Manufacturing anomalies, inaccurate forecasts, and other problems can lead to SC disruptions. Traditional monitoring methods are not sufficient in this respect, because com- plex SCs feature changes in manufacturing tasks (dynamic complexity) and carry a large number of stock keeping units (detail complexity). Problems are easily confounded with normal system variations.
Motivated by these real challenges faced by modern SC, new surveillance solutions are proposed to detect system deviations that could lead to disruptions in a complex SC. To address supply-side deviations, the fitness of different statistics that can be extracted from the enterprise resource planning system is evaluated. A monitoring strategy is first proposed for SCs featuring high levels of dynamic complexity. This presents an opportunity for monitoring methods to be applied in a new, rich domain of SC management. Then a monitoring strategy, called Heat Map Contrasts (HMC), which converts monitoring into a series of classification problems, is used to monitor SCs with both high levels of dynamic and detail complexities. Data from a semiconductor SC simulator are used to compare the methods with other alternatives under various failure cases, and the results illustrate the viability of our methods.
To address demand-side deviations, a new method of quantifying forecast uncer- tainties using the progression of forecast updates is presented. It is illustrated that a rich amount of information is available in rolling horizon forecasts. Two proactive indicators of future forecast errors are extracted from the forecast stream. This quantitative method re- quires no knowledge of the forecasting model itself and has shown promising results when applied to two datasets consisting of real forecast updates.
The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.