Suchergebnisse

PurposeLogistics service providers (LSPs) are important actors for creating logistics performance in supply chains. However, there is little previous research on how they handle the performance management process. The purpose of this paper is to explore the handling of the performance management process and its obstacles from the perspective of LSPs.Design/methodology/approachA multiple‐case study is conducted with the three largest LSPs in Sweden.FindingsThe handling of the performance management process shows similarities among LSPs in selecting performance variables, defining metrics, and capturing real‐time data. The differences are found in target setting, in report‐making and analysing, and in the perceived demand for performance management. The following three perceived obstacles are found for supply chain performance management: lack of understanding and knowledge; poor capabilities for adapting performance metrics definitions; and lagging IT solutions for performance report‐making. The findings indicate possibilities for an increased supply chain scope where activities are handled by the partner that has the best capabilities, improving efficiency in supply chains.Research limitations/implicationsThe study contributes to performance management theory by providing exploratory knowledge of the supply chain performance management process and its obstacles from the perspective of three LSPs. The study focuses on large LSPs and has respondents at the managerial level.Practical implicationsThe study reveals differing supply chain performance management practices among LSPs, which implies that customers can choose an LSP that handles performance management in the way required.Originality/valueLittle previous research includes LSPs in studies of supply chain performance management. In particular it is unusual to have the perspective of LSPs and apply case‐based methodology.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how the performance management (PM) process may be affected by the design and contents of logistics service performance (LSP) contracts between customer and supplier.Design/methodology/approachA case study of four manufacturing companies' way of working with contracts towards their suppliers was conducted.FindingsDifferent design and contents of contracts, containing some patterns related to industry, company size and degree of formalization, were found. The PM process with contracts was split up into one setup and one execution sub‐process. Once the setup was made, all resources were focused on measuring, analysing and improving LSP. The changed management of the PM process may be one factor explaining the improved LSP all studied customer companies perceived.Research limitations/implicationsAn explorative approach with few cases limits the possibilities to generalize the results to analytical generalization.Practical implicationsThis paper has illustrated how companies can apply LSP contracts.Originality/valueFew empirical and especially case‐based studies of LSP contracts were found.

PurposeThe main objective of this paper is to describe state‐of‐the‐art practices for handling logistics performance management in dyadic relationships. Another objective is to explain the relationship between logistics performance management practices and customers' expected logistics performance.Design/methodology/approachA logistics performance management model was developed and applied to 136 dyads of Swedish manufacturing companies and their most important suppliers. Two linked survey studies were conducted.FindingsA state‐of‐the‐art description of the activities in logistics performance management is provided, addressing the following questions in dyadic relationships: how often are expectations updated? Who is the customer's contact person? What is the contract situation? Which actor (customer or supplier) formulates performance targets, and who measures logistics performance? Some of these issues' relationships to customers' expected logistics performance were verified.Research limitations/implicationsThe contribution of the paper is mainly descriptive. A logistics performance management model together with descriptions of how the various activities are executed in dyadic relationships is presented. It is also explanatory, showing that some of these practices influence customers' expected logistics performance.Practical implicationsThis study provides knowledge of the impact of contact persons and contracts on customers' expected logistics performance, which could increase the possibilities for the supplier to meet customers' expectations. The importance of a collaborative discussion on performance management is emphasized.Originality/valueDyadic research approaches are rarely performed in logistics research. Studies highlighting the link between logistics performance measurement and logistics performance are also few. This paper will hopefully remedy this neglected area.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess the existence of logistics performance gaps in the dyadic order fulfillment process.Design/methodology/approachA literature review on service quality, logistics quality and logistics performance generated a conceptual model, four hypotheses and a scale for measuring logistics performance. Dyads of customers (large manufacturing companies) and their most important suppliers were addressed in two similar surveys. A total of 136 such dyads were acquired.FindingsThe dyadic order fulfillment process contains four significant logistics performance gaps, even though important business dyads are addressed. Customers' expectations are not perceived by customers as being fulfilled, customers' expectations are over‐targeted by suppliers, but suppliers' internal performance decreases performance. Finally, suppliers overestimate their performance compared with the ratings of customers.Research limitations/implicationsBy applying a service quality model to a logistics process, new knowledge about logistics performance was obtained. A tested conceptual model and a tested scale for measuring logistics performance are theoretical contributions.Practical implicationsThe model can be used as a basis for deeper communication between customer and supplier in order to improve logistics performance in the dyadic order fulfillment process.Originality/valueA true dyadic approach is rare in logistics research. As no comprehensive studies of the "mechanisms" of the dyadic order fulfillment process were found, the results can be valuable to both customers and suppliers.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explain to what degree supplier relationship obstacles and operational tool obstacles hinder supply chain integration of the performance management (PM) process.Design/methodology/approachThis is a hypothetical‐deductive study, where the results are based on a survey of 257 purchasing managers in nine manufacturing industries in Sweden.FindingsSupplier relationship obstacles (lack of trust, different goals and priorities and lack of parallel communication structure) were found to significantly hinder PM process integration the most, which is in accordance with previous studies. The operational tool obstacles (manual performance data management and non‐standardized performance metrics) were seen on an overall level to hinder PM process integration. However, the hypothesis that non‐standardized performance metrics hinder PM process integration was not verified, which does not accord with previous studies.Research limitations/implicationsThe use of single informants in data collection presents a limitation of the study.Practical implicationsContrary to previous studies, the paper has applied a broader, quantitative survey methodology, and hence provides deeper knowledge about the impact of obstacles on PM process integration. It identifies critical obstacles which are important for industry to overcome.Originality/valueMost previous studies of supply chain PM are either case‐ or experience‐based. Here, hypotheses are tested on empirical data and general results presented regarding lack of supplier relationships and operational tools as obstacles for supply chain integration of PM.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how to integrate the performance management (PM) process of delivery service in customer/supplier dyads.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a multiple case study of six customer/supplier dyads of manufacturing companies.FindingsThe analysis focuses on describing and comparing the activities of the PM process. Most activities show low levels of integration in the dyads studied. Defining metrics and target setting are considered most important to integrate. Lack of common metrics definitions and ERP deficiencies were important obstacles for integration. Research issues related to four areas of supply chain PM are discussed.Research limitations/implicationsThe study ends with a number of suggestions for further research on the PM process in supply chains. Proceeding into these studies is necessary for increasing knowledge about PM.Practical implicationsThe paper reveals practical problems and outlines practical issues in integrating and handling the PM process in dyads, especially when measuring delivery service using the on‐time delivery metric. It also presents a model for describing and integrating the PM process and its activities.Originality/valuePractical implications and generation of multiple issues for further research applying a dyadic approach in supply chain PM, a research approach that is quite uncommon.

PurposeThis paper aims to describe the extent of supplier access to customer forecast information and the perceived quality of such information and also to explain the impact of forecast information access and forecast information quality (FIQ) on supply chain performance.Design/methodology/approachFIQ is defined, and a measurement instrument is developed from theory. The analysis is based on a survey of the most important suppliers of 136 Swedish companies.FindingsFindings show that a large proportion of the suppliers receive customer forecasts, but that the FIQ is lower further upstream in the supply chain and, in some variables, lower for make‐to‐order suppliers. The greatest information quality deficiency of the forecast was that it was considered unreliable. The only significant difference in supply chain performance found between make‐to‐stock suppliers with and without access to forecast was related to the use of safety stock in finished goods inventory.Research limitations/implicationsThe study contains two types of conclusions: those developed from the conceptual discussion in the theoretical framework and those of the empirical study. In the theoretical framework, measurement instruments for FIQ and supply chain performance (corrective actions, preventive actions and customer service performance) were developed. The study identified several empirical relationships, but it was conducted on a sample with a lot of variation.Practical implicationsThe understanding of the performance impact of FIQ. FIQ shows quality deficiencies on all variables, which indicates room for improvement.Originality/valueResearch on supply chain information quality as well as dyadic research approaches are rare.

PurposeContradictory sustainability priorities and perspectives among supply chain actors in greening transportation can be challenging. Several of these contradictions can be described as paradoxes (i.e. interests that are logical in themselves, but become irrational when perceived together). The aim of this study is to increase the understanding of paradoxical tensions hampering the greening of transportation in transport buyer–supplier dyads.Design/methodology/approachA case study method targeting greening transportation in two transport buyer–supplier dyads was applied, followed by an analysis with a point-of-departure in paradox theory.FindingsTensions related to performing, belonging, learning and organizing paradoxes in greening transportation were identified. These tensions arise as a consequence of actions, perspectives and other tensions, within three identified loci in individual companies and in dyads.Research limitations/implicationsBy identifying examples of tensions through the lens of paradoxes in a particular setting, this study provides an increased understanding of why the transition toward green transportation goes slow, despite the high ambitions of involved actors. The suggested framework provides a novel contribution to the literature that further increases the understanding of tensions, by providing additional insights into where tensions arise and how actions, perspectives and tensions in one place of a locus spectrum can disseminate along that spectrum.Originality/valueThis study is original because it applies paradox theory and the four categories of performing, belonging, learning and organizing within the field of greening transportation, and in particular as a lens to study interactions between different actors.

PurposeFlexibility is one enabler of efficient use of resources and is therefore an antecedent to sustainability. The purpose of this article is to identify supplier flexibility variables in, and related to, the order-to-delivery (OTD) process and categorize them into a framework, followed by empirically exploring the framework.Design/methodology/approachA perception-based survey was sent to Swedish purchasing managers. 289 responses were received. After descriptive gap analysis, exploratory factor analysis was applied to structure the responses into factors. This formed the basis for hierarchical linear regression analysis, explaining supplier flexibility.FindingsA conceptual framework, specifying supplier flexibility into volume, delivery and information exchange dimensions and relating these dimensions to the OTD process, was developed. Significant negative gaps between actual and demanded volume flexibility and delivery flexibility were identified, while positive gaps were found for information exchange flexibility. The factor analysis revealed three factors. The regression analysis verified that OTD-related information exchange flexibility and OTD-related volume and delivery flexibility explain the variation in OTD-specific flexibility and are important antecedents for supplier flexibility in the OTD process.Research limitations/implicationsA contribution to research is the framework – with defined, related and empirically validated flexibility types.Practical implicationsThe study proposes a perception-based way to capture supplier flexibility in the OTD process, which is of practical relevance when evaluating suppliers.Originality/valueIdentifying, conceptualizing and capturing types of supplier flexibility in the OTD process is new related to academic literature. Also the wide empirical study mapping supplier flexibility gaps is unique in its focus.