ANÁLISIS Y SÍNTESIS DE DATOS

There is a lack of consensus among scholars and practitioners regarding the definition of SCM (Burgess, Singh, & Koroglu, 2006; Croom, Romano, & Giannakis, 2000; Gibson, Mentzer, & Cook, 2005; Mentzer et al., 2001). The SCM concept is in its early stages of development (Burgess et al., 2006; Gibson et al., 2005), but the initial advancements of the SCM concept can be largely confined to functional supply chain areas such as physical distribution and transport management (Croom et al., 2000), purchasing, logistics, information technology and marketing (Burgess et al., 2006).

Gibson et al. (2005, p. 17) noted that “new knowledge is constantly processed by those

in the discipline to determine discipline definition; scope and boundaries; elements and

Supplier _{Organization Customer}

Direct Supply Chain

Supplier’s Supplier Organization Customer Supplier Customer’s Customer Extended Supply Ultimate Supplier

Supplier Organization Customer Ultimate

Customer

Third Party Logistics

Market Research Financial

Provider

Ultimate Supply Chain

Figure 2.1-b

Figure 2.1-c Figure 2.1-a

42

functions; relationships between elements and functions; relationship with other

discipline; direction and evolution; and significance”. Thus, the lack of a universal

definition of SCM can be attributed to its multidisciplinary origin and relatively broad scope (Croom et al., 2000). Similarly, Mentzer, Stank, and Esper (2008, p. 31) asserted

that the definitional incongruity of the SCM concept is due to the fact that “SCM is not ‘owned’ by any one discipline or department, but rather is a phenomenon that touches

nearly all areas of business”. According to Kathawala and Abdou (2003, p. 141), SCM

“has been poorly defined and there is high degree of variability in people’s minds about what is meant”.

Burgess et al. (2006) suggested that SCM has been conceptually framed into four categories. This comprises a set of intra-organizational (internal) functions and activities (e.g., purchasing, logistics, operations management), business processes, networks of

related processes, and ‘other’, which constitutes a broader level of analysis involving

other disciplines such as sociology, marketing and psychology (Burgess et al., 2006; Frankel et al., 2008; Mentzer et al., 2001). However, there is an ongoing debate among scholars around which functions, organizations and processes are to be included or excluded while defining the scope and boundaries of SCM (Gibson et al., 2005; Larson, Poist, & Halldórsson, 2007). Interestingly, if SCM is viewed as an activity this would limit its scope to narrow operational functions. Conversely, if SCM is viewed from a systems perspective it would be viewed as a multidisciplinary and holistic concept encapsulating several supply chain activities and processes as well as various disciplines (Burgess et al., 2006).

43

A review of SCM literature suggests that inconsistencies exist in terms of defining the scope, boundaries, activities and functions that constitute SCM. However, some agreement seems to exist for SCM conceptualization (Frankel et al., 2008). The common SCM definitional themes include: integration of inter- and intra-organizational activities, the management of cross-functional business processes, collaboration of relationships among supply chain network members (e.g., Cooper, Lambert, & Pagh, 1997; Frankel et al., 2008; Harland, 1996), and the bi-directional flows of information, products and other operational activities (Cooper et al., 1997; Trent, 2004). The following discussion describes various perspectives of SCM and how it is conceptualized in the current body of knowledge.

SCM as a Management Philosophy

As a management philosophy, the SCM concept takes a system perspective that involves all supply chain channel members to develop mutual partnerships and long-term relationships (Cooper & Ellram, 1993; Lisa & Cooper, 1990; Tyndall, Gene, Gopal, Partsch, & Kamauff, 1998). Cooper and Ellram (1993, p. 13) defined SCM as “an integrative philosophy to manage the total follow of a distribution channel from the

supplier to the ultimate user”. This perspective suggests that the aim of SCM is to

manage the flow of goods and services in such a way that improves overall supply chain performance and customer value (Cooper et al., 1997; Mentzer et al., 2001).

However, Mentzer et al. (2001) argued that SCM as a management philosophy is

congruent with ‘supply chain orientation’. They describe supply chain orientation as “the recognition by an organization of the systemic, strategic implications of the tactical

44

2001, p. 11). Mentzer et al. (2001) emphasized that SCM refers to the implementation of this orientation across several companies along the supply chain. Accordingly, supply chain orientation is an essential prerequisite for companies wanting to implement the SCM approach. Building on the ‘implementation of supply chain orientation’ logic, Mentzer et al. (2001) offered a relatively broad definition of SCM, which has been adopted in this study:

The systematic, strategic coordination of the traditional business functions and the tactics across these business functions within a particular company and across businesses within the supply chain, for the purposes of improving the long-term performance of the individual companies and the supply chain as a whole. (p. 18)

SCM as an Integrated Management Strategy

SCM has been also conceptualized as an integration of internal and external supply chain activities, processes as well as flows of information, material and products (Alfalla-Luque, Medina-Lopez, & Dey, 2013). The prior literature suggests that supply chain integration has focused on either upstream supply chain practices (e.g., Choi & Hartley, 1996; Vonderembse & Tracey, 1999) or downstream supply chain practices (Alvarado & Kotzab, 2001) in a standalone manner. According to Chen et al. (2009), the traditional SCM and logistics management research has associated SCM with intra- functional integration that deals with the collaboration of various departments within an

45

However, modern conceptualization, such as that of Flynn et al. (2010, p. 59) described

supply chain integration as “the degree to which a manufacturer strategically collaborate

with its supply chain partners and collaboratively manages intra- and inter-organization

processes”. Similarly, Stevens (1989) suggested that seamless supply chain integration

encompasses collaboration with upstream as well as downstream partners in the chain. The goal of integrated SCM is to make supply chains more efficient through the reduction of costs, stock-outs, and lead time, and more effective by focusing on entire supply chain activities so that a company can provide improved services and products to its customers (Flynn et al., 2010; Frohlich & Westbrook, 2001), and build competitiveness in the marketplace (Gimenez & Ventura, 2003).

SCM as Management of Set of Activities

The concept of SCM is also viewed as the management of a related set of activities to implement a SCM management philosophy. According to Mentzer et al. (2001), previous SCM research has identified seven key sets of activities: integrated behaviour, mutually sharing information, mutually sharing risk and rewards, cooperation, a common goal and a focus on serving customers, integration of processes and partners to build and maintain long-term relationships. Trent (2004) has identified additional activities such as purchasing and material releasing, inbound and outbound transportation, receiving, material handling, warehousing and distribution, inventory control and management, demand and supply planning, order processing, production planning and scheduling, shipping, processing and customer service, while Stock et al. (2010) proposed that material/physical and informational flows, and networks of relationships within and across organizational boundaries, as key activities involved in SCM. This perspective gives a little indication about how SCM activities are related to

46

each other but it advocates that SCM refers to the management of all these activities in a coherent manner by which a company or its supply chain partners can accomplish improved performance.

Process Management Perspective of SCM

Trent (2004, p. 54) suggested SCM should be considered “as a set of interrelated

processes rather than discrete, nonaligned activities”. Davenport and Short (1998, p.12)

defined business process as “a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a defined business outcome”. SCM as a process is described as “the integration of

business processes from end user through original suppliers that provides product,

services and information that add value for customers” (Cooper et al., 1997, p. 2).

According to Trent (2004), well-defined and well-communicated SCM processes enable practitioners to evaluate SCM implementation and outcomes. Moreover, it makes it easier to perform global supply chain activities with consistency through the utilization of the best practices and knowledge that facilitate performance for supply chain members (Trent, 2004).

Network and Collaboration Perspective of SCM

Modern supply chains are complex and their management is also increasingly challenging because of increasing customer expectations and changing market dynamics (Erhun & Keskinocak, 2011). The complex and challenging business environment requires companies to establish collaborative relationships and active networking with their supply chain partners (Erhun & Keskinocak, 2011). According to Cohen and Roussel (2005, p. 139), collaboration is “the means by which companies within a supply chain work together towards mutual objectives through the sharing of ideas,

47

information, knowledge, risks, and reward”. This perspective holds that SCM is about

“establishing networks of relationships between interrelated and interdependent

organizations, as well as across business units” (Stock et al., 2010, p. 34). In line with

the network view, Ellram (1991, p. 14) depicted SCM as “a network of firms interacting to deliver products or services to the end customer, linking flows from raw material

supply to final delivery”.