IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p11797-d919419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Proposed Performance-Measurement System for Enabling Supply-Chain Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Paitoon Varadejsatitwong

    (Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University, Bangkok 10200, Thailand)

  • Ruth Banomyong

    (Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University, Bangkok 10200, Thailand)

  • Puthipong Julagasigorn

    (Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University, Bangkok 10200, Thailand)

Abstract

Existing performance-measurement systems in the supply-chain literature have been designed for specific supply chains. Without a business-appropriate performance-measurement system, practitioners devise strategies that are neither scientific nor supported by data. The objective of this paper was to propose a performance-measurement system to support the enabling of supply-chain strategies. The proposed performance-measurement system (PMS), combining the Plan–Do–Check–Act cycle (PDCA) with the evidence-based management (EBM) concept, served as the basis for developing a procedural framework. The PMS was validated using the case logistics service providers (LSPs). The PDCA methodology was used to develop a structural framework for fourth-party logistics (4PL). In the Plan step, the research team identified the business problems of fourth-party logistics (4PL). In the Do step, the LSP literature was reviewed, to identify five performance dimensions (‘Service Quality’; ‘Social and Environmental’; ‘Inter-organizational Relationship’; ‘Financial’; and ‘Efficiency and Effectiveness’), and key performance indicators (KPIs). The 4PL management team participated in the finalization of the five performance dimensions and the 53 KPIs, which were used to propose a preliminary version of the structural framework for the 4PL. In the Check step, the data collected from 478 subcontractors of the 4PL were analyzed, using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling, and were used to validate the proposed structural framework for the 4PL. The validated structural framework was further presented at an academic conference, and to the 4PL for feedback, and was used to formulate supply-chain strategies through brainstorming. The findings include a validated structural framework containing five performance dimensions and 32 KPIs. The research revealed that input performance (‘Service Quality’, ‘Social and Environmental’, and ‘Inter-organizational Relationship’) positively affected output performance (‘Financial’ and ‘Efficiency and Effectiveness’). Supply-chain strategies were further suggested to the 4PL. The validating case in this study demonstrated that the employed procedural framework (PDCA and EBM) was applicable, and could be used to derive a structural framework and supply-chain strategies for the 4PL. This study contributes to the literature, by proposing a PMS for supply-chain strategy development. The paper’s illustrative case provides a practical application of how to develop a performance-measurement system.

Suggested Citation

  • Paitoon Varadejsatitwong & Ruth Banomyong & Puthipong Julagasigorn, 2022. "A Proposed Performance-Measurement System for Enabling Supply-Chain Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11797-:d:919419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11797/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/11797/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Cheng Lu & Shi, Yizheng & Barnes, Bradley R., 2015. "The role of satisfaction, trust and contractual obligation on long-term orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 473-479.
    2. Miguel Afonso Sellitto & Giancarlo Medeiros Pereira & Miriam Borchardt & Rosnaldo Inácio da Silva & Cláudia Viviane Viegas, 2015. "A SCOR-based model for supply chain performance measurement: application in the footwear industry," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(16), pages 4917-4926, August.
    3. Tang, Ou & Nurmaya Musa, S., 2011. "Identifying risk issues and research advancements in supply chain risk management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 25-34, September.
    4. Lyu, JrJung & Ding, Jyh-Hong & Chen, Ping-Shun, 2010. "Coordinating replenishment mechanisms in supply chain: From the collaborative supplier and store-level retailer perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 221-234, January.
    5. Sandeep Vij & Rayees Farooq, 2014. "Multi-Group Moderation Analysis for Relationship between Knowledge Sharing Orientation and Business Performance," International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), IGI Global, vol. 10(3), pages 36-53, July.
    6. Bryan Hong & Zhichuan Li & Dylan Minor, 2016. "Corporate Governance and Executive Compensation for Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 199-213, June.
    7. Irene Wei Kiong Ting & Noor Azlinna Azizan & Rajesh Kumar Bhaskaran & Sujit K Sukumaran, 2019. "Corporate Social Performance and Firm Performance: Comparative Study among Developed and Emerging Market Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Schnetzler, Matthias J. & Sennheiser, Andreas & Schonsleben, Paul, 2007. "A decomposition-based approach for the development of a supply chain strategy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 21-42, January.
    9. Lima-Junior, Francisco Rodrigues & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro, 2019. "Predicting supply chain performance based on SCOR® metrics and multilayer perceptron neural networks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 19-38.
    10. Rezaei, Jafar & van Roekel, Wilco S. & Tavasszy, Lori, 2018. "Measuring the relative importance of the logistics performance index indicators using Best Worst Method," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 158-169.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu, Yun & Ntim, Collins G. & Zhang, Qingjing & Li, Pingli, 2022. "Board of directors’ attributes and corporate outcomes: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Schmidt, Christoph G. & Wuttke, David A. & Heese, H. Sebastian & Wagner, Stephan M., 2023. "Antecedents of public reactions to supply chain glitches," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    3. Pasura Aungkulanon & Walailak Atthirawong & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon & Wirachchaya Chanpuypetch, 2024. "Navigating Supply Chain Resilience: A Hybrid Approach to Agri-Food Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-41, May.
    4. Robert E. Till & Mary Beth Yount, 2019. "Governance and Incentives: Is It Really All about the Money?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 605-618, October.
    5. Ben-Ammar, Oussama & Bettayeb, Belgacem & Dolgui, Alexandre, 2019. "Optimization of multi-period supply planning under stochastic lead times and a dynamic demand," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 106-117.
    6. Tuo, Ling & Rezaee, Zabihollah & Gao, Lei, 2024. "Is there a tradeoff between management earnings forecasts and sustainability reporting?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    7. Christian Wankmüller & Maximilian Kunovjanek & Robert Gennaro Sposato & Gerald Reiner, 2020. "Selecting E-Mobility Transport Solutions for Mountain Rescue Operations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Zhao, Na, 2019. "Managing interactive collaborative mega project supply chains under infectious risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 275-286.
    9. Chakraborty, Atreya & Gao, Lucia Silva & Sheikh, Shahbaz, 2019. "Managerial risk taking incentives, corporate social responsibility and firm risk," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 58-72.
    10. Dilupa Nakandala & Yung Po Tsang & Henry Lau & Carman Ka Man Lee, 2022. "An Industrial Blockchain-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Framework for Global Freight Management in Agricultural Supply Chains," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Kwon, He-Boong & Lee, Jooh, 2019. "Exploring the differential impact of environmental sustainability, operational efficiency, and corporate reputation on market valuation in high-tech-oriented firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 1-14.
    12. Seyyed Mohammad Seyyed Alizadeh Ganji & Mohammad Hayati, 2016. "Identifying and Assessing the Risks in the Supply Chain," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(6), pages 1-74, June.
    13. Laurent Lim, Lâm & Alpan, Gülgün & Penz, Bernard, 2014. "Reconciling sales and operations management with distant suppliers in the automotive industry: A simulation approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 20-36.
    14. Qazi, Abroon & Dickson, Alex & Quigley, John & Gaudenzi, Barbara, 2018. "Supply chain risk network management: A Bayesian belief network and expected utility based approach for managing supply chain risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 24-42.
    15. Zanon, Lucas Gabriel & Munhoz Arantes, Rafael Ferro & Calache, Lucas Daniel Del Rosso & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro, 2020. "A decision making model based on fuzzy inference to predict the impact of SCOR® indicators on customer perceived value," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    16. Gürler, Hasan Emin & Özçalıcı, Mehmet & Pamucar, Dragan, 2024. "Determining criteria weights with genetic algorithms for multi-criteria decision making methods: The case of logistics performance index rankings of European Union countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Yang Yang & Xuezheng Chen & Jing Gu & Hamido Fujita, 2019. "Alleviating Financing Constraints of SMEs through Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, January.
    18. Chung, Henry F.L. & Kingshott, Russel P.J. & MacDonald, Robyn V.G. & Putranta, Martinus Parnawa, 2021. "Dynamism and B2B firm performance: The dark and bright contingent role of B2B relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 250-259.
    19. Yusheng Kong & Alex Antwi‐Adjei & Jonas Bawuah, 2020. "A systematic review of the business case for corporate social responsibility and firm performance," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 444-454, March.
    20. Miguel Afonso Sellitto & Guilherme Schreiber Pereira & Rafael Marques & Daniel Pacheco Lacerda, 2018. "Systemic Understanding of Coopetitive Behaviour in a Latin American Technological Park," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 479-494, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:11797-:d:919419. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.