4.5 Article

Collaborative performance measurement in supply chain

Journal

INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT & DATA SYSTEMS
Volume 110, Issue 8-9, Pages 1297-1318

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/02635571011087400

Keywords

Supply chain management; Performance measurement (quality); Inventory; Partnership

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose - The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the challenges when developing a common performance measurement system (PMS) in the context of a collaborative supply chain. Design/methodology/approach - The paper utilizes qualitative and quantitative data from a case study. The qualitative data refer to the assessment of collaborative performance measures based on interviews with experts, while the quantitative data demonstrate the use of two performance measures in a collaborative supply chain network. Findings - The development of a collaborative PMS is a challenging task. Through the systematic study of two significant performance measures for a supply chain, it was found that the one could not be supported due to reliability restrictions, while the other requires the development of a complex information system. Based on these, a discussion of specific challenges follows. Research limitations/implications - The paper has the general case study limitations. Practical implications - Companies operating in supply chain networks need to synchronize existing business processes and data before the design of a new PMS. Selecting the measures and the measurement method is not a trivial task. Important challenges reveal when dealing with, underlying data, business processes and the evaluation method of a PMS in supply chains. Originality/value - The management control function usually focuses on the design and development of PMSs for a single organization. Limited knowledge exists when more than two companies require the development of a PMS for a jointly agreed business process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available