LogForum Logo
Scopus Logo
Webofsc Logo

ISSN 1895-2038, e-ISSN:1734-459X

Submit manuscript
Journal metrics
Choose language
Newsletter subscription
Indexed in:
Creative Commons licence CC BY-NC (Attribution-NonCommercial)

Issue 3/ 2019, article 4

Marek Ciesielski, Sylwia Konecka

Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poznań, Poland



Background: The most important contemporary methodological problems in the study of supply chains include creating and verifying hypotheses and theories as well as selecting appropriate research schemes. An acceptance of the different ways to explain problems (induction, deduction or abduction) is key. It should be remembered that interesting and useful results can be achieved only with well-formulated questions and research problems. All of these issues relate to the need to strengthen methodological rigor within the research into supply chains.

Methods: The primary method employed in this article is critical analysis. This article focuses on the most important issues related to the construction of a theory and its verification, as well as the issue of the pattern of research and the cognitive scheme. In addition, the issue of the correctness of definitions has been developed, as these are often wrongly formulated and do not fulfil their role.

Results: The main purpose of this article is to indicate that supply chain research requires a change in the general model of scientific practice, assigning a higher rank to replication research and increasing the role of scientific criticism. Potential drivers of supply chain research are all types of reasoning: deduction (reasoning, checking), reduction and its special case induction (translation, command), and the systematization of knowledge. The knowledge gained from this research is so extensive and varied that its further development is possible through refutation, i.e. thesis making, defence and falsification. The aim of this article is also the systematization and analysis of theories and methodological assumptions in the area of supply chain management.

Conclusions: The analysis points to a need to structure the definitions of supply. What needs to be established is a set of basic theories useful in the study of supply chains and the assessment of the assertions formulated with regards to hypotheses. The improvement of methodological assumptions, as well as the search for methodological elements useful in this study, need to be continuously ensured. The scope of the theories used in the research should be broadened, but at the same time, new theories should be examined which also pertain to their usefulness in explaining and creating the concept and practical recommendations. It is suggested that research on supply chains needs to be approached in a slightly broader way than has been done so far in the literature. The methodology is recognized as a system of analysis in a particular area of study or activity. Therefore, the majority of publications retrieved according to this key word refer only to examples of the use of particular methods, tools for researching supply chains, or only some aspects of its functioning. However, methodology can also be understood as a philosophy of science. This approach to supply chain research methodology is an important research gap and a new view on supply chain management.

Keywords: methodology, theories, reasoning, cognitive scheme, hypothesis, supply chains

Full text available in in english in format: Adobe Acrobat pdf article nr 4 - pdf

Streszczenie w jezyku polskim Streszczenie w jezyku polskim.

DOI: 10.17270/J.LOG.2019.341
For citation:

MLA Ciesielski, Marek, and Sylwia Konecka. "The main areas of methodological reflection in the supply chains research ." Logforum 15.3 (2019): 4. DOI: 10.17270/J.LOG.2019.341
APA Marek Ciesielski, Sylwia Konecka (2019). The main areas of methodological reflection in the supply chains research . Logforum 15 (3), 4. DOI: 10.17270/J.LOG.2019.341
ISO 690 CIESIELSKI, Marek, KONECKA, Sylwia. The main areas of methodological reflection in the supply chains research . Logforum, 2019, 15.3: 4. DOI: 10.17270/J.LOG.2019.341
EndNote BibTeX RefMan