Supply chain flexibility is widely seen as one major response to the increasing uncertainty and competition in the marketplace. That is to say a firm with a flexible supply chain is likely to survive and grow its market share. Despite several evidences suggesting that performance improvements are related to SCM, managing supply chains today and practicing flexibility has become more difficult due to the fact that business environments are highly competitive, businesses are going more global, dynamic, and customer‐driven. Therefore, this study assessed the path between supply chain flexibility and firm performance using supply chain agility as a moderating variable. A total of 77 manufacturing and service firms operating in the Kumasi metropolis were selected as sample. The sample was made up of key management staff as well as non-management operatives of the firms. Questionnaires was used as instrument for data collection. The findings revealed that SC Flexibility and SC Agility positively correlated firm performance (p<0.01/0.05). Additionally, moderating SC Agility on SC Flexibility, produced a positive effect, however the effect was insignificant and this implies that SC agility does not significantly moderate the positive impact the SC Flexibility has on firm performance. SC flexibility better predicts firm performance through SC Agility as a moderator and not moderator. Therefore, it is rather necessary to appreciate the individual roles that both SC Flexibility and SC Agility play to ensure value for customers and thereby contributing to firm performance and not necessarily moderating each other.
The competitive atmosphere of modern businesses makes it essential for organizations to highly consider the supply chains. This study focuses on supply chain for palm industry in Sistan and Baluchestan Province. First, the problems involved in the palm industry are discussed and solutions are provided; then a supply chain model for date industry is introduced and requirements to increase the performance and agility are discussed. At the end, to evaluate the performance, two models are presented.