THE ROLE OF SECURITY IN THE FOOD SUPPLIER SELECTION DECISION by M. Douglas Voss University of Central Arkansas David J. Closs Michigan State University Roger J. Calantone Michigan State University Omar Keith Helferich Central Michigan University and Cheri Speier Michigan State University ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research was supported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Grant number N-00014-04-1- 0659), through a grant awarded to the National Center for Food Protection and Defense at the University of Minnesota. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not represent the policy or position of the Department of Homeland Security. INTRODUCTION Firms are increasingly concerned regarding the threat of security failures to supply chain continuity. Sixty-nine percent of Chief Financial Officers, treasurers, and risk managers surveyed at global 1000 companies in North America and Europe indicated that security related hazards and supply chain disruptions are a major threat to revenue (Elkins et al. 2005). Supply chain disruptions have also been shown to devalue stock price by as much as nine percent (Radjou 2003). In order to ensure firm viability, some firms have initiated supply chain security management initiatives. Closs and McGarrell (2004, p. 8) define supply chain security management as: “The application of policies, procedures, and technology to protect supply chain assets (product, facilities, equipment, information, and personnel) from theft, damage, or terrorism, and to prevent the introduction of unauthorized contraband, people, or weapons of mass destruction into the supply chain.” Many supply chains are vulnerable to security failures because it is difficult to justify the expense of security programs (Unysis 2005). Most firms are currently bearing security costs internally with little hope of recouping expenses through price increases passed on to their customers (EyeforTransport 2004). It is estimated that the U.S. economy incurs an extra annual cost of $151 billion to fund security initiatives (Russell and Saldanha 2003). Motor and air carriers alone incur an extra $2 billion (Wolfe 2001). The practice of bearing costs internally cannot continue forever and will eventually be passed on to customers. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2009 127