Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Re-engineering global supply chains: Alliances between manufacturing firms and global
logistics services providers
Rohit Bhatnagar, S. Viswanathan,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
Rohit Bhatnagar, S. Viswanathan, (2000) "Reengineering global supply chains: Alliances between
manufacturing firms and global logistics services providers", International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 30 Issue: 1, pp.13-34, https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030010307966
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030010307966
Downloaded on: 10 October 2017, At: 23:29 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 33 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4596 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(1994),"Global Supply Chains: Factors Influencing Outsourcing of Logistics Functions", International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 24 Iss 6 pp. 11-19 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/09600039410066141">https://doi.org/10.1108/09600039410066141</a>
(2007),"Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda", The International Journal of Logistics
Management, Vol. 18 Iss 1 pp. 125-150 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090710748207">https://
doi.org/10.1108/09574090710748207</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:593819 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
Introduction
During the 1980s and 1990s, the imperatives of cost efficiency and customer
responsiveness have pushed firms to aggressively pursue two business strategies
global location of production/distribution facilities (referred to hereinafter as
globalization) and time-based competition. Both these strategies have dramatically
transformed the way in which business activities are organized and carried out.
Gobalization motivated by pressures like cost-effectiveness, access to new markets
and economies of scale, among others, has led to the emergence of a borderless
organization with globally located suppliers and production/distribution facilities.
This trend towards globalization, aided by the liberalization of trade policies by
governments all over the world, is likely to strengthen in future. However, the
impetus for time-based competition has come from more exacting customers, who
demand a wide variety of products with minimal lead-time. This trend is also
likely to intensify in the future as companies adopt mass customization, leading to
greater choice for customers.
The chief difficulty that a firm faces in the implementation of these
strategies globalization and time-based competition is that they make
somewhat contradictory demands on its resources. For instance, globalization
increases the uncertainty in the company's operations, and the need to deal
International Journal of Physical
The authors acknowledge the useful contributions of Mr Abdul Halim Selamat and Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, 2000,
Mr Yam Hein Leong of United Parcel Service, and the anonymous referees whose comments pp. 13-34. # MCB University Press,
and suggestions considerably improved this paper. 0960-0035
IJPDLM with this uncertainty leads to considerably increased inventories and longer
30,1 lead-times through global supply chains. Hewlett-Packard Company (H-P)
estimated that in 1994 it had more than $3 billion invested in worldwide
inventories (Billington, 1994). Larger work-in-process inventories at different
points in the supply chain could result in longer lead-times when there is a
mismatch between the products that are demanded and the products that are in
14 inventory. This degrades cost performance and customer responsiveness and
hence diminishes the ability of the firm to compete on time (de Treville, 1992).
A supply chain is used here to refer to a network of facilities that procures raw
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
materials, transforms the raw materials into intermediate and finished goods at
processing centers, and delivers the finished goods to customers through
distribution warehouses (see Figure 1).
To ensure effective management of global supply chains, managers will
have to resolve the contradictory demands of globalization and time-based
competition. For effective supply chain management, managers must resolve
the tradeoffs between asset costs (facilities, capital equipment, and inventory),
time-based performance measures (lead-time and variance of customer
delivery), and other cost factors (transportation costs). See Stock and Lambert
(1987) and Davis (1993) for details. Given the complexity of accounting for all
the above factors simultaneously, a commonly adopted objective for this
decision problem is to minimize the total costs while ensuring that lead-time
falls within an acceptable range and does not exhibit sizable variability. The
fulfillment of such an objective depends crucially on both manufacturing and
distribution functions. Manufacturing cost and lead-time performance is a
Figure 1.
Representation of
supply chain
function of variables such as supplier's on-time performance and quality, Re-engineering
manufacturing lotsizes, and process performance. Distribution cost and global supply
lead-time performance is determined by decisions relating to order processing, chains
transportation, inventory policies, and warehousing.
In the past decade, there have been many efforts both in the industry and
academia that have emphasized the objective of enhancing manufacturing
performance. See Karmarkar et al. (1983), Karmarkar (1987) and Cohen and Lee 15
(1988) for details of some of the scenarios. However, beyond a certain level,
improvements in manufacturing alone are not sufficient. Efficiency of the
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
alliance must be seen within the overall framework of the changing imperatives
in contemporary supply chains.
The second important gap relates to the dependence of the success of
logistics alliances on changes in the supply chain structure (supply chain
re-engineering). Recent research on the US computer industry shows that cost
savings were substantially higher when GLSPs significantly re-engineered the
original supply chain as an inherent aspect of the alliance (Kopczak, 1997). This
claim needs to be verified in settings other than the computer industry, and for
global supply chains, because Kopczak (1997) reported only two global
alliances in her research.
This paper presents an analysis of these two issues. From a regional
perspective, this paper fulfills an important gap since we report a logistics
alliance linking facilities in Asia and North America which, to our knowledge,
has not been done before. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. First,
we review the literature, and specifically discuss the principles of
postponement and consolidation, which are important constructs from the
point of view of strategic logistics alliances and provide a common platform on
which these alliances could be built. Next we focus on a real life case study
pertaining to the logistics alliance between the global supply chain of
Motorola's Semiconductor Products Sector and United Parcel Service (UPS).
The case study is used to develop the two issues on strategic logistics alliances
that have been identified above. Concluding comments and research directions
are outlined in the final section.
Literature review
As earlier defined, a supply chain is a network of production and distribution
facilities that procures raw materials, transforms these materials into
intermediate and finished goods and distributes the finished goods to
customers (Lee and Billington, 1993). The supply chain encompasses both the
manufacturing and the logistics functions (provided either by an in-house
logistics department or an external contractor). We will address the two issues
identified earlier advantages for manufacturing firms from a strategic
alliance with GLSPs in the context of contemporary supply chain imperatives,
and the importance of supply chain re-engineering.
IJPDLM Supply chain imperatives and advantages of strategic alliances
30,1 The advantages that accrue to manufacturing firms from entering into
strategic partnerships with GLSPs must be seen within the overall framework
of the decision issues relating to supply chains. Considerable work has been
done by both academicians and practitioners in modeling the various tradeoffs
in efficient supply chain management. Davis (1993) provides several examples
18 of efficient management of supply chains leading to enhanced competitiveness
of the firm. The author illustrates his research through several case studies
where supply chain analysis was used as a strategic tool to improve
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
Product Process
Chowdhury, 1997, p. 203). Many of the other actions proposed in Table I have a
direct impact on the logistics strategies of the firm and support the idea of
strategic alliances between manufacturing firms and specialized logistics
firms. The interested reader is also referred to Lee et al. (1993) and Lee and
Billington (1993) for an exposition of the evolution of studies on supply chain
analysis implications for strategic logistics alliances between manufacturing
firms and GLSPs.
Parker (1994) overviews the role of logistics strategy within the business,
using examples from the garment industry in the UK. The author suggests that
innovation in logistics emanates from a systematic analysis of opportunities
aimed at reducing the supply chain and/or improving customer service, and
supports the idea of strategic logistics alliances between firms and GLSPs.
Gentry (1996) suggests that the important prerequisites to look for in such
alliances are, long-term commitment, information sharing, cooperative and
continuous improvement, and sharing of risks and rewards.
Overall, the above discussion brings out the benefits of strategic logistics
alliances between manufacturing firms and GLSPs in the overall context of
supply chain management. In the next section, we discuss the central role of
supply chain re-engineering as a determinant of the success of logistics
alliances.
are an important direction for the future. However, at a detailed level, there are
key gaps in our knowledge about:
. Payoffs from strategic logistics alliances within an overall framework of
global supply chain imperatives.
. Supply chain re-engineering as a determinant of success of such
alliances.
In the next section we use a detailed case study relating to the strategic alliance
between Motorola and UPS, to elaborate these issues.
Methodology
The methodology used in this paper is the case study method. The logistics
alliance between Motorola's Semiconductor Products Sector (manufacturer)
and United Parcel Service (GLSP) is described. Case studies typically
answer the how and why of a decision problem. In our previous discussion
of literature, the two important issues to emerge were:
(1) Advantages of strategic logistics alliances in the context of supply chain
imperatives.
(2) The linkage between logistics alliances and supply chain re-engineering.
While a number of authors have reported survey-based empirical results, there
is an important need to describe the implementation of logistics strategies at a
detailed level in a particular organization. Case studies are an appropriate
methodology when focusing on one organisation/entity, which is investigated
in-depth, with careful attention to detail. Several authors such as Lovelock and
Bless (1996), O'Byrne (1997), among others, have used the case study method to
describe different facets of the logistics function. For the current study, the
primary sources of information were UPS executives including those
responsible for the finance function, warehouse management and general
management. These contacts gave us an overall picture of the alliance. The
structure of the contact primarily comprised face-to-face interviews and a site
visit to UPS's Singapore logistics facility. Follow-up clarification was obtained
through phone calls or e-mails. Finally, interviews were conducted with
logistics personnel in Motorola.
IJPDLM Case study: Motorola's strategic alliance with United Parcel Service
30,1 Motorola Inc. is a well-known US-based, electronics multinational corporation,
diversified in eight business sectors. These business sectors, which are
autonomous, operate independently of each other. Each business sector
comprises several product lines, with production facilities and sales outlets
located around the world. The focus of our discussion in this paper will be
22
Motorola's Semiconductor Products Sector (SPS). SPS has several major
production facilities whose locations are shown in Table II. Worldwide,
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
Factory Destination
Origin Customer Dock
Current Arrangement
Production Customs Warehouses Customer
Sites Clearance (Handling)
Korea Phoenix
Others Toronto
Figure 3.
Average transit times
Transit 1 (Air) Transit 2(Truck) Transit 3(Truck)
through the original
supply chain in 199X
IJPDLM ways of improving the shipment time. At this time, Motorola started
30,1 interacting with UPS. The initial objective was relatively narrow cut down
shipment time to the required limits. Motorola and UPS jointly developed
methods to trace and study the times taken at every step of the distribution
process, from the point of order to delivery. Based on this, they also developed a
best case scenario under ``perfect conditions'' using current resources. The
24 conclusion was that under the current supply chain structure, the distribution
time could be brought down to 90 hours under ``perfect conditions''. The best
case transit times through the supply chain are shown in Figure 4.
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
Since the required reduction in cycle times went beyond the best case level,
Motorola and UPS started looking at the rationalization of the entire process of
manufacturing and distribution. This laid the ground for the two firms to enter
into a strategic alliance so that the distinctive competence/resources of both
firms could be synergized. Several distinguishing features of the semiconductor
industry, as well as the transit times through the supply chain (as outlined in
Figures 3 and 4) must be underlined here.
. Products have a high value/weight ratio. The use of air transport over
long distances is justified because investment in pipeline inventory
increases considerably if slower transport is used. The semiconductor
industry is characterized by rapid product obsolescence, which makes
pipeline inventory minimization an eminent goal.
. Almost half (49.5 percent) of the overall transit time in the supply chain
is spent between the point the shipment is cleared through customs, and
the point of delivery to customers. This time consists of transport from
Los Angeles to the warehouses, handling at the warehouses, and finally
transit to customers. A substantial amount of time is therefore spent
directing the shipments to the warehouses, and eliminating this step
could enhance performance.
. UPS, given its extensive air/ground network, would have a distinct
advantage in handling the transportation of shipments from the point of
entry into North America to the locations of individual customers.
30,1
Production Customs Louisville Customer
Sites Clearance
Korea
26
Manila North
Taiwan Region
China Customers
Others
Figure 5.
Average transit times
for Motorola's
re-engineered supply 48 hours 4 hours 5 hours 15 hours
chain
Total Transit Time Under New Structure = 72 hours
custom handling procedures has helped to cut down time wastage in this
process. UPS has thus been able to achieve the overall objective of factory to
customer dock delivery within 72 hours. An important point that arises is
whether the 72 hours timeline incorporates some slack and hence leaves scope
for future improvement. Discussions with UPS executives revealed that on a
system-wide basis, the 72-hour timeline represents a long-term optimal delivery
time. Delivery time could, of course, be reduced by initiating direct flights
between Anchorage and Motorola's customer locations in North America, but
this would severely impact UPS's cost economies which have been obtained by
consolidating the Motorola and the non-Motorola shipments along existing
UPS routes.
Prior to its alliance with UPS, Motorola was using the services of multiple
service providers. Taking a generic example, this meant that shipments
moving from Asia-Pacific to the USA were picked up from the factory of origin
by one trucking company. The trucking company tendered the shipments to an
air-freight forwarder at the cargo hub. The air-freight forwarder, who had
earlier made arrangements to book the appropriate flight, prepared the
shipments and export documents and tendered the cargo to the airport
handling agent for loading on the aircraft. On arrival at the destination airport
(Los Angeles), the shipments were cleared through customs by a Motorola-
appointed handling agent and later sent by trucks or air by yet another
operator to Motorola's distribution warehouses for sorting, prior to final
dispatch to the ultimate consumer. In all, there were at least five independent
operators involved in the chain, with whom Motorola had to make prior
arrangements and coordinate the services. In contrast, the current strategic
alliance involves a direct partnership between Motorola and UPS. UPS Re-engineering
coordinates the activities within the entire supply chain on a door-to-door basis. global supply
The relationship between Motorola and UPS has evolved to a higher level along chains
the outsourcing continuum suggested by Coyle et al. (1996).
the inventory carrying costs is in order here. As outlined in Stock and Lambert
(1987), inventory carrying costs comprise capital costs incurred on inventory
investment, inventory service costs, storage space costs, and inventory risk
costs. In the semiconductor industry, product life cycles are getting
increasingly compressed, and being encumbered with obsolete products at the
end of the product life cycle is a significant disadvantage. Hence it is
appropriate that firms use a high inventory carrying cost to more accurately
reflect these high costs of obsolescence. We believe that the 45 percent cost of
carrying inventory is a correct reflection of the real life situation.
The cost improvements owing to lead-time reduction are only one aspect of
overall efficiency enhancement. An important concern of Motorola is the
service level achieved, i.e. long-term probability of on-time deliveries. Empirical
evidence of the service performance in the first full year of the Motorola-UPS
alliance showed an average of 91.5 percent on-time delivery (based on the 72
hours time commitment) and 98.4 percent on-date delivery. On average, there
was an 8 percent-9 percent failure rate in keeping with the 72-hour timeline, but
only a 1.5 percent failure rate in delivery within the day promised.
Investigation indicated that most of the service failures were due to factors
outside the complete control of UPS, e.g. snowstorms in winter. Discussions
with UPS executives revealed that there are contingency plans and backup
aircraft are pressed into service to support the 72-hour delivery commitment.
Overall, the average service level achieved under the current system was found
to be significantly better than the previous system because it eliminated the
need for Motorola to coordinate the activities of multiple service providers.
Coordination now from one stage to another is seamless via the EDI linkage
between the various facilities.
There are several other benefits which fall into a grey zone, i.e. benefits
which cannot be easily measured or quantified. These benefits can be classified
into several distinct categories:
updates are now available to the customers and key marketing offices in real
time.
Reduced damage
. Reduced damage resulting from less handling in the delivery process.
The above is a brief overview of the main benefits accruing from the alliance
between Motorola and UPS. For a detailed treatment of these issues the
interested reader is referred to Selamat and Chin (1996).
IJPDLM Impact of supply chain re-engineering
30,1 Comparing Figures 3 and 5, we can see that the improvements in the lead-time
have resulted from the supply chain re-engineering that has taken place as part
of the strategic alliance between Motorola and UPS. Kopczak (1997) has
described the following six strategies for supply chain restructuring
(re-engineering) in her research on the computer industry in the USA:
30
(1) Use of faster modes of transportation and more direct transportation.
(2) Consolidation of transportation routes accompanied by relocation of
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
consolidation/deconsolidation points.
(3) Elimination of local inventory stocking points and centralization of
inventories.
(4) Substitution of merge centers or consolidation/deconsolidation points
for warehouses as mixing points.
(5) Addition of a regional warehouse or a warehouse for a particular
customer.
(6) Reassignment of roles and responsibilities among supply chain entities.
In the case of the Motorola-UPS alliance, the supply chain re-engineering is a
composite of strategies 1, 2, 4, and 6 above. The alliance has enabled Motorola
and UPS to effectively balance the contradictory needs of globalization and
time-based competition by integrating the principles of postponement and
consolidation. Motorola's critical need to compete on time is fulfilled. The
understanding built up with UPS on time sensitivity has helped Motorola
effectively coordinate the manufacturing process with the distribution process
and effectively minimize the overall lead-time in the supply chain. The alliance
has resulted in increased freight charges for Motorola which are, on average, 10
percent-15 percent higher, as compared to the previous system of dealing with
five different service providers. However, this is more than compensated for by
the savings from reduced inventory, and lesser needs for warehousing and
coordination. From UPS's point of view, the alliance with Motorola has
provided a stable base volume and hence facilitated the consolidation process
at different points in its ``hub and spoke'' network. The UPS-Motorola alliance
has therefore yielded strategic benefits to both parties time postponement
benefits (at an effective price) to Motorola and volume consolidation to UPS.
Since these benefits affect the long-term competitiveness of either firm, the
alliance fulfills our earlier definition of a strategic alliance. Our study also
confirms, in the context of the Motorola-UPS global supply chain, the findings
of Kopczak (1997), that supply chain re-engineering is a dominant determinant
of improvements in logistics alliances.
The success of strategic alliances like Motorola and UPS depend crucially on
the information sharing that takes place between the two parties. Information
sharing between partners in a logistics alliance has been described as the ``glue Re-engineering
that holds these ventures together'', (Bowersox, 1990). The author describes the global supply
critical role of information as an ``enabler'' at two levels. chains
(1) In performing a specified role in a well-defined operating domain.
(2) For each party to see its assignment in terms of its contribution to the
alliance and the way it adds value for customers. 31
The first role is being fulfilled through a customized EDI linkup between
Motorola and UPS, whereby the operational sharing of critical information
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
takes place. The benefits that result tracking and tracing of shipments and
improved information availability have already been described earlier. The
second role of information is more tricky. The success of the alliance hinges on
the balance between the principle of postponement (Motorola's priority) and the
principle of consolidation (UPS's priority). This balance could be affected by
uncertainty in the volume at the origin points. Benchmarking the current
performance of the system, using existing data for the joint operations, can be a
very useful first step. Simulation is an appropriate tool for this purpose.
Guidelines for dealing with any deviations from the benchmark can then be
defined by Motorola and UPS in an open environment. A cooperative ``win-win''
arrangement, will reinforce the parties' trust in one another, as suggested by
Bowersox (1990) and Gentry (1996). Such modeling represents an important
direction for future research.
Our last observation is that Motorola's re-engineered supply chain and
inventory movement has some parallels with Wal-Mart's cross-docking
facility-based distribution system, in that both systems attempt to keep
``inventory in motion'' while minimizing the time spent by products idly sitting
by (Stalk et al., 1992; O'Byrne, 1997). Yet Wal-Mart's strategy of investing in its
dedicated logistics systems is radically different from Motorola's strategy of
partnering with UPS. The answer probably lies in ``capabilities-based
competition'', espoused by Stalk et al. (1992). Wal-Mart is in the business of
retailing and its stores support enough volume to see logistics as a primary
concern. It has therefore made strategic investments in a variety of interlocking
support systems (e.g. private satellite communication systems, 2,000 truck
dedicated fleet, etc.). Motorola, however, primarily sees product design and
manufacturing as its core capability, and has therefore opted to outsource its
logistics activities to UPS, through its strategic alliance. Keeping products
moving continuously by re-engineering the supply chain is a complex activity.
By aligning with UPS, Motorola has gained some of the same advantages as
Wal-Mart. Our study indicates that companies that fall into Motorola's profile
(global manufacturing supply chain, high value/weight ratio of products,
emphasis on time-based service) increasingly can be expected to enter into
strategic alliances with GLSPs. This suggests a likely transformation of the
logistics scene in Asia, where manufacturing facilities of more than 3,000
multinational companies are located.
IJPDLM Conclusions and future directions
30,1 In this paper, we analyzed several important issues relating to strategic
alliances between manufacturing firms and global logistics services providers.
The chief motivation for such an alliance is the quest for efficient supply chain
management. However, firms face contradictory pressures from two
imperatives of modern business globalization and time-based competition.
32 Strategic logistics alliances represent an important direction wherein
manufacturing firms and GLSPs can mutually benefit from one another while
alleviating the above pressures.
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
At the outset, a strategic alliance was defined as one which yielded cost
benefits to both parties and where both parties utilized the competence of the
other partner to enhance their competitive position. Using the real life case of
Motorola and UPS, the benefits realized by the two partners of a strategic
logistics alliance were demonstrated. The primary benefit of lead-time
reduction and its cost impact was outlined. It was estimated that through this
alliance, Motorola could realize potential cost savings to the extent of
2.7 percent of its net profits, while improving its service performance. Other
significant benefits realized were improved information availability, reduced
coordination and communication needs, reduced need for warehousing, and
reduced damage. For UPS, the primary benefits stemmed from enhanced
volume consolidation which improved its cost economies. These benefits affect
the long-term competitiveness of either firm, and therefore the Motorola-UPS
partnership fulfills our earlier definition of a strategic alliance.
Our study confirmed the earlier findings of Kopczak (1997), that supply
chain re-engineering is a dominant determinant of improvements in logistics
alliances. We argued that the alliance has enabled Motorola and UPS to balance
effectively the contradictory needs of globalization and time-based competition
by integrating the principles of postponement and consolidation. Our study is
one of the first ones to propose such an interpretation. This is also one of the
few studies which has reported results in the context of Asian supply chains.
Given the large number of multinational corporations that have facilities in
Asia, we foresee a transformation of the logistics sector in this region, on the
lines discussed in this study. Information sharing was identified as a critical
reinforcer of such alliances.
An interesting observation was the parallel between Motorola-UPS and
Wal-Mart. While the actual strategy adopted in the two cases was radically
different Motorola outsourcing its logistics activities completely to UPS
versus Wal-Mart making strategic investments in interlocking logistics
systems both systems are inherently trying to keep ``inventory in motion'', by
minimizing the time spent by products idly sitting by. This emerges as a
critical requirement for effectiveness of global supply chains, with the actual
strategy that is adopted depending on what the firm believes is its core
competence.
An important future direction that emerges from this research is to assess
the link between volume variability at the origin points, UPS's consolidation
process and the on-time service levels achieved. Also, other similar case Re-engineering
studies, as well as empirical research covering a larger cross-section of industry global supply
also need to be carried out. Finally the role of information in reinforcing a chains
strategic logistics alliance needs to be studied in greater detail.
Note
1. Throughout this discussion, we use the term 199X to represent the year in order to respect 33
the confidentiality request of the companies.
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
References
Ballou, R.H. (1992), Business Logistics Management, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Berry, D., Towill, D.R. and Wadsley, N. (1994), ``Supply chain management in the electronics
products industry'', International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 35-44.
Bhatnagar, R. (1998), ``Third party logistics services in Singapore'', Working Paper, Nanyang
Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798.
Billington, C. (1994), ``Strategic supply chain management'', OR/MS Today, April, pp. 20-7.
Bounas, G. (1994), ``Federal Express: the vision made real'', in Bounas, G., Yorks, L., Adams, M.
and Ramney, G. (Eds), Beyond Total Quality Management Toward the Emerging
Paradigm, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Bowersox, D.J. (1990), ``The strategic benefits of logistics alliances'', Harvard Business Review,
July-August, pp. 36-45.
Bowersox, D.J. and Closs D.J. (1996), Logistical Management: The Integrated Supply Chain
Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Cohen, M.A. and Lee, H. L. (1988), ``Strategic analysis of integrated production distribution
systems: models and methods'', Operations Research, Vol. 36, pp. 216-28.
Coyle, J.J., Bardi, E.J. and Langley, C.J. (1996), The Management of Business Logistics, 6th ed.
West Publishing Co., St Paul, MN.
Dapiran, P., Lieb, R.C., Millen, R.A. and Wassenhove, L.H.V. (1996), ``Third party logistics
services: usage by large Australian firms'', International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 10, pp. 36 -45.
Davis, T. (1993), ``Effective supply chain management'', Sloan Management Review, Summer,
pp. 35-46.
de Treville, S. (1992), ``Time is money'', OR/MS Today, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 30-4.
Gentry, J.J. (1996), ``Carrier involvement in buyer-supplier strategic partnerships'', International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 14-25.
Islam, I. and Chowdhury, A. (1997), Asia-Pacific Economies: A Survey, Routledge, London.
Karmarkar, U.S. (1987), ``Lotsize, lead-times and in process inventories'', Management Science,
Vol. 33, pp. 409-18.
Karmarkar, U.S., Kekre, S. and Kekre, S. (1983), ``Multi item lotsizing and manufacturing lead
times'', Working Paper No. QM8325, University of Rochester.
Kopczak, L.R. (1997), ``Logistics partnerships and supply chain restructuring: survey results
from the US computer industry'', Production and Operations Management, Vol. 6 No. 3,
pp. 226-47.
IJPDLM La Londe B.J. and Masters, J.M. (1994), ``Emerging logistics strategies: blueprints for the next
century'', International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 24
30,1 No. 7, pp. 35-47.
Langley, C. J. (1997), ``Outsourcing continues to make gains'', Traffic Management, Vol. 36 No. 10.
Lee, H.L. and Billington, C. (1993), ``Material management in decentralized supply chains'',
Operations Research, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 835-47.
34 Lee, H.L., Billington, C. and Carter, B. (1993), ``Hewlett-Packard gains control of inventory and
service through design for localization'', Interfaces, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 1-11.
Lieb, R.C., Millen, R.A. and Wassenhove, L.H.V. (1993), ``Third party logistics services: a
comparison of experienced American and European manufacturers'', International Journal
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
1. Kamel A. Fantazy, Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu, Vinod Kumar. 2016. Conceptualizing the relative openness of
supply chain and its impact on organizational performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal 23:5,
1264-1285. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Ernesto D.R. Santibanez-Gonzalez, Ali Diabat. 2016. Modeling logistics service providers in a non-
cooperative supply chain. Applied Mathematical Modelling 40:13-14, 6340-6358. [Crossref]
3. Rylie E. O. Pelton, Mo Li, Timothy M. Smith, Thomas P. Lyon. 2016. Optimizing Eco-Efficiency Across
the Procurement Portfolio. Environmental Science & Technology 50:11, 5908-5918. [Crossref]
4. Hsin-I Hsiao, Kuan-Lin Huang. 2016. Time-temperature transparency in the cold chain. Food Control
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
21. Jenni Eckhardt, Jarkko Rantala. 2012. The Role of Intelligent Logistics Centres in a Multimodal and
Cost-effective Transport System. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 48, 612-621. [Crossref]
22. R. Rajesh, S. Pugazhendhi, K. Ganesh, Ducq Yves, S. C. Lenny Koh, C. Muralidharan. 2011. Perceptions
of service providers and customers of key success factors of third-party logistics relationships an empirical
study. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 14:4, 221-250. [Crossref]
23. Lianguang Cui, Susanne Hertz. 2011. Networks and capabilities as characteristics of logistics firms.
Industrial Marketing Management 40:6, 1004-1011. [Crossref]
24. Carl Marcus Wallenburg, Peter Lukassen. 2011. Proactive improvement of logistics service providers as
driver of customer loyalty. European Journal of Marketing 45:3, 438-454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
25. R. Rajesh, S. Pugazhendhi, K. Ganesh, C. Muralidharan, R. Sathiamoorthy. 2011. Influence of 3PL service
offerings on client performance in India. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation
Review 47:2, 149-165. [Crossref]
26. Chung-Yung Wang, Gia-Shie Liu, Mu-Chen Chen, Ju-Long Chen, Hsiao-Min Chen. A supply chain
network system optimum model for rush orders production decision in global manufacturing 617-622.
[Crossref]
27. Carl Marcus Wallenburg, A. Michael Knemeyer, Thomas J. Goldsby, David L. Cahill. 2010. Developing
a scale for proactive improvement within logistics outsourcing relationships. The International Journal of
Logistics Management 21:1, 5-21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
28. Elten Briggs, Timothy D. Landry, Patricia J. Daugherty. 2010. Investigating the influence of velocity
performance on satisfaction with third party logistics service. Industrial Marketing Management 39:4,
640-649. [Crossref]
29. Wang Jin. The Management Research on Agreement System Dynamic Automobile Supply Chain Alliance
3463-3466. [Crossref]
30. W Chandraprakaikul, T S Baines, R Y Lim. 2010. Strategic positioning of manufacturing operations
within global supply chains. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of
Engineering Manufacture 224:5, 831-844. [Crossref]
31. A. Creazza, F. Dallari, M. Melacini. 2010. Evaluating logistics network configurations for a global supply
chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 15:2, 154-164. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
32. H.I. Hsiao, R.G.M. Kemp, J.G.A.J. van der Vorst, S.W.F. (Onno) Omta. 2010. A classification of logistic
outsourcing levels and their impact on service performance: Evidence from the food processing industry.
International Journal of Production Economics 124:1, 75-86. [Crossref]
33. Shao Zhi-fang, Lin Yan-jie. Glass substrate production strategies optimization 403-407. [Crossref]
34. Glin Bykzkan, Orhan Feyziolu, Mehmet akir Ersoy. 2009. Evaluation of 4PL operating models:
A decision making approach based on 2-additive Choquet integral. International Journal of Production
Economics 121:1, 112-120. [Crossref]
35. Lars-Erik Gadde, Kajsa Hulthn. 2009. Improving logistics outsourcing through increasing buyerprovider
interaction. Industrial Marketing Management 38:6, 633-640. [Crossref]
36. Rohit Bhatnagar, CheeChong Teo. 2009. Role of logistics in enhancing competitive advantage.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 39:3, 202-226. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
37. CARL MARCUS WALLENBURG. 2009. INNOVATION IN LOGISTICS OUTSOURCING
RELATIONSHIPS: PROACTIVE IMPROVEMENT BY LOGISTICS SERVICE PROVIDERS AS A
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
DRIVER OF CUSTOMER LOYALTY. Journal of Supply Chain Management 45:2, 75-93. [Crossref]
38. Alessandra Marasco. 2008. Third-party logistics: A literature review. International Journal of Production
Economics 113:1, 127-147. [Crossref]
39. Christopher A. Boone, Christopher W. Craighead, Joe B. Hanna. 2007. Postponement: an evolving
supply chain concept. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 37:8, 594-611.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
40. Mirghani S. Mohamed. 2007. The triad of paradigms in globalization, ICT, and knowledge management
interplay. VINE 37:2, 100-122. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
41. Konstantinos Selviaridis, Martin Spring. 2007. Third party logistics: a literature review and research
agenda. The International Journal of Logistics Management 18:1, 125-150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
42. Li Shiying, Yu Yongli, Qu Changzheng, Zhang Yanzhong, Zhang Liu, Chen Le, Li Shiying. Distribution
Programming for Test Resources Based on Hungary Method 2207-2209. [Crossref]
43. Hlio Zanquetto Filho, Andrew Fearne, Nlio Domingues Pizzolato. 2006. Gerenciamento da cadeia
de abastecimento de hortifrutigranjeiros frescos: uma pesquisa exploratria no Reino Unido. Revista de
Administrao Contempornea 10:4, 71-92. [Crossref]
44. William B. Joyce. 2006. Accounting, purchasing and supply chain management. Supply Chain Management:
An International Journal 11:3, 202-207. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
45. Gunnar Stefansson. 2006. Collaborative logistics management and the role of thirdparty service providers.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 36:2, 76-92. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
46. Amit Sachan, Subhash Datta. 2005. Review of supply chain management and logistics research.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 35:9, 664-705. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
47. Constantine Bourlakis, Michael Bourlakis. 2005. Information technology safeguards, logistics asset
specificity and fourthparty logistics network creation in the food retail chain. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing 20:2, 88-98. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
48. Edward Rubesch, Ruth Banomyong. 2005. Selecting suppliers in the automotive industry: comparing
international logistics costs. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 17:1, 61-69. [Abstract] [PDF]
49. Biao Yang *, Neil D. Burns, Chris J. Backhouse. 2005. An empirical investigation into the barriers to
postponement. International Journal of Production Research 43:5, 991-1005. [Crossref]
50. R. Glenn Richey, Anthony R. Wheeler. 2004. A New Framework for Supply Chain Manager Selection.
Journal of Marketing Channels 11:4, 89-103. [Crossref]
51. Biao Yang, Neil D. Burns, Chris J. Backhouse. 2004. Postponement: a review and an integrated framework.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 24:5, 468-487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. Shilpa S Dani, Jenny A Harding. 2004. Managing reuse in manufacturing system modelling and design: a
value net approach. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 17:3, 185-194. [Crossref]
53. John Kidd. 2003. Us not them! Impeding knowledge management in supply chains. Knowledge and Process
Management 10:1, 18-28. [Crossref]
54. Anu H. Bask. 2001. Relationships among TPL providers and members of supply chains a strategic
perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 16:6, 470-486. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
55. Michael G Harvey, R.Glenn Richey. 2001. Global supply chain management. Journal of International
Management 7:2, 105-128. [Crossref]
Downloaded by Institute of Management Technology - Hyderabad At 23:29 10 October 2017 (PT)
56. Jaouad Boukachour, Charles-Henri Fredouet, Mame Bigu Gningue. Building an Expert-System for
Maritime Container Security Risk Management 86-108. [Crossref]
57. Vasileios Giotopoulos, Dimitrios E. Koulouriotis, Vasileios Moustakis. Using Outsourced Logistics Services
(4pl) 360-375. [Crossref]
58. Omprakash K. Gupta, S. Samar Ali, Rameshwar Dubey. Third Party Logistics 90-116. [Crossref]
59. Eric Lambourdire, Jrme Verny, Elsa Corbin. Exploring the Sources of the Competitive Advantage of
Logistics Service Providers 163-184. [Crossref]