## 2 Literature Review  
### Supply Chain Network Resilience  
A supply network is represented by a'set of \"nodes\" that represent autonomous business units as firms who are able to exercise sovereign choices, and a set of \"connections\" that link these firms together for the purposes of creating products or services [35]. Due to the nature of the network settings, interconnected firms can expect to receive benefits such as innovation [1; 36], and face risks such as increased vulnerability [10; 37]. Specifically, [PERSON] et al. [38] state that although an extended enterprise structure may benefit from potential business opportunities through the increased level of connectivity, it may also suffer from being exposed to new threats.  
As part of the effort to deal with the variety and level of uncertainties, many studies have investigated and developed the necessary capabilities that supply networks must acquire to remain resilient. The investigations of resilience enablers have widened globally such as external, internal, and flexibility capabilities in food and beverage, retail, and general manufacturing in France [39], technological capabilities of electronics manufacturing in India [40], preparedness, alertness, agility of 20 different industries in the United States [41], and robust, agile, lean, flexibility of European premium drink producer [42].  
In addition to the technology driven firm level capabilities, the effectiveness of collaboration gained attention as well. For example, SC disruption orientation [21], institutional pressure [43], collaboration, culture, information sharing [44], and collaborative communication, mutually created knowledge, joint relationship efforts [45] have been proven to be an interdependent factor in achieving overall network resilience. Consequently, [PERSON] [11] concluded the importance of cultural competence, operational competence, and situation awareness in the process of aiding the buyer's firm to adapt to a turbulent environment.  
From a network structural perspective, prior research focuses on the characteristics of disruption and their effects depending on the type of network typologies. [PERSON] et al. [46] empirically verified how the probability of disruption and the magnitude of its impact encouraged buyers to seek alternative suppliers. Based on a transaction cost economy and resource dependence theory, they identified the characteristics of the supply market and the products that increase the likelihood and effects of disruptions. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [47] simulated how network characteristics (average path length,clustering coefficient, size of the largest connected component, and maximum distance between the nodes) affected the robustness of supply networks (measured by insignificant differences in the mean of the performance measure). [PERSON] et al. [6] compared four fundamental supply network structures to analyze the importance of node and arc disruptions for network-level disruption. They proposed that, assuming every firm (node) and its connection (link) had an equal probability of failure, network resilience was determined by the degree distribution. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [35] argued that an efficient SC followed a scale-free network based on key properties such as short characteristic path length, a high clustering coefficient, and a power law connectivity distribution. Thus, the structural design of a network and its properties can shed light on the resilience management of a complex network from both theoretical and managerial perspectives.  
Despite the consensus on the importance of a network perspective, studies on SC sustainability and resilience have been limited to analysis at the firm level. Most lacked practical suggestions for considering integrative capability and network measures. Moreover, while recent studies highlight theoretical and empirical findings with regard to SC capabilities and resilience, the implications for managerial application remain unclear.