4.a comparative

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm

BIJ
18,3 A comparative study of dates
export supply chain performance:
the case of Oman and Tunisia
386
Msafiri Mbaga
Natural Resource Economics Department,
College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University,
Muscat, Oman
Mohammed Suleiman Rashid Al-Shabibi
Ministry of Agriculture, Muscat, Oman, and
Houcine Boughanmi and Slim Mohamed Zekri
Natural Resource Economics Department,
College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University,
Muscat, Oman

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach to the
dates export supply chain (DESC) in Oman and Tunisia (taking Tunisia as a benchmark) to identify
gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries. Second, is to
utilize the information generated to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC.
Design/methodology/approach – Four benchmarking dimensions are developed, each dimension
with a number of key performance indicators (KPIs). The KPIs are then used in the benchmarking exercise.
Findings – Results show that Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the four dimensions.
Originality/value – The study enables the readers and the stakeholders to gain some valuable
insights in the subject matter. A careful analysis of the findings should enable Oman policy makers
and stakeholders to produce an industry action plan to correct the gaps and take the lead.
Keywords Sultanate of Oman, Tunisia, Exports, Performance criteria, Benchmarking
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The date industry is an important component of the Oman economy and date is a leading
cash crop. According to the 2005 census, there are an estimated 7.8 million date palm
trees grown throughout the Sultanate, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area,
employing a significant number of Omani people directly and indirectly. Statistics
shows that in 2006 the Sultanate ranked ninth in the world in date production far behind
its neighbors such as Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (Table I).
Date production has been declining since 2001, the year date production reached its
highest level in the Sultanate in recent years (FAO, 2008). Export disincentives which
Benchmarking: An International include poor quality output, absence of a well-coordinated supply chain and lack of
Journal aggressive export promotion, together with the 2002-2004 drought, have been widely
Vol. 18 No. 3, 2011
pp. 386-408 recognized as being the reasons behind the decline in date production.
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited Based on Table I, we see that Oman and Tunisia have consistently ranked ninth and
1463-5771
DOI 10.1108/14635771111137778 tenth, respectively, among the ten leading date producers in the world. However, even

Dates export
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
supply chain
World 4,966 5,447 5,624 6,172 6,503 6,724 6,653 7,092 6,682 6,704
1. Egypt 741 840 906 1,007 1,102 1,090 1,100 1,166 1,170 1,170
2. Iran 877 918 908 900 900 879 885 880 997 997
3. Saudi Arabia 649 648 712 712 712 830 884 901 970 970
4. Iraq 750 913 764 932 907 866 868 875 404 404 387
5. UAE 288 290 535 757 757 757 757 760 859 859
6. Pakistan 537 722 580 613 630 625 630 622 497 507
7. Algeria 303 387 428 366 370 418 492 470 516 491
8. Sudan 180 200 240 332 330 330 330 330 328 328
9. Oman 185 236 282 280 298 239 220 231 247 259
10. Tunisia 95 103 103 105 112 115 111 122 125 125
Table I.
Note: 1,000 tons Main countries
Source: FAO Statistics producing dates

though Tunisia ranked tenth in terms of date production, the country ranked fourth
(Table II) in terms of date export volume. Furthermore, Tunisia ranked ﬁrst and third
with regard to date export value and date export unit value, respectively. In 2005, for
example (Table II), while Tunisia exported 50,180 metric tons (40 percent of its
production) at a price of US$2,008 per metric ton, Oman managed to export only 4,090
metric tons (1.65 percent of its production) at a price of US$290 per metric ton.
It is therefore clear from that Tunisia is performing better than other countries in the
region in terms of export unit value and export value. In addition, even though Tunisia
accounts for only 2 percent of world dates production, its share of global exports in value
is around 30 percent (FAO and Table I).
Given that an estimated 7.8 million date palm trees are grown throughout the
Sultanate of Oman, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area, one would have
expected Oman to be a leading date producer and exporter in the region. Statistics
presented above, however, show that Oman is lagging behind in terms of date export
volume and export value, while Tunisia is leading (Table II).

Country Volume (Mt) Country Value (6,000 US$) Country Unit value (US$)

1. Iran 117,060 Tunisia 100,769 Israel 4,480
2. Pakistan 84,060 Iran 68,495 USA 3,188
3. Saudia 51,450 Israel 40,836 Tunisia 2,008
4. Tunisia 50,180 Saudia 32,456 Algeria 1,702
5. UAE 23,880 Pakistan 29,775 Jordan 942
6. Algeria 10,860 Algeria 18,492 Saudia 635
7. Israel 9,120 USA 13,723 Iran 585
8. Egypt 8,880 UAE 8,830 Egypt 551
9. USA 4,300 Egypt 4,893 UAE 370
10. Oman 4,090 Jordan 2,155 Pakistan 354 Table II.
11. Jordan 2,290 Oman 1,184 Oman 290 Dates export volume,
value and unit value
Note: Volume multiplied by unit value may not be exactly equal to total export value because of for the main exporting
rounding countries based on 2005
Source: FAO Statistics statistics

BIJ Furthermore, for the last nine years (2001-2009) as indicated in Table III, the internal
18,3 consumption (IC) of dates in Oman was only 49 percent of total dates production,
This leaves 51 percent of dates produced in Oman potentially available for export.
Therefore, there is a need for benchmarking so as to find ways to improve the dates
export supply chain (DESC) in Oman. Based on these facts, Tunisia is taken as a
benchmark or best practice among date-producing countries.
388 The purpose of this study is therefore two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking
approach employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia (Tunisia as a
benchmark) so as to identify gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the
export supply chain in the two countries. Second, is to utilize the information generated
(regarding the gaps) to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. This paper
is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a description of the DESC in Oman and Tunisia.
Section 3 reviews the literature on benchmarking and supply chain. Section 4 presents the
methodology and includes the various key performance indicators (KPIs) used to identify
and quantify gaps in Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs. Section 5 presents the results
and discussion. Lastly, Section 6 presents the conclusions and policy recommendations.

2. A description of Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs
2.1 Oman DESC
For the purpose of this paper, dates supply chain (DSC) is defined as the various stages
through which dates are channelled starting from farm until it reaches the consumers.
Generally, the DSC includes three main stages:
(1) production and harvesting;
(2) initial processing at farm level, processing and packaging at factory level and
transport to the port; and
(3) handling of dates at the international markets by wholesalers, retailers and
consumers.

DESC, therefore, can be defined as steps through which dates undergoes, starting from
post-harvest until dates arrives at the port of the exporting country. Stage two in
the DSC is more or less the DESC itself. Activities in stages one and two of the DSC are
performed in the exporting country – in this case Oman and Tunisia. Stage three
activities are performed in the importing country.
The marketing channels are a set of interdependent organizations involved in the
process of making a product or service available for use or consumption. The DESC
in Oman is one of the marketing channels that include: initial processing at farm level,

Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010a

TP 298 239 220 231 252 259 261 267 273 280
IC 123 125 118 120 123 127 132 134 133 135
Export 13 9 9 5 5 5 9 7 7 9
Excess 162 105 93 106 124 127 120 126 133 136
Table III. IC as a percentage of TP 41 52 54 52 49 49 51 50 49 48
Oman dates production,
consumption an export, Note: aIndicate a forecast for 2010 based on a time trend
2001-2010 Source: Ministry of Agriculture (Statistics Department)

processing and packaging at factory level and transportation to the port. Generally, Dates export
it is how the dates are produced, sorted, graded, processed, packaged and transported supply chain
that determines their final export market value. Furthermore, safety and quality
management of dates along the DESC plays a very important role in the determination of
their final market value. Currently, there are around four dates factories (exporters) in
Oman beside several small processing units mostly for local consumption.
389
2.2 Tunisian DESC
Tunisia is the world-leading producer of Deglet-Nour date variety and most of the
dates-producing oases are concentrated in the Southern part of the country. Tunisia
possesses approximately 50 percent of the world’s Deglet-Nour palm trees. The official
production figure in 2006 was 125,000 tons for all varieties, of which about two-thirds
were Deglet-Nour. The dates export sector in Tunisia is ranked third at export level after
olive oil and seafood products. Dates production in Tunisia is characterised by five types
of date varieties: Deglet-Nour, Allig, Khouat Allig, Kenta and Farmla. But Deglet-Nour is
the most popularly produced variety and better appreciated as a noble variety because of
its quality and flavour. Significant investments in modern Deglet-Nour plantations and
an aggressive marketing strategy have led to a steady increase in exports. While exports
ranged between 15,000 and 20,000 tons in the first half of the 1990s, exports reached
25,000 and 50,180 tons in 2000 and 2005, respectively.
Dates destined for the export market are treated in more than 30 processing factories
registered for exports. Dates export account for about 40 percent of total production (TP).
Although Tunisia accounts for only 2 percent of world date production, the country
ranks first in terms of export value and fourth in terms of export quantity (Table III). This
is mainly due to the high market value of the Deglet-Nour variety, a good quality product,
well appreciated in foreign markets, leading to higher market share. In general, Tunisia
is well positioned in high-value markets with high purchasing power. Compared to its
direct competitors, Tunisia represents 55 percent of EU imports in value. Tunisian dates
are mainly exported to European countries accounting for more than 81 percent of total
date imports and other Arab countries in second position with 15 percent of total date
imports. Around 70 percent of Tunisian dates exports are processed dates. Tunisia’s top
20 clients in the international markets during 2005 are as presented in Table IV.
The DESC in Tunisia is organized into somewhat comprehensive and complex
marketing channels. All the agents are involved: producers, collectors, conditioners,
exporters, wholesalers, etc. As most of these market participants operate individually and
independently, it is difficult to monitor and control their actions. As a result, it is difficult to
provide an estimate of the exact volumes of dates handled by each one. Date marketing
takes place mostly in the last quarter of the year (October to December), and during the
holy month of Ramadan. Given the strong tradition of date consumption in Tunisia, a large
share of production is consumed within the country and especially in the producing areas.
Dates for the domestic market are often bought by wholesalers and semi-wholesalers from
the collectors (Laajimi, 2002). Decisions concerning the distribution of dates between
export markets and domestic markets seem to be taken by collectors. They are the main
marketing agent in the supply chain. They ensure the supply of dates to wholesalers,
exporters and conditioning and packaging industries. Exports operations are undertaken
´´
either by foreign trade enterprises (Societes de Commerce International) or by the
conditioning and packaging industries – dates factories (Laajimi, 2002).

BIJ
Country Export quantity (tons)
18,3
1. France 16,601
2. Morocco 9,405
3. Italy 6,179
4. Spain 4,794
390 5. Germany 4,095
6. Belgium 1,765
7. UK 1,700
8. Russia 1,388
9. Switzerland 909
10. Turkey 855
11. Indonesia 588
12. Senegal 533
13. Canada 492
14. Holland 476
15. Mauritania 407
16. Hungary 355
17. UAE 346
18. Malaysia 291
Table IV. 19. Greece 257
Tunisia’s clients in the 20. Bosnia and Herzegovina 233
international markets
during 2005 Source: GidF (2005)

3. Literature review
Benchmarking also known as “best practice benchmarking” is an approach used in
management and particularly strategic management, in which organizations evaluate
various aspects of their processes in relation to best practice, usually within the same
sector – for example, in this case, Tunisia and Oman in relation to DESC. This then
allows organizations to develop plans to adopt such best practice, usually with the aim
of improving their performance even beyond that of the best practice. Benchmarking
may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which
organizations continually seek to challenge their practices. The benchmarking process
is, therefore, valuable to producers and or companies in opening up many different
ideas about processes, approaches and concerns (Allan, 1997).
The benchmarking approach was ﬁrst developed in the USA during the late 1970s by
Xerox Corporation. It has since then been an effective way of improving productivity
and competitiveness, and in fact today benchmarking has become a widely practiced
and generally accepted method of assessing performance. The benchmarking approach
is very versatile; it has been applied in many areas, from assessing public policy, as in
Helgason (1997); in the food industry, as in the UK Food and Drink National Training
Organisation (2001, 1998); in dairy, as in Anon (2005); in strategic planning in
agriculture, as in Ronan and Taylor (2004); in food and beverage, as in Deloitte (2009); in
grain supply chain, as in Barnes (2007); in food and drinks, as in Luther and Abdel-Kader
(2006); international competitiveness in agriculture, as in Thelwell and Ritson (2006);
in analyzing information ﬂow to farmers, as in Verissimo and Woodford (2005); in
agriculture performance indicators, as in Wilson et al. (2004); in analyzing good
agricultural practices, as in UNCTAD (2005); in analyzing fruits and vegetable supply

chain, as in UNCTAD/WTO (2007); in the area of quality management and productivity Dates export
improvement, as in UNIDO (2002); in agriculture in relation to fresh produce quality supply chain
and safety management, as in Garcia and Poole (2003); in locating and leveraging
manufacturing best practices, as in Brandt and Taninecz (2004); in assessing microfinance
institutions across countries, as in Stephens (2004); in agriculture in relation to greenhouse
gas emissions, as in CLAN (2006); in assessing government organizations, as in Howard
and Kilmartin (2006); in evaluating and comparing the performance of federal agencies, as 391
in USDA (2008); in evaluating the sustainability performance of food supply chains, as in
Yakovleva et al. (2009) and many more.
The process of benchmarking is more than just a means of gathering data on how well
a company performs against others. It is also a method of identifying new ideas and new
ways of improving processes to better meet the expectations of customers. According to
Omachonu and Ross (1994), the ultimate objective of benchmarking is process
improvements to meet and whenever possible exceed customer expectations.
Benchmarking as a methodological tool has been gaining attention among academics
and practitioners as a means of strengthening the ability to compete (Yasin, 2002). The
benchmarking approach has an internal dimension whereby an organization critically
examines itself in search of the best practice, as well as an external dimension whereby the
organization analyses its industry and other domains in an attempt to identify external
and competitive practices, which may be implemented in its operating environment
(Yasin, 2002). In this study, both the internal and external dimensions are implemented.
To date, there is no single benchmarking process that has been universally adopted.
The wide appeal and acceptance of benchmarking has led to the emergence of various
benchmarking methodologies. The most prominent methodology is the 12-stage
methodology by Camp (1989), which consists of the following:
(1) selection of the subject in advance;
(2) clear definition of the process;
(3) identification of the potential partners;
(4) identification of data sources;
(5) data collection from selected partners;
(6) gap analysis;
(7) establish process differences;
(8) target future performance;
(9) communicate;
(10) adjust goal;
(11) implement; and
(12) review/recalibrate.

A shorter version of the methodology as proposed by Camp (1989) includes six steps,
namely:
(1) identify problem areas;
(2) identify other industries that have similar processes;
(3) identify organizations that are leaders in these areas;

BIJ (4) survey companies for measures and practices;
18,3 (5) visit the “best practice” companies to identify leading edge practices; and
(6) implement new and improved business practices.

Broadly, this shorter version will be adopted in this study.
This study seeks to analyze the DESC in Tunisia and Oman in order to identify
392 gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries.
The information generated will then be used to put forward recommendations to
improve Omani DESC. Generally, supply chain encompasses all the facilities, functions
and activities performed in the process of producing and delivering a service or a
product (in this case dates) from suppliers to the final customer (Russell and Taylor,
1998; Sparling and van Duren, 2003). More specifically, the concept of supply chain
management (SCM) can be defined as collaboration among actors in a supply system,
from the primary producer to the final retailer, with the aim of satisfying the consumer
at lower costs possible. SCM in relation to agricultural commodities therefore focuses
on improving efficiency and effectiveness in the system in order to deliver a wide range
of safe and desirable agricultural products in a cost-effective manner.
The performance of firms and the industry particularly with respect to food safety
and quality standards is strongly influenced by the structural characteristics of the
food chains, the strategies of individual firms and the level of coordination of the food
system (Poole et al., 2002). With recent concerns regarding food-borne diseases, now
food supply chains must be efficient, transparent and “traceable” as consumers expect
to be able to trace each food item back to its earliest production stage. Traceability
helps to increase consumer confidence on the product and hence value. Supply chains
that are less flexible and inefficient, where supply chain processes and procedures
cannot be upgraded very quickly, and products are not traceable, become a major
impediment to trade (Garcia Martinez and Poole, 2003).
Implicit in the benchmarking framework is the notion of gap analysis, namely, the
difference between the level of operations in a given organization and that within a best
practice company. Comparisons made within benchmarking are often about
understanding the gap. Making comparisons against best practice or stated aims
allows companies to assess the nature of the improvement that they have to make in
order to catch or surpass world-class competitors. Analysis of gaps from base (current
performance) to benchmark (current performance level of the best companies) helps
companies to prioritize resource allocation (Balm, 1996).
Identification of critical performance measures (or KPIs) and their comparison with
similar performance measures of “Best in Class” organizations is at the heart of
benchmarking (Bhutta and Huq, 1999). Identification of the proper measures is a
fundamental part of the study as they represent the yardsticks, which tell people how
well they have done, and as such motivates them to achieve higher targets (Zairi, 1994).
The information sought in benchmarking usually consists of the following two parts:
(1) qualitative business process descriptions; and
(2) quantitative performance data used to determine the differences in performance
levels among the companies being compared (Andersen et al., 1999).

The next section shows how key benchmarking principles from the literature reviewed
above have been utilized in this study.

4. Benchmarking methodological framework Dates export
In businesses today, it is commonplace to benchmark practices and performance against supply chain
other companies, both at home and abroad. Typically, firms aspire to best practice as a
yardstick, wherever this is feasible. This study applies the benchmarking approach
employed by Garcia et al. (2003) to analyze the DESC in Oman and Tunisia. The aim is to
identify gaps in the DESC taking Tunisia as the benchmark or the best practice. This
study, however, adds to the body of literature in that it goes beyond the Garcia et al. 393
(2003) by incorporating some additional simple quantitative indicators to enrich the
analysis.

4.1 Development of benchmark measures
The identification and development of proper benchmark measures is a fundamental
part of benchmarking. Benchmark measures focus on dimensions of performance that
reflects a firm’s capabilities to meet current export supply chain demands by
international customers. In this study, these critical dimensions have been broadly
grouped into qualitative and quantitative groups. The qualitative group has been
further sub-divided into three dimensions. The quantitative group, however, has only
one dimension. Each of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. The
KPIs for dimensions 1-3 were developed to reflect the characteristics which describe
internal and external business behaviour of the firms in the industry. When compared
with “the best practice”, the KPIs will lead to the identification of a performance gap.
These KPIs will therefore be used to identify and quantify the performance gap between
Tunisia and Oman. Dimension 1 investigates how the export SCM practices are
coordinated in Oman and Tunisia. Table V presents a summary of KPIs that form
dimension 1. There are altogether eight KPIs for dimension 1.
Dimension 2 looks at safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain in
Oman and Tunisia. Safety and quality of exports are very important ingredients as far
as the export business is concerned. Table VI presents a summary of KPIs that
represents dimension 2. There are altogether six KPIs for dimension 2.

Areas analysed Key performance indicators

Coordination of the Exporter-producer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the
export SCM practices relationship in terms of communication of requirements, specifications and
regulations
Exporter-importer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the
relationship in terms of communication of the requirements, specifications
and regulations
Market orientation. This reflects the ability of exporter to predict customer
requirements
Production flexibility. This reflects the abilities of the exporter to meet
changing customer requirements
Customer orientation. Involves visits by customers to check and advise on
safety and quality practices throughout the production and export system
Vertical integration. Reflects the involvement of exporters in upstream and
/or downstream processes in the supply chain
Vertical coordination. The degree of co-ordination of operations in the
supply chain Table V.
Traceability systems. The existence of documented traceability systems Dimension 1 KPIs

BIJ
18,3
Safety and quality orientation Quality certification. The level of certification obtained by the firm,
of the export supply chain e.g. ISO, HACCP, etc.
Quality control specialists. The availability of specialists with the
required skills
394 Training and knowledge. The availability of training for workers
Social responsibility. The exporter’s policies with respect to worker
health, safety and welfare
Environmental management. The exporter environmental
management policies and practices
Table VI. Safety and quality requirements. Safety and quality specifications as
Dimension 2 KPIs part of exporter-importer contracts or agreements

Dimension 3 analyzes the export operational infrastructures under which Oman and
Tunisian firms operate. Operational infrastructure for the purpose of this benchmarking
exercise include: processing and packaging quality and technology used; labelling
flexibility in processing and packaging in response to customer needs; storage
technology and storage capacity; and transport quality and technology. A good export
operational infrastructure is very important for the success of the export business.
Table VII presents a summary of KPIs that represents dimension 3. There are altogether
seven KPIs for dimension 3.
Dimension 4 tracks the efficiency of the export supply chain in Oman and Tunisia.
For the purpose of this benchmarking exercise, the efficiency of the export supply
chain is measured by four KPIs which include: profit per ton (PPT) exported; profit
per employee ratio; cost per ton exported and export intensity. Table VIII presents a
summary of the four KPIs that represents dimension 4.

4.2 Questionnaire design and data collection
To implement the benchmarking methodological framework presented in Tables V-VIII, a
questionnaire was developed to collect the required data and other relevant information.


Export operational Processing and packaging technology. The technology used in processing
infrastructure and packaging operations
Processing and packaging quality. The quality of processing and packaging
materials used and the extent of operational flexibility available to meet
customer requirements
Labelling flexibility in processing and packaging. Flexibility in meeting
customer labelling requirements
Storage technology. The level of technology or automation the firm uses in
its storage facilities
Storage capacity. The firm’s storage capacity
Storage quality. The firm’s storage quality
Transport technology. The level of technology or automation employed by
the firm
Table VII. Transport quality. The availability of transport of required quality and the
Dimension 3 KPIs extent to which problems are encountered en route to the customer

Each KPI in the benchmarking methodological framework was used to formulate questions Dates export
used as a discussion guide during firm visits and interviews with dates exporters. The supply chain
questionnaire was pre-tested for consistency and validity. Data were collected from seven
Tunisian and three Omani dates exporters during June-July 2007. Table IX presents
information on dates exporters in Oman and Tunisia where data were collected.
The complexity and difficulties in benchmarking performance dimensions tends to
be in assigning quantitative measures to the selected indicators. For dimensions 1-3, 395
a qualitative approach is used to compute each KPI as in other studies as follows
(Garcia et al., 2004; Food and Drink National Training Organisation, 2001):
.
Level 1. Firm shows little or no capacity in achieving “best practice”.
.
Level 2. Firm shows some capacity in achieving “best practice”.
.
Level 3. Firm shows “best practice” in this area (e.g. consistent performance,
clear and demonstrable systems in place).

This method allows the identification of areas in which firms have room for
improvement (Gilmour, 1999). For dimension 4, descriptive statistics were computed
to measure the efficiency and the performance of the export supply chain.

5. Results and discussion
Results from the benchmarking exercise are presented below. For clear presentation and
comparison of results, the spider web or radar charts have been used (Mosley and Mayer,
1999). A spider web diagram shows at a glance multiple targets and gaps, and as a result,
capture tradeoffs that occur between goals and their achievements (Ahmed and Rafiq,
1998). As indicated earlier, in this study, Tunisian exporters are taken as “best practice”.
These are the practices which have often been assigned a “level 3” in the benchmarking
analysis.


Efficiency of the export PPT exported. Measured in US dollars, this is the amount of profit generated
supply chain per unit volume of business
Profits per employee ratio. The amount of profit in US dollars generated
per employee
Cost per ton exported ðin US$Þ ¼ Cost of Export=Export Volume Table VIII.
Export intensity ¼ Export revenue=Total revenue for the entire output Dimension 4 KPIs

No. Company name (Tunisian companies) No. Company name (Oman companies)

1 Vacpa (in Beni Khalled – Tunis) 1 Ibn Nasser Al-Siyabi Trading
2 Horchani (in Tozeur – Tunis) 2 United Dates Factory Company
3 Cap Bon Frigorifique 3 Oman Dates International
4 Sages in Tunis
5 Jasmine Export Table IX.
6 Profruits Dates processing
7 Medi fruits companies in Tunisia
8 Les Agrumes Du Golse Flus and Oman

BIJ 5.1 Qualitative dimensions
18,3 5.1.1 Dimension 1: coordination of the export SCM practices.
5.1.1.1 Exporter-producer information sharing. Exporter-producer information
sharing is a key to the success of the export supply chain. This is because, it is
through information-sharing process that feedbacks from consumers in the export
market reach producers in exporting country. Through this process, consumer needs and
396 wants can very be incorporated in the production process at farm level in the producing
country. In many cases, exporters are less likely to have systems in place for providing
producers with information related to market intelligence, crop protection regulation,
quality standards, etc. With regard to exporter-producer information sharing, Oman
score is 51.8 percent or 1.55 in the KPI scale of 1-3 indicating a weak exporter-producer
relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 68.2 percent or 2.05 (Figure 1). This is largely
due to the lack of information sharing system in Oman. In Tunisia, some degree of vertical
integration and contacts with government agencies facilitates communication greatly.
5.1.1.2 Exporter-importer information sharing. In addition to exporter-producer
information sharing, information sharing between exporters and importers is very
important. Exporters need to know the importing countries requirements and
speciﬁcations. Importers also need to know safety and quality standards in the exporting
countries. Therefore, strong information sharing between exporters and importers leads
to high performance in the production and delivery of the products to importers and
ultimately to the consumers. With regard to exporter-importer information sharing,
Oman’s score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 in KPI scale indicating a relatively weak
relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 85.7 percent or 2.57 in KPI scale (Figure 1).
This is due to lack of a strong exporter organization in Oman and lack of a strong link
with importers. In Tunisia, such organizational relationships exist and are strong.
5.1.1.3 Market orientation. Market orientation is another area of export supply chain
coordination in which partners in different regions can share market intelligence.
Market orientation plays a role in choosing the varieties to be grown, and this can change
every year depending on market requirements and the type of agricultural commodity
whether it is an annual crop. For a perennial crop, such as date palm changes take time.
Exporters can develop their own information network through visiting trade fairs,
getting advice from international organizations and following market trends.

Exporter-producer information
sharing
3
Exporter-importer
Traceability 2 information sharing

1

Vertical coordination 0 Market orientation

Figure 1. Vertical integration Production flexibility
Benchmarking results on
the coordination of the
Oman Customer orientation
export SCM practices
Tunisia

Omani dates export sector presents a medium degree of market orientation with a score Dates export
of 77.8 percent or 2.33, as shown in the spider chart (Figure 1). The Omani exporters supply chain
monitor demand trends in the international markets. They target mostly the developing
countries in Asia where firms are generally not very well organized in terms of market
research and they have inefficient promotion programs. All Omani firms supply three
varieties of dates which are Faradh, Khalas and Khasab. Most of the exports are of
Faradh variety which is in high demand in the traditional low-value Asian markets due 397
to its intact and non-sticky skins.
On the other hand, Tunisian dates export sector with a score of (100 percent or 3,
Figure 1) presents a high degree of market orientation. Tunisia monitors very closely
demand trends in the European market and other international markets and firms
seem to be generally very well organized. Firms have good relationships with other
firms and organizations in the international markets, enabling them to work together
efficiently. In this arrangement, information regarding domestic and export markets
requirements flows efficiently along the export supply chain. This may be one of the
reasons why Tunisian export firms have managed to compete successfully for a larger
share of the EU market.
5.1.1.4 Production flexibility. Production flexibility can be defined as the ability of
the exporter to meet changing customer requirements. Production flexibility can be
enhanced by the existence of strong communication infrastructure capable of reaching
and communicating with importers easily and efficiently. Omani firms score is
67 percent or 2.01 implying a limited flexibility in terms of changing varieties supplied
and responding to customer demands. On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is
85.7 percent or 2.57 implying that Tunisian firms tend to be more proactively involved
in changing their production processes to meet customer requirements. This is due to
better communication infrastructure that constantly monitors and forecast consumer
trends.
5.1.1.5 Customer orientation. Customer orientation can be measured by the number
of visits from customers to audit, check and advice on safety, quality practices and all
matters of interest throughout the production and export supply chain. Customer
orientation is important as one of the coordination practices in the export supply chain.
For both Oman and Tunisia, visits to exporters by customers take place regularly
every season. However, their regularity and frequency depends on the customers.
Results from survey data show that customers have fewer direct involvement in Oman
(score 56 percent or 1.68) compared to Tunisia (score 90.5 percent or 2.72).
5.1.1.6 Vertical integration. Vertical integration is the involvement of exporters in
upstream or downstream processes in the export supply chain. In vertical integration,
the exporter may be vertically integrated from production to exportation
and sometimes large and modern producers are directly involved in exportation.
Tunisia’s score is 76.1 percent or 2.28 which imply a high degree of vertical integration
in terms of production, processing and export. Oman’s score is 67 percent or 2.01 which
imply a less direct involvement of exporters in production.
5.1.1.7 Vertical coordination. Vertical coordination includes operations such as
harvesting, processing, packing, storage and transportation organized and coordinated
in order to control product quality along the export supply chain. With regard to
vertical coordination, Oman score is 78 percent or 2.01 which implies that generally
there is some coordination of operations (harvesting, processing and export) but with

BIJ no modern control systems, such as IT tracking systems. Tunisia score is 90.5 percent
18,3 or 2.72 implying that operations are generally highly coordinated in large and modern
packinghouses equipped with IT tracking systems. This enables the system to monitor
time closely and, as a result, making it possible to minimize time in storage and
transportation.
5.1.1.8 Traceability systems. Product-tracing systems are essential for food safety and
398 quality control. Most of the foreign markets especially in North America and Europe
require traceability system. Traceability systems help firms to solve safety and quality
problems quickly with minimal disruption by tracing back the origin of the products.
A well-functioning traceability system uniquely codes each item or product to identify
time of production, line of production, place of production and sequence. With such
specific information, the processor can trace faulty products to the minute of production
and determine whether other products from the same batch are also defective. With regard
to traceability systems, Tunisia score is 92.1 percent or 2.76 which imply that generally
there is a high level of traceability. Any packing box sold in the European market carries
codes and references that allows tracing of the product to the packinghouse, so the
treatment undergone by the product at the packinghouse can be verified easily. Oman
score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 which implies that many dates exporters have no traceability
system in place. This will likely make it difficult for Oman to penetrate the lucrative EU
and North American markets that require traceability systems. A summary of the eight
KPIs (5.1.1.1-5.1.1.8) is shown in the radar chart (Figure 1).
Figure 1 is a spider web that presents a visual graphical summary of the eight KPIs
of dimension 1. Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all eight KPIs. At the range
of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators. On the other hand, Oman’s
performance is not all that impressive. Its scores range from 1 to 2, achieving a score of
above 2 in one indicator, namely market orientation.
5.1.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain.
5.1.2.1 Quality certification. As industries are widening their range of products,
certification to national and international requirements has become necessary and
crucial in winning consumer confidence. Varying levels of certification are seen in each
country. Omani firms score reached 55.5 percent or 1.66 where some of them have
ISO certificates and the majority are without certificates. On the other hand, Tunisian
firms score reached 61.9 percent or 1.86, where some of them have several types of
certificates (ISO 9001, ISO 22000, HACCP, BRC, IFS, ISO 14000), but just like in Oman,
the majority are without certificates.
5.1.2.2 Quality control specialists. Quality control specialists are the employees who
devise ways to guarantee the quality of products. They study products at various
stages of development to make sure that they are safe, will satisfy customers and meet
the company’s and regulators’ standards. With regard to quality control specialists,
they are a norm in Tunisia with score reaching 100 percent or 3.00 and less common in
Oman with score reaching 77.8 percent or 2.33.
5.1.2.3 Training and knowledge. Training is important because organizations need
to upgrade the knowledge and skills of their professionals. In most cases, training is
focused on achieving business goals leading to high-quality products and services. For
this particular KPI, Oman score is 77.8 percent or 2.33 compared to Tunisia score of
81.9 percent or 2.46. Implying that there is no significant difference between the two
countries in as far as training and knowledge is concerned.

5.1.2.4 Social responsibility. It is the obligation of the management of the firm. Social Dates export
responsibility involves making decisions and taking actions that will enhance the supply chain
welfare and interests of employees. This is important in increasing employee
productivity. With regard to social responsibility, Omani firms score is 92.1 percent or
2.76 where workers are generally insured (social insurance) and labour regulations are
generally adhered to, with access to medical care and provisions for the workers welfare
(e.g. workers age, working hours, working conditions, legal and health requirements, 399
salary and number of days for vacation). Tunisian firms score is 95.91 percent or 2.88,
where approximately all the non-seasonal workers are insured and labour regulations
are adhered to, with access to medical care and provision for the workers welfare.
5.1.2.5 Environmental management. Lately, corporations have been confronted with
a number of global environmental challenges such as global warming, acid rain,
depletion of natural resources, waste management, green consumerism and pollution
prevention. Nowadays, there is a growing pressure for corporations to deliver products
and services which are GREEN or environmentally friendly. Various environmental
management practices (e.g. implementing aggressive pollution-prevention programs;
initiating environment-related performance measures; and developing green products
and process technologies) provide opportunities for firms to strengthen their
distinctive competence. With regard to environmental management, the score for
Omani firms is 33.3 percent or 1 implying that generally there are no demonstrable
environmental management policies or practices in many of the Omani firms.
On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is 47.6 percent or 1.43 implying that there is
generally very little verifiable efforts in place focused towards environmental
management.
5.1.2.6 Safety and quality requirements. The competitiveness of food companies at
national and international markets depends upon their ability to adopt production
processes which meet food safety and quality requirements. Food safety and quality
assurance affect the cost of carrying out business transactions, and implicit therein is the
private incentive for adopting voluntary quality assurance systems. Quality assurance
systems have the potential to reduce transaction costs by serving as the seller’s
guarantee of safety or quality (Holleran et al., 1999). With regard to safety and quality
requirements, Tunisian score is 80.7 percent or 2.42. In Tunisia, the safety and quality
specifications are always put in the contract with the customers. In addition, because of
Tunisian Government assistance in improving dates quality control systems, the safety
and quality requirements are always met by the exporters. Omani score is 59.21 percent
or 1.78 where exporters place more emphasis on personal contacts and good
relationships with customers than on formal contracts. Moreover, because of low
government assistance, dates quality control systems in Oman are not efficient
sometimes hampering exporter’s ability to meet foreign customer specifications.
Figure 2 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of the
six key qualitative performance indicators of dimension 2. As indicated, Tunisia is
performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative performance indicators. At the
range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators except for two, namely,
quality certification and environmental management. Moreover, Tunisia scores 3 or
100 percent in quality control specialist indicator implying that Tunisia takes the issue
of quality control very seriously by employing enough qualified quality control
specialists.

BIJ Quality certification
3
18,3
2 Quality control
Safety and quality
requirements specialist
1

400 0

Environmental Training and
management knowledge
Figure 2.
Result on the safety and Oman
Social responsibility
quality orientation of the Tunisia
export supply chain
Note: A summary of dimension 2

On the other hand, Oman’s performance is not all that impressive – for three
indicators, Oman scores range from 1 to 2. For quality control specialist, training and
knowledge, and social responsibility indicators, Oman achieved scores above 2.
5.1.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure.
5.1.3.1 Processing and packing technology. Advances in packaging technology
provide a potential for improved quality and extended shelf life of agricultural products.
With regard to processing and packing technology, Oman is 77.73 percent or 2.33 and
Tunisia 84.1 percent or 2.52. Both countries have some degree of automation in sorting
and grading lines, varying in the age of equipments and states of the technology used.
5.1.3.2 Processing and packing quality. It depends on customer requirements and
specifications. For instance, some customers require sterile foods with aseptic
processing and packaging in a manner that leaves the food free of microorganisms. Such
a requirement has public health significance, because it helps to prevent the growth of
any microorganism under normal non-refrigerated storage condition and distribution.
Some of the foods we buy from grocery stores go through non-refrigerated storage
conditions; as a result, processing and packing quality are of paramount importance.
With respect to processing and packing quality, Tunisian firms score is 100 percent or
3.00 indicating there are high-quality processing and packing operations in virtually all
firms – with packaging materials readily available. In Tunisia, packaging requirements
are pre-agreed with customers. Omani firms score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 indicating
some level of processing and packing quality.
5.1.3.3 Labelling flexibility. Flexibility in dealing with customer labelling
requirements varies across firms in the two countries. Some firms use excellent
labelling systems which include bar coding whereas for others labelling is entirely
manual. With regard to labelling flexibility, Omani firms score is 72.2 percent or
2.17 where labelling is carried out by hand in a few of the Omani firms. However, as long
as customer requirements can be met by this method, there are no problems. There are
also many traceability labelling requirements which not all Omani firms are able to
meet. Tunisian firms score is 90.46 percent or 2.71 indicating that excellent labelling
systems are used which include bar coding and use of coded reference. As a result, firms
have no problem meeting customer labelling requirements. In Tunisia, firms’ use of
advanced IT systems in labelling facilitates labelling flexibility.

5.1.3.4 Storage technology. High level of technology used in storage has to include Dates export
temperature and humidity equipments control. With regard to storage technology, supply chain
Oman score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 and Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79 indicating
some level of investment and use of storage technology in both countries.
5.1.3.5 Storage capacity. With regard to storage capacity, Omani firms scored
100 percent or 3.00 implying that there is enough storage capacity available with a
significant refrigerated capacity ranging from 100 to 2,600 tons. On the other hand, the 401
score for Tunisian firms reached 71.41 percent or 2.14.
5.1.3.6 Storage quality. The level of storage quality depends on the conditions of
controlled atmosphere stores. Storage quality score for Tunisia is 98 percent or 2.94
which implies that all storage is under controlled atmosphere and pre-cooling takes
place before transport, even with the hired storage facilities. In Oman, the score is
70 percent or 2.1. The small firms visited have few or no controlled atmosphere storage
facilities, as a result, products are subject to different storage qualities. The largest
firms, however, were found to have high-quality storage facilities.
5.1.3.7 Transport technology. The level of technology used in the transportation of
products for export has to include temperature and humidity control equipments in
order to control storage atmosphere either in the trucks or in the ships during
shipment. With regard to transport technology, Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79
which implies that most of the dates exporters use cold transport with technology to
control temperature and humidity in both land and sea transport. On the other hand,
Oman score is 61.05 percent or 1.83 which implies that most of the dates exporters use
non-cold transport, with low technology in both land and sea transportation.
5.1.3.8 Transport quality. The level of transport quality can be evaluated based on
the availability of refrigerated containers and problems encountered en route to
customers. Sometimes, dates are stored for a long time before shipment (up to several
months). Owing to marketing conditions and packing possibilities, it is necessary to
sample each consignment, in order to make sure that the quality of the fruit has not
changed. During loading, it is important to ensure that the surfaces or packaging are
not damaged. All the labels and markings must be checked to ensure compliance with
the laws of the importing country, as well as the customer requirements. Furthermore,
since temperature and humidity are important factors in the preservation of the quality
of the dates, temperature and humidity control equipments with recorders must be
placed in the container or the truck. With regard to transport quality, Tunisia score is
95 percent or 2.85. Tunisian firms use cold transport with technology to control
temperature and humidity. The cost of cold transport is high, but with governmental
support, the exporters are able to use cold transport in order to preserve dates from
deterioration especially for the long distances between Tunisia and export destinations
in the EU. Oman score is 60 percent or 1.8. Oman firms use non-cold transport with low
technology to control temperature and humidity both in land and sea transport. The
cost of cold transport is high, and without governmental support, the exporters in
Oman are unable to use cold transport.
Figure 3 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of
the eight KPIs of dimension 3. As indicated, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in
all the seven KPIs. At the range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators.
Tunisia scores 3 or 100 percent in processing and packing quality indicating the
existence of high-quality processing and packing operations for all firms in Tunisia.

BIJ Processing and
packing technology
18,3 3
Processing and
Transport quality 2 packing quality
1
402 Transport technology 0 Labelling flexibility

Storage quality Storage technology

Figure 3. Oman Storage capacity
Export operational Tunisia
infrastructure
Note: Summary of dimension 3

Omani firms are performing better than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely
storage capacity, because in Oman there is excess refrigerated storage capacity. This is
because of the low-processed volumes handled by Omani firms compared to their
initial planned capacity during establishment. At the range of 1-3, Oman scores 2-3 for
most indicators except two, namely, transport technology and transport quality.

5.2 Quantitative dimensions
5.2.1 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain.
5.2.1.1 Profit per ton. A firm adds to profits if marginal revenue from selling an
extra unit is greater than the marginal cost of production. Therefore, the PPT or per
unit will be equal to average revenue (AR) minus average total cost (ATC). That is, the
PPT ¼ AR 2 ATC. The firm with the highest PPT is therefore considered to be
performing better than the other firms. The PPT or profit per exported ton is used here
as measure of export performance. With respect to this indicator, Tunisian firms
achieved around US$418 per exported ton, whereas Omani firms achieved around
US$102 per exported ton. This implies that Tunisian exporters earn around four times
higher profit per exported ton than Omani exporters. In other words, Tunisian
operations are efficient and more profitable than Omani operations. It is important to
note that the observed differences in profitability between Oman and Tunisia, to some
extent, may be attributable to differences in variety, quality, price of raw material at
the farm level and pre- and post-harvest operations.
5.2.1.2 Profit per employee. Recently, firms create wealth by converting “raw”
intangibles into products, services, brands, intellectual capital and networks. The most
valuable intangibles are employee skills, reputation and relationships. They represent
competitive advantage in today’s business environment and are now the true source of
corporate wealth. In this regard, one new metric of business performance is profit per
employee (Wolfe, 2007; Lowell, 2007). Profit per employee or a contribution of each
employee to the firm profit is therefore a good proxy for earnings on intangibles and
hence a good indicator to evaluate the performance of a firm. With regard to profit per
employee, Tunisian firms achieved around US$3,874 per employee, whereas Omani
firms achieved around US$1,802 indicating that Tunisian are efficient and generate
more profit per employee than Omani firms.

5.2.1.3 Export intensity. It is another financial indicator of export performance. Dates export
It is defined as the proportion of export sale in total sale (Export Intensity ¼ supply chain
Value of Export/Value of TP). With regard to this indicator, Tunisian firms score is
around 0.86 indicating that around 86 percent of their revenue comes from export earnings
and hence much more export oriented. Oman score, on the other hand, is around 0.35
implying that only 35 percent of Oman firms revenue come from export earnings. These
export intensity statistics clearly show that Tunisian firms are very successful in date 403
export compared to Oman firms.
Table X presents a summary of the three KPIs of dimension 4. As indicated, Tunisia
is performing better than Oman in all three indicators. Results of this dimension
complements and enrich the results of the previous three dimensions.

6. Conclusions and recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
The purpose of this study is two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach
employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia in order to identify
gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries.
Second, is to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. The Tunisian
DSC was used as the “best practice” or “benchmark” since, in many ways, it is more
advanced and efficient than dates-producing countries. The benchmarking measures
were put into two groups, namely, qualitative and quantitative group. The qualitative
group has three dimensions and the quantitative group has one dimension only. Each
of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. It is these KPIs that are
used to identify the gaps between Tunisia and Oman.
The analysis required an audit of the export supply chains of both countries. The
audit was executed by visiting the exporters in both countries to collect the required
data by means of questionnaires. In total, ten date exporters were interviewed, three of
which were Omani and the remaining seven firms were Tunisian.
Results from the benchmarking exercise were summarized in radar chart diagrams
to visualize multiple targets and gaps. The results show that Tunisia is performing
better than Oman in all the four dimensions. Evaluation and the implementation
of the gaps highlighted in this study would help Omani firms to adapt and respond to
safety and quality standards demanded by international market customers. It is
important to note that some of the practices that are feasible in Tunisia may not be
feasible in Oman. This is simply because there could be large variations in resource
availability, degree of modernization and market orientation of agri-food systems
between Oman, Tunisia and importing countries. A careful analysis of the findings
should enable Oman policy makers and stakeholders to produce an industry action
plan to correct the gaps and take the lead.

Key performance indicators Tunisian exporters Omani exporters

PPT exported (US$) 418 102
Profit per employee (US$) 3,874 1,802 Table X.
Export intensity 0.857 0.353 Efficiency of the
export supply chain
Note: A summary of dimension 4 (efficiency of the export supply chain) (dimension 4)

BIJ 6.2 Recommendations
18,3 6.2.1 Coordination of the export SCM practices. The level of coordination seen in Oman
is significantly lower than that in Tunisia where operations are highly coordinated in
large and modern packinghouses. Hence, initiatives should be developed at firm level in
Oman to increase the level of coordination among actors in the export supply chain.
To increase the level of coordination in the DESC in Oman, there is a need to support and
404 encourage horizontal and vertical integration, as well as information sharing between
exporter and producers and exporter and importers. Because of the likely welfare
impacts of DESC, the public sector needs to be involved through direct investment and
through availability of credits/loans to the private sector to invest in the DESC. The
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of National Economy and the Ministry of Commerce
and Industry could work together to coordinate this so that social objectives such as
employment and income are taken into account.
Key to greater coordination in the DESC is a traceability system. In future, it will be
impossible to export to most of the foreign markets (in North America, Europe and
Asia) without having a traceability system in place. As a result, Oman needs to start
now working on establishing such a system especially for economically important
commodities such as dates. However, the fragmented nature of the DESC makes
it difficult for Omani dates exporters to establish a traceability system. This is why the
government leadership and involvement is needed to make sure that this done.
6.2.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain. In this
dimension, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative
performance indicators. It is therefore clear that there is a lot that needs to be done to
bridge the gaps identified. This will require significant investments on the part of the
Omani Government, date exporters, as well as on the part of the stakeholders. These
investments are of course costly and must be planned and executed carefully in a
coordinated fashion in consultation with all the stakeholders.
Because these investments are costly, they should not be borne entirely by the
government, instead all the stakeholders should take part. As a result, it is important to
assign more responsibility for ensuring safety and quality along the supply chain to
the food companies themselves. This can be achieved by requiring date exporters and
processors to obtain HACCP, ISO and other certifications that are necessary to win
international and local customer confidence. Of course, obtaining these HACCP and
ISO certifications and maintaining them, as articulated earlier herein, requires
significant investments both in human and physical capital; including quality control
infrastructures and business information systems.
6.2.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure. Here Tunisia is performing
better than Oman in seven out of the eight KPIs. Omani firms are only performing better
than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely storage capacity. Export
operational infrastructure which include eight items ranging from processing and
packing technology, labelling technology to storage technology requires significant
long-term investments that cannot be made by the private sector alone. The lack of
technical and financial support in Oman very often makes the required investments in
export operational infrastructure very difficult. Therefore, it is recommended to
implement joint public/private initiatives to develop actionable strategies aimed
at improving export infrastructure following Tunisian experience. Firm-level
infrastructure-related investment should be done through preferential financing

arrangements as suggested earlier. Considerations must be given to innovative ways of Dates export
financing improvements, such as contributions in the cost of factory establishment and supply chain
factory upgrading (rehabilitation) similar to what is done by the Tunisian Government.
6.2.4 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain. Results from dimension 4
show that the Tunisian DESC performance is more efficient than Oman in all three KPIs.
In fact, these results are consistent with the results of the previous three dimensions. More
need to be done to improve the efficiency of the DESC in Oman through training of 405
employees and investment in technology. The following recommendations are important:
.
There are several date varieties in Oman most of which are of very low quality.
At farm level, all these different varieties are mixed-up resulting in a substandard
quality. To overcome this problem, the government needs to embark on long-term
program to modernize and promote high-value varieties such as Medjool, Barhee
Khalas, Abu Naringa, Barni, Madlouki and Faradh.
.
There is a need for investment in research and development to identify and develop
alternatives uses for dates such as: baby food ingredients, sugar production out of
dates, baking ingredients, ice cream, coffee, sweets, confectionery, chocolates,
preservatives, salads, sauces, breakfast cereals and soft drinks.

References
Ahmed, P.K. and Rafiq, M. (1998), “Integrated benchmarking: a holistic examination of select
techniques for benchmarking analysis”, Benchmarking for Quality Management &
Technology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 225-42.
Allan, S. (1997), “Partners benchmarking”, available at: www.benchmarking.co.uk/bmark.
htm#partners
Andersen, B., Fagerhaug, T., Randmoel, S., Schuldmaier, J. and Prenninger, J. (1999),
“Benchmarking supply chain management: finding best practice”, Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 378-89.
Anon. (2005), “Welfare benchmarking and herd health plans on organic dairy farms (OF0343)”,
available at: http://orgprints.org/10776/ (unpublished).
Balm, G.J. (1996), “Benchmarking and gap analysis: what is the next milestone?”, Benchmarking:
An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 22-33.
Barnes, C. (2007), “Study exposes weak links in grain chain”, Food Manufacture, 27 March,
available at: www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/4483/Study_exposes_
weak_links_in_grain_chain.html
Bhutta, K.S. and Huq, F. (1999), “Benchmarking best practices: an integrated approach”,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 254-68.
Brandt, J.R. and Taninecz, G. (2004), “Benchmarking: an executive primer to locating and
leveraging manufacturing best practices”, available at: www.mpi-group.net/
thoughtleadership/ITC_MPI_Benchmarking.pdf
Camp, R. (1989), The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to Superior Performance,
Productivity Press, Portland, OR.
CLAN (2006), “Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from Australian agriculture: the role of
benchmarking in driving best management practice”, A discussion paper prepared by
the Climate Change in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Agriculture
Working Group, available at: www.greenhouse.gov.au/agriculture/publications/pubs/
benchmarking.pdf

BIJ Deloitte (2009), Benchmarking for Success: New Trends in North America’s Food and Beverage
Processing Industry, Deloitte, New York, NY, available at: www.deloitte.com/assets/
18,3 DcomCanada/Local%20Content/Articles/Industries/Consumer%20business/ca_en_
Benchmarking%20for%20success.pdf
Food and Drink National Training Organisation (Ed.) (2001), Measuring Success: International
Benchmarking of the Food and Drink Manufacturing Industry, Food and Drink National
Training Organisation, London.
406
Garcia Martinez, M. and Poole, N. (2003), “Developments in fresh produce quality and safety
management: implications for Mediterranean countries”, paper presented at the 82nd
European Seminar of the EAAE on Quality Assurance, Risk Management and
Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks, Bonn, 14-16 May.
GidF (2005), Groupment Interprofessionnel des Fruits, Ministry of Agriculture and Water
Resources, Tunisia.
Gilmour, P. (1999), “Benchmarking supply chain operations”, International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 29, pp. 259-66.
Helgason, S. (1997), “International benchmarking experiences from OECD countries”,
paper presented at a conference organized by the Danish Ministry of Finance on:
International Benchmarking, Copenhagen, 20-21 February, Public Management Service
(PUMA), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
Holleran, E., Bredahl, M.E. and Zaibet, L. (1999), “Private incentives for adopting food safety and
quality assurance”, Food Policy, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 669-83.
Howard, M. and Kilmartin, B. (2006), Assessment of Benchmarking within Government
Organizations, Accenture, Dublin, May.
Laajimi, A. (2002), “National safety and quality systems in Tunisia: an analysis of the olive oil
´ ´
and dates sectors”, working paper, Departement d’Economie et de Developpement Rural,
Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Tunis.
Lowell, L.B. (2007), “The new metrics of corporate performance: profit per employee”,
The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1, available at: www.massmac.org/newsline/0707/McKinsey.
pdf
Luther, R. and Abdel-Kader, M. (2006), “Management accounting practices in the British food
and drinks industry”, British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 5, pp. 336-57.
Omachonu, V.K. and Ross, J.R. (1994), Principles of Total Quality, St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.
Poole, N., Marshall, F. and Bhupal, D.S. (2002), “Air pollution effects and initiatives to improve food
quality assurance in India”, Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Vol. 41, pp. 363-86.
Ronan, G. and Taylor, P. (2004), “Strategic planning and benchmarking: keys to sustainable
economic development in food and fibre industries”, paper presented at the 48th Annual
Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Melbourne,
11-13 February, available at: www.aares.info/files/2004_ronan.pdf
Russell, R.S. and Taylor, B.W. (1998), Production and Operations Management, Focusing on
Quality and Competitiveness, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Sparling, D. and van Duren, E. (2003), “Supply chain management – trends and implications for
ASEAN agribusiness in agribusiness management: systems approach”, SEAMO, pp. 169-76.
Stephens, B. (2004), Benchmarking Arab Microfinance Institutions, The Microfinance Gateways,
Washington, DC, available at: www.microfinancegateway.org/content/article/more/14260
Thelwell, D. and Ritson, C. (2006), “The international competitiveness of the UK cereals sector”,
paper presented at the 98th EAAE Seminar on Marketing Dynamics within the Global
Trading System: New Perspectives, Chania, Crete, 29 June-2 July.

UNCTAD (2005), “Country case study on reflecting national circumstances and development Dates export
priorities in national codes on good agricultural practices that can be benchmarked to
Eurepgap”, available at: www.unctad.org/trade_env/test1/meetings/eurepgap/ supply chain
UNCTAD%20Country%20Case%20Study.pdf
UNCTAD/WTO (2007), Fresh Tropical and Off-season Fruit and Vegetables, International Trade
Center, Geneva, available at: www.intracen.org/mns/documents/Fruits_and_vegetables.pdf
UNIDO (2002), Continuous Improvement and Quality Management – Quality and Productivity, 407
United Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna, available at: www.unido.
org/doc/501746.htmls
USDA (2008), “Benchmarking: findings and recommendations”, Final Report May 30, The US
Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency Organizational Assessment, available at:
www.fsa.USDA.gov/Internet/FSA_File/kbapp3benchmarking.pdf
´
Verıssimo, A. and Woodford, K. (2005), “Top performing farmers are information rich: case
studies of sheep and cattle farmers in the South Island of New Zealand”, Proceedings of the
Fifteenth International Farm Management Association Congress, Campinas, Brazil,
August, Vol. 1, International Farm Management Association, Cambridge, pp. 365-8.
Wilson, R., Charry, A.A. and Kemp, D.R. (2004), “Performance indicators and benchmarking in
Australian agriculture: a whole farm family centered approach”, available at: www.csu.edu.
au/faculty/science/saws/afbmnetwork/conferences/2004/proceedings/Wilson_et_al.pdf
Wolfe, I.S. (2007), “Profit per employee: can HR be trusted to get the job done?”,
Business 2 Business, May, available at: www.super-solutions.com/ProfitPerEmployee_
B2BMay2007.asp
Yakovleva, N., Sarkis, J. and Sloans, T.W. (2009), “Sustainable benchmarking of food supply
chains”, GPMI Working Paper No. 2009-02, George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark
University, Worcester, MA, available at: www.clarku.edu/departments/marsh
Yasin, M.M. (2002), “The theory and practice of benchmarking: then and now”, International
Journal of Benchmarking, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 217-43.
Zairi, M. (1994), “Benchmarking: the best tool for measuring competitiveness”, Benchmarking of
Quality Management and Technology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-24.

Further reading
Andersen, B. and Pettersen, P.-G. (1996), The Benchmarking Handbook, Chapman & Hall,
London.
Aramyan, L., Ondersteijn, C., Van Kooten, O. and Oude Lansink, A. (2005), “Performance
indicators in agri-food production chains”, in Ondersteijn, C., Wijnands, J.H.M.,
Huirne, R.B.M. and Van Kooten, O. (Eds), Quantifying Supply Chains, Kluwer Academic
Publisher, Dordrecht.
Barreveld, W.H. (1993), “Date palm products”, FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 101,
FAO, Rome.
Bateman, G.R. (1994), “Benchmarking management education teaching and curriculum”,
in Camp, R. (Ed.), Benchmarking: The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to
Superior Performance, Quality Resources, White Plains, NY.
Country Report (2003), “Development of dates production and marketing in Arab nation”,
Country Report, October (Oman).
FAO (n.d.), FAO Statistics, FAO, XXX.
Matters, M. and Evans, A. (1997), “The nuts and bolts of benchmarking”, available at: www.
ozemail.com.au/, benchmark/nuts.bolts.html

BIJ Ministry of Agriculture, Oman (n.d.), available at: www.maf.gov.om
18,3 Oman Customs (2006), Foreign Trade Statistics.
Shah, J. and Singh, N. (2001), “Benchmarking internal supply chain performance: development of
a framework”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 37, pp. 37-47.
Tunisian Agency for the Promotion of Agricultural Investment (n.d.), available at: www.tunisie.
com/APIA
408 United Dates Factory (n.d.), Processing and handling of dates in Oman.

Corresponding author
Msaﬁri Mbaga can be contacted at: msaﬁri@squ.edu.om

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

4.a comparative

More Related Content

Similar to 4.a comparative

More from libfsb

4.a comparative