Supply Chain Management Practices - Literature review Example

Logistics Take Home Exam By Student Name Code+ course name Professor’s name University name DAte Date Introduction Supply chain management practices have become an integral strategic tool for firms and organizations that discern to achieve improved performance and levels of competitiveness. The reason is due to the recognition that the competitiveness and performance of firms is dependent on the level of integration among upstream and downstream partners in the SCM system. According to Petrovic-Lazarevic, Sohal & Baihaqi (2007), a firm can belong to several supply chains and the place it occupies within chain will be different depending on the type of goods or services it produces and supplies. These variations in position contribute to the complexity of various supply chains where a company is involved in. According to Gupta & Jain (2013), the fundamental reasoning behind the implementation of LM practices is to enhance the quality of products or services whilst minimizing the cost of producing them. In their entirety, LM practices primary concern is the elimination of wastes from the manufacturing process, (Gupta & Jain 2013). The wastes can be eliminated by the identification and elimination of wastes and wasteful processes. In addition, reduced costs of production are minimized through the reduction of planning cycles, production lead times and the expedition of the distribution system, (Gunasekaran & Ngai 2005). This LM system ensures that firms only manufacture products whose orders they have received. Petrovic-Lazarevic, Sohal & Baihaqi (2007) indicates that there are various management practices that companies adopt in order to enhance their supply chains. These include mutual information sharing, maintaining long-term relationships and a focus on integrated behaviors among members of a common supply chain. Others include mutual cooperation, sharing of rewards and risks and and a focus on customer relationships. Recent literature reviews on SCM practices has utilized the exploratory research approach with the aim of exploring and identifying various aspects of the SCM practices. Most literature reviews aim to identify various SCM practices adopted by various firms. Others aim to identify the extent to which specific SCM practices have been implemented among various firms. Further still, others have tended to focus on the determination of the benefits of various SCM practices among the partners in a specific supply chain. Most have focused on the manufacturing sector. A review of the Built-to-Order Supply Chain Management Practice Gunasekaran & Ngai (2005) carried out a literature review on built-to-order supply chain (BOSC) systems and identified an elaborate categorization of the literature on various aspects of built-to-order SCM practice. These aspects include how firms develop and implement the built-to-order supply chain system and the influence of the built-to-order supply chain systems on organizational competitiveness. The other aspect is how firms operationalize the built-to-order supply chain system and how they utilize information technology to enhance their built-to-order supply chain practices. They state the objectives of carrying out their literature review as including an evaluation of the concepts that underpin BOSC, classification of the literature on BOSC with the intention of identifying gaps and providing suggestions for future research. Another objective includes a review of the contributions of literature regards the development and operationalization of BOSCs as well as the development of a framework on BOSC. The objectives of utilizing the build-to-order practice is to meet the individual client needs in a cost effective way through leveraging on the advantages brought about by information technology and outsourcing. From this objective, it is clear that the build-to-order practice is a customer-focused SCM practice. The reason why companies utilize such a practice is to meet the changing requirements of the customer market in a responsive and flexible manner. Gunasekaran & Ngai (2005, pp. 425) notes that Dell Corporation’s build-to-order SCM practice enables it to run a LM system. As such, one can associate the built-to-order SCM strategy with the LM practice. An Analysis of the Literature Review From Gunasekaran & Ngai’s literature review of BOSC, one can identify the built-to-order SCM practice as a variant of the LM practice. The difference between the two arises as a result of the different principles that underpin the two systems. As Gunasekaran & Ngai (2005) explains, the LM system works on the principles of stable production schedules and long stable production runs. On the other hand, the BOSC practice is based on the principles of short production runs, unstable production schedules as well as customer responsiveness, (Gunasekaran & Ngai 2005). According to SOCM practices, firms produce products or services based on individual customer specifications in a short period of time through leveraging competitive advantages of each partnering firm in the supply chain, (Gunasekaran & Ngai 2005). Just like the LM system, SOCM systems employ an extensive application of information technologies and the internet to achieve a close, elaborate and seamless SCM. As Gunasekaran & Ngai (2005) notes, the application of the SOCM manufacturing system eliminates the reliance on demand forecasts, inventory and working capital thereby acting to eradicate possible wastes as result of inaccurate forecasts. The distribution logistics are tailored based on the delivery requirements of individual customers. As such, it is clear from the analysis of the two practices that LM practices are more stable relative to the SOCM practices. The review distinctly recognizes that the observed uncertainty in the SOCM production systems requires the need to develop an elaborate integration of all supply chain partners at all levels, be it upstream, midstream or downstream suppliers, (Gunasekaran & Ngai 2005). They effectively recognize that such integration is achievable through the focus on entering into strategic alliances with all partners in the supply chain and leveraging on IT, the internet and people to develop seamless relationships that effectively address the inherent instability. Mutual relationships help to ensure that firms operate at near-zero work in progress inventory as well as minimum finished product inventories, (Gunasekaran Ngai 2005). Factors that influence the decision to develop and implement a build-to-order supply chain Gunasekaran & Ngai (2005) identify various factors that influence firms to develop a BOSC system. These factors include economic, political and industrial factors. In their literature review, economic factors include inflationary pressures, exchange rate and interest rate fluctuations. Market forces include market growth rates, globalization and level of innovation. Competitive factors include number of competitors, suppliers, existing and potential competitors, Built-to-customer practices form one managerial strategies that enables firms to leverage on global outsourcing so as to address such factors and whether the stiff competition in the current operating environment. The authors do not successfully identify nor do they explain the political factors that influence firms to implement SOCM. 1. Critical Review of Literature on Lean Manufacturing Practices Doolen & Hacker (2005) report in their literature review that some studies on LM practices have explored varied aspects of LM system. For instance, some studies have focused on the study of the extent and level of implementation of LM systems. Others have focused on the examination of the impacts of as well as the challenges that face the implementation of LM practices. LM practices are remarkably different from the traditional manufacturing practices, (Gupta & Jain 2013). The traditional manufacturing practices focus on holding adequate inventories to avoid stock-outs during the manufacturing process. On the other hand, the LM practices consider holding inventories as a waste of resources in the organization that needs to be eliminated or minimized, (Gupta & Jain 2013). Petrovic-Lazarevic, Sohal & Baihaqi (2007) state that previous studies have indicated that effective implementation of SCM practices contributes to enhanced organizational outcomes. Petrovic-Lazarevic, Sohal & Baihaqi (2007) further state that from their literature review, there exist five different integration strategies that firms can utilize to enhance the overall effectiveness of the SCM strategy. These integration strategies determine the degree of integration that exists between various members of a given supply chain. Where the degree of integration is extensive between all the members of a supply chain, there is a tendency to observe an elevated collective and individual performance improvement among the firms. The literature review by Gupta & Jain (2013) regards LM had the objective of understanding its conceptual framework, tools and techniques, implementation and barriers. AS they posit, the cardinal construct of applying LM practices in the supply chain is to enhance the quality of a product whilst ensuring that the production costs are minimized and maintained at low levels. From their literature review, the LM practice makes use of a broad range of tools and techniques that are situation specific. Reference List Doolen, TL & Hacker, ME 2005, A review of lean assessment in organizations: an exploratory study of lean practices by electronics manufacturers. Journal of manufacturing systems, Vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 55-67. Gunasekaran, A & Ngai, EW 2005, Build-to-order supply chain management: a literature review and framework for development, Journal of operations management, Vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 423-451. Gupta, S & Jain, SK 2013, A literature review of lean manufacturing. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, Vol. 8 no. 4, pp. 241-249. Petrovic-Lazarevic, S, Sohal, A & Baihaqi, I 2007, Supply chain management practices and supply chain performance in the Australian manufacturing industry. Monash University Faculty of Business and Economics. Introduction The purpose of a critical analysis of a research article is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. The intention is to assess its usefulness in contributing to the knowledge in a given field, (Young & Solomon, 2009). The identification and understanding of the strengths and weaknesses further help to evaluate the validity of the research findings, (Young & Solomon, 2009). Such an evaluation is achieved through an investigation into the appropriateness of study design in relation to answering the research question(s). In addition, the methodology utilized by the researcher(s) is also evaluated, (Young & Solomon, 2009). In addition, the analysis should further consider the suitability of the statistical methods applied and an interpretation of the findings and any potential limitations of the study. Ding, Jie, Parton & Matanda (2013) carried out an analysis of various supply chain practices and the supply chain food quality performance indicator in the Australian beef processing industry. The researchers report in their findings that supply chain practices such as a strategic alliance, information quality, as well as trust and commitment, have a substantial influence on food quality. In addition, they identify information quality as having a positive relationship with food quality. The study’s findings reveal that the explanatory variables identified as a strategic alliance, information quality and trust and commitment have a significant association to food quality. Critique The research question formulated is appropriate as it is Germaine with the research topic as identified in the title of their research article. The authors present a literature review that is efficacious, employing a mix of tabulations, graphs and charts to present quantitative data on Australia’s beef industry. These improve presentation and clarity of the research report, thereby enhancing the readers’ readability and understandability of the article and its findings and recommendations. They identify a number of fundamental aspects of the supply chain that can be applicable in their condensed research question. These dimensions include a strategic alliance, customer focus, information sharing, information quality and LM systems. An exhaustive analysis of these dimensions is provided which forms the basis on which the researchers formulate their research hypotheses. Such an analysis is comprehensive covering the research area of supply chain practices broadly in various sectors with an explanation and connection with the beef industry clearly presented. In these analyses, the gaps in research are identified and well highlighted. An analysis of Australia’s beef industry supply chain is seamlessly explored, analyzed and presented in the literature review. For instance, they state that the supply chain in Australia’s beef industry is integrated vertically with a salient involvement of large producers and processors in all stages from farming, processing, packaging to wholesaling and retailing. They also identify the key players in the beef industry supply chain as including cattle farmers, processors, wholesalers, retailers and final consumers. Adequate statistical data is provided regards the composition and extent of involvement in the beef industry supply chain. The researchers identify two types of supply chains with the first one being a fully integrated supply chain while the other is a partially integrated supply chain. An explanation of each type is explicitly provided. The researchers clearly state that there are a number of supply chain performance indicators in any given industry that can be studied. These indicators include quality, time, flexibility and cost. Their rationale for choosing beef quality as their preferred performance indicator in the study is well-explained and supported by existing knowledge as explained by a consideration of prior research. Their evaluation and analysis of previous literature forms the basis on which the researchers formulate their null and alternate hypotheses. From these hypotheses, they develop a conceptual model that guides them in testing their hypotheses and answering their research question. It is from the literature review that Ding et al. (2013) identified the research gap that they intended to fill. For instance, they explain the fact that previous studies on the topic of supply chain practices in Australia have predominately focused on investigating the impact of demand, supply, production and transportation uncertainties on supply chain effectiveness in the manufacturing and or retail sectors. They also note that few researchers have investigated how supply chain practices impact on Australia’s beef processing industry. They further explain that even a few studies addressing the topic have mostly focused on the application of the case study methodology. Appropriateness of the study design for the research question The researchers used a quantitative research design to explore and provide answers to their research question. Such a choice of study methodology is appropriate and consistent with the quantitative study design defined. Their decision to use a survey questionnaire to collect data is ideal for this type of research that seeks to provide perceptions regards on the various elements of the supply chain. Use of a Likert scale is particularly useful due to its appropriateness in studies where perceptions, attitudes and views are required. However, they fail to provide justifications for the choice of the mail and email survey questionnaires over other methodologies such as interviews. As Curtis, Murphy & Shields (2013) note, interviews deliver a superior response rate relative to mailed questionnaires. The researchers clearly indicate their sample size with an indication that 600 questionnaires were distributed by mail or email with 162 questionnaires being returned. Of the returned questionnaires, 22 were unusable due to incompleteness with the final response rate being 23%. However, they do not provide any explanation on the possible implications of the low response rate on the study’s findings. As Curtis, Murphy & Shields, (2013) posit, the response rates vary markedly depending on the method of data collection chosen, nature of the issue being investigated and respondents. They note that postal questionnaires can sometimes get a response rate of as little as 15% with face to face interviews yielding a response rate of as high as 100%. As a result, they argue that instead of looking for a particular figure that then can regard as appropriate, it is preferable to evaluate the response rate of comparable studies. This evaluation helps to gauge the reasonableness and acceptability of a particular response rate. Bryman & Bell (2011) state that one needs to demonstrate that those who decline to participate in the survey do not significantly differ from those who consent to and ultimately participate in a particular study. Failure to attest to such a fact will imply the existence of biases that negatively impacts on the validity of the findings. An alternative to address the challenge presented by low response rates particularly in mail surveys is to employ triangulation- the use of a mixture of data collection methods. The authors however fail to explain the sampling criteria in their study, implying a rather significant limitation on any desired duplication of the study. Critique of the results and interpretation, implications and conclusions section The researchers provide a clear and consistent presentation of their findings with a subsequent coherent interpretation. Specifically, the results findings from regression analysis, tests on validity and reliability are clearly tabulated enhancing their clarity and coherency. Sufficient details are presented clearly and consistently. They refer to information provided in the literature review in order to present a clear discussion of the findings. The researchers’ findings also show no direct correlation between the chosen supply chain’s effectiveness indicator- food quality and the identified explanatory variables. These findings are based on a step by step multiple regression analysis. They imply that the identified statistically significant relationships have not been misinterpreted to suggest the subsistence of a causal relationship when in actuality there is no cause-effect association. They also highlight and explain the limitations of the study. Furthermore, they describe various implications of the research’s findings. For instance, they clearly identify one limitation of the study as being the fact that only one supply chain performance indicator was considered in the study. They however note that other performance indicators will be the subject of future studies. The researchers also indicate that there is a need to consider multiple case studies in order to reconfirm and substantiate the findings from the study. In addition, they note that the study was carried out within the context of the Australian market hence limiting the ability of making generalizations to other markets outside of Australia. However, the implications and conclusions section largely focuses on the implications of the study as well as the limitations. No clear conclusion is provided and thus the researchers fail to sum up the key findings from the study of the readers. Conclusion In assessing the validity and relevance of a particular research article, Young & Solomon (2009) propose some questions that can assist the analysts in their evaluation. These questions are based on the determination of the type, appropriateness and relevance of the study question. The analyst should also identify the contributions of the study by considering whether there is any research gap that it fills. The evaluation of the research methods utilized by the researcher helps the analyst to determine any potential sources of bias. In addition, the appropriateness of the statistical methods and whether the data collected is appropriate and justifiable for providing the findings and conclusions arrived at by the researcher are analyzed, (Young & Solomon, 2009). The consideration of these questions indicates that the researchers clearly identify the research gap that they intend to feel. They have also given a comprehensive literature review on the research topic, which provides a clear rationale for their study. The literature review is relevant, current, and balanced with a clear synthesis of previous studies regards their study area of interest. Although the methodology is explicitly addressed, the researchers fail to justify their choice of particular data collection methodologies. They however provide a detailed explanation of their methodologies. The results are well presented with a clear and consistent discussion and interpretation section that links the study’s findings with the literature review. Although the conclusion section fails to sum up the key outcomes from the study of the readers, overall, the study achieves its objectives as demonstrated by the successful answering of the research question. Reference List Bryman, A & Bell, E 2011, Business Research Methods 3e, Oxford University Press Curtis, W, Murphy, M & Shields, S 2013, Research and Education: Foundations of Education Studies, Routledge Desmarchelier, P, Fegan, N, Smale, N & Small, A 2007, Managing safety and quality through the red meat chain. Meat science, 77(1), 28-35. Rong, A, Akkerman, R & Grunow, M 2011, An optimization approach for managing fresh food quality throughout the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 421-429. Read More