This study aims to reduce the hurdles in the humanitarian services supply chain (HSSC) deliverance with digitization. This will help reduce the communication and execution gap between the participating organization, suppliers and ground-level welfare service vendors.
The hybrid Plan-Do-Check-Act–fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution approach was adapted to strategize, address and prioritize the key strategic benefits (KSBs) of using business digitization interface (BDIs) with an interactive dashboard for data visualization and efficient monitoring.
The HSSCs typically depend on the availability of funds, procurement of relief materials, allocation of projects, engagement of service vendors and project execution. A unique approach was adapted to visualize the HSSC using BDIs to reduce inefficiencies in conventional tender-based welfare systems and international aid for Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3, SDG7 and SDG11.
The study reflects the use of data visualization in non-profit community development activities with the Technology–Organization–Environment–Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology approach. This replaces the old conventional methods of favored/non-transparent tender allotments. Non-profit organizations often lack access to funds to implement modern technology. However, adopting cost-effective, sustainable technology will pave the way for performance improvements and future adaptations.
The dashboard created with BDI enables ground-level implementation with direct source connectivity integrated with blockchain, Internet of Things and artificial intelligence. This implementation can be a digital twin that will bring resilience to HSSCs.
Adapting BDIs for managerial activities will expedite welfare tasks. This study can guide the digitization of international humanitarian aid efforts if implemented.
This study addresses more philanthropic goals than corporate social responsibility objectives. Hence, this study can be replicated in relief supply chains in the regional or international landscapes.
1. Introduction
The world is witnessing an increase in existential poverty, despite the Industrial Revolution, and is facing pollution and climate crises, even in the era of Industry 5.0. It needs to be addressed through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (European Commission, 2021; Gamberini and Pluchino, 2024). The population’s necessities, such as education, sanitation, housing, food and economic stability, remain unaddressed, at least in developing nations (Ali and Khan, 2024; Bazaanah and Mothapo, 2024). Families struggle to make ends meet with limited income (Kitole et al., 2024). Thus, the government, taxpayers, conglomerates and other stakeholders take up initiatives to uplift the underprivileged, differently abled and tribal population by means possible, such as food distribution, clothes distribution, building and maintaining houses, schools, community centers, training/skilling centers (Aydın et al., 2024; Kim et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2009). The most significant implementation of humanitarian services supply chains (HSSCs) and public welfare activities is overseen by the United Nations and the Red Cross Society across underdeveloped, war-torn, drought-stricken and politically unstable nations such as Ukraine and Gaza (Heaslip et al., 2024). They also serve the masses affected by natural calamities and pandemics (Díaz and Tachizawa, 2015; McLachlin and Larson, 2011). However, the Bill Gates Foundation is one example that has adopted a strategy to improve people’s lives in developed, developing and underdeveloped nations by providing necessities (Kumar et al., 2009, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2026). Similarly, every nation’s conglomerates are mandated to implement corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives for the local population near industrial establishments (Dixit et al., 2022; Kumar et al., 2019). However, this conglomerate “A” has set an example by taking several steps ahead, continually providing deliverables such as nutrition, education, awareness, living spaces and health care for both able-bodied and specially abled individuals. They build and maintain infrastructure such as schools, houses and water bodies to nurture the future generation (Wassenhove, 2006). Moreover, several organizations have established public welfare verticals (PWVs) to uplift society from earned profits (Kim et al., 2020). However, the welfare programs launched by several business houses are limited to providing education, food and sometimes medical facilities. However, this example “A” serves more than that. It offers public welfare in more than 35 PWVs, targeting the relevant audience. In this study, an effort has been made to reduce the turnaround time by digitizing the conventional HSSC tasks as a proposal. Business house-dependent HSSCs are usually slow, characterized by redundant approval stages and a lack of transparency, leading to favoritism and corruption. Thus, the functions shall be based on community development objectives, periodic maintenance schedules, public complaints and volunteer field exploration. This can be expedited by digitizing the HSSCs (Wassenhove, 2006).
Figure 1 illustrates a functional flowchart for an HSSC venture focused on public welfare activities.
The flowchart begins with a periodic work plan in geographical locations, divided into procurement and execution processes. The procurement process begins with floating tender for suppliers, then receiving quotations, next finalizing suppliers, followed by detailing timeline and contract, and finally material shipment. Material shipment then connects to issuing materials and funds in the execution process. The execution process begins with floating tender for service vendors, then receiving quotations, next finalizing vendors with contract, followed by issuing materials and funds, and then monitoring. Monitoring leads to receiving reviews from beneficiaries. These reviews return to the periodic work plan in geographical locations.Functional flowchart for an HSSC venture
Source: Authors’ own work
The flowchart begins with a periodic work plan in geographical locations, divided into procurement and execution processes. The procurement process begins with floating tender for suppliers, then receiving quotations, next finalizing suppliers, followed by detailing timeline and contract, and finally material shipment. Material shipment then connects to issuing materials and funds in the execution process. The execution process begins with floating tender for service vendors, then receiving quotations, next finalizing vendors with contract, followed by issuing materials and funds, and then monitoring. Monitoring leads to receiving reviews from beneficiaries. These reviews return to the periodic work plan in geographical locations.Functional flowchart for an HSSC venture
Source: Authors’ own work
Figure 1 also illustrates a timeline of events where the organization must simultaneously communicate with suppliers and service vendors to execute tasks on time. The work procedure must undergo a series of rounds until material procurement and delivery to the site are completed, initiating the project. The projects shall be monitored accordingly. Finally, the newer work strategies shall be based on reviews from beneficiaries.
This study addresses a few research questions (RQs) such as:
Are HSSCs efficient in dispersing public welfare initiatives?
How could this dispersal of social welfare schemes be expedited?
What are the visible benefits of digitizing the HSSCs?
The study introduces the focus area in Section 1, followed by a literature review in Section 2. Section 3 encapsulates the methodology, regional demography and critical aspects of the implementation. Section 4 illustrate results and discussions discuss the RQs in Section 5. Conclusions are captured in Section 6. The managerial implications are discussed in Section 7, and Section 8 covers limitations and scope for future research.
2. Literature review
Relief aid mechanisms are essential for any nation, as some citizens cannot make ends meet on their wages, given the size of their families. The Indian Government illustrated its response to COVID-19 by ensuring food security for 800 million citizens (Mishra and Rampal, 2020). Sometimes, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) sponsored by public donations or corporate funding organize community kitchens, clothing distribution drives and education programs in developed nations for the homeless or in war-torn nations. Similarly, developing nations require public welfare initiatives implemented by corporations or NGOs for specific tasks, such as international educational programs, technological exchanges, sanitation programs and water management. Thus, internationally funded programs come to the rescue.
2.1 Literature review for humanitarian efforts put by global and government bodies
A holistic health-themed HSSC was executed in Africa. It attempted to bridge the gap between nutrition, sanitation and functional medical facilities in Africa, aligning with global standards. It focused on enhancing NGO efforts to meet expanded public needs with limited resources in the wake of scarcity. They highlight public satisfaction metrics, competent collaboration and recruiting volunteers for enhanced supply chain operations (Kumar et al., 2009). An exploratory study was conducted by surveying HSSC practitioners to identify specific parameters, including the time taken, reliable connections, simplified processes, planning before a calamity, delivering on objectives, equal stakeholder involvement and mutual and specialized collaboration, among others (McLachlin and Larson, 2011). The Spanish Red Cross executed an HSSC in Haiti during the 2010 earthquakes. Critical concepts were standardization, modularization, the top-down hierarchy approach, information transfer and capital sourcing mechanisms. This study highlights the delivery of efficiency and responsiveness through the five methods mentioned for businesses, as learned from HSSCs (Díaz and Tachizawa, 2015). It is reported that friendly nations engage in various relief activities, such as health care, food, incentives, educational subsidies and cultural initiatives, to deepen relations (Ruffini, 2016). The role of HSSC, global supply chains and international logistics was better understood during the COVID-19 pandemic, prompting institutions to introspect more effectively for human causes (Kwon, 2020). The HSSC volunteers require specialized skills in handling, temperature maintenance, contamination control, donor regulations and technology proficiency, among others (Erturgut and Gürler, 2021). Sanitation problems (SDG6) have been a persistent issue in developing nations, including India. Hence, governments launched several sanitation programs to improve it year after year. The open defecation cases observed in 2010 were approximately 43.9% in India, which decreased to 14.9% by 2020. A study reported that the utility and effectiveness of green toilets in rural India have illustrated a rise in adaptation over time (Ali and Khan, 2024).
2.2 Literature review for corporate social responsibility
A study on the enablers of CSR undertaken by Indian multinational companies highlighted the roles of management commitment, management dispersion practices, community integration and a strategic approach to execution as critical aspects of HSSC implementation for public well-being (Dixit et al., 2022; Kumar et al., 2019). There are reports in the literature on the direct correlation between gender diversity and CSR. Thus, uplifting women can positively influence business development if they are provided with ample education, training and skill development opportunities in developing nations (Alhosani and Nobanee, 2023).
2.3 Literature review for corporate-sponsored development
Numerous examples of corporate-sponsored development are found in the literature, such as a study on the distribution of medicines/medical devices to the public and health sector NGOs for the benefit of public welfare. Such efforts in lower- and middle-income nations will improve health security (Fabbri et al., 2020). However, a better idea is to provide facilities that originate locally to serve the locals (i.e. a circular economy). A few prominent business houses, including Birla (Aditya Birla Group, 2026; Aditya Birla Group, 2023), Manipal (MIT NSS Units Honored with National Humanitarian Excellence Award for Manipal, 2024), Medanta,, 2024; Medanta Foundation, 2026), Tata (Tata Steel Foundation, 2026; Tata and the Community, 2027) and Symbiosis (Monday Motivation: A Historic Milestone for Symbiosis: Launch of the Rotary Peace Centre – Symbiosis - Dr. Vidya, 2026), have established numerous hospitals in India. They offer affordable primary health and specialty centers for general public awareness. These efforts to provide beds and oxygen cylinders were highly effective during the peak COVID-19 outbreaks in 2020 and 2021 (Aggarwal et al., 2023; Banerjee and Paliwal, 2023; Faruqui et al., 2021; Ghosh, 2023). Several examples of public marathon runs organized by businesses to increase health awareness are available (Chih, 2023; Lunawat, 2021). Some examples of social leadership promote continuous skill development and culture-building within the South Korean community (Kim et al., 2020).
2.4 Literature review for performance building in humanitarian supply chains
It is often said that HSSCs should function such as any product-oriented supply chain to bring accountability, efficiency, responsiveness, adaptability and deliverance (Wassenhove, 2006). The intermodal logistics performance in an HSSC improves with coordination (Lee and Bang, 2014). It is essential to bring sophisticated supply chain alignment to execute the projects on time and effectively serve the public with adaptability, responsiveness and delivery (Dubey et al., 2015). This case was observed during the execution of tasks by NGOs and state departments, as well as Indian Railways, during religious events such as the Maha Kumbh Mela, held in 2013 in Allahabad (now known as Prayagraj). It concluded that strategic supply chain alignment, leadership and adaptability are essential for achieving both logistical and human performance (Dubey et al., 2015). A study highlights that effective corporate governance management improves CSR initiatives; i.e. the periodically disbursed projects for social development allocated to vendors ultimately turn out well-executed when monitored effectively (Stuebs and Sun, 2015). A study highlights the urgency of adopting green supply chains in power distribution. Hence, it suggests using solar power to reduce energy consumption. Such initiatives were only theorized about in the past but are being implemented via government-run solar power schemes and corporate-run CSRs to endorse the use of solar power for domestic and business use now (Soda et al., 2016). One of the most recent examples is provision of Starlink in Ukraine by Elon Musk (Abels, 2024). Thus, there is a huge need for improved information integration and visibility in the HSSCs.
2.5 Gaps in the literature (i.e. use of technology for humanitarian supply chains visualization)
It is reported that business intelligence software, such as Microsoft Power BI or Tableau, is not widely used, even in small- and medium-sized industries in countries such as Germany and Spain. However, it offers excellent visualization, Web reporting and performance management capabilities for business digitalization (Fähndrich and Pedell, 2024; Monteiro et al., 2024; Powell et al., 2024). Kumar et al. (2022) demonstrates the utility of blockchains in improving post-harvest supply chains. This technology adaptation can also be extended to government-run HSSCs (i.e. public distribution schemes) for improved transparency and reduced inefficiencies. Reports in the literature emphasize the significance of big data analytics in HSSCs for enhancing efficiency and collaboration. Such an implementation eventually shortens the existing supply chains and improves CSR disbursal mechanisms (Dubey et al., 2019). Eventually, the utilization of visualization software to build collaborations, operational tools such as cloud computing, the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI) will reduce the response time by understanding the problems faster, finding vendors quicker to respond to the situation and building potential connections to plan and perform preventive actions much before the occurrence of a calamity. Hence, a shorter supply chain is achieved (Caruso et al., 2023; Chiffoleau et al., 2019; Fähndrich and Pedell, 2024). The PWVs (i.e. philanthropic activities) focused on in this study are captured in the literature. The relevant information is highlighted in Table 1.
Key PWVs in HSSC and mentions in the literature
| Sr. no. | Initiatives mentioned in the literature toward the PWVs | Notable mentions |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Electrical power distribution and electrical infrastructure services (EES) | Barman et al. (2021); Soda et al. (2016) |
| 2 | Solar equipment, supplies and service agents (SSA) | Priyadarshi et al. (2023); Soda et al. (2016) |
| 3 | Transportation on-lease agents (TLA) | Stekelorum et al. (2020) |
| 4 | Public welfare education providers (PEP)
| Heriyati et al. (2024); Kumar et al. (2009); Schade et al. (2022) |
| 5 | Public welfare, sports activity organizers (PSO) | Chih (2023); Lunawat (2021) |
| 6 | Public health-care/vaccination volunteers (PHV) | Chetan et al. (2015); Schade et al. (2022) |
| 7 | Event management and catering services (ECS) | Chih (2023); Prakash (2018) |
| 8 | Regional/community-level security agents (RSA) | Gorostidi-Martinez and Zhao (2017); Jhawar and Jain (2021) |
| 9 | Occasional workforce and housekeeping providers (OWP) | Jhawar and Jain (2021) |
| 10 | Irrigation/borewell service providers (ISP) | Smith (2008); Styles et al. (2012) |
| 11 | Sanitary hardware providers (SHP) | Ali and Khan (2024); Basil et al. (2019); Jhawar and Jain (2021) |
| 12 | Public welfare awareness using drama (i.e. Nukkad Natak) for public awareness and sustainability (PAD) | Jhawar and Jain (2021) |
| 13 | FMCG suppliers/essential supplies vendors (FSV) | Aydın et al. (2024); Dubey et al. (2015); Kumar et al. (2022), (2009); McLachlin and Larson (2011); Wassenhove (2006) |
| 14 | Woodwork service agents (WSA) | Styles et al. (2012) |
| 15 | Pest control providers (PSP) | Chen et al. (2023); Song and Zhuang (2017); Styles et al. (2012) |
| 16 | Seeds, plants and Agri-input providers (SPP) | Chen et al. (2023); Raut et al. (2018) |
| 17 | Public welfare temporary housing, masonry, maintenance service and machinery providers (HMP) | Barman et al. (2021); Ijabadeniyi and Govender (2024); Jhawar and Jain (2021) |
| 18 | Underprivileged and tribal rehabilitation providers (UTP) | Balkrishna et al. (2022); Bazaanah and Mothapo (2024); Martinelli et al. (2010); Palash et al. (2021); Porter and Kramer (2019) |
| 19 | Public welfare motivation building, incentives/scholarship, dissipaters (MID) | Dixit et al. (2022); Gorostidi-Martinez and Zhao (2017); Ijabadeniyi and Govender (2024); Jhawar and Jain (2021); Lunawat (2021); Porter and Kramer (2019) |
| 20 | Water source service agents (WSS) | Bazaanah and Mothapo (2024) |
| Sr. no. | Initiatives mentioned in the literature toward the PWVs | Notable mentions |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Electrical power distribution and electrical infrastructure services ( | |
| 2 | Solar equipment, supplies and service agents ( | |
| 3 | Transportation on-lease agents ( | |
| 4 | Public welfare education providers ( Creating awareness Child welfare and clothing Study material distribution Digital instruments distribution | |
| 5 | Public welfare, sports activity organizers ( | |
| 6 | Public health-care/vaccination volunteers ( | |
| 7 | Event management and catering services ( | |
| 8 | Regional/community-level security agents ( | |
| 9 | Occasional workforce and housekeeping providers ( | |
| 10 | Irrigation/borewell service providers ( | |
| 11 | Sanitary hardware providers ( | |
| 12 | Public welfare awareness using drama (i.e. Nukkad Natak) for public awareness and sustainability ( | |
| 13 | ||
| 14 | Woodwork service agents ( | |
| 15 | Pest control providers ( | |
| 16 | Seeds, plants and Agri-input providers ( | |
| 17 | Public welfare temporary housing, masonry, maintenance service and machinery providers ( | |
| 18 | Underprivileged and tribal rehabilitation providers ( | |
| 19 | Public welfare motivation building, incentives/scholarship, dissipaters ( | |
| 20 | Water source service agents ( |
Table 2 provides a literature review on theories used for HSSCs.
Literature review on theories used for HSSCs
| Sr. no. | Theories used in humanitarian service supply chains | Notable mentions |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Social enterprise business model advocates to focus on mission, actors, nature of operation, hindrances and goals but lacks to cover about technology | Heriyati et al. (2024) |
| 2 | Spiral model focuses on supply chain performance improvement with collaboration via information dissipation, common goals, aligned decisions, incentives after assignments, shared information and knowledge creation makes a strong claim for utility. However, does not exactly fit our model | McLachlin and Larson (2011) |
| 3 | Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) with technology acceptance model (TAM) to propose blockchain acceptance in HSSCs with parameters such as performance yield, social impact, applicable criteria, blockchain authentication, stakeholder trust to suffice behavioral intention and expectation | Queiroz and Fosso Wamba (2019) |
| 4 | Design thinking approaches such as lean and kaizen in humanitarian missions to achieve fundraising. It can be used for policymaking, management, administration and learning development programmes. The awareness, communication and collaboration driven attempts shall be made. It supports the study partially | Wong et al. (2019) |
| 5 | Grounded theory in social entrepreneurship talks about social change, CSR, ground-level impact, motives mission and objectives, social and technical innovation and challenges, level of commitment, woman involvement, training, teaching and university-level exposure, business strategy, financial, leadership and government role challenges, etc. This meta-analysis supports the study partially | Gupta et al. (2020) |
| 6 | Humanitarian innovation as a theory of change focuses on improving physical infrastructure and extended performance, use of information and decision making to improve deliverance, certainty and adaptability. It supports the study partially | Comes et al. (2018) |
| 7 | Social entrepreneurial sustainability initiates with social mission, social capital, managerial role, mission agility, social and tech innovation, new partnerships and pivoting. It supports the study partially | Kamaludin et al. (2021) |
| 8 | Dynamic capabilities view (DCV) with practice-based view (PBV) and TOE encapsulates technologies such as digital twins with the Internet of Things (IoT), blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing with agility and stakeholder collaboration. This approach will enable to address context-driven dynamics. It highlights that, along with technological support, training programs, pilot projects, collaboration models and continuous improvement can be enabled. This approach supports the study to an extent | Dong et al. (2024); Singh, (2024) |
| 9 | UTUAT with resource-based view (RBV) emphasizes resilience and transparency more. The implementation objectives can be achieved with performance expectations on parameters, effort expectations in the domains, coordination outcomes to ensure implementation and facilitating conditions to ensure continuous monitoring and supply. Even a supply chain control tower can be established to monitor the conditions and real-time supervision. This model fits the study aptly | Dwivedi et al. (2019); Venkatesh et al. (2003) |
| 10 | Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework with UTUAT can not only align with the ground-level implementation goals but also can help to integrate the technology as well with efficient resource allocation, reduced “time-to-insight” and dashboards for automated tracking and predictive analytics. This approach fits the study very well | Kruger and Schutte (2026); Panagiotopoulos et al. (2026); Seddigh et al. (2023); Yang et al. (2022) |
| Sr. no. | Theories used in humanitarian service supply chains | Notable mentions |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Social enterprise business model advocates to focus on mission, actors, nature of operation, hindrances and goals but lacks to cover about technology | |
| 2 | Spiral model focuses on supply chain performance improvement with collaboration via information dissipation, common goals, aligned decisions, incentives after assignments, shared information and knowledge creation makes a strong claim for utility. However, does not exactly fit our model | |
| 3 | Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology ( | |
| 4 | Design thinking approaches such as lean and kaizen in humanitarian missions to achieve fundraising. It can be used for policymaking, management, administration and learning development programmes. The awareness, communication and collaboration driven attempts shall be made. It supports the study partially | |
| 5 | Grounded theory in social entrepreneurship talks about social change, CSR, ground-level impact, motives mission and objectives, social and technical innovation and challenges, level of commitment, woman involvement, training, teaching and university-level exposure, business strategy, financial, leadership and government role challenges, etc. This meta-analysis supports the study partially | |
| 6 | Humanitarian innovation as a theory of change focuses on improving physical infrastructure and extended performance, use of information and decision making to improve deliverance, certainty and adaptability. It supports the study partially | |
| 7 | Social entrepreneurial sustainability initiates with social mission, social capital, managerial role, mission agility, social and tech innovation, new partnerships and pivoting. It supports the study partially | |
| 8 | Dynamic capabilities view ( | |
| 9 | ||
| 10 | Technology-Organization-Environment ( |
Hence, the Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) framework with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) approach shall be used. A model is proposed to integrate the existing HSSCs with digitized business intelligence platforms and AI-enabled cloud computing platforms as a digital twin for improved responsiveness in policy deployment, as shown in Figure 2. The pictorial representation below illustrates the conceptual integration of an offline HSSC’s objectives with existing technology to deliver a better experience to beneficiaries. The integrated UTAUT approach will assist in performance assessment via automated tracking of ground-level execution and predictive analytics for real-time modifications and future improvements. Thus, shared dashboards and mobile dashboards will help not only in the display of real time information but also in real-time execution improvements. Hence, business digitization interface (BDIs) such as PowerBI will function as a strategic asset that will save time.
The conceptual framework begins with offline humanitarian supply chain objectives covering strategic and operational aspects. These connect to technological implementation and adoption based on T O E plus U T A U T theory, including digitisation and visualisation with Power B I and Tableau. The objectives also connect to an integrated AI-enabled cloud computing platform based on D C V, P B V, and R B V theory. Technological implementation and adoption connects with the integrated A I-enabled cloud computing platform. Both then lead to responsiveness in policy and operational deployment. A digital supply chain twin for simulation and forecasting is positioned beside the integrated A I-enabled cloud computing platform.Proposed developments in the HSSCs
Source: Authors’ own work
The conceptual framework begins with offline humanitarian supply chain objectives covering strategic and operational aspects. These connect to technological implementation and adoption based on T O E plus U T A U T theory, including digitisation and visualisation with Power B I and Tableau. The objectives also connect to an integrated AI-enabled cloud computing platform based on D C V, P B V, and R B V theory. Technological implementation and adoption connects with the integrated A I-enabled cloud computing platform. Both then lead to responsiveness in policy and operational deployment. A digital supply chain twin for simulation and forecasting is positioned beside the integrated A I-enabled cloud computing platform.Proposed developments in the HSSCs
Source: Authors’ own work
3. Proposition development and methodology
The organization in focus serves the public in more than 35 PWVs in 27 geographical locations, with its offices in 12 City Headquarters, highlighted in Figure 3, in different capacities, as mentioned in Table 1.
The network model lists 20 factors on the left: E E S, S S A, T L A, P E P, P S O, P H V, E C S, R S A, O W P, I S P, S H P, P A D, F S V, W S A, P S P, S P P, H M P, U T P, M I D, and W S S. Twelve challenges on the right are labelled C H 1 through C H 12. Connections from the factors converge into three groups. The upper group connects to C H 1 and C H 2. The middle group aligns with C H 7. The lower group connects towards C H 12. Dashed vertical segments separate portions of the challenge list between these convergence points.Key focus initiatives taken up by the organization with the city headquarters
Source: Authors’ own work
The network model lists 20 factors on the left: E E S, S S A, T L A, P E P, P S O, P H V, E C S, R S A, O W P, I S P, S H P, P A D, F S V, W S A, P S P, S P P, H M P, U T P, M I D, and W S S. Twelve challenges on the right are labelled C H 1 through C H 12. Connections from the factors converge into three groups. The upper group connects to C H 1 and C H 2. The middle group aligns with C H 7. The lower group connects towards C H 12. Dashed vertical segments separate portions of the challenge list between these convergence points.Key focus initiatives taken up by the organization with the city headquarters
Source: Authors’ own work
3.1 The Plan-Do-Check-Act strategy
The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) strategy is adapted in numerous articles for HSSCs in the literature, such as for performance improvement (Goffnett et al., 2013), for waste elimination during disaster relief supply chains (Madu and Kuei, 2014), to improve agility in HSSCs during COVID 19 outbreak (Sangkachan, 2022) and to capture HSSC risks (Lwin and Permwonguswa, 2024). The PDCA is adapted to use the vast, non-uniform data to create centralized, insightful data to be used for enhanced decision-making and to verify the timely implementation of philanthropic activities on the ground.
The PDCA stages are mentioned below:
Plan: The organization’s public welfare hierarchy works with offline setups and minimal technology to date in releasing tenders, requests for quotations, declaring the budget, finalizing vendors, project execution, completion, inspection and payments. This entire process takes anywhere from three to six months to complete. This tactic can be categorized as a reactive approach rather than a predictive or preventive one. Hence, there is scope for improvement. From the literature, an HSSC should function like a corporate entity to deliver efficiency, performance, agility, adaptability and responsiveness. Hence, digitizing this HSSC setup is necessary with AI, Blockchain, IoT and digital twins. An advanced supplier and service vendors’ information database needs to be built using Microsoft Excel and a business intelligence tool to have a combined directory with AI and IoT. The objective is to streamline the procurement process and vendor management with Blockchain and enhance overall operational efficiency with digital twins.
Do: The initial data was collected from various electronic sources (i.e. procurement and service records in Systems Applications and Products in Data Processing (SAP) and communication channels), physical files and telephonic calls. It required cleaning (removing discrepancies, outdated, duplicate and incomplete information), formatting, filtering and pivoting for enhanced use with accuracy, consistency and accessibility in Microsoft Excel. The data comprised information about suppliers and service vendors with respect to location, product/service category, entity codes and business scale. It had to be identified and categorized into PWVs, which were narrowed down to 20 PWVs in Table 1. Hence, an appropriate and robust platform had to be chosen to make contacts, make declarations, accept quotations, announce the budget and finalize the vendors for business intelligence. This sort of data integration was possibly beyond the capabilities of SAP alone to build a centralized and interactive supplier and vendor repository. Thus, a BDI framework would be used to create a dashboard over the PWVs and regions to be served with digital twins comprising AI, blockchain and IoT. The prospects of this framework are to regularize this mammoth HSSC with efficient reporting using IoT, supplier management using blockchain, periodic preventive plans with AI, online expense sheets and analysis of over-expenses/delays with BDI and create a better image in society with improved satisfaction, among other benefits with digital twins. This addresses RQ1.
Check: A pilot model taking a sample of data from the aggregated information was simulated for 11 PWVs in the system to check for completeness, visualization, potential and ease of use with dashboards. The sample PWVs, i.e. “solar equipment supplies and service agents” and “tribal rehabilitation providers,” were simulated. The pilot’s outcome provided significant data capturing, visualization, interaction and business decision-making potential. It detailed the supplier’s product/service offerings with respect to geography. The timeline of events could be shortened with supplier and service location mapping using this platform. Thus, the full-scale model building was initiated. The time it took to grasp the extent of the information and feed it into Microsoft Power BI was around three months, but its implications will serve the sector for a much longer time. The full-scale model was built with a promising trajectory, yielding reliable outcomes and easy navigation. It improved the work method multiple times over with the ability to track several projects on one platform, as displayed in Figure 3. The vendors for the work are visible in an online ledger for the desired geographical location; the managers will declare the allocated budget and timeline with the suppliers/vendors. The vendors must produce a detailed quotation with updated wage rates and material costs as quotations. When the execution manager and the verified vendor agree to take up the job, a standard business contract shall be signed along with taxation information. Funds will be released periodically to accomplish the task. Adherence to the timeline, quality and deviations will be noted to allot a score to the vendor for future transactions. The vendor can be upgraded as a preferential vendor based on indexed scoring. This HSSC will shorten supply linkages by digitally allocating tasks to local vendors, gathering materials from both local and distant suppliers and providing services to the target group/beneficiaries. Such implementations will get the work done in less time than anticipated. The problems with commission agents, bribery, delays, the use of substandard materials and quality control, among others, could be reduced to some extent with this implementation. Figure 4 illustrates the proposed standardized method of operations for a corporate-sponsored HSSC.
The flowchart begins with P R generation, then R F Q floatation, next vendor quotation shortlisting, followed by vendor selection and purchase order. R F Q floatation also leads to budget declaration. Purchase order also leads to locking the project. The main process continues from purchase order to execution and then monitoring. Monitoring branches to feedback and rating. Rating leads to vendor continuity and also to vendor rejection. Vendor continuity finally leads to supply chain resilience.Flowchart of the work procedure in the HSSCs vendor sourcing
Source: Authors’ own work
The flowchart begins with P R generation, then R F Q floatation, next vendor quotation shortlisting, followed by vendor selection and purchase order. R F Q floatation also leads to budget declaration. Purchase order also leads to locking the project. The main process continues from purchase order to execution and then monitoring. Monitoring branches to feedback and rating. Rating leads to vendor continuity and also to vendor rejection. Vendor continuity finally leads to supply chain resilience.Flowchart of the work procedure in the HSSCs vendor sourcing
Source: Authors’ own work
Act: The final activity is to sustain the implementation with effective training and documentation for the workforce. The workforce shall be issued with user manuals. Middle management shall be able to add or remove suppliers/vendors as needed. The SAP system will be integrated with Power BI to yield better insights and facilitate data-driven decision-making. The supplier/vendor shall also be considered for continuing business based on supplier/vendor ratings. A feedback/grievance mechanism shall be incorporated with the help of a front-desk system. The quality management approaches, live tracking and project completion information will be captured with AI. An automated data validation system can be adopted to add/remove/flag new entries for future improvements with a BDI digital twin comprising AI, blockchain and IoT. This addresses RQ2.
3.2 Fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
The fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS) approach is used to prioritize and validate the benefits achieved from implementation. A series of multi-criteria decision-making algorithms, such as the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP), are used in the literature. For e.g. FAHP-FTOPSIS approach for health-care supply planning (Ommane et al., 2025), FAHP-FTOPSIS for risk management during emergencies (Chukwuka et al., 2025), FAHP in supplier selection (Hallak, 2024) and FAHP to plan earthquake shelters (Li et al., 2025). Priyadarshi et al. (2022) adopted a two-stage F-TOPSIS method to highlight the order of enablers that need to be addressed. Similarly, this implementation highlights the most notable benefits achieved in this research. This approach was also used to highlight and address the most crucial benefits. The steps are as follows:
Problem Definition: Identifying the key strategic benefits (KSBs): The identified KSBs of BDIs shall be further evaluated and ranked to enhance the decision-making process within organizations with respect to PWVs, segregated into societal health care (SDG 3), energy security (SDG 7) and sustainable living with welfare (SDG 11). The following KSBs are identified to address PWVs highlighted in Table 3.
Key strategic benefits (KSBs) identified to facilitate public welfare verticals (PWVs)
| Focusing SDGs | PWVs | KSBs |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Security (SDG 7) | Electrical power distribution and electrical infrastructure services (EES) | Multi-stakeholder interface visibility with IoT (MIV) |
| Solar equipment, supplies and service agents (SSA) | Prompt information transformation with BDI (PIT) | |
| Societal Healthcare (SDG 3) | Public healthcare/vaccination volunteers (PHV) | Multi-stakeholder information reporting with IoT (MIR) |
| Sanitary hardware providers (SHP) | Visualization-enabled decision-making with BDI (VDM) | |
| Pest control providers (PSP) | Cloud-based computing using BDI (CBC) | |
| Water source service agents (WSS) | Secure data transformation using blockchain (SDT) | |
| Sustainable Living withWelfare (SDG 11) | FMCG suppliers/essential supplies vendors (FSV) | Big-data compatibility and performance using IoT (BCP) |
| Seeds, plants and agri-input providers (SPP) | Objective-oriented KPIs and monitoring using IoT (OOM) | |
| Public welfare education providers (PEP) | Change management with digital twins (CMT) | |
| Public welfare, sports activity, organizers (PSO) | Automated obligation fulfilment using AI (AOF) | |
| Transportation on-lease agents (TLA) | AI-enabled technology disruption (ATD) | |
| Public welfare temporary housing, masonry, maintenance service and machinery providers (HMP) | ||
| Woodwork service agents (WSA) | ||
| Underprivileged and tribal rehabilitation providers (UTP) | ||
| Public welfare motivation building, incentives/scholarship, dissipaters (MID) | ||
| Event management and catering services (ECS) | ||
| Regional/community-level security agents (RSA) | ||
| Occasional workforce and housekeeping providers (OWP) | ||
| Irrigation/borewell service providers (ISP) | ||
| Public welfare awareness using drama (i.e. Nukkad Natak) for public awareness and sustainability (PAD) |
| Focusing SDGs | PWVs | KSBs |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Security ( | Electrical power distribution and electrical infrastructure services ( | Multi-stakeholder interface visibility with IoT ( |
| Solar equipment, supplies and service agents ( | Prompt information transformation with | |
| Societal Healthcare ( | Public healthcare/vaccination volunteers ( | Multi-stakeholder information reporting with IoT ( |
| Sanitary hardware providers ( | Visualization-enabled decision-making with | |
| Pest control providers ( | Cloud-based computing using | |
| Water source service agents ( | Secure data transformation using blockchain ( | |
| Sustainable Living withWelfare ( | Big-data compatibility and performance using IoT ( | |
| Seeds, plants and agri-input providers ( | Objective-oriented KPIs and monitoring using IoT ( | |
| Public welfare education providers ( | Change management with digital twins ( | |
| Public welfare, sports activity, organizers ( | Automated obligation fulfilment using | |
| Transportation on-lease agents ( | AI-enabled technology disruption ( | |
| Public welfare temporary housing, masonry, maintenance service and machinery providers ( | ||
| Woodwork service agents ( | ||
| Underprivileged and tribal rehabilitation providers ( | ||
| Public welfare motivation building, incentives/scholarship, dissipaters ( | ||
| Event management and catering services ( | ||
| Regional/community-level security agents ( | ||
| Occasional workforce and housekeeping providers ( | ||
| Irrigation/borewell service providers ( | ||
| Public welfare awareness using drama (i.e. Nukkad Natak) for public awareness and sustainability ( |
3.2.1 Data collection
The linguistic scale questionnaire was sent to around 110 respondents by email. Only 41 responded after multiple reminders. However, only 33 inputs from respondents comprising corporate managers, NGO managers, CEOs, vendors and end consumers were useful. The criteria were stakeholders’ level of importance in the HSSC. The detailed information is provided in Table 4.
Detailed description of respondents
| Sr. no. | Profession | Education level | Experience/ Period of benefit | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corporate managers | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 6 |
| 2 | NGO managers | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 6 |
| 3 | CEOs | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 3 |
| 4 | Service vendors | Intermediate and graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 8 |
| 5 | Beneficiaries | Intermediate, graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 10 |
| Total | 33 |
| Sr. no. | Profession | Education level | Experience/ Period of benefit | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corporate managers | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 6 |
| 2 | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 6 | |
| 3 | CEOs | Graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 3 |
| 4 | Service vendors | Intermediate and graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 8 |
| 5 | Beneficiaries | Intermediate, graduation and Post-graduation | 10–15 yrs. | 10 |
| Total | 33 |
The following formula to obtain a suitable sample size was used:
where:
for 90% = 1.645, for data collection with 90% level of confidence);
= 0.9 as the percent of respondents associated with the PWVs;
as the percent of respondents that have not experienced the PWVs;
= error acceptance (up to 10%).
Now, once placing the figures into the calculation:
=
Thus, the prerequisite sample size is 24.35, i.e. 25. Hence, inputs from 33 stakeholders will serve the purpose of the study.
The collective opinion was recorded based on the linguistic measure illustrated in Table 5. The obtained linguistic inputs are highlighted in Tables 6 and 7 as examples.
Standard linguistic terms and fuzzy values
| Linguistic term | Fuzzy value |
|---|---|
| VH | (7,9,9) |
| H | (5,7,9) |
| M | (3,5,7) |
| L | (1,3,5) |
| VL | (1,1,3) |
| Linguistic term | Fuzzy value |
|---|---|
| (7,9,9) | |
| H | (5,7,9) |
| M | (3,5,7) |
| L | (1,3,5) |
| (1,1,3) |
A sample linguistic input from stakeholders over PWVs and KSBs as an example
| Comparison | EES | SSA | TLA | PEP | PSO | PHV | ECS | RSA | OWP | ISP | SHP | PAD | FSV | WSA | PSP | SPP | HMP | UTP | MID | WSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIV | H | M | H | H | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH |
| PIT | VH | VH | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | H | VH | H | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH |
| MIR | H | M | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | H | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH |
| VDM | H | H | VH | M | M | VH | H | VH | VH | H | H | H | VH | H | H | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH |
| CBC | VH | VH | VH | H | M | VH | H | M | M | VH | H | M | VH | M | H | H | M | H | VH | H |
| SDT | H | H | VH | H | M | VH | VH | VH | M | H | H | M | VH | M | H | M | M | H | VH | H |
| BCP | VH | VH | VH | VH | M | VH | VH | VH | M | VH | H | M | VH | M | M | VH | M | H | VH | H |
| OOM | VH | VH | VH | VH | M | VH | VH | VH | VH | VH | H | H | VH | M | H | H | H | VH | VH | H |
| CMT | M | H | H | VH | M | H | H | M | M | H | M | H | H | M | M | H | M | H | H | M |
| AOF | H | H | H | VH | H | VH | VH | M | H | M | M | M | H | L | M | M | M | M | M | M |
| ATD | H | VH | H | VH | H | VH | VH | H | M | VH | M | VH | H | L | L | M | L | L | MH | H |
| Comparison | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H | M | H | H | H | H | |||||||||||||||
| H | H | H | H | |||||||||||||||||
| H | M | H | H | |||||||||||||||||
| H | H | M | M | H | H | H | H | H | H | |||||||||||
| H | M | H | M | M | H | M | M | H | H | M | H | H | ||||||||
| H | H | H | M | M | H | H | M | M | H | M | M | H | H | |||||||
| M | M | H | M | M | M | M | H | H | ||||||||||||
| M | H | H | M | H | H | H | H | |||||||||||||
| M | H | H | M | H | H | M | M | H | M | H | H | M | M | H | M | H | H | M | ||
| H | H | H | H | M | H | M | M | M | H | L | M | M | M | M | M | M | ||||
| H | H | H | H | M | M | H | L | L | M | L | L | H |
Linguistic inputs from stakeholders over SDG classification and KSBs
| Comparison | MIV | PIT | MIR | VDM | CBC | SDT | BCP | OOM | CMT | AOF | ATD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SDG3 | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | I | I | I | L | M |
| SDG7 | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | I | VI | I |
| SDG11 | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | VI | M | I | I | L | L |
| Comparison | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SDG3 | I | I | I | L | M | ||||||
| SDG7 | I | I | |||||||||
| SDG11 | M | I | I | L | L |
Formulating the Decision Matrix: The decision matrix values are a reference to the performance of each KSB and are expressed in the form of triangular fuzzy numbers. The decision matrices in Tables 8 and 9 are constructed using the linguistic scale. This amount of data proves to be sufficient for a qualitative study.
Fuzzy values for PWVs and KSBs
| Input values | EES | SSA | TLA | PEP | PSO | PHV | ECS | RSA | OWP | ISP | SHP | PAD | FSV | WSA | PSP | SPP | HMP | UTP | MID | WSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIV | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) |
| PIT | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) |
| MIR | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) |
| VDM | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) |
| CBC | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) |
| SDT | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) |
| BCP | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) |
| OOM | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) |
| CMT | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) |
| AOF | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) |
| ATD | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (1,3,5) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (1,3,5) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) |
| Input values | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | |
| (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | |
| (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | |
| (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | |
| (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | |
| (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | |
| (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | |
| (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | |
| (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | |
| (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | |
| (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (1,3,5) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (1,3,5) | (1,3,5) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) |
Fuzzy values for SDG classification and KSBs
| Comparison | MIV | PIT | MIR | VDM | CBC | SDT | BCP | OOM | CMT | AOF | ATD | Aggregate fuzzy values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SDG3 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3, 7.72, 9) |
| SDG7 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5, 8.63, 9) |
| SDG11 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (1,3,5) | (1, 7.36, 9) |
| Comparison | Aggregate fuzzy values | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SDG3 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (3,5,7) | (3, 7.72, 9) |
| SDG7 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (7,9,9) | (5,7,9) | (5, 8.63, 9) |
| SDG11 | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (7,9,9) | (3,5,7) | (5,7,9) | (5,7,9) | (3,5,7) | (1,3,5) | (1, 7.36, 9) |
Step 2: Normalization of the Decision Matrix
This step ensures that all the criteria are treated equally and have comparable influences on the final decision. Table 10 highlights the aggregate fuzzy values of PWVs and the normalized matrix values.
Aggregate fuzzy values of PWVs and normalized matrix
| KSBs | Aggregate fuzzy values of PWVs | Normalized matrix |
|---|---|---|
| MIV | (3,8.3,9) | (0.33,0.92,1) |
| PIT | (5,8.6,9) | (0.56,0.96,1) |
| MIR | (3,8.5,9) | (0.33,0.94,1) |
| VDM | (3,7.8,9) | (0.33,0.87,1) |
| CBC | (3,7.1,9) | (0.33,0.79,1) |
| SDT | (3,7,9) | (0.33,0.78,1) |
| BCP | (3,7.5,9) | (0.33,0.83,1) |
| OOM | (3,8,9) | (0.33,0.89,1) |
| CMT | (3,6.2,9) | (0.33,0.69,1) |
| AOF | (1,6.1,9) | (0.11,0.68,1) |
| ATD | (1,6.4,9) | (0.11,0.71,1) |
| KSBs | Aggregate fuzzy values of PWVs | Normalized matrix |
|---|---|---|
| (3,8.3,9) | (0.33,0.92,1) | |
| (5,8.6,9) | (0.56,0.96,1) | |
| (3,8.5,9) | (0.33,0.94,1) | |
| (3,7.8,9) | (0.33,0.87,1) | |
| (3,7.1,9) | (0.33,0.79,1) | |
| (3,7,9) | (0.33,0.78,1) | |
| (3,7.5,9) | (0.33,0.83,1) | |
| (3,8,9) | (0.33,0.89,1) | |
| (3,6.2,9) | (0.33,0.69,1) | |
| (1,6.1,9) | (0.11,0.68,1) | |
| (1,6.4,9) | (0.11,0.71,1) |
Step 3: Weighted Normalized Matrix
This step involves multiplying each normalized fuzzy number by its respective fuzzy weight, as shown in the following equation:
is the weighted normalized value for alternative i under criterion j:
= fuzzy weight for criterion j; and
= normalized fuzzy number for alternative i under criterion j.
Table 11 highlights the weighted normalized matrix values, where weights are allotted to every PWV based on their inclination with the SDGs.
Weighted normalized matrix values
| KSBs | SDG 3 | SDG 7 | SDG 11 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIV | 0.33 | 6.95 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.96 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.79 | 9 |
| PIT | 0.56 | 7.20 | 9 | 2.78 | 8.25 | 9 | 0.56 | 7.03 | 9 |
| MIR | 0.33 | 7.12 | 9 | 1.67 | 8.15 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.95 | 9 |
| VDM | 0.33 | 6.53 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.48 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.38 | 9 |
| CBC | 0.33 | 5.95 | 9 | 1.67 | 6.81 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.81 | 9 |
| SDT | 0.33 | 5.86 | 9 | 1.67 | 6.71 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.72 | 9 |
| BCP | 0.33 | 6.28 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.19 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.13 | 9 |
| OOM | 0.33 | 6.70 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.67 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.54 | 9 |
| CMT | 0.33 | 5.19 | 9 | 1.67 | 5.95 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.07 | 9 |
| AOF | 0.11 | 5.11 | 9 | 0.56 | 5.85 | 9 | 0.11 | 4.99 | 9 |
| ATD | 0.11 | 5.36 | 9 | 0.56 | 6.14 | 9 | 0.11 | 5.23 | 9 |
| FIPS B+ | 0.56 | 7.20 | 9.00 | 2.78 | 8.25 | 9.00 | 0.56 | 7.03 | 9.00 |
| FIN B– | 0.11 | 5.11 | 9.00 | 0.56 | 5.85 | 9.00 | 0.11 | 4.99 | 9.00 |
| KSBs | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.33 | 6.95 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.96 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.79 | 9 | |
| 0.56 | 7.20 | 9 | 2.78 | 8.25 | 9 | 0.56 | 7.03 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 7.12 | 9 | 1.67 | 8.15 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.95 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 6.53 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.48 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.38 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 5.95 | 9 | 1.67 | 6.81 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.81 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 5.86 | 9 | 1.67 | 6.71 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.72 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 6.28 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.19 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.13 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 6.70 | 9 | 1.67 | 7.67 | 9 | 0.33 | 6.54 | 9 | |
| 0.33 | 5.19 | 9 | 1.67 | 5.95 | 9 | 0.33 | 5.07 | 9 | |
| 0.11 | 5.11 | 9 | 0.56 | 5.85 | 9 | 0.11 | 4.99 | 9 | |
| 0.11 | 5.36 | 9 | 0.56 | 6.14 | 9 | 0.11 | 5.23 | 9 | |
| 0.56 | 7.20 | 9.00 | 2.78 | 8.25 | 9.00 | 0.56 | 7.03 | 9.00 | |
| 0.11 | 5.11 | 9.00 | 0.56 | 5.85 | 9.00 | 0.11 | 4.99 | 9.00 | |
Step 4: Calculation of Positive and Negative Ideal Solutions
Positive ideal solution: It represents the perfect scenario where all benefit criteria are maximized and the cost criterion is minimized.
Negative ideal solution: It represents the worst-case scenario where all benefit criteria are minimized and the cost criterion is maximized.
Step 5: Calculate Distance to Ideal Solutions
This step determines how far each alternative is from ideal solutions.
Distance to PIS (D+):
Distance to NIS (D–):
is the weighted normalized score for alternative i under criterion j, for and corresponding value for the PIS for criterion j.
Step 6: Closeness Coefficient
This step involves calculating the closeness coefficient for each alternative using the following equation:
Table 12 and Figure 5 also illustrate that among the three SDGs, i.e. Societal Health care (SDG 3) and Sustainable Living with Welfare (SDG 11) require more manual intervention for decision-making than Energy Security (SDG 7), as judgments over supplies must be carefully observed. Meanwhile, the Automated Deployment of Energy Security (SDG 7) can occur, since it demands less reaction time. The results of the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making process, along with their interpretation, are presented in the next section.
Distances for KSBs using FIPS and FINS
| Distance | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 | Distance | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| d(MIV, D+) | 0.194 | 0.663 | 0.191 | d(MIV, D–) | 1.072 | 1.377 | 1.047 |
| d(PIT, D+) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | d(PIT, D–) | 1.236 | 1.887 | 1.208 |
| d(MIR, D+) | 0.137 | 0.644 | 0.137 | d(MIR, D–) | 1.168 | 1.475 | 1.140 |
| d(VDM, D+) | 0.408 | 0.780 | 0.399 | d(VDM, D–) | 0.832 | 1.139 | 0.813 |
| d(CBC, D+) | 0.737 | 1.049 | 0.720 | d(CBC, D–) | 0.500 | 0.847 | 0.489 |
| d(SDT, D+) | 0.784 | 1.094 | 0.766 | d(SDT, D–) | 0.454 | 0.812 | 0.444 |
| d(BCP, D+) | 0.547 | 0.885 | 0.535 | d(BCP, D–) | 0.689 | 1.006 | 0.673 |
| d(OOM, D+) | 0.317 | 0.722 | 0.311 | d(OOM, D–) | 0.928 | 1.232 | 0.906 |
| d(CMT, D+) | 1.168 | 1.475 | 1.140 | d(CMT, D–) | 0.137 | 0.644 | 0.137 |
| d(AOF, D+) | 1.236 | 1.887 | 1.208 | d(AOF, D–) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| d(ATD, D+) | 1.095 | 1.769 | 1.070 | d(ATD, D–) | 0.145 | 0.166 | 0.142 |
| Distance | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 | Distance | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| d(MIV, D+) | 0.194 | 0.663 | 0.191 | d(MIV, D–) | 1.072 | 1.377 | 1.047 |
| d(PIT, D+) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | d(PIT, D–) | 1.236 | 1.887 | 1.208 |
| d(MIR, D+) | 0.137 | 0.644 | 0.137 | d(MIR, D–) | 1.168 | 1.475 | 1.140 |
| d(VDM, D+) | 0.408 | 0.780 | 0.399 | d(VDM, D–) | 0.832 | 1.139 | 0.813 |
| d(CBC, D+) | 0.737 | 1.049 | 0.720 | d(CBC, D–) | 0.500 | 0.847 | 0.489 |
| d(SDT, D+) | 0.784 | 1.094 | 0.766 | d(SDT, D–) | 0.454 | 0.812 | 0.444 |
| d(BCP, D+) | 0.547 | 0.885 | 0.535 | d(BCP, D–) | 0.689 | 1.006 | 0.673 |
| d(OOM, D+) | 0.317 | 0.722 | 0.311 | d(OOM, D–) | 0.928 | 1.232 | 0.906 |
| d(CMT, D+) | 1.168 | 1.475 | 1.140 | d(CMT, D–) | 0.137 | 0.644 | 0.137 |
| d(AOF, D+) | 1.236 | 1.887 | 1.208 | d(AOF, D–) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| d(ATD, D+) | 1.095 | 1.769 | 1.070 | d(ATD, D–) | 0.145 | 0.166 | 0.142 |
The grouped bar chart compares S D G 3, S D G 7, and S D G 11 across 11 categories. The vertical axis ranges from 0 to 1 at intervals of 0.1. The horizontal axis lists M I V, P I T, M I R, V D M, C B C, S D T, B C P, O O M, C M T, A O F, and A T D. M I V has approximate values of 0.85, 0.73, and 0.94 for S D G 3, S D G 7, and S D G 11, respectively. P I T has values near 1.00, 1.05, and 1.10. M I R has values near 0.89, 0.75, and 0.98. V D M has values near 0.68, 0.65, and 0.78. C B C has values near 0.41, 0.50, and 0.51. S D T has values near 0.38, 0.48, and 0.47. B C P has values near 0.56, 0.59, and 0.65. O O M has values near 0.75, 0.70, and 0.85. C M T has values near 0.12, 0.36, and 0.21. A O F has values near 0, 0.05, and 0.10. A T D has values near 0.13, 0.15, and 0.22.values of KSBs for PWVs with respect to SDGs
Source: Authors’ own work
The grouped bar chart compares S D G 3, S D G 7, and S D G 11 across 11 categories. The vertical axis ranges from 0 to 1 at intervals of 0.1. The horizontal axis lists M I V, P I T, M I R, V D M, C B C, S D T, B C P, O O M, C M T, A O F, and A T D. M I V has approximate values of 0.85, 0.73, and 0.94 for S D G 3, S D G 7, and S D G 11, respectively. P I T has values near 1.00, 1.05, and 1.10. M I R has values near 0.89, 0.75, and 0.98. V D M has values near 0.68, 0.65, and 0.78. C B C has values near 0.41, 0.50, and 0.51. S D T has values near 0.38, 0.48, and 0.47. B C P has values near 0.56, 0.59, and 0.65. O O M has values near 0.75, 0.70, and 0.85. C M T has values near 0.12, 0.36, and 0.21. A O F has values near 0, 0.05, and 0.10. A T D has values near 0.13, 0.15, and 0.22.values of KSBs for PWVs with respect to SDGs
Source: Authors’ own work
4. Results
The KSBs were compared and prioritized for PWVs with respect to SDGs using the FTOPSIS analysis. Figure 5, based on Table 13, highlights the values for various KSBs as per SDGs inclination. It can be clearly observed that the KSB, Prompt Information Transformation (PIT), is crucial to address all three SDGs. Then, the KSBs such as Multi-Stakeholder Interface Visibility (MIV), Multi-Stakeholder Information Reporting (MIR), Objective-Oriented KPIs and Monitoring (OOM) and Visualization-enabled Decision Making (VDM) assist in addressing the SDGs in the best way. One more observation from the figure is that SDG 3 and SDG 11 will be captured better if these KSBs are focused on. However, long-term commitments are required to address SDG7. Figure 6, based on Table 14 below, shows the outcome of closeness coefficient values in decreasing order. The figure illustrates that the KSBs of using the BDIs will offer PIT the most, as all PWVs require the transition ability; the MIR is the second, as maximum PWVs need accounting; the MIV is third, as most PWVs need to be displayed in real time. The OOM is the fourth, as many PWVs require KPI-driven decision-making. VDM is the fifth, as most PWVs need a pictorial representation on the dashboard. The Big-data Compatibility and Performance (BCP), Cloud-Based Computing (CBC), Secure Data Transformation (SDT), Change Management (CMT), AI-enabled Technology Disruption (ATD) and Automated Obligation Fulfilment (AOF) are required in the desired order accordingly for the implementation areas such as power, health care, fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) supplies, education, transportation, housing, woodwork, tribal rehabilitation, scholarship, security, irrigation and public awareness. This addresses RQ3.
Closeness coefficient () values with respect to SDGs
| KSBs | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MIV | 0.846761 | 0.675 | 0.845719 |
| PIT | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| MIR | 0.895019 | 0.696083 | 0.892717 |
| VDM | 0.670968 | 0.593538 | 0.670792 |
| CBC | 0.404204 | 0.44673 | 0.404467 |
| SDT | 0.366721 | 0.426023 | 0.366942 |
| BCP | 0.557443 | 0.531994 | 0.557119 |
| OOM | 0.745382 | 0.630502 | 0.744454 |
| CMT | 0.104981 | 0.303917 | 0.107283 |
| AOF | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ATD | 0.116935 | 0.085788 | 0.117162 |
| KSBs | SDG3 | SDG7 | SDG11 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.846761 | 0.675 | 0.845719 | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 0.895019 | 0.696083 | 0.892717 | |
| 0.670968 | 0.593538 | 0.670792 | |
| 0.404204 | 0.44673 | 0.404467 | |
| 0.366721 | 0.426023 | 0.366942 | |
| 0.557443 | 0.531994 | 0.557119 | |
| 0.745382 | 0.630502 | 0.744454 | |
| 0.104981 | 0.303917 | 0.107283 | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0.116935 | 0.085788 | 0.117162 |
The bar chart presents 11 categories on the horizontal axis and values from 0.000 to 1.000 on the vertical axis at intervals of 0.100. P I T is highest at 1.000. M I R is about 0.805, followed by M I V at about 0.769. O O M is about 0.693, V D M about 0.636, and B C P about 0.545. C B C is about 0.422 and S D T about 0.392. C M T is about 0.193 and A T D about 0.102. A O F is labelled on the horizontal axis with no visible bar.Prioritization of KSBs for PWVs as a technological intervention
Source: Authors’ own work
The bar chart presents 11 categories on the horizontal axis and values from 0.000 to 1.000 on the vertical axis at intervals of 0.100. P I T is highest at 1.000. M I R is about 0.805, followed by M I V at about 0.769. O O M is about 0.693, V D M about 0.636, and B C P about 0.545. C B C is about 0.422 and S D T about 0.392. C M T is about 0.193 and A T D about 0.102. A O F is labelled on the horizontal axis with no visible bar.Prioritization of KSBs for PWVs as a technological intervention
Source: Authors’ own work
Closeness coefficient () values for KSBs
| KSBs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MIV | 1.047 | 3.495 | 0.769 |
| PIT | 0.000 | 4.331 | 1.000 |
| MIR | 0.918 | 3.784 | 0.805 |
| VDM | 1.586 | 2.784 | 0.637 |
| CBC | 2.506 | 1.837 | 0.423 |
| SDT | 2.644 | 1.710 | 0.393 |
| BCP | 1.967 | 2.369 | 0.546 |
| OOM | 1.351 | 3.066 | 0.694 |
| CMT | 3.784 | 0.918 | 0.195 |
| AOF | 4.331 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| ATD | 3.934 | 0.453 | 0.103 |
| KSBs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.047 | 3.495 | 0.769 | |
| 0.000 | 4.331 | 1.000 | |
| 0.918 | 3.784 | 0.805 | |
| 1.586 | 2.784 | 0.637 | |
| 2.506 | 1.837 | 0.423 | |
| 2.644 | 1.710 | 0.393 | |
| 1.967 | 2.369 | 0.546 | |
| 1.351 | 3.066 | 0.694 | |
| 3.784 | 0.918 | 0.195 | |
| 4.331 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| 3.934 | 0.453 | 0.103 |
5. Discussion
The PDCA stages are developed not only to standardize the internal working mechanism of the HSSCs but also to improve deliverance of humanitarian efforts. Hence, the “Do” phase of the PDCA specifically addresses RQ1 to improve efficiency in delivering the public welfare initiatives. Firstly, the SAP subscription is considered expensive for implementation into HSSCs. However, even if the SAP is deployed, it cannot serve the purpose alone of data visualization for decision making. Hence, an SAP-PowerBI integration is proposed. The “Act” phase of the PDCA addresses RQ2 to assist in expedited dispersal of social welfare schemes by standardizing the work procedures in HSSCs for vendor sourcing as shown in Figure 4. The vendor can be upgraded as a preferential vendor based on indexed scoring. The supplier/vendor shall also be considered for continuing business based on supplier/vendor ratings. A feedback/grievance mechanism shall be incorporated with the help of a front-desk system. The quality management approaches, live tracking and project completion information will be captured. The RQ3, i.e. the benefits of digitizing the HSSCs are ranked and highlighted with F-TOPSIS analysis and elaborated in the results section. The visible benefits of digitizing the HSSCs (RQ3) are transition ability, accounting, real-time multiple stakeholder metric display through visualization on the dashboard and KPI-driven decision-making with digital twins comprising AI, blockchain and IoT. The objective is to streamline the procurement process, vendor management and enhance overall operational efficiency.
5.1 Theoretical implications
The results imply that the utility and implementation of digitization and data visualization tools in an HSSC will bring efficiency, visibility and transparency by addressing the PWVs, namely, Electrical power distribution and Electrical infrastructure Services (EES), Solar equipment, Supplies and service Agents (SSA), Transportation on-lease Agents (TLA), Public welfare Education Providers (PEP) (Creating awareness, Child welfare and clothing, Study material distribution, Digital instruments distribution), Public welfare, Sports activity Organizers (PSO), Public Health-care/vaccination Volunteers (PHV), Event management and Catering Services (ECS), Regional/community-level Security Agents (RSA), Occasional Workforce and housekeeping Providers (OWP), Irrigation/borewell Service Providers (ISP), Sanitary Hardware Providers (SHP), Public welfare Awareness using Drama (i.e. Nukkad Natak) for public awareness and sustainability (PAD), FMCG suppliers/essential Supplies Vendors (FSV), Woodwork Service Agents (WSA), Pest control Providers (PSP), Seeds, plants and agri-input providers (SPP), Public welfare temporary Housing, Masonry, maintenance service and machinery Providers (HMP), Underprivileged and Tribal Rehabilitation Providers (UTP), Public welfare motivation building, Incentives/scholarship, Dissipaters (MID) and Water Source Service agents (WSS). Hence, the SDGs, namely, Societal Healthcare (SDG 3), Sustainable Living with Welfare (SDG 11) and Energy Security (SDG 7) will improve.
5.2 Managerial implications
Implementation of business intelligence and other digitization mechanisms helps an HSSC to serve the public welfare better. Thus, this online business intelligence dashboard serves to strategize over PWVs. Additionally, to supervise the events taking place and rank suppliers and service vendors based on key performance indicators. It also enables the organization to introspect more into future implementations and expansions into the domain, such as increasing the number of suppliers, verifying suppliers, etc. The virtualization of the supply chain displays the application of the digital twin concept in HSSCs.
5.3 Limitations and scope for future research
This study covers a nation-level conglomerate’s large-scale philanthropy example and does not reflect a global-scale implementation. However, the technological and managerial implications in general can be used at the global scale. It also only uses the multi-criteria decision-making approach to highlight the benefits of digitization but does not comprise a statistical analysis that can be carried as a future study based on geography and respondents.
6. Conclusions
This study demonstrates a significant leap forward and a force majeure to be taken in HSSCs or CSR activities to serve the public’s welfare efficiently in the given circumstances. This study has identified the visible gaps in the system, the reasons behind them and the ways they can be addressed. The key learnings can be as follows. If there was a problem earlier with keeping track of reliable suppliers and their geographical locations, then it can be solved with a series of approaches adapted for supplier development. The employees of the CSRs may sometimes have a bias toward the target audience they are serving. Thus, the focus area can always be flagged or alerted by on-ground volunteers to adopt a predictive/preventive approach. There may be an evident level of mismanagement in financial matters related to project execution. Thus, business intelligence helps track finances and project status over time. The situation can also arise that the quality of the work performed by the vendor might not match the least expected level. Hence, continuous online supervision and rating-driven performance can bind the vendor to deliver quality. Eventually, for the organization, a predictive mechanism can be developed to work on welfare efforts and plan for upcoming events better. HSSCs will be able to make strategic decisions on how to further expand the welfare schemes and identify operational shortfalls in the offline supply chains as well. They can also modify and improve the online dashboard to improve physical operations. The HSSCs usually address specific SDGs. However, this implementation addresses selected SDGs with more aspects to achieve better welfare.
Declaration
The article does not require ethical committee approval because no personal data of the respondents has been captured, and no sensitive questions were asked.

