and at a certain location is a rather intractable task. Drawing on the institutional theory and the recently developed competitive isomorphism argument, this manuscript proposes that five specific sources of pressure impel firms to adopt logistics security practices: government, customer, peer, norms, and performance. We develop a conceptual model describing the motivational forces behind the adoption of security practices in the context of transport logistics. In addition, we argue that the saliency of motivational forces varies by type of security practices and over the life-cycle of security practices. Theoretical and managerial implications are provided.

Keywords: supply chain security; transport logistics security; risk management; institutional theory; supply chain management; SCM; competitive isomorphism; conceptual modelling; motivation.

DOI: 10.1504/IJSTL.2014.064918

International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics, 2014 Vol.6 No.6, pp.611 - 631

Received: 29 Aug 2012
Accepted: 24 Sep 2013
Published online: 27 Sep 2014 *

Full-text access for editors Full-text access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article