Interorganisational – Supply Chain Management

Entries categorized as ‘Supply Chain Management’

Trendspotting: what is hot and what is not

June 14, 2009 · 6 Comments

Trendspotting is a lovely sport. In research you can look at conference tracks, topics of current calls for papers, conduct your own survey on trends, or have a glance on which articles are downloaded the most. Downloads are interesting as they reveal not only what is read but implicitly, which topics academics currently work on. Let’s see the (convenience sample of) Emerald statistics for IJLM, IJPDLM and SCM:IJ. So here’s the what is hot in terms of being most downloaded in the first quarter of 2009 (compared to previous such lists from 2008). “Hotties” are the articles that are new or got into the spotlight in 2009, “classics” are the ones that were already in the spotlight in 2008 and continue to be there.

1. Supply chain integration (and collaboration). An outstanding paper award just went to such a topic, to Fabbe-Costes and Jahre (2008) article on SC integration (congrats!). Another outstanding hottie is Pålsson & Johansson’s (2009) SC integration through labelling that received most downloads ever within the first 6 months after publication (and has only been published in 2009, no 6 months have gone yet). Many of the classics look at characteristics of SCM and the supply chain management framework, such as Croxton et al.’s (2001) SC processes (framework), Cooper et al. (1997): SCM framework, Cooper & Ellram (1993): characteristics of SCM, Power (2005): SC integration, Fawcett et al. (2008): SC integration, New (1997) scope of SCM and collaboration such as Barratt’s (2004) SC collaboration andSandberg’s (2007) logistics collaboration.

2. Corporate social responsibility, ethics, and green/reverse supply chains (indeed moving towards more CSR and ethics focus). With hotties such as Hanafi et al. (2008) as well as van Hoek (1999) on reverse logistics, Wikner & Tang (2008) on closed-loop SC, and Andersen & Skjoett-Larsen (2009) moving towards CSR, and Svensson & Bååth (2008) towards SC ethics. The classics here are Carter & Rogers’ (2008) framework for sustainable SCM, Wu & Dunn (1995) environmentally responsible logistics, and Markley & Davis’ (1997) sustainable SCM.

3. Supply chain risk management. The hotties (new interest) are articles such as Christopher & Lee (2004) on SC risk mitigation, Khan et al. (2008) product design and SC risk, Khan & Burnes (2007) on SC risk. In addition there are a number of steady interest articles (the “classics”) on this topic such as Norrman & Jansson (2004): SC risk management at Ericsson, Manuj & Mentzer (2008) and Jüttner (2005) and Finch (2004) on SC risk management in general.

4. Lean and agile supply chains. Agility is in fashio, or at least in the fashion industry, says Masson et al. (2007). Another hottie is Christopher & Towill’s (2001) article on agility. Classics are Jones et al.’s (1997) lean logistics, and Christopher & Towill (2000) lean and agile supply chains.

5. E-commerce. Hotties such as Cho et al.’s (2008) logistics capability in e-commerce, Giménez & Lourenço (2008): e-commerce, classics: Puschmann & Alt (2005) e-procurement, Lewis et al. (2005): internet.

6. RFID. Pålsson & Johansson’s (2009) article also falls into this category. Classics are Spekman & Sweeney (2007),  Attaran (2007) and Vijayaraman & Osyk (2006).

Other topics with more interest:
(a) Value chain analysis. Hotties: Barber (2008),  Classics: Taylor (2005)
(b) Humanitarian logistics. Hotties: Kovács and Spens (2007),  Oloruntoba & Gray (2006). No classics (i.e. a very “hot topic”).
(c) Demand management. Hotties: Walters (2008). Classics: Walters (2006). (a one-man show?)
(d) Logistics outsourcing. Classics: Razzaque & Sheng (1998), Kremic et al. (2006). No hotties, though (i.e. no newcomers, no renewed interest articles).
(e) Warehousing and inventory management. Hotties: Williams & Tokar’s (2008) inventory management, Claassen et al. (2008) VMI. Classics: Nynke Faber et al. (2002) warehouse complexity, Baker (2007) inventory mgmt
(f) Transportation. Hotties: Meixell & Norbis (2008): transport mode selection, Mangan et al. (2008): port-centric logistics. Classics: Selviaridis & Spring (2007): TPL
(g) Implementation of SCM. Classics: Sridharan et al. (2005) SC implementation, Wong et al. (2005) SC toy practice. Interestingly, no hotties.

Other hotties on random topics. Notably, these are unique articles that triggered a lot of interest among readers. These are Fernie & Grant’s (2008) on-shelf availability, Shook et al.’s (2009): strategic sourcing (another breakthrough article looking at downloads of the first 6 months), and Green et al.’s (2008) logistics performance.

Other classics. Mangan et al. (2004): qualitative and quantitative methods,  Sachan & Datta (2005)’s general literature review, Christopher et al. (2006) taxonomy of SC strategies, Cox (1999): power.

Here’s the trend. Integration, CSR, risk management, even humanitarian logistics were already hot topics the last time we looked at them. Optimisation doesn’t make the list any more – though that can be due to the convenience sample of these very journals. The same goes for customisation and modularisation, and supply chain design. “Global” this and that has been dropped. Then again, what in supply chain management is local only?

Gyöngyi

Categories: Academic journals · Academic publications · Supply Chain Management

SCM theory and practice – what comes first?

June 8, 2009 · 4 Comments

Can supply chain management work well in practice without drawing on ‘theories of supply chain management’?

Árni

Categories: Scientific explanation · Socks and sandals · Supply Chain Management

Logistics dissertation awards once again

April 7, 2009 · 1 Comment

SOLE as well as LRN have just announced their deadlines for logistics dissertation awards: Apr 24 (forms/applications to Stanley Griffis) and May 22 (forms/applications to Sarah Skinns), respectively.

Gyöngyi

Edit on Apr 15: The 2009 Emerald/EFMD Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards are also up to grab, with the application deadline being Oct 1, 2009.

Categories: Logistics · Supply Chain Management

Must all inventories be “eliminated”?

March 11, 2009 · 3 Comments

I am a bit troubled with the representation of “lean” and “just-in-time” in various core textbooks. What students read far too often is that all inventories are waste and must be eliminated.

“First you identify the waste, then you elimiate it”.

Without recognising that inventories do have a role to play, and that role is easy to address e.g. through various trade-offs; inventory costs vs. other forms of logistics costs. And there is (ideally) also a relationship with customer service to consider.

The grumpy point I want to make is that the misinterpretation is not only the fault of the students; our textbooks can be (and are) vague on this point, and as teachers we must also pin this down more carefully.

Árni

Categories: Socks and sandals · Supply Chain Management

JBL seeking editor

March 5, 2009 · Leave a Comment

The Journal of Business Logistics is seeking a new editor – see CSCMP’s call here. Deadline for applications: May 1, 2009

Gyöngyi

Categories: Academic journals · Logistics · Research & Methodology · Supply Chain Management

SCM journal rankings, here we go again

March 2, 2009 · 1 Comment

Finally, it’s out, the Menachof/Gibson/Hanna/Whiteing update on SCM journal rankings. Some of their findings will be interesting to read to the researchers who just sent out a survey on the ranking of transportation journals :-) Other findings confirm previous studies, with the trio of JBL, IJPDLM and IJLM being on top for research, and with a number of reviews (i.e. more practitioner-oriented journals) leading the teaching bit. A convergence of the three amigos is also to be seen, with OM journals “entering” the list. Does it mean we agree on SCM even though we come from different backgrounds?

Gyöngyi

Categories: Academic journals · Journal ranking · Supply Chain Management

Securing cargo

February 23, 2009 · 1 Comment

Security seems to be the next big topic in supply chain management research. Or rather, a range of topics, from intellectual property rights (read counterfeit) to health and safety questions (read unwanted additives like led in toys, melamine in milk…), to technology to increase flow visibility (read RFID to locate your goods), piracy and theft. Even the EU’s 7th Framework Programme has a security focus, prompting an own Wikipedia entry on supply chain security. Yet apart from projects on biosecurity, the interest in SCM research has not been overwhelming. Articles on the topic are particularly rare. So this is to welcome one of a kind, Daniel Ekwall’s article on “the displacement effect of cargo theft“. The sad news is that theft patterns just change over time…

Gyöngyi

Categories: Academic publications · Supply Chain Management

Let it snow – but not in the supply chain?

February 6, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. Christmas carrolls are full of wishes for snow – alas, anyone living in the UK now doesn’t think of a white Christmas. (Nor did anyone in China a year ago.) Why is it that snow comes such a surprise that all(!) transportation modes come to a halt? It’s the same thing at Milan airport, the first snowfall of the year leads to a complete shutdown, and to infinite disruptions in any supply chain that involves companies from Milan. Hope it doesn’t affect fashion week ;-)

What I do not understand is the “surprise” effect of snow; it snows there every year at least once! Or have we got used too much to the effects of global warming that we have forgotten about snow?

What is more, what ever happened to dynamic vehicle routing models that could be used to avoid such disruptions? Or maybe we should ask Emmett Lodree for advice how to incorporate weather forecasts in supply chain modelling? (see his latest article in Computers and Operations Research)

Well, I certainly hope that the supply chains of “snow chains” don’t suffer from snow!

Gyöngyi

BTW, according to IBM, “SNOW” will make your supply chain greener :-)

Categories: Socks and sandals · Supply Chain Management · Sustainability

The woes of interdisciplinary research

February 6, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Not sure whether it was Cooper, Lambert and Pagh’s first article on the supply chain management framework that debated the problem of “functional silos” first, but at least ever since, SCM researchers have been criticising companies for their organisation in these functional silos. Having said so, we researchers excel at maintaining these when it comes to teaching and even to doing research. It’s the good old “don’t step on my toes” mentality.

At the same time, we are reminded – not the least by funds – that we should break down our own functional silos and conduct interdisciplinary research. Easier said than done. First of all, what counts as “interdisciplinary“? Does marketing + SCM constitute interdisciplinary research? Or finance + SCM? Or, say, industrial management and SCM? Probably the funniest way of conducting “interdisciplinary” SCM research is to get a researcher from a technical university and one from a business school; both from their SCM faculty, of course :-)

Crossing the boundaries of other disciplines / research areas is not at all straightforward. Where does your theoretical frame then come from, and which literature do you include/exclude, on what basis? It is nice to have the tradition in SCM research to “borrow” theories from other disciplines, but the question can be disputed whether sthg then still qualifies at SCM research at all. So where are the boundaries of our “discipline”? (This is in fact a question we need to debate in conference committees over and over again.)

Yet another question arises from interdisciplinary research: does your study have to contribute to both disciplines, or is it enough to have a contribution to one? Or, as Magnus Lindskog once asked me, where do you want to leave your mark?

Gyöngyi

Categories: Research & Methodology · Supply Chain Management

Open source review

January 26, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Remember when Árni suggested to debate articles in public, as a sort of open source review? The Journal of Operations Management has indeed taken on the idea and publishes articles, and ideas for articles, in their operations and supply management forum. Some of the articles did already generate quite a number of (high quality) comments. Today’s topic is “too much theory, not enough understanding”. Time to log on and contribute to the debate!

Gyöngyi

Categories: Academic journals · Academic publications · Operations management · Popular science · Research & Methodology · Supply Chain Management · Theory