4.6 Review

Supply chain performance measurement systems: A systematic review and research agenda

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS
Volume 183, Issue -, Pages 299-315

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.11.005

Keywords

Performance measurement; Supply chain management; Systematic literature review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Supply chain performance measurement systems (SCPMSs) are experiencing a new life in business practice thanks to new technologies that allow the collecting, integrating and sharing of information among multiple supply chain partners. However, studies that truly investigate performance measurement beyond a single firm's boundaries are still limited. With the purpose of revamping SCPMSs as a relevant research topic, we conduct a systematic review of the literature. To this end, we firstly provide a clear and up-to-date definition of SCPMSs, which sets the boundary of the study. Secondly, we perform a systematic review of academic articles published in peer-reviewed international journals, mostly in the domains of supply chain management and performance measurement. A final sample of 92 articles published from 1998 to 2015 constitutes the knowledge base of the study. The results show the publication pattern over time and provide evidence about the journals, the methodology adopted and the content elements (the SCPMS frameworks presented and the scope and phase of the measurement process). We synthesize the research state of the art and present a detailed research agenda for future scientific contributions. In particular, we envisage a theory-testing approach concerning the relatively more mature component of SCPMSs (i.e. supplier PMSs) from a life cycle perspective as well as an exploratory/theory-building approach concerning the other under-investigated components (i.e. customer PMSs, multi-tier SCPMSs and many-to-many SCPMSs).

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