4.6 Article

Joint operational decision-making in collaborative transportation networks: the role of IT

期刊

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/SCM-08-2013-0298

关键词

Information technology; Supply chain management; Horizontal collaboration; Transport operations

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - This paper addresses horizontal supply chain collaboration among autonomous freight carriers in the less-than-truckload industry. The main purpose of the paper is to identify and explain the challenges with joint operational decision-making in this context and investigate the precise role of information technology (IT) therein. Design/methodology/approach - Empirical evidence is gathered by means of exploratory and explanatory case research, with multiple cases at the planning departments of European freight carriers operating in collaborative transportation networks. Findings - Collaborating carriers face fundamental challenges in joint operational planning and control of collaborative transportation, despite the broad availability of state-of-the-art IT. These operational supply chain challenges can be explained by technological differences of the available IT applications, which hinder integration. Research limitations/implications - Any expectations with regard to state-of-the-art XML or EDI-based IT integration for improved joint operational decision-making in collaborative transportation networks should be considered with care. In particular, the authors' research findings may encourage practitioners to consider new planning and control procedures and develop dedicated IT applications for collaborating freight carriers. Originality/value - The paper highlights the importance of horizontal supply chain collaboration for small and medium-sized freight carriers in the less-than-truckload industry and conceptualises how collaborative transportation networks are organised. Furthermore, an IT typology is introduced to explain the challenges with joint operational decision-making.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据