SCMT 6473 Summary Week 4 September 24

Instructor: Dr. Terry L. Esper.

Doctoral student: Poliano Bastos da Cruz.
Lambert, Cooper and Pagh (1992) demonstrated that managing the supply chain involves three closely inter-related
elements, supply chain network structure, business processes and the management components. To reach a successful
SCM we have to determining: who are the key members to link processes? What type/level of integration should be
applied? Which kind of members we are dealing with, primary or supporting? Given that we have four fundamentally
different types of business process links: managing, monitoring, not managing, and non-member. In that sense SCM
deals with total business process excellence, in which business process become supply chain business process linked
across intra- and inter-company boundaries. SCM vs. Logistics is similar to the confusion over marketing as a concept
and marketing as a functional area. Authors argue that it is much easier to write a definition for SCM than it is to
implement the definition. I s it because firms used different names for similar process, and similar names for
different process, and we do not know how to communicate and how to link these process across firms? (Alderson
point about the precise language). SCM objective is maximize competitiveness and profitability for the company and
whole supply chain network. I s this different to the concept to exceed customer requirements (add value)?
Fisher (1997) argues that the first step in devising an effective SCS is to considering the nature of the demand for the
products that could be primarily, functional or innovative. The root cause of the problems plaguing many supply chains
is a mismatch between the types of, product and supply chain. Functional products have predictable demand and long
life cycles. However, their stability invites competition, which often leads to low profit margins. Although the very
newness of innovative products makes demand for them unpredictable with short life cycle (imitators). To understand
the difference is necessary distinguish the types of functions, physical or market mediation. To access the demand
predictability of functional products the flow of information exerts a crucial role and occurs not only under low costs
but also when suppliers will chose for their speed and flexibility. Managers can employ a matrix to formulate the ideal
supply-chain strategy. Many companies have turned or tried to turn traditionally functional products into innovative,
but keeping focus on physical efficiency. This could explains why one finds so many broken supply chains. I s it a
tentative of implementing a leagile approach? We have four tools to cope with uncertainty in demand, Accept the
inherence of uncertainty (high levels of demand uncertainty that exist today in many markets. They have a
tendency to declare a high level of forecast errors unacceptable, and they virtually command their people to
think hard enough and long enough to achieve accuracy in their forecasts) and three coordinated strategies,
continue to strive to reduce uncertainty, avoid uncertainty (cutting lead times and increasing flexibility to demand can
be accurately forecast) and hedging.
Sebastio and Golicic (2008) shows the importance of matching SCS with product characteristics and environment.
The emergent strategy is different from efficiency, responsiveness, or agility, given that the structure of the nascent
technology firm's demands interactions with the market, both in an attempt to speed up and in response to the diffusion
of their product or service. This strategy must focus on cultivation and management of an initial core group of supply
chain partners, complementary product and service providers, and customers. The successful commercialization of
products leveraging radical technological or marketing innovations requires a market driving approach. Thus, the target
is demarcating market and limit competition. The result is influences and addresses supply and demand characteristics
in an emerging market. I s this DSI ? In contrast of traditional firms, innovative must first achieve market legitimacy to
gain entry to key markets. In that way, to get succeed with radical innovations requires collaboration with influential
channel partners, complementary product and service providers, and initial customers. Collaboration in this context
play the role of coordination, since that is "impossible"?
Goldsby, Grifis and Roath (2006) based in previous studies the authors hypothesized if Customer service, as measured
by order-to-ship time, will be best in the lean system and Enterprise-wide inventory will be lowest in the agile system.
The third aspect of interest is total cost evaluate by a post hoc analysis. I s this a form to measure TCO? Results
provides evidences that lean support customer demand more quickly (1.5 days) with forecast-driven supply, than leagile
(4 days) and agile (10.5 days). The idea that leagile model experiences fewer inventory than the agile is not supported.
The main point is that the lean approach (more inventory) operates with much less inventory than a conventional mass

production approach. A review of the total costs indicates that the lean approach represents the least-cost, however the
sensitive analysis don't supports this finds. The research suggests that there is an appropriate time and place for each
of the three strategies. Lean strategy resulted the highest service level to customers and lowest enterprise-wide costs.
This holds under conditions: low-value finished goods ($10) at lower inventory carrying cost percentages (30% and
below). However, the agile strategy proved to be the low-cost approach in all other modeled scenarios.
Christopher, Peck and Towill (2006) argues that to avoid sub-optimization, a holistic approach to SCM should be
adopted. Consider Distance and Time is crucial since that are higher transport costs and geopolitics factors (uncertainty
in oil markets). Thus, distance implies in inevitable complications involved in coordinating shipments from far-off
suppliers, through forwarders, shippers, customs and delivery networks, which requires the ability to manage across
diverse cultural, legal and regulatory environments. Business organizations must to find supply chain solutions that
best fits the demands of the market place. In many markets, time has become a competitive variable (chance of error
in the forecast). Authors suggesting a simple three-dimensional classification appropriate for global supply chains,
products (standard or special), demand (stable or volatile) and replenishment lead-times (short or long). This typology
can be simplified into just two dimensions: predictability and replenishment lead-times.
Mentzer and Esper (2010) authors argues that SCM strategy consists of aligning all companies involved in a supply
chain with respect to product, market, and supply characteristics and involves two interrelated activities, Defining and
Design the supply chain. Fit is central to organizational success and the best performing organizations establish
strategies that closely fit the requirements of their environment. The criterion for defining the strategically appropriate
emphasis is the nature of end products within the supply chain, innovative or functional. Are products characteristics
antecedents of SCM effectiveness, SCM strategy or pure strategy? The key to leagile strategic operations understands
when to most effectively convert from a lean to an agile focus, dictated by environmental characteristics. Are
environmental characteristics antecedents of SCM effectiveness, SCM strategy or pure strategy? It is important to
design a supply that can effectively implement the defined strategic focus in a way that supply chain partners are
capable of supporting and executing the strategy closed. Design is designing a procedure or designing a mechanism
(contract)? Organizational compatibility is necessary given that more similar and complementary firms have high
levels of strategic agreement and thus support the necessary coordination of flows. I s organizational compatibility an
antecedent of coordination flow? The authors argues that DSI can creating superior customer value. DSI is a hybrid
approach like leagile? The SCO paradigm is a transvection view of SCM?
Gligor, Holcomb and Stank (2013) based on the social and life science theory five FSCA dimensions, alertness,
accessibility, decisiveness, swiftness, and flexibility, FSCA is defined as a firms ability to quickly adjust tactics and
operations within its supply chain to respond or adapt to changes, opportunities, or threats in its environment. Alertness
is the ability to quickly detect changes, opportunities, and threats. Accessibility is the ability to access relevant data.
Lin et al. (2006) refer to the capacity to access information as information integration, and describe it as the ability
to use information technology to share data between buyers and supplies. Information integration can be considered
as the infrastructure needed to create a virtual supply chain. How is the difference between information integration
and flow coordination because looks like more than share information? Decisiveness is the ability to make decisions
resolutely. Combined alertness, accessibility, and decisiveness form the cognitive area of FSCA. These dimensions
are related to information-processing and allow the firm to determine what actions to take in response to changes,
opportunities, or threats. Swiftness is the ability to implement decisions quickly. Flexibility is the ability to modify the
range of tactics and operations to the extent needed. Combined swiftness and flexibility represent the physical area
of FSCA. Despite the results suggests that the five dimensions are all measuring some aspect of the same construct, the
data provided insufficient evidence to model FSCA as a second-order construct reflecting five independent
dimensions. As the five constructs emerged as dimensions of FSCA, but not distinct from each other, FSCA was
determined to be a first-order reflective construct tapping five domains of agility. I s it because simultaneous causality
that implies in an endogeneity problem?