4.6 Article

A swift response framework for measuring the strategic fit for a horizontal collaborative initiative

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS
Volume 121, Issue 2, Pages 550-561

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.04.004

Keywords

SCM; Collaborative supply network; Strategic fit; AHP; Case study

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Companies operate globally and face increasing competition. Collaboration between companies could be a critical factor to remain competitive. Extensive academic research addressed the collaboration inside a supply chain (vertical collaboration). Despite persuasive research, a literature survey indicates some major theoretical shortcomings, as presented in this paper. A major theoretical and practical shortcoming is the lack of a strategic decision support framework for the implementation of horizontal collaboration (collaboration between different supply chains). An appropriate collaboration-feasibility test is needed here. Two companies strategically ready to work together should first test if no insurmountable practices inhibit the collaboration. If Such practices are present, initiating a collaborative strategy will be probably a waste of time and effort. This paper starts with determining the key elements influencing feasibility based oil it literature study and in-depth interviews in different companies. The Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) model is used. These quantitative elements are hierarchically classified and are combined in a feasibility-test model. At the same time, lower-level hierarchical qualitative elements such as company characteristics are aggregated using the analytic hierarchy process as a method of multi-criteria decision-making and are integrated in the model in order to evaluate the different collaboration-types. The model is validated by means of several case studies of which one is presented in this paper. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available