Research has shown that supply chain resilience is of paramount necessity in today's interconnected world. Owing to this essence, this study set out to examine the effect of supply chain digitalization on supply chain resilience, through supply chain ambidexterity, as well as the moderating role of relational governance in the relationship in the context of Ghanaian manufacturing firms.
Data were collected from 247 manufacturing firms in Ghana using structured questionnaires administered in person. The study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional design and analyzed the data using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to test both mediation and moderation effects. The constructs were adapted from validated scales in prior research and refined for contextual relevance.
The results reveal that while the direct relationship between supply chain digitalization (SCD) and supply chain resilience (SCR) is negative and non-significant, SCD exerts a positive and significant effect on SCA, which in turn significantly enhances SCR. Thus, SCA fully mediates the SCD–SCR relationship. However, relational governance (RG) does not significantly moderate the relationships between SCD, SCA and SCR. Interestingly, excessive reliance on RG may even weaken the positive digitalization–resilience link, suggesting that overembedded relational structures can constrain digital adaptability.
Despite the valuable insights presented, this study is not without limitations, which also provide fertile ground for future research. Firstly, the study employed a cross-sectional design, capturing data at a single point in time. This temporal limitation restricts the ability to draw causal inferences about the relationships between SCD, ambidexterity, resilience and RG. Future research should consider adopting longitudinal approaches to better understand how these dynamics evolve over time, particularly as firms deepen their digital transformation efforts. Secondly, the research focused exclusively on manufacturing firms in Ghana, which may limit the generalizability of the findings across other sectors or regions with different institutional, cultural or technological environments. Subsequent studies could explore similar models in diverse contexts such as healthcare, logistics or retail sectors, or compare findings across developing and developed economies. Third, although the study integrated both RG and SCA, other potential mediating or moderating variables such as supply chain agility, absorptive capacity or digital maturity levels were not included. Incorporating these variables could offer a more in-depth understanding of the complex mechanisms underpinning digital resilience. Moreover, future studies could investigate how different types of ambidexterity (e.g. structural vs contextual) influence resilience in various supply chain contexts. For example, structural ambidexterity might involve dedicating separate teams for exploration and exploitation, while contextual ambidexterity allows individuals to switch between the two modes. Also, future research should explore the conditions under which RG enhances or hinders supply chain outcomes, considering factors like the complexity of supply chain relationships and the technological capabilities of firms.
Managers should prioritize digital investments that strengthen ambidextrous capabilities, balancing efficiency and innovation rather than relying solely on digital tools or relational trust. The study's maturity assessment framework offers a practical roadmap for benchmarking firms' progress in digitalization, ambidexterity and resilience. Policymakers should also support digital infrastructure, training, and collaborative ecosystems that enable firms to leverage digital technologies flexibly.
Policymakers should also support digital infrastructure, training and collaborative ecosystems that enable firms to leverage digital technologies flexibly.
This study extends complex adaptive systems theory and the relational view by showing that resilience emerges not directly from digitalization, but through ambidextrous learning and adaptation. The findings advance the state of the art by explaining how digital transformation outcomes depend on adaptive mechanisms rather than technological intensity alone, providing both theoretical insight and managerial guidance for building resilient, digitally enabled supply chains.
