International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

Mikko Kärkkäinen; Sanna Laukkanen; Sami Sarpola; Katariina Kemppainen

2007 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600030710752505

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to investigate how and for what purposes companies use interfirm information systems (IS) in supply chain management (SCM). Further, the drivers for the different uses of interfirm IS are investigated. Design/methodology/approach – Two a priori constructs – the roles of interfirm IS in SCM and the drivers for interfirm IS use in SCM – are derived from the prior research. The case study approach is applied to analyze empirical data collected from 16 Finnish companies in order to assess the validity of the constructs. Findings – The findings suggest that the proposed three categories – transaction processing, supply chain planning and collaboration, and order tracking and delivery coordination – represent well the different types of interfirm IS uses in SCM. Further, the findings suggest that the drivers behind these different categories of interfirm IS use differ. Practical implications – The different purposes for which interfirm IS can be used in the management of supply chains are demonstrated. Further, the reasons for adopting interfirm IS for the different purposes are shown to vary and not to be as self‐evident as anticipated in the prior research. Originality/value – The study addresses the lack of empirical research on how companies actually use IS in managing supply chain activities. It also contributes to the extant knowledge on the factors that drive companies to use IS in specific ways in their SCM efforts.

Frans Cruijssen; Olli Bräysy; Wout Dullaert; Hein Fleuren; Marc Salomon

2007 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600030710752514

Purpose – To provide empirical evidence on the level of savings that can be attained by joint route planning and how these savings depend on specific market characteristics. Design/methodology/approach – Joint route planning is a measure that companies can take to decrease the costs of their distribution activities. Essentially, this can either be achieved through horizontal cooperation or through outsourcing distribution to a logistics service provider. The synergy value is defined as the difference between distribution costs in the original situation where all entities perform their orders individually, and the costs of a system where all orders are collected and route schemes are set up simultaneously to exploit economies of scale. This paper provides estimates of synergy values, both in a constructed benchmark case and in a number of real‐world cases. Findings – It turns out that synergy values of 30 per cent are achievable. Furthermore, intuition is developed on how the synergy values depend on characteristics of the distribution problem under consideration. Practical implications – The developed intuition on the nature of synergy values can help practitioners to find suitable combinations of distribution systems, since synergy values can quickly be assessed based on the characteristics of the distribution problem, without solving large and difficult vehicle routing problems. Originality/value – This paper addresses a major impediment to horizontal cooperation: estimating operational savings upfront.

Lisa M. Ellram; Wendy L. Tate; Craig R. Carter

2007 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600030710752523

Purpose – The primary purposes of this paper are to add support to the existing three‐dimensional concurrent engineering (3DCE) theoretical framework and to identify issues that currently hinder the adoption of 3DCE. Design/methodology/approach – While 3DCE has been suggested as a way to improve new product development success and supply chain performance, the research on 3DCE is in its infancy, largely conceptual, or based on two, rather than all three aspects of 3DCE. To help bridge the gap between concept and theory for 3DCE, this paper provides a cross‐disciplinary perspective, incorporating literature from supply chain management (SCM) and logistics, operations management, marketing channels, and general management and strategy, to help ground the theory of 3DCE. Based on this literature, testable research propositions are developed. Findings – Based on the review of the literature, there is substantial theoretical grounding for 3DCE and evidence that it should provide beneficial outcomes to organizations. 3DCE is also a very useful theoretical lens as researchers become more concerned with taking a systemic view of supply chain and organizational performance. Effectively using 3DCE as a lens may require different research approaches, such as systems dynamics and supply chain mapping. Practical implications – This research provides insights into the relatively low adoption rates of 3DCE in practice. Successful 3DCE requires top management support as well as functional support. It is not simply a SCM tool. Originality/value – From a research perspective, this paper helps provide support for using 3DCE as a theoretical lens for grounding future research. It also provides an insight into research methods that might be most useful in gaining greater understanding of 3DCE practices.

Jeff Hoi Yan Yeung; Willem Selen; Zhou Deming; Zhang Min

2007 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600030710752532

Purpose – This research widens the scope of the use of postponement by addressing how the generic supply chain structure and information sharing/relationship among supply chain actors affects the postponement decision, based on empirical data of Chinese manufacturers in the Pearl River Delta. Design/methodology/approach – Case analysis, cross‐case comparisons, semi‐structured interviews. Findings – A cross‐case analysis including study of the downstream structure, downstream relationship, upstream structure, upstream relationship, production method and inventory position produced a postponement classification into five categories: balanced structure without customer information; customer dominated; manufacturer dominated; balanced structure with loose suppliers, and finally virtual supply chain. Based on this classification, two propositions are postulated: when a supply chain has a balanced structure, it should use speculation or production postponement. When the supply chain has an unbalanced structure, it should use purchasing postponement or product development postponement. Research limitations/implications – This study is exploratory in nature, and more empirical data is needed to further validate the postulated results. Another limitation of the study is in its measurement of postponement, measured in this instance by the production method and inventory positions used. Other characteristics of postponement may be included in future research. Practical implications – This research has extended the scope of the use of postponement by addressing how the generic supply chain structure and information sharing/relationship among supply chain actors affects the postponement decision. Originality/value – Addresses postponement on the level of the supply chain, rather than company‐level. Addresses how the supply chain structure (balanced/unbalanced) and information sharing/relationship among supply chain actors affect the postponement decision.