Juventud, empleo y migración

The manufacturing reports examined in Chapter I emphasised the importance of improving supply chain capabilities, focusing on resources and determining the right corporate strategy and structure to fit with the business environment challenges being faced. The focus in these reports was one of addressing internal factors as an important prerequisite for managing all organisations within a supply chain. In addressing these recommendations, the aim of the literature review was to examine three areas:

 Understanding how the firm’s SCO decision supports supply chain related issues facing medium and large sized manufacturers

 Defining and explaining supply chain orientation (SCO)  Clarifying the role of strategic orientation

The key concepts of SCM, SCO, strategic orientation and cross-functional coordination have been systematically and extensively examined in the review, taken from a wide range of research disciplines and using the ABS list as a starting point for strategic orientation studies. This interdisciplinary approach has exposed ‘linguistic freight’ challenges, meaning that authors from different research fields were found to have contrasting ways of interpreting important concepts such as strategic orientation (Wilcox, n.d ).

This review has exposed the broad nature of how strategic orientation has been applied within organisations since the early 1900s and 36 different strategic orientation approaches have been featured. When identifying contrasting yet complimentary strategic orientation approaches such as lean orientation (Yang et al., (2011) versus agile orientation (D’ Olivieira Luna et al., 2010), market orientation (Keith, 1960) versus operations orientation (Mabert and Venkataramanan, 1998), and product orientation (Kotler, 1994) versus process orientation (Porter, 1985), these can be argued as disciplines in their own right. Fundamentally, they have all been claimed as supporting SCM.

It seems that authors have focused on understanding the links between marketing and SCM; hence this review builds on those views by exploring the relevance of three specific function-based strategic orientations with SCM which have been proposed as critical elements of the manufacturing firm’s SCO. These include:

 Market orientation - putting the customer first and the ability to translate this into product customisation at a reasonable cost;

 Production orientation - determining the most effective manufacturing strategy for the supply chain organisations to pursue;

 Purchasing orientation - the desire to pursue collaborative inter-firm relationships with supply chain partners (espoused by the SCM paradigm).

Based on the studies examined, this review concludes that strategic orientation goes beyond the realms of representing business functions, business processes or business objectives. The phenomenon of strategic orientation makes a significant contribution to shaping the firm’s business model and is central to the organisation’s success… or failure. Whilst the review has established that strategy and strategic orientation are inextricably linked, authors such as Morgan and Strong (1998; 2003) have debated the varying levels of strategic relevance. This point may be especially relevant for managing multi- dimensional constructs such as SCO. The most influential papers reviewed within this chapter included: Pearson (1993) was the first author to question the relevance of strategic orientation, asking if business orientation was “substance or cliché?” This study triggered an early research motivation for gaining a better understanding of the role of strategic orientation in the supply chain context.

Mentzer et al. (2001) Research co-authored by John Mentzer has been influential in establishing the necessary flows for SCM. Mentzer et al. were the first authors to distinguish between SCM and SCO. However, this study was conceptual, based on existing supply chain studies.

Mello and Stank (2005) highlighted the predominance of qualitative methodologies for understanding the necessary behavioural and cultural changes required within the organisation to become supply chain orientated, before SCM can take place.

Cagliano et al. (2005) recognised that as manufacturing strategy changed so must the strategic orientation configuration. The authors contradicted the business growth cycle concept highlighted in the review by Liu et al. (2004), stating that strategic configuration was not linked to a final maturity target which others could follow.

Juttner (2007) and Juttner and Christopher (2013) examined the role of marketing to support the management of supply chains. The marketing function has become a focus of attention in contemporary studies examining SCM and SCO.

Esper et al. (2010) conceptualised SCO as a prerequisite for SCM. The authors proposed three central constructs, strategy, structure and behaviours, which are supported by philosophy and culture. The research was conceptually significant in its development and the authors invited more empirical examinations of SCO and specific focus on the behavioural aspects of SCO.

The studies examined in this review have evidenced that understanding the role of strategic orientation in the supply chain context offers far-reaching consequences in terms of achieving a sustainable competitive advantage for individual manufacturing organisations. Figure 2.15 highlights the key points found within this review of literature which includes the origins of SCM and the arguments presented by authors plus the importance of cross-functional coordination for effective SCM and SCO. Effective management of the manufacturing firm’s strategic orientation has been argued as lacking a control mechanism for shaping management and employee behaviour (Taylor, 1996; Peck, 1998; Raymond and

Bergeron, 2008). SCO places a particular emphasis on stronger collaboration internally within the organisation, creating a supply chain culture (Mello and Stank, 2005).

Figure 2.15: Responses to critical questions derived from the literature

Adopting a SCO business model approach promotes high levels of trust and coordination across supply chain business functions such as purchasing, marketing and production. These same business functions have, historically, been acknowledged as difficult to manage and prone to conflict, functional rivalry as inevitable (Crittenden, 1992; Crittenden and Crittenden, 1993; Fisher, 1997; Morgan and Strong, 2003; Piercy, 2007). In understanding the extent to which a manufacturing organisation may be supply chain orientated, studies are limited, with Mentzer et al. (2001) emphasising concepts such as commitment and trust and Mollenkopf et al. (2007) focusing on developing a causal model for measuring marketing and logistics. The elements of SCO have been identified as philosophy, strategy, structure, culture,

How can firms manage supply chains?

A precondition of SCM is termed SCO (Mentzer et al., 2001; Esper et Al., 2010). SCO involves building and

maintaining internal behavioural dimensions of trust, commitment, cooperation, senior management support, to facilitate relational exchange (Min et al., 2007)

Historically, Stevens (1989) suggested conflicting goals amongst business functions in the intra-firm network:  High customer service levels (marketing)

 Low inventory management (purchasing)  Low unit cost (production/operations)

Marketing orientation is the foundation for managing supply chains (Min et al., 2007; Erevelles and Stevensson, 2005) Market orientation requires cross-functional coordination (Narver and Slater, 1990)

What is strategic orientation?

The phenomenon of strategic orientation should make a significant contribution in shaping the firm’s business model and become central to its effectiveness (Morgan and Strong, 1998)

Four approaches for explaining the evolution of strategic orientations:  Chronological order (Lynch et al., 2012)

 Eras to depict management thinking (Kieser, 1997; Jones and Richardson, 2005)  In line with business growth/cyclical (Liu et al., 2004)

 As a branching evolution (Narver and Slater, 1990; Kohli and Jaworski, 1990)

Function-based strategic orientations (Pearson, 1993; Paneerselvam, 2005), Objective-based strategic orientations (Drucker, 1973; Miles and Russell, 1996), Process-based strategic orientation (Porter, 1985)

SO is a multi-dimensional construct (Pearson, 1993; Gatignon and Xuereb, 1997; Voss and Voss, 2000)

How should function-based strategic orientations be configured when firms are faced with changes in the business environment?

Pearson (1993) stressed the problem of becoming over-reliant on one strategic orientation

Firms which relied solely on one approach such as a market orientation were only considering a partial model (Bennett and Cooper, 1979; Noble et al., 2002)

Trade-offs between business functions should be smoothed out

There exists a gap in understanding dominance across the strategic orientation configuration dependent on conditions in the external business environment

What is supply chain management (SCM)?

SCM is both a philosophy and a strategic orientation (Mentzer et al., 2001)

SCM creates customer value and provides the firm with a source of competitive advantage (Mentzer et al., 2001) SCM is the flow of materials and products (Mentzer et al., 2001) (6 flows)

leadership and behaviours (Esper et al., (2010); these constructs can be further separated to identify a control mechanism for the organisation.