Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Supply Chain Eff...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)provides the nec...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)decision making....
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Consumer satisfa...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)This efficiency ...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013) of inter-influ...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)This efficiency ...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Thus, the effici...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)The main contrib...
World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Cooke, J.A. (199...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Supply Chain Efficiency Evaluation: A Contemporary Theoretical Model

558

Published on

Supply chain management has gained a prodigious amount of attention from both practitioners and industriessince the last decade. Until now, there are many articles, and dissertations that address supply chain management, but there is still a lack of integration between the current efficiency evaluation methods and practical requisites for the supply chain management. A contemporary efficiency evaluation method is proposed to provide necessary support for efficiency improvement in supply chain management. The proposed method will address this aim in the
following main aspects: a basic supply chain model; concrete and unconcrete efficiency measurement in various dimensions; a cross-organizational efficiency evaluation; and weighted average and fuzzy set theory method.

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
558
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Supply Chain Efficiency Evaluation: A Contemporary Theoretical Model"

  1. 1. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Supply Chain Efficiency Evaluation: A ContemporaryTheoretical ModelJanvier-James Assey MbangGlorious Sun School of Business & Management,Donghua UniversityP.O.box: 200051, 1882 West Yan an road, Shanghai, ChinaAbstractSupply chain management has gained a prodigious amount of attention from both practitioners and industries sincethe last decade. Until now, there are many articles, and dissertations that address supply chain management, butthere is still a lack of integration between the current efficiency evaluation methods and practical requisites for thesupply chain management. A contemporary efficiency evaluation method is proposed to provide necessary supportfor efficiency improvement in supply chain management. The proposed method will address this aim in thefollowing main aspects: a basic supply chain model; concrete and unconcrete efficiency measurement in variousdimensions; a cross-organizational efficiency evaluation; and weighted average and fuzzy set theory method.Keywords: Supply chain, Efficiency evaluations, Theoretical Model1. IntroductionIn contemporary business environments, producers face high pressure of customers requirements in goods qualityamelioration, customization, and demand responsiveness. In consideration of supporting the business under thesepressures, many companies are striving to develop long-term collaborations with a few adequate suppliers andcooperate with them in inventory control and product development. Furthermore, the high competitive requirementsof customer responsiveness and cost efficiency have encouraged companies to pursue strategic partnership withsuppliers, downstream customers to exploit their competences and create new value to end consumers. This allianceis known as supply chain and the control, organizing and planning of the supply chain activities is called supplychain managementEven though supply chain management has become common practice across all enterprises, and many papers relatedto theories and practices of supply chain management have been published, the topic of efficiency evaluation ofsupply chain management does not receive enough attention therein (Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu,E.,2001; Mithun J. Sharma and Song Jin Yu,2010). As a fundamental management tool, efficiency evaluationInternational journal ofSupply ChainManagementAvailable on: http://wajbas.webs.com/Journal of Supply Chain Management (2013)
  2. 2. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)provides the necessary support for efficiency improvement in pursuit of supply chain superiority. However, manycritical deficiencies pervert the current efficiency measurement systems from making important contribution to thedevelopment of supply chain management. With the purpose to fill this gap, the present paper attempts to propose acontemporary efficiency evaluation method for supply chain.Efficiency evaluation is an important element of effective control and decision making, as well as planning It canprovide essential feedback information to disclose progress, augment communication and motivation, and identifyproblems (Waggoner, D.B., Neely, A.D. and Kennerley, M.P., 1999;Amos Sola Ogunsiji and Oluwatosin ObaOgunsiji,2011). In supply chain management context, efficiency evaluation can further ease integration among thesupply chain members. The evaluation results disclose the effects of potential opportunities strategies in supplychain management. There are many articles and papers that have addressed efficiency evaluation in supply chainmanagement. Beamon Martin (1999), Jian Cai, Xiangdong Liu, Zhihui Xiao,Jin Liu (2009) identifie the followingmeasures: flexibility, output, and resources. Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E.. (2001) develop a modelfor evaluating the efficiencies from, operational, tactical, and strategic levels in supply chains; this model principallyconcerns supplier, delivery, inventory and logistics costs, and customer service.In spite of the importance of efficiency evaluation, there is very little literature available for efficiency evaluation ofsupply chain management, especially that deals with measures selection and system design (Beamon, 1999; Jian Cai,Xiangdong Liu, Zhihui Xiao,Jin Liu,2009). The contributions of the efficiency evaluation in use are lowered byexistence of many imperfections in supply chain management context. Classic finance-based efficiencymeasurement has already received wide judgment on short-term profit orientation, stimulating local optimization,thus failing to support constant improvement. In addition, efficiency evaluations in supply chain context are alsoassociated with many problems, as asserted below (Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E., 2001, AsgharSabbaghi and Ganesh Vaidyanathan ,2008): being not linked with adequate strategy; being lack of equalized approach to integrating non-financial and financial measures; being lack of system thinking, in which a supply chain must be perceived as one whole entity, and being loss of supply chain context, and thus stimulating local optimization.With these imperfections above-mentioned, an effective efficiency evaluation method has always been underconsiderable discussion, and necessitates further research investigation.This paper is organized as following: this part is the preliminary part to supply chain management and efficiencymeasurements in supply chain management. Part two is literature review. Part three introduces the proposedefficiency evaluation method. Part four is conclusion.2. Literature reviewSupply chain collaboration helps in strengthening the customer responsiveness, increase of flexibility for changingmarket conditions, amelioration of customer service, and also benefits to retain customers. The primary initiative ofsupply chain integration could be antedated to 1992, when fourteen trade association sponsors created the EfficientConsumer Response (ECR) group (Robins, 1994; Barratt and Oliveira, 2001; Ursula Y. Alvarado andHerbert Kotzab ,2001). Then in 1995, five enterprises: the Warner-Lambert, Wal-Mart Stores, Manaugistics, andSAP worked on the Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment project. The objectives of the projectwere to ameliorate the business (Cooke, 1998; Felix TS Chan & SH Chung,2004). Collaborative Planning,Forecasting and Replenishment attempted to bring organizations (manufacturers and retailers) together to makecollaborative planning, encompassing promotion sales, purchasing, logistics planning, and replenishment. Blair, N.(1998) and Mark Powell, Paul Childerhouse (2010).asserted that Collaborative Planning, Forecasting andReplenishment had won the support of organizations in the grocery, general commodities, and clothing industries.Practitioners in supply chain management are many. Barratt, M. and Oliveria, A. (2001) and Margaret L. Sheng(2006) pointed out that two important bottlenecks encountered in implementation of supply chain integration werethe lack of perceptibility of real customer demand, and the joint relationships in the area involved collaborative
  3. 3. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)decision making. New, S. and Ramsay, J. (1997) also asserted that there was a danger of arbitrary costs’ distributionand advantages in practice. This is due to the inequality of power between different organizations. Neuman, J. andSamuels, C. (1996) suggested that adequately sharing the benefits from the supply chain was important. Pfohl,Hans.Christian. and Buse, H.P. (2001) had interrogated that what type of organization, in the supply chain, shouldbe the fundamental decision maker to decide all of the operation and coordination decisions. Stank, T.P., Daugherty,P.J. and Autry, C.W. (1999) demonstrated that there was a vigorous support in using automatic inventoryreplenishment in cross-organizational partnership.2.1 Supply chain efficiency measuresAnderson, P., Aronson, H. and Storhagen, N.G. (1989) pointed out that, in evaluating logistics efficiency, a strategy ofevaluation is necessary for the successful realization, management and planning of the different activities, which includethe business logistics function. Thor, C.G. (1994) asserted that there should be a group of measures. This is a collectionof four to six efficiency measurements, generally encompassing quality, productivity, and customer satisfaction, which,together, provide an all-embracing view of results but also provide a characteristic value. Stainer, Alan (1997) pointedout that an efficiency measure is used to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of a current system. Efficiencymeasurements are also used to design proposed systems, by determining the values of the decision variables that grantthe most judicious level of efficiency. Generally, efficiency measurements can be categorized as quantitative andqualitative in nature.2.1.1 Quantitative efficiency measurementsQuantitative efficiency measurements are those measures that may be straightforwardly depicted numerically.Quantitative supply chain efficiency measurements may be classified by goals that are based on profit or cost, productivity,and customer responsiveness’ measures. Since quantitative measurements are something that can be depicted andmanaged easily, any qualitative measurements should be interpreted into quantitative measurements. Some illustrationsof quantitative efficiency measurements are as follows:a. Measurements based on costCost reduction: Cost is generally reduced for a whole supply chain. For instance transportation cost reduction.Sales increase: Increase the amount of sales dollars.Profit increase:Increase revenues less costs.Inventory investment reduction: Reduce the amount of inventory costs so minimization of the inventory level isnecessary.Return on investment increase: Increase the ratio of net profit to capital that was used to produce that profit.b. Measurements based on customer responsiveness:Fill rate increase: Increase the portion of customer orders filled on time.Product lateness reduction: Reduce the amount of time between the agreed goods delivery date and the current goodsdelivery date.Customer response time reduction: Reduce the amount of time required from the time an order is placed until the timethe order is received by the client, such as order lead time.Lead time reduction: Reduce the time that is required from the time an order has started its production until the timethe order is ready for shipment.Function duplication reduction: Reduce the volume of business functions that are provided by more than one businessentity.c. Measurements based on productivity:Capacity utilization increase: Increase the capacity utilization.Resources utilization increase: Increase the resources utilization.2.1.2 Qualitative efficiency measurementsQualitative efficiency measurements are those measurements for which there is no direct numerical measure, althoughsome aspects of them may be measured. For instance:
  4. 4. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Consumer satisfaction: The extent e to which consumers are satisfied with the goods and service received, and can beapplied to external consumers and internal consumers. Consumer satisfaction mainly includes three components: pre-transaction satisfaction, transaction-satisfaction, and post-transaction satisfaction.Flexibility: The extent to which the supply chain can respond to fluctuation in the demand pattern.Material flow and information integration: The extent to which functions within the supply chain can pass transportmaterials and information easily.Effective risk management: The relations within the supply chain include inherent risk. Effective risk managementdepicts the extent to which the influence of these risks is reduced.Supplier efficiency: A measure to depict how good a supplier can deliver raw materials to manufacturing facilities ingood conditions and on time.3. A contemporary efficiency evaluation methodIn consideration of solving the above- mentioned problem, a contemporary efficiency evaluations method is presented inthis paper. The proposed method is a model that uses fuzzy-set theory to assess the integrated efficiency of compoundsupply chain. Fuzzy set theory is generally employed to address the real situation in measurement and judgmentprocesses. It can deal with uncertain information to help decision making. The measurement’s procedure is very simple:after choosing the adequate efficiency measurements as mentioned above, data should be collected for examination. Theefficiency measurements are weighted by determining the normalized importance weight through a geometric scale oftriangular fuzzy number. Then, fuzzy efficiency grade is defined to determine the fuzzy evaluation result and anefficiency score can be estimated. In conclusion, the evaluation results can be defuzzified to an efficiency index, which canbe used to show the efficiency of the system under evaluation.3.1 Process-based model and System-thinking viewThe goal of supply chain management is to create the most value, not only for some enterprises, but for the entiresupply chain network, even encompassing the end consumers. In this context, favorable supply chain evaluationsystems do more than just concentrate on partial areas, but rather look across the entire network. This paperproposes that an integrated system-thinking view is used to suit the essence of supply chain management, in whichthe supply chain efficiencies should be evaluated beyond the classic boundaries of organizations and functions. Then,an efficiency evaluation system that bridges the key business aspects will facilitate seamless integration and globaloptimization of supply chain efficiencies.It is difficult to control supply chains than just to define it. A supply chain is an inter-connected network of variousmembers and complex relationships (Lambert, D.M., Cooper, M.C. and Pagh, J.D., 1998). It is common that, inpractice, a company participates in many supply chain, and a company has not all its divisions and functionsinvolved in one supply chain with the same integration. This complexity also confuses efficiency evaluation ofsupply chains, and then requires building an effective model to facilitate the examination and evaluation of supplychain management.This research attempts to build a process-based method to facilitate the practical supply chains from theircommonalities and essence. In general, a process is a set of activities designed to perform particular functions andgenerate particular outputs. In this model, a process refers to a series of activities from original producers andsuppliers till retailers add value for the end consumers. The core business processes, which are of critical importanceto corporate strategies and goals, are proposed to identify and enclose herein as the framework of this efficiencyevaluation systems. For any supply chain, the basic structure and processes can be described as indicated in figure 1,in which six core processes are connected.The key processes identified can be further classified into activities and sub-processes to address their efficiencies.For instance, the inbound logistics can be classified into such sub-processes as purchasing, transportation, supplybase management. These key processes and sub-processes consist of a hierarchy of supply chain model, which is themodel of the proposed efficiency evaluation systems.
  5. 5. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)This efficiency evaluation method is based on the process model of the supply chain, so the measurements can beformulated from process efficiency.Any process employs particular company resources, achieves the planned objectives and functions, and then addsvalue to goods that are delivered to end consumers. The consumed resources, and planned operations are theimportant efficiency of processes. Power, Time, capital, labor facilities, and information are generally the resourcesthat processes employ. Generally, they can be evaluated in terms of their amount per output unit. The efficiency onexpected outcomes and operations can be evaluated according to their planned operations. For instance, purchasingprocess is principally responsible for material replenishment and supply base management. Thus it can be assessedfrom such efficiency as quality and reliability of material replenishment, and supplier-purchaser relationship.Reliability in transportation and delivery, and flexibility in production, material supply, and order delivery havereceived more attention in efficiency evaluation of supply chains.For each process and its sub-processes that need to be evaluated, the corresponding measurements are identified andclassified into the processes and measurements hierarchy. This composes the framework of the efficiency evaluationsystems.For each process and its sub-processes that need to be assessed, the corresponding measurements are identified andclassified into the processes and measurements hierarchy (figure 2)Figure1: Supply chain flow chartFigure 2: Generic design of the PMH3.2 Relevant efficiency measurementsThese efficiencies should include such areas as those: of important concern to supply chain current objectives and strategies;
  6. 6. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013) of inter-influence and of current concern among the supply chain collaborators; and concerned by both internal collaborators and external customers.3.3 Efficiency evaluation teamworkIn this paper, an efficiency evaluation team is proposed. This efficiency evaluation team is composed of the representativesfrom different areas of the supply chain, which can be department directors, plant managers, and process supervisors. Themembers of efficiency evaluation team serve principally as the appraisers, and provide point of views for each efficiency.They come from different management areas and have wide experiences, and thus can cover a wide range of perspectives.Concurrently, the weights of their point of views are not necessarily the same. When combining their point of views, theweights will be assigned. There are varieties of ways to determine the weights; for instance, by the supply chain’s topofficials, or balancing the opinions of efficiency evaluation team members.3.4 The innovative evaluation algorithmThis part is devoted to describe the evaluation algorithm and application of evaluation results. The data that indicatedifferent efficiencies are compared against the evaluation scales that are set by the efficiency evaluation team throughmeasuring the corresponding efficiency objectives and operation environments. An efficiency grade in forms of fuzzy setis acquired to indicate the result of each efficiency measurement. The measurement results of different measurements byeach efficiency evaluation team member are integrated with the weighted averaging aggregation method. The aggregatedresults are defuzzified and employed to measure the supply chain efficiency impartially.3.4.1 Measure and processes’ relative weightsConsidering the changing goals and strategies of supply chains, the prerogatives of individual processes and theirdifferent dimensions of efficiency should diverge from each other in efficiency measurement. Therefore, it is necessary toset relative weights for them to aggregate the evaluation results. General scale of comparison ratio with crisp numbersfails to address the fuzziness. Until now, many literatures have suggested new applications by using fuzzy set theory.This research proposes a mathematic scale of triangular fuzzy numbers (Boender Boender, C.G.E., de Graan, J.G. andLootsma, F.A.., 1989).3.4.2 Fuzzy efficiency grade and measurement scaleAfter obtaining the relative weights of each efficiency measurements, it is still absurd to measure any efficiency withoutits related context about histories and goals. Furthermore, the current evaluation methods, in which the current efficiencyare assessed through being divided by the expectations, have such imperfections as ignoring operation context, andlosing the critical information arising from the ambiguity of human judgment (Zadeh, Lotfi Asker (1965)). Thisresearch creates a fuzzy efficiency grade and measurement scale to address these issues.When assessing efficiency, the appraisers of the efficiency evaluation team consider the planned history and objective, aswell as the related operation environments, and then set the measurement scale in forms of the interval, varying fromthe agreeable bottom of efficiency to the completely satisfactory efficiency. The effect of the supply chain context andassociated operation environment being measured and taken into account, the agreeable bottom and completelysatisfactory efficiency are not inevitably same to efficiency objective and history, respectively.The measurement scales’ judgment process includes fuzziness as well. Accordingly, the measurement results areacquired and denoted by fuzzy numbers through the following steps: first, comparing current efficiency against theirmeasure scales, and then indicating with the crisp numbers varying from 0 to 10 as script marking method does;second, codifying the acquired crisp number into fuzzy efficiency grade set. The efficiency set in the form of a fuzzyvector . These 6 grades indicate the gradational measure results varyingfrom the excellent to the worst. The triangular fuzzy numbers defines these grades following:
  7. 7. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)This efficiency grade set in the finite universe of discourse is defined by a set ofordered pairs as following: Where a mapping is named “themembership function of the fuzzy set G”, and shows the extent of belongingness. is the crisp number incomparison of current efficiency against measurement scales.3.4.3 Defuzzi6fing and aggregating the measure resultsIn evaluation activity, the point of views of all the appraisers in the efficiency evaluation team are required tointegrate; in order to get the general picture of one process the measure results of individual measurements and itssub-processes are necessary to integrate as well. As annotated above, due to the various backgrounds in differentareas, the point of views of the appraisers from diverging areas should be given distinct weights. The relativeweights of different efficiency measurements and sub-processes can be deduced from the changing supply chainstrategies and objectives.Finally, these results are efficiency grades in forms of fuzzy sets .According to their definitions, these efficiencygrades that denote the measure results symbolize the connotations of approximation "about". That is, these 6 gradesdenote "about 10", "about 8", and "about 0". In this connection, these efficiency grades can be defuzzified into thecrisp numbers from 10 to 0 through weighted averaging the grade set . The defuzzified crisp number(efficiency index), indicates the synthetic measurement of the holistic efficiency of different areas of supply chainsby the appraiser team.3.5 The applications of the efficiency indexThe efficiency index is a global, single, and integrated process efficiency score. According to the design of thisefficiency evaluation method, this integrated result is the weighted integrative measurement of the entire supplychain process efficiency with the multi-dimensions. This number provides a concise means to analyze and measurethe efficiency in the supply chain systems for their general managers. Put in the range [0, 10], this result can bemeasured. Because the evaluation result of each process on the higher layer is aggregated from the evaluation resultsof sub-processes, the bad results can be captured layer by layer in the PMH. Thus the proneness and strengths ofsupply chain processes are identified. Furthermore, the parallel processes can be compared and the enigmatic nodescan be found. Next, from a dynamic point, the efficiency of all the business processes of the supply chain systemcan be measured and recorded on the base of a monthly period. With a series of evaluation results at normalintervals, the trend of efficiency of each business process can be examined and irregular efficiency can be disclosedclearly. This information can help corporate managers identify the issues in the management of supply chainprocesses.4. ExampleIn this part we propose an example to illustrate the evaluation method proposed above. Assume cost is one ofmeasurements in a supply chain network to show its efficiencies and there are 4 appraisers in the efficiencyevaluation team with the relative weights.WT= (0.10,0.20,0.25,0.45) of their corresponding points of views Note that weights=1,as they must normalizedbefore putting into the equation above.Firstly, one appraiser makes his judgment for the measure. Suppose that the efficiency history of this cost is $22 perunite, and the efficiency goal requires this cost to be minimized to $19 per unit .The appraiser first determines themeasure scale of cost, to suppose which is the interval as [21, 19].Assume the current efficiency on production costis average 19.45 per unit, according to the daily operation records, the efficiency score and efficiency grades areestimated as following:Efficiency score = ,Efficiency grades:PA (7.75) =0, PE (7.75) =0, PC (7.75) =0, PD (7.75) = , PE (7.75) = , PF= 0
  8. 8. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Thus, the efficiency grade set can we formulated as follows:PG= (7.75) =Or )This is the evaluation result of cost that has been judged by the first appraiser. Assume the efficiency grade sets bythe other three appraisers, in form of row vector, to be as follows:These vectors compose the fuzzy efficiency grade matrix as following:=Then the evaluation results of these four appraisers, with their corresponding weights are aggregated as following:.W=This vector shows the aggregated point of view of the evaluation of cost efficiency by the four appraisers. It takesthe form of fuzzy efficiency grade set.The efficiency index is:Undoubtedly “7.13” is not a satisfactory index with respect to the 10- point scale. The supply chain network shouldbe refined in order to improve this efficiency measurements defined by appraisers, the individual efficiency indexcan be estimated through the same procedures.5. ConclusionsThis research discloses the key problems in the current efficiency evaluation method in supply chain managementcontext. In order to support efficiency improvement in supply chain management, this research proposes a cross-organizational efficiency evaluation method from a system view.Process-based framework, relevant efficiency measurements, teamwork measurement, and fuzzy evaluationalgorithm are summarized, and some propositions are given. These designs support integrated evaluation of theholistic efficiencies of supply chains. Particularly, the introduction of fuzzy set theory in evaluating efficiencies isbeneficial, because this fuzzy method addresses the actual situation of human judgment with fuzziness in evaluationactivity. The defuzzified results provide facile access to benchmark the efficiencies.
  9. 9. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)The main contribution of the proposed approach is to provide a strong model to calculate an efficiency e index of anefficiency evaluation in a supply chain network to deal with both intangible and tangible and efficiencymeasurements. The model integrates fuzzy set theory, which can symbolize ambiguities in real-life applications.This method can be used to replace a classical pair wise comparison technique such as Analytic Hierarchy Process(Saaty, 1980). De facto, Saatys pair wise comparison engenders the asymmetrical scale of weight.With the proposed efficiency evaluation method, supply chain managers can smoothly assess the efficiencies of theentire system, and then analyze the efficiency of their strategies, and determine the potential opportunities. Thisfeedback information eases more decision making and efficiency improvement in supply chain management.To optimize the supply chain model, much efficiency evaluation should be considered. But, the following importantquestion should be answered first: how to combine all quantitative and qualitative efficiency measurements tocompose a significant figure to support decision making? In most cases, two methods can be used for themeasurement; especially, mathematical simulation and optimization. Mathematical optimization methods encompassaccurate algorithms that are settled to find an optimal solution. Additionally, heuristic algorithms can be used to findgood solutions, but not inevitably the optimal solutions. Future research could consolidate all efficiencymeasurements through similar algorithms so that a single efficiency index can be discovered to represent the entirenetwork, regardless of individual efficiency index.AcknowledgementsThe authors gratefully acknowledge the con-structive and helpful comments of two anonymous referees on the earlierversion of the manuscript.ReferencesAmos Sola Ogunsiji and Oluwatosin Oba Ogunsiji (2011).Comparative Ports Performance Efficiency Measurementin Developing Nations: A Matching Framework Analysis (M FA) Approach. European Journal of Social Sciences.Volume 18, Number 4 (2011)Anderson, P., Aronson, H. and Storhagen, N.G. (1989).Measuring logistics performance, Engineering Costs andProduction Economics, Vol. 17, pp. 253-62.Asghar Sabbaghi and Ganesh Vaidyanathan (2008). Effectiveness and Efficiency of RFID technology in SupplyChain Management: Strategic values and Challenge. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic CommerceResearch ISSN 0718–1876 .VOL 3 / ISSUE 2 / AUGUST 2008 / 71-81Barratt, M. and Oliveria, A. (2001) .Exploring the experiences of collaborative planning initiatives, InternationalJournal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 266-89.Blair, N. (1998).Minding the store: with inventory reduction measures under way in the warehouse, executives areeyeing similar strategies based on store-level data, Supermarket News, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 81-2.Beamon, Martin (1999). Measuring supply chain performance, International Journal of Operations and ProductionManagement, Volume19 No. 3, pp. 275-92.Boender, C.G.E., de Graan, J.G. and Lootsma, F.A. (1989).Multi-criteria decision analysis with fuzzy pairwisecomparisons, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 29, pp. 133-43.
  10. 10. World Academic Journal of Business & Applied Sciences-Journal of Supply Chain Management-Vol.1 No.1 (2013)Cooke, J.A. (1998).Into the great wide open, Logistics Management and Distribution Report, Vol. 37 No. 10, pp.84-7.Felix T.S Chan and S.H. Chung (2004). A multi-criterion genetic algorithm for order distribution in a demand drivensupply chain. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Volume 17, Issue 4, 2004Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and E.Tirtiroglu,(2001). Performance measurement and metrics in a supply chainenvironment, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 1/2, pp. 71-87.Jian Cai, Xiangdong Liu, Zhihui Xiao,Jin Liu (2009). Improving supply chain performance management: Asystematic approach to analyzing iterative KPI accomplishment. Decision Support Systems 46 (2009) 512–52Lambert, D.M., Cooper, M.C. and Pagh, J.D. (1998). Supply chain management: implementation issues and researchopportunities, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1-19.Margaret L. Sheng (2006). Global integrated supply chain implementation: the challenges of E-procurement. DOI:10.4018/978-1-59140-611-2.ch006, ISBN13: 9781591406112, ISBN10: 1591406110, EISBN13: 9781591406136.Global Integrated Supply Chain SystemsMark Powell, Paul Childerhouse (2010).Retail value management. nternational Journal of Electronic CustomerRelationship Management. Inderscience Enterprises Ltd. Volume 4, Number 3/2010.Mithun J. Sharma and Song Jin Yu (2010) .Measuring Supply Chain Efficiency and Congestion. Advance onlinepublication: 23 November 2010. Engineering Letters, 18:4, EL_18_4_08Neuman, J. and Samuels, C. (1996). Insights from industry supply chain integration: vision or reality, Supply ChainManagement: An International Journal, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 7-10.New, Steve. and Ramsay, J. (1997). A critical appraisal of aspects of the lean chain approach, European Journal ofPurchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 93-102.Pfohl, Hans.Christian. and Buse, H.P. (2001). Inter-organizational logistics systems in flexible production networks,an organizational capabilities perspective, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 388-408.Robins, Gabriel, (1994).Sailing into ECRs uncharted waters. Stores, Vol. 76 No. 10, pp. 43-4.Saaty, Thomas.L. (1980). The Analytical Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.Stainer, A. (1997). Logistics:a productivity and performance perspective, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 2 No. 2,pp. 53-62.Stank, T.P., Daugherty, P.J. and Autry, C.W. (1999). Collaborative planning: supporting automatic replenishmentprograms, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 75-85.Thor, C.G. (1994). Measures of Success - Creating a High Performing Organization, Oliver Wight, Essex Junction,VT.Ursula Alvarado Y. and Herbert Kotzab (2001). Supply Chain Management: The Integration of Logistics inMarketing. Industrial Marketing Management Volume 30, Pages 183-198.Waggoner, Douglas.B., Neely, Andy.D., and Kennerley, M.P. (1999). The forces that shape organizationalperformance measurement systems: an interdisciplinary review, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol.60, pp. 53-60.Zadeh, Lotfi Asker (1965). Fuzzy sets, Information and Control, Vol. 8, pp. 338-56. Stainer, Alan (1997). Capitalinput and total productivity management.Management Decision, 35:3-4, pp. 224-232.

×