Editorial for special issue: Interfaces in Supply Chains

Citation

Lasch, R. and Schultmann, F. (2012), "Editorial for special issue: Interfaces in Supply Chains", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 42 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpdlm.2012.00542faa.001

Editorial for special issue: Interfaces in Supply Chains

Article Type: Guest editorial From: International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Volume 42, Issue 6

About the Guest Editors

Rainer Lasch Professor of Business Management focusing on Logistics at the Dresden University of Technology. He studied Business Mathematics at the University of Augsburg. His thesis for the Certificate of Habilitation was on market oriented design of logistics processes. He has published several papers in international journals of logistics and operations management, edited several conference proceedings and has written some logistics textbooks. He received the 2000 Stinnes Logistics Award for his work on market-oriented design of logistics processes. Recent research activities have involved logistics process design, supplier relationship management, supplier risk management, supplier innovation management, complexity management and spare part logistics. Rainer Lasch has led and participated in many research projects funded by industry and government. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Board of the German Federal Association of Procurement Managers (BME) and has worked as a visiting professor in Italy, China and Australia. From 2008 to 2010 he was chair of the Scientific Group of Logistics within the Association of University Professors in Management.

Frank SchultmannProfessor of Business Management focusing on Production and Logistics at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (formerly University of Karlsruhe). He studied Business and Industrial Engineering, completed his doctoral thesis and his Habilitation at the Faculty of Economics and Business Engineering at the University of Karlsruhe. In 1999, he received the Klaus Tschira Award for Achievements in Public Understanding of Science for his doctoral thesis and in 2000 his habilitation thesis was awarded with the Carl-Freudenberg-Award for the best scientific work in engineering. Recent research focuses on closed-loop supply chains, industrial value chains, sustainable systems, project and risk management. Frank Schultmann has published numerous papers in international journals on operations management, logistics and sustainable systems. He serves as Editor and Editorial Board Member of international journals and conducted several research projects funded by industry, government and the European Union. He leads and coordinates international working groups and commissions and holds adjunct professorial positions at the University of Adelaide, Australia, and the Queensland University of Technology, Australia. Since 2010, he has been chairman of the Scientific Group of Logistics within the Association of University Professors in Management.

To make use of economic advantages by developing and producing goods in different countries with either extensive know-how or low production costs, companies have extended their relations and evolved into globally distributed manufacturing networks. Accompanying this approach is a focus on core competencies, which is widely acknowledged as strengthening the market position of a company while outsourcing additional services to other enterprises. The reduction of manufacturing depth led to supply chains spreading around the world and integrating different entities in order to produce and deliver goods to customers. As a consequence, material as well as information flows between these various entities – that is, functions inside a company or the companies themselves – have to be managed to ensure a functioning working environment. The management of these flows is addressed by the research area of supply chain management (SCM). Thus, “successful global supply chain integration depends on the partners’ ability to share information across inter-functional, inter-organizational and cross-national borders” (Scholz-Reiter et al., 2010). Accordingly, SCM “seeks improved performance through effective use of resources and capabilities via the development of internal and external linkages in order to create a seamlessly coordinated supply chain” (Barratt and Barratt, 2011). In this case the term coordination is of special interest as different targets, perceptions and interests as well as the corresponding physical equipment have to be synchronized and integrated to obtain a unified network. To realize the required information and product exchange, adequate interfaces between the entities of a supply chain have to be established. The configuration and the operation of seamless flows of material, goods and information within supply chains require efficient interfaces between facilities and stakeholders. An active shaping of interfaces is vital in terms of the physical transformation of products as well as for the transformation of data and information flows.

Interfaces are not only interesting in terms of IT infrastructure, standardized communication protocols or transportation mechanisms, but are also highly relevant for the perception they create of collaboration among partners. For instance, an intended long-term business connection depends significantly on mutual reliance and is based on open communication channels which exceed the exclusive exchange of production or logistics data. Hence, interfaces have to be designed for both operational and strategic issues. A literature review by Arshinder and Deshmukh (2008) shows different aspects of coordination in supply chains and illustrates different approaches to coordination for frequently investigated interfaces. These interfaces are usually examined to address relatively specialized conflicts, e.g. in terms of stock levels, timing of orders, lot sizing or forecasting. Strategic and more general issues of collaboration at the interfaces are, however, less thoroughly investigated.

The papers presented in this special issue are highly relevant to the challenge of overcoming this lack of information, as they all incorporate long-term considerations of the analyzed collaborations and the related interfaces which enable a better understanding and management of interfaces in supply chains.

Outsourcing often refers to a shift of logistics tasks, which have previously been carried out by the producer, to a specialized logistics service provider (LSP). These LSPs, often also referred to as third party logistics providers (3PLs), usually offer complex service bundles rather than single transportation services, and the cooperation between a producer and the corresponding LSP can last for several years. As outsourcing of logistics services is accompanied by a transfer of various tasks and the establishment of new communication channels and long-term business connections, the interface between the producer and the LSP is of special interest, and is incorporated in the following papers.

Classification of the papers

In December 2010 we received a total of 16 manuscripts. Within a double blind review process, we chose four papers for presentation in this special issue. As pointed out in the previous section, all topics discussed in the presented papers address issues on a strategic rather than an operational level. In addition, all papers are at least partially based on empirical analyses through the use of surveys. This shows that the topic of interfaces in supply chains is of high practical relevance for the industry. While Hartmann and De Grahl, Prockl et al. and Martinsen and Björklund investigate the interface between customer firms and LSPs, Goebel et al. examine the interface between retailers and consumers with an additional consideration of the LSP’s perspective. The customer firms’ perspective is the focus of the analyses of De Grahl and Hartmann, whereas Prockl et al. and Martinsen and Björklund include the view points of both customer firms and LSPs. Goebel et al. focus on the demand side and their analyses are the only ones which directly address the end consumer. Figure 1 summarizes the different interfaces, indicated by the gray rectangles, and the focuses, indicated by the black rectangles.

Figure 1 Classification of the investigated interfaces

The two papers by Hartmann and De Grahl and Prockl et al. present the relationship between the analyzed entities on a relatively general level. In contrast, Martinsen and Björklund investigate the green logistics market while Goebel et al. focus on time-based delivery.

The methodologies described in the papers are of a similar structure. Hartmann and De Grahl use a partial least squares approach and Goebel et al. use a one way ANOVA and linear regression analysis to verify or falsify the previously postulated hypotheses using the collected data. Prockl et al. carry out conceptual considerations, whereas Martinsen and Björklund develop a gap model. These latter two approaches also use surveys to collect and analyze field data in terms of the considered interface.

Summary of the papers

Paper 1: Hartmann, Evi/De Grahl, Alexander: “Logistics outsourcing interfaces: the role of customer partnering behavior”

De Grahl and Hartmann analyze the influence of customer partnering behavior on the resulting outsourcing performance. They refer to the term partnering behavior “as a way for customers to manage logistics outsourcing interfaces”. Initially, the theoretical background is described and the conceptual model is developed. Based on a literature review, four dimensions of customer partnering behavior, namely operational information exchange, planning, sharing of benefits and burdens and extendedness, are explained and investigated. To measure the influence of these dimensions on outsourcing performance, the extent to which predefined goals are achieved or even overachieved (e.g. services that significantly exceed the goals and expectations) is examined. To derive measurable statements, eight hypotheses are postulated and subsequently tested. For every hypothesis a positive effect of the four dimensions referring to customer partnering behavior on both goal achievement and goal overachievement is expected. Before the results are discussed, the sample design and respondents to the survey (which were directed to customer firms cooperating with LSPs), as well as the measurement scales, are presented. The analysis and interpretation of the partial least squares approach, required to test the hypotheses, is conducted in two stages. After the assessment of the reliability and validity of the collected data in terms of the formulated hypotheses, the results of the model are interpreted. It is shown that operational information exchange, planning and extendedness positively and significantly influence goal achievement and goal overachievement, and for this reason can be interpreted as strong predictors of logistics outsourcing performance. This does not hold true for the sharing of benefits and burdens. Furthermore, De Grahl and Hartmann give managerial advice for concrete actions based on the tested hypotheses to drive logistics outsourcing performance.

Paper 2: Prockl, Günter/Pflaum, Alexander/Kotzab, Herbert: “3PL factories or lernstatts? Value-creation-models for 3PL service providers”

Prockl et al. examine different business model configurations for contract logistics services incorporating the required customer needs on the one side (market based view) as well as the required structural settings of corresponding 3PLs on the other (resource based view). The focus is on two contrasting forms of LSPs. The first one, called 3PL service factory, is characterized by efficiency-driven processes with clearly defined interfaces, and the second one, called 3PL service lernstatt, is more interaction oriented and provides know-how and impulses for customized processes. Based on a literature review, a conceptual framework is derived. This includes the customer’s motives for outsourcing logistics services, the value creation mechanisms. Prockl et al. identify cost cutting motives, quality improvements, and concentration on core competencies as well as buying impulses for innovation and service provider’s know-how. To investigate the fulfillment of these value propositions on behalf of the 3PL, the required resources and capabilities are subsequently analyzed. These can be separated in “property-based” and “knowledge-based” resources or in “discrete resources” and “systemic resources”. Whereas the 3PL service factory is characterized by a high level of “property-based” resources to gain economies of scale, the 3PL service lernstatt has extensive know-how in terms of individualizing complex processes. Both types are equipped with “systemic resources”, as their value results from the integration of various resources. By examining the partial layers of the total logistics network (institutional layer, physical goods layer, information layer, relational layer and financial, performance layer) Prockl et al. deduce that a 3PL service factory is more aligned to large global-acting LSPs while a 3PL service lernstatt is more aligned to smaller sized LSPs, which are able to offer individualized services. These findings are also supported via a short empirical analysis, where techniques of macro and micro segmentation are used.

Paper 3: Martinsen, Uni/Björklund, Maria: “Matches and gaps in the green logistics market”

Due to the negative impact on the environment caused by emissions of transportation tasks, Martinsen and Björklund “develop and apply a tool for the identification of matches and gaps in the interface between the environmental demands of the shippers and the corresponding offers from the LSPs”. After a description of the LSP-shipper interface and the identification of relevant green categories, the gap model is introduced. This model type accounts for the fact that customers and suppliers can have different expectations and perceptions of the offered services. A negative gap indicates that demands cannot be satisfied, whereas large positive gaps imply an overachievement and for this reason a waste of resources. Martinsen and Björklund identify three external (between shipper and LSP) and two internal (concerning only one of the supply chain actors) gaps, which have to be investigated in order to discover imbalances in the perceived services concerning the previously defined green categories. For this reason, a survey directed to LSPs as well as shippers has been conducted, where the participants were asked to what extent the addressed green offers and green demands have been asked for and offered, respectively. The findings show that supply and demand do not necessarily have to match if the green logistics market is considered. The results indicate that LSPs overachieve the demands of the shippers and seem to be aware of that fact. On the one hand this can be explained by an alignment towards higher future environmental demands, whilst on the other hand the shippers do not seem to perceive the described overachievement, which indicates a waste of resources. Finally, Martinsen and Björklund state that a more intensive collaboration is needed for the well-regarded LSP-shipper interface.

Paper 4: Goebel, Philipp/Moeller, Sabine/Pibernik, Richard: “Paying for convenience: attractiveness and revenue potential of time-based delivery services”

Goebel et al. investigate the potential of a new convenience-enhancing service called time-based delivery. The consumer’s convenience – the saving of effort and time while shopping – is increased by choosing a preferred time slot for a parcel to be delivered. To evaluate the potential, views of the consumer, retailer and LSP are taken into account. While the consumer has advantages concerning the aforementioned effort and time savings, the retailer can eventually achieve higher demands for products and charge higher prices. The latter arguments also hold for the LSP, who is confronted with an “enormous logistics challenge because of the unpredictability of demand”. To set up the research model, Goebel et al. formulate five hypotheses, mainly based on the consumer’s perspective. The author postulates that the level of availability at home decreases the perceived attractiveness of the service, while the time required to pick up a parcel at the office of the LSP and the hours a consumer works per week increase the perceived attractiveness. Additionally, it is stated that the price consumers are willing to pay for the service and its related usage are positively related to the perceived attractiveness. The data collection to verify or falsify the hypotheses has been carried out through a survey of passersby. To measure the outcomes of attractiveness – the willingness to pay and the level of usage – Goebel et al. use contingent valuation, which means that each respondent evaluates which prices for the service s/he considers high or low. With this information demand curves and revenue functions are derived. The results related to the first three hypotheses are obtained by applying a one way ANOVA and linear regression analysis. It is shown that the perceived attractiveness of time-based delivery is influenced by the availability at home as well as the hours a consumer works per week. This does not hold for the time required to pick up a parcel. The results related to the fourth and fifth hypothesis, also tested by a regression model, indicate that “higher levels of perceived attractiveness also lead to higher levels of usage and willingness to pay for time-based delivery”. Goebel et al. additionally demonstrate that the price and utilization effect of the service contribute less to the revenue potential than the volume effect, which means that a higher overall number of parcels are delivered. Finally, managerial implications based on the obtained results are given.

We would like to thank the reviewers of this special issue of the International Journal of Distribution & Logistics Management for their excellent assistance and cooperation.

Rainer Lasch, Frank SchultmannGuest Editors