Quality Systems and Customer Services


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Quality Systems and Customer Services

  1. 1. <ul><ul><ul><li>Module 9 : Strategic Partnering & Collaboration in Supply Chain </li></ul></ul></ul>SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT Dr Vinh Thai
  2. 2. <ul><li>Some initial observations </li></ul><ul><li>A framework of strategic partnering & collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Supply chain partnership models </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Manufacturer and supplier partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strategic partnering with logistics service providers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSP or retailer supplier partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distributor integration </li></ul></ul>Topics
  3. 3. <ul><li>At the completion of this module you should be able to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>explain the role of strategic partnering in s integrated supply chain management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>explain what is vendor managed inventory and why major retailers are moving towards it </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>outline the options available to firms when deciding on outsourcing logistics functions of the firm </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>outline the scope of strategic partnering in improving supply chain performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>identify the major challenges for new business models and how these challenges can be converted into advantages for firms </li></ul></ul>Learning Outcomes
  4. 4. <ul><li>Textbook: Chapter 6 (undergraduate); Chapter 1, pp. 1-24; Chapter 5, p. 240, pp. 248-252; Chapter 7, pp. 324-325 </li></ul><ul><li>Readings: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Undergraduate: 8.1-8.5 (N26726) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Postgraduate: 8.1-8.5 (N26726); 10.1-10.3 (N09726) </li></ul></ul>Textbook and Readings
  5. 5. <ul><li>We have roughly 30,000 employees now, and $26 billion in revenue this year. If we were vertically integrated, I don’t know how many employees I would have, but it would be some huge numbers. </li></ul><ul><li>- Michael Dell – in Ayers (2001) </li></ul>Food for Thought...
  6. 6. Food for Thought... <ul><li>Recall that SCM is built on the notion of ‘integration’. So why are they, e.g. Dell, doing that, e.g. virtual instead of vertical integration? </li></ul><ul><li>And what is the value to the supply chain? </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>Recall that it is supply chain competing against supply chain, not individual firm against firm in business world today </li></ul><ul><li>It thus makes sense for firms to collaborate so as to maximise ‘strength’ of SC </li></ul><ul><li>Four basic ways to assure business function completion (Simchi-Levi et al. 2003): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Internal activities: vertical integration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Perform activities in-house using internal resources & expertise </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Require large & capable firms </li></ul></ul></ul>Some Initial Observations
  8. 8. <ul><ul><li>Acquisitions: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Acquire another firm that has expertise & resources in other areas </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Full control gained, but culture may clash, effectiveness of acquired company may be lost </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Management is more important than ownership in achieving goals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Arm’s-length transactions: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>For many times, this is the most effective arrangement as specialised firms (suppliers) have economies of scale </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Goals & strategies may not match </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does not lead to long-term strategic advantage </li></ul></ul></ul>Some Initial Observations (C)
  9. 9. <ul><ul><li>Strategic alliances: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Multifaceted, goal-oriented, long-term partnership between companies </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Risks and rewards are shared </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Aiming at achieving long-term supply chain goals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Eliminating acquisition downsides, while more resources committed for mutual goals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Leading to long-term strategic benefits for both partners </li></ul></ul></ul>Some Initial Observations (C) So why is it critical to supply chain success?
  10. 10. <ul><li>The most obvious purposes of strategic partnering & collaboration are to reduce cost & enhance better product quality </li></ul><ul><li>This takes advantage of learning & innovation (coordination & collaboration) between partners </li></ul><ul><li>With partnering firm would be able to focus more on their ‘core competence’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>activities in which it can achieve definable pre-eminence and provide unique value for customers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>activities which are central to a company’s business, and which it can perform more effectively than its competitors </li></ul></ul>A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration
  11. 11. A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration (C) <ul><li>What Does It Take to Have an Area of Core Competency? </li></ul>Source: Coyle e al. (2003)
  12. 12. <ul><li>Strategic alliance or partnership may help achieve benefits in the followings (Simchi-Levi et al. 2003): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adding value to products –Ex: improved time to market, distribution times, partnerships between companies with complementary product lines can add value to both companies’ products </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improving market access – Ex: better advertising or increased access to new market channels, e. g. consumer product manufacturers cooperate to address the needs of major retailers, increasing sales for everyone </li></ul></ul>A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration (C)
  13. 13. <ul><ul><li>Strengthening operations – Ex: improve operations by lowering system costs and cycle times, efficiently and effectively use facilities and resources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adding technological strength – Partnerships in which technology is shared can help add to the skills base of both partners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enhancing strategic growth – Partnerships might enable firms to pool expertise and resources to explore new opportunities by overcoming high entry barriers </li></ul></ul>A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration (C)
  14. 14. <ul><li>Enhancing organisational skills – Alliances provide a tremendous opportunity for organisational learning (Recall Module 8?) </li></ul><ul><li>Building financial strength </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: income can be increased and administrative costs can be shared between partners or even reduced owing to the expertise of one or both of the partners. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But, alliances also limit investment exposure by sharing risk </li></ul></ul>A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration (C)
  15. 15. A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration (C) Source: McLaren, Head & Yuan (2002, p. 355)
  16. 16. <ul><li>What and how information is shared? </li></ul>A Framework for Strategic Partnering and Collaboration: The Value of Information Source: Matchette and Siekel (2005, p. 1)
  17. 17. <ul><li>Two types of partnership ( Ayers 2002): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Vertical partnerships : spanning different businesses in a common supply chain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: partnership between suppliers & retailers, manufacturer & 3PL, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Streamlining existing capabilities </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Horizontal partnerships : spanning different supply chains </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: partnership between shipping companies, airlines, 3PLs, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Creating new strategic capabilities, access to new markets, new products and services, and the like </li></ul></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models
  18. 18. Supply Chain Partnership Models (C) Source: Ayers (2002)
  19. 19. <ul><li>Four types of vertical partnership in consideration are: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>manufacturer and supplier partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>manufacturer and 3PL service providers partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>manufacturer and distributor partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>suppliers and retailers partnership </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models (C)
  20. 20. <ul><li>Traditional adversarial relationship between manufacturer and supplier shifted to a collaborative relationship </li></ul><ul><ul><li>manufacturer and supplier interact like partners </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Main tangible benefits </li></ul><ul><ul><li>integrated SCM through integration of business processes & information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ transparency’ in information and ‘cooperation’ in activities </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Manufacturer-Supplier Partnership
  21. 21. <ul><li>Partnership with suppliers came originally from Japanese business culture, keiretsu , a sort of supplier cooperative or association, was found to be linked with each major manufacturer </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dell: with ‘virtual integration’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>HP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Chrysler Corporation ( Reading 8.1 – N26 726 ) </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Manufacturer-Supplier Partnership (C)
  22. 22. <ul><li>The use of an outside company to perform all or part of the firm’s material management and distribution functions </li></ul><ul><li>3PL relationships are truly strategic alliances: long-term commitment, not based on transactions, multi-functional </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not simply trucking or warehousing </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Most prevalent among large companies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Whirlpool Corporation’s inbound logistics handled by Ryder Dedicated Logistics, IKEA & Maersk, NIKE & PONL (Now MAERSK), etc. </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL
  23. 23. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C) Source: Brown & Allen (2001)
  24. 24. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C) Source: Carding (1998)
  25. 25. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C) Source: Adapted from European Distribution & Logistics, January 2001
  26. 26. <ul><li>Advantages of 3PL partnership (Simchi-Levi 2003, Brown and Allen 2001): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Concentrating capital investment &management on core competencies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gaining access to the latest technology and equipment employed by the third-party provider </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Proving other flexibilities, i.e. geographic locations, in service offerings, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The need for investment in new equipment and premises is avoided </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C)
  27. 27. <ul><ul><li>There are potential cost reductions, for example: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>shared use may give better utilisation of vehicles and warehouses, leading to lower unit costs due to the consolidation of different customers’ demands; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the specialisation of the contractor may allow volume buying of vehicles, warehouses, and mechanical handling equipment and systems; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the labour costs of a third-party operator may be lower </li></ul></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C)
  28. 28. <ul><li>Disadvantages of 3PL partnership (Simchi-Levi 2003, Fernie 1990): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost issue: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Operations at cost plus could be run more cheaply in-house, assuming other variables remain equal, because the third-party logistics company needs to make a profit on its operations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Monitoring and control of costs is easier when the distribution function remains in-house </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The cost of monitoring the performance of the logistics can be high and is also sometimes difficult to achieve effectively </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Some companies do not have the necessary information or expertise to assess which logistics providers are offering good services at competitive prices </li></ul></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C)
  29. 29. <ul><ul><li>Control issue: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>In-house logistics and distribution operations can provide the company with more control over important customer service considerations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Flexibility of operations is also seen as a possible advantage of retaining an in-house distribution function, with the loyalty of the distribution operation not torn between several customers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>There is also the concern that outsourcing could result in a loss of security and that confidential information will be passed to competitors </li></ul></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C)
  30. 30. <ul><li>Fourth-party Logistics (4PL) or supply chain logistics, or Lead Logistics Provider (LLP): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Manages and runs complex logistics operations including resources, control room, and architecture/integrator function </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thought of as supply chain integrator, a firm that “assembles and manages the resources, capabilities, and technology of its own organization with those of complementary service providers to deliver a comprehensive supply chain solution.” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developed from 3PL but covering the broader scope including 3PL, information technology (IT) services, and business process management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A single contact that manages and integrates all kinds of resources and oversees 3PL functions throughout the supply chain for the reach of global market, strategic advantages, and long -term relationship </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C)
  31. 31. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C) Source: Coyle e al. (2003)
  32. 32. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Partnership with 3PL (C) <ul><li>Fifth-party Logistics (5PL): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Developed to serve the e-business market. They are those 3PL and 4PL providers managing all the parties in the supply chain on e-commerce. The key to success in this area is the information technology and system </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Issues & Requirements in Partnership with 3PL <ul><li>Know your own cost, compared with cost of using outsourcing firm </li></ul><ul><li>Customer orientation of the 3PL: how a 3PL fits into the firm’s strategic logistics plan, e.g. flexibility, reliability, cost saving, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Specialisation of 3PL: 3PL whose roots lie in particular area relevant to logistics requirement in question should be considered </li></ul><ul><li>Asset-owning versus non-asset-owning 3PL: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Asset-owning 3PL: significant size, access to HR, large customer base, economies of scale & scope, etc. but bureaucratic, long decision-making cycle </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Non-asset-owning 3PL: limited resources, lower bargaining power, but more flexible, be able to tailor service, etc. </li></ul></ul>
  34. 34. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Implementation Issues in 3PL Partnership <ul><li>Enough time to start-up considerations should be devoted: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The firm must identify exactly what it needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The firm must provide specific performance measures & requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The 3PL must discuss these requirements, (including their realism & relevance) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Effective communication is essential: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Within the firm, managers must communicate to each other & employees on why to outsource & what to expect </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication between the firm and its 3PL is critical, e.g. between information systems, etc. </li></ul></ul>
  35. 35. <ul><li>Other important issues for successful implementation (Simchi-Levi et al. 2003): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respect of confidentiality of data shared </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specific performance measures must be agreed upon </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specific criteria regarding subcontractors should be discussed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Arbitration issues should be considered. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Escape clauses should be negotiated </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Methods to assure achievement of performance goals should be discussed </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Implementation Issues in 3PL Partnership(C)
  36. 36. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Factors for Success in 3PL Partnership <ul><li>Five factors that are critical to the success of a logistics partnership (Bowersox 1992): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selective matching : All organisations have compatible corporate cultures and values </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information sharing : Partners openly share strategic and operational information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Role specification : Each party in the partnership is clear about the specifics of its role </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ground rules : Procedures and policies are clearly spelled out </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Exit provisions : A method for terminating the partnership is defined </li></ul></ul>
  37. 37. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Other Factors for Success in 3PL Partnership <ul><li>Trust </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the most significant factor to succeed in outsourcing logistics because companies have to share information, benefits, and risks to each other </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Performance evaluation: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the major factor to measure the success and maintain the achievement after outsourcing starts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If the performance is not satisfied, the outsourcing can be ceased or failed because the objective of outsourcing is not achieved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To maintain the alliance and succeed in the long term, it is necessary to measure or evaluate the performance regularly </li></ul></ul>
  38. 38. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Other Factors for Success in 3PL Partnership (C) <ul><li>Sharing information & maintaining communication: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>This leverages the efficiency and effectiveness in logistics outsourcing because both partners know what they want and provide the relevant information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of information sharing and communication maintaining can fail the outsourcing especially in strategic partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Top management’s commitment & support: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>If top management are fully committed and support staff in performing their jobs, the whole company will function in a defined direction and thus achieve concrete goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The lack of commitment and support from top management will discourage the operations level’s decision in management, sharing information, and communication </li></ul></ul>
  39. 39. Supply Chain Partnership Models: Other Factors for Success in 3PL Partnership (C) <ul><li>Having clear goals, vision, and roles: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goal, vision and roles are required to avoid confusion between staff and staff, and between two companies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>They should be clarified at the early stage and updated from time to time to prevent the risks that the partners may work in the different directions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other key critical factors can be relationship commitment, sharing benefits and risks, flexibility, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Both sides may have to consider these issues in their specific condition and context </li></ul></ul>
  40. 40. <ul><li>Types of RSL: Quick response, Continuous Replenishment, Advance Continuous Replenishment, VMI (Simchi-Levi et al. 2003) </li></ul><ul><li>Quick Response : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Vendors receive POS data from retailers, and use this information to synchronize production and inventory activities at the supplier </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The retailer still prepares individual orders, but the POS data is used by the supplier to improve forecasting and scheduling </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Example: Milliken and Company: The lead time from order receipt at Milliken’s textile plants to final clothing receipt at several of the department stores involved was reduced from eighteen weeks down to three weeks </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Retailer-Supplier Partnerships (RSP)
  41. 41. <ul><li>Continuous Replenishment : Vendors receive POS data and use it to prepare shipments at previously agreed upon intervals to maintain agreed-upon levels of inventory </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wal-Mart, Kmart </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Advanced Continuous Replenishment : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Suppliers may gradually decrease inventory levels at the retailer’s store or distribution center as long as service levels are met </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inventory levels are thus continuously improved in a structured way </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Kmart </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Retailer-Supplier Partnerships (C)
  42. 42. <ul><li>Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplier/vendor is usually manufacturer, but can also be a distributor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplier/vendor is in charge of ordering & inventory replenishment decisions, thus reduce cost & improve service level through information sharing & eliminating factors of bullwhip effect </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>It also leads to better manufacturing scheduling, supplies to retailers, improved service level with coordinated distribution & transshipment of inventory between retailers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>VMI Projects at Dillard Department Stores, J.C. Penney, and Wal-Mart have shown sales increases of 20 to 25 percent, and 30 percent inventory turnover improvements </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Retailer-Supplier Partnerships (C)
  43. 43. <ul><li>Advanced information systems on both sides </li></ul><ul><li>Top management commitment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information must be shared </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Power and responsibility within an organization might change (for example, contact with customers switches from sales and marketing to logistics) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mutual trust </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information sharing: manufacturer serves many competing retailers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Management of the entire supply chain: inventory of manufacturer and retailers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Initial loss of revenues </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Requirements for Effective RSP
  44. 44. <ul><li>Inventory ownership: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Traditionally retailer owns inventory when received </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In VMI supplier owns the goods until they are sold (consignment relationship) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Why would a firm do this? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Performance measures must be agreed upon: POS accuracy, fill rate, inventory level, inventory turns, lead time </li></ul><ul><li>Confidentiality </li></ul><ul><li>Communication & cooperation: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: the case of First Brands & Kmart </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Important RSP Issues
  45. 45. <ul><li>Fully utilize system knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consider the partnership between White-Hall Robbins (W-R), who makes over-the-counter drugs such as Advil, and Kmart </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W-R initially disagreed with Kmart about forecasts, and in this case, it turned out that W-R forecasts were more accurate because they have a much more extensive knowledge of their products than Kmart does </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>This implies the ability to control the bullwhip effect </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Advantages and Disadvantages of RSP
  46. 46. <ul><li>Other advantages: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Decrease required inventory levels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improve service levels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decrease work duplication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improve forecasts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Disadvantages: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Expensive advanced technology is required </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplier/retailer trust must be developed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplier responsibility increases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expenses at the supplier often increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Why? How can this be addressed? </li></ul></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Advantages and Disadvantages of RSP (C)
  47. 47. <ul><li>Manufacturers treat their distributors as partners </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Value of distributors & their relationship with end users are appreciated </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Manufacturer can use information about customer needs & wants acquired by distributors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Necessary support, i.e. parts & services are provided to distributors by manufacturer </li></ul></ul><ul><li>In modern distributor integration, expertise & inventory located at one distributor is available to the others (Simchi-Levi et al. 2003) </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: Caterpillar & their dealers </li></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Distributor Integration (DI)
  48. 48. <ul><li>DI is used to address both inventory-related & service-related issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Parts are shared across the distributor network </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specialized service requests are steered to appropriate dealers or distributors </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Each distributor can check inventories of others; they are also contractually bound to exchange parts for agreed-upon remuneration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How does this improve supply chain performance? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What does it need to be realised? </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Distributor Integration (C)
  49. 49. <ul><li>Issues in DI </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incentives for dealers – are they giving away competitive advantages? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Skills and responsibilities are taken from some dealers/distributors </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What is required? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Trust, e.g. be assured about long-term alliance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pledges </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Guarantees from the manufacturer, in terms of commitment of resources & effort </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Advanced information systems </li></ul></ul>Supply Chain Partnership Models: Distributor Integration (C)
  50. 50. <ul><li>Ayers, J. B. 2001, Handbook of supply chain management , CRC Press. </li></ul><ul><li>Ayers, J.B. 2002, ‘Supply Chain Management (SCM), the Wheel and the Manufacturing Engineer’, CASA/SMA Blue Book Series, http://www.ayers-consulting.com/download/SME%20Blue%20Book%20for%20Posting.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Bowersox, D. 1992, Logistical Excellence , Digital Press, Burlington Quinn, J. & Hilmer, F. 1994, ‘Strategic outsourcing’, Sloan Management Review, vol. 35, pp, 43–55. </li></ul><ul><li>Brown, M. & Allen, J. 2001, ‘Logistics out-sourcing’, Handbook of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Elsevier Science. </li></ul><ul><li>Carding, T. 1998, Centralized sites serve Pan-European distribution needs, http://www.supplychainbrain.com/archives/1.98.PanEuropean.htm?adcode=50 </li></ul><ul><li>Coyle, J. J., Bardi, E. J. & Langley, C. J. 2003, The Management of Business Logistics: A Supply Chain Perspective , 7th edn, South-Western/Thomson Learning, Mason, OH. </li></ul><ul><li>Kim, B. 2005, Supply Chain Management , Mastering Business in Asia, John Wiley & Sons (Asia). </li></ul><ul><li>Matchette, J. & Seikel, M.A. 2005, ‘Inquiries and insights on supply chain collaboration’, ASCET , vol. 7, http://www.ascet.com/documents.asp?d_id=3472 </li></ul><ul><li>McLaren, T., Head, M. & Yuan, Y. 2002, ‘Supply chain collaboration alternatives: Understanding the expected costs and benefits’, Internet Research , vol. 12, no. 4. </li></ul><ul><li>Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P. & Simchi-Levi, E. 2003, Designing and Managing the Supply Chain , 2nd edition, McGraw-Hill, USA. </li></ul>References
  51. 51. <ul><li>Textbook: Chapter 9 (undergraduate); Chapter 4 (postgraduate) </li></ul><ul><li>Readings: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Undergraduate: 10.1-10.5 (N26726) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Postgraduate: 10.1-10.5 (N26726) </li></ul></ul>Preparation for next Module: Supply Chain and Product Design Issues