Team performance in collaborative and partnered supply chains

Team performance in collaborative and partnered supply chains

Article Type: Guest editorial From: Team Performance Management, Volume 19, Issue 7/8

Introduction

Since the initial conception of the supply chain (see Lambert et al., 1998; Cousins et al., 2008), there have been notable attempts to define it (for instance, Cooper et al., 1997; Mentzer et al., 2001), as well as to operationalise it by identifying and assessing the implications of its features. The impact of globalisation, risk resilience and the efficiencies (and in some case deficiencies) of high levels of collaboration attract interest. Supply chain management, especially on the level of managing partnerships, is approached as an essential core element of strategy (Christopher and Jüttner, 2000), and team working within and among companies is the common denominator for all supply chain functions to be effectively and efficiently operated and delivered, and further be improved. As a result, the role of cross-functional and cross-organisational teams has been identified as essential in successful supply chain management, especially in collaborative and highly partnered forms of supply chains. The performance of any team formations within supply chains, in terms of how they are established, how they communicate, and how they are dynamically managed to deliver the anticipated outcomes, may be an aspect to consider depending on the supply chain type under investigation (Bal and Gundry, 1999). With the nature of supply chain relationships and operations management practices evolving in some highly competitive industries (Lettice et al., 2010), it was decided to launch a call for a special issue that would enhance our understanding on the contribution of teams and their performance and management in collaborative and partnered supply chains. The aim of the call was to link research on team performance with a particular focus on supply chain management.

Supply chain management

The need to add further value to products and services typically demands capabilities beyond those achievable by a single organisation. The statement that competition nowadays takes place among supply chains rather than individual companies (see, among others, Christopher, 1997; Cox, 1999; Christopher and Towill, 2000; Li et al., 2006) is probably one of the most referred to statements in the field of operations and supply chain management. However, it is a also a common ground nowadays that companies can effectively compete and create unique and difficult-to-imitate value only when the network of companies they assemble is effective and efficient in how they collaborate (Dyer, 2000). Hence, to serve the customer, all supply chain members must increasingly become more closely integrated, collaborating to ensure an effective and efficient value stream, along the entire chain of their operations, from suppliers to the final customer.

During the last couple of decades, supply chain collaboration has increasingly become the central focus of operations and supply chain management to identify its core elements (see Barratt, 2004). The globalisation of the markets presents new realities and challenges for both manufacturing and service sectors, and integrating supply chain partners on both the upstream and the downstream sides is becoming a prominent theme in the relevant literature (Kannan and Tan, 2010). Competing more effectively on a global scale is closely linked with offering a distinctive and innovative value proposition to the final customer that further demonstrates the need for upstream and downstream members of a supply chain to work collaboratively in terms of aligning their production processes, as well as their strategies. Past research has provided considerable evidence on the need for close relationships and collaboration among companies involved in adding value to the development, preparation, and provision of products and/or services to achieve cost benefits and competitive gains.

Cross-functional and cross-organisational teams positively contribute to the level of supply chain integration (Lambert and Cooper, 2000; Gunasekaran et al., 2004; Chen and Paulraj, 2004), and in the development of a collaborative and partnered supply chain environment (e.g. Kannan and Tan, 2010; Min et al., 2005). Within a highly-competitive market environment, the need for companies to act with careful consideration is of paramount importance. Anticipating change that may in turn trigger instability and potential mistakes in practice safeguards their future competitiveness. Cross-functional teams are essential within highly partnered supply chains, such as the extended enterprise, since they provide a base on which effective sharing of risk and rewards and smooth collaborative operations are built on. These teams are crucial in achieving enhanced collaboration and a common strategic intent (Spekman and Davis, 2004).

In the quest for enhanced competitive advantage organisations expose their supply chains to higher levels of risk. Global sourcing, single versus multi sourcing and other short and long term decisions add to the risk supply chain members are exposed to. Supply chain risk management is seen as an area of considerable concern and academic attention (Christopher et al., 2011; Wakolbinger and Cruz, 2011). To strengthen the supply chain against market-related risk, the practice of contractually sharing costs (e.g. product development) and sharing revenues in the form of risk and revenue sharing partnerships becomes common in many industries (Chauhan and Proth, 2005; Giannoccaro and Pontrandolfo, 2004). Such risk and revenue sharing partnerships are based on effective collaboration of cross-organisational teams. For example, on a more operational level, in an effort to facilitate the relationship among cross-partner teams and also identify the best possible solutions to problems, trust-related issues about product design should be openly discussed. Similarly, cross-organisational teams are established to review quality improvement approaches and product specifications along the supply chain (Braziotis and Tannock, 2011).

The call for the special issue and the papers selected

Six papers were submitted in response to the special issue call with the title “Team Performance in Collaborative and Partnered Supply Chains”. From these, five entered the review process. Eventually, two papers were accepted for publication. These papers make valuable contributions in the areas of their inquiry.

Ambidexterity within risk and revenue sharing partnerships

The first paper selected for publication by Fiset and Dostaler is titled “Combining old and new tricks: ambidexterity in aerospace design and integration teams”. The paper focuses on the aerospace industry, where risk and revenue sharing partnerships dominate the design and assembly phases. The system integrator model is explored and described as the main model followed by aerospace OEMs in order to effectively manage risks.

The research aims to evaluate the extent to which aerospace design and integration teams operating within highly partnered supply chains are able to further leverage extant capabilities in order to adapt to unforeseen challenges. The paper stresses the importance of ambidexterity in partnered supply chains, i.e. the ability to successfully perform conflicting tasks and/or pursue disparate goals and objectives simultaneously. The authors look on the ambidextrous solutions that teams can develop, as well as the relevant behaviours involved, to enhance design and integration team performance within risk and revenue sharing partnerships. Grounding their inquiry on the previous work by Gibson and Birkinshaw (2004), the authors discuss elements of contextual ambidexterity, namely stretch, trust, support, and discipline, to effectively address how members of aerospace design and integration teams deal with competing demands and various unforeseen challenges. The research is guided by three research questions. The first one is addressing the extent to which design and integration teams are able to leverage extant capabilities in order to adapt to new situations; the second one with identifying the contextual factors favouring such ambidextrous behaviour, while the third one is concerned with identifying the impact this behaviour on team performance.

The research presented involved organisations that aimed at successful introduction of organisational change. Data was collected by interviewing team members at various organisational levels, that belonged to five aerospace design and integration teams that were part of three aircraft development programmes. The authors aimed at evaluating the level of demonstrated ambidexterity by the design and integration teams, identifying what triggers ambidexterity, and measuring its impact (in terms of the four variables of contextual ambidexterity) on team performance.

The paper provides evidence that aerospace design and integration teams that work in a context characterised by appropriate contextual ambidexterity, namely stretch, trust, support and discipline, are more likely to produce a diverse array of ambidextrous solutions in order to deal with unexpected events. Similarly, a supportive climate is identified to positively impact innovation, as well as effectively tackle risk in a collaborative manner.

Collaborative risk management: avoiding logistics disruption

The second paper selected for publication by Breuer, Siestrup, Haasis, and Wildebrand is titled “Collaborative risk management in sensitive logistics nodes”. As part of a resilient design of modern supply chain, the focus is on minimising costs and maintaining competitiveness among organisations by linking their various supply chains. Potential risks resulting from intermeshed and synchronised processes form disruptions within the supply chain which affect the various partners. The impact of these disruptions may range in influence, character and also in its position within the supply chain. Within the context of supply chain risk management and business continuity management, the authors are discussing collaborative efforts in handling risks and also managing their impact within the supply chain paying attention to its sensitive positions.

In particular, the paper analyses the structures and processes of freight villages in Bremen and Dresden, which are seen as representing an important piece of the logistics infrastructure in the supply of goods. They are classed as “sensitive logistics nodes” mainly due to the impact an unpredictable damage can have on trade and general population. More specifically, the Bremen case is discussed as providing a benchmark to freight village development on the national, European and global level.

The authors establish that although emergency plans are in place for freight villages addressing some collaborative risk management issues, plans to maintain business operations after a damaging occurrence do not exist within the companies and also within the freight villages. Their research is identifying ways to promote co-ordinated and collaborative logistics and transport processes in freight villages. The main themes that emerge are collaborative analysis of management and control functions, the communication of risks and exchange of information among all participants in a freight village and within the village’s network.

As part of the methodology, the design of an agent-based simulation model is discussed in order to support collaborative planning in relation to the potential of damage caused by a supply chain disruption. The measures that can be taken in response to these disruptions are also included in this model alongside the negotiations with assumed partners that are taking place in order to relocate transportation of goods within the network in the case of damage to the network structure. In effect, the implementation and evaluation of the collaborative decision is completed as part of the simulation. As part of the findings, the model is discussed as a tool that aims to prepare collaboration and co-ordination of autonomous activities across multiple companies in the case of a damaging event and also in an effort to handle the impact while promoting rapid collaborative decision-making among partners.

Conclusions and future research proposed

The special issue call aimed to extend understanding on the contribution of teams and their performance and management in collaborative and partnered supply chains. The call for the special issue indicated areas that could, potentially, be the focus of further research in relation to team performance management in collaborative and highly partnered supply chains. The featured papers in this issue shed light on two important areas of the call for the special issue, namely risk management, team performance in terms of dealing with unforeseen situations in highly partnered supply chains. They achieve this by combining case study research and multi-agent simulation. Nevertheless, further relevant areas remain topical for consideration that future inquiry could elaborate and operationalise. For instance, current and/or innovative approaches to team performance measurement and management in collaborative and highly partnered supply chains, such as extended and virtual enterprises could be the focus of future research. Future research could enhance our understanding on aspects of team formation, performance, and their management within risk and revenue sharing partnership agreements, with emphasis on co-creation of value. Research could also shed more light on the operational implication of team formation and their performance in relation to institutional trust, commitment and information sharing within and among those teams in collaborative supply chains. Further, with Information and Communication Technology ever involving, there is a constant need to update our knowledge on team performance and effective communication channels in collaborative supply chains. With the increasing global sourcing, future research on team performance could also look particularly on supplier development issues and approaches in supply alliances, probably with particular emphasis on risk resilience issues. Finally, co-location-related issues and/or characteristics in collaborative and partnered supply chains can also be explored. Such research can have an inter-disciplinary stand and can, ideally, move beyond the dyadic level of analysis, employing either qualitative, quantitative, or a mixture of methodologies.

Acknowledgements

The Guest Editor would like to thank the authors, as well as the reviewers for their effort and time invested in reviewing the papers.

Christos Braziotis
Guest Editor

About the Guest Editor

Dr Christos Braziotis is a Lecturer in Supply Chain and Operations Management at Nottingham University Business School, where he received his PhD in Manufacturing Engineering and Operations Management. He has an MBA in Operations and Quality Management, and he has worked in the past as a consultant and researcher in supply chain related projects. His research interests are operational and collaboration effectiveness issues within the extended enterprise paradigm of supply chain.

References

Bal, J. and Gundry, J. (1999), “Virtual teaming in the automotive supply chain”, Team Performance Management, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 174–193
Barratt, M. (2004), “Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 30–42
Braziotis, C. and Tannock, J. (2011), “Building the extended enterprise: key collaboration factors”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 349–372
Chauhan, S.S. and Proth, J.-M. (2005), “Analysis of a supply chain partnership with revenue sharing”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 44–51
Chen, I.J. and Paulraj, A. (2004), “Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs and measurements”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 119–150
Christopher, M. (1997), Marketing Logistics, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford
Christopher, M. and Jüttner, U. (2000), “Developing strategic partnerships in the supply chain: a practitioner perspective”, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 117–127
Christopher, M. and Towill, D.R. (2000), “Supply chain migration from lean and functional to agile and customised”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 206–213
Christopher, M., Mena, C., Khan, O. and Yurt, O. (2011), “Approaches to managing global sourcing risk”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 67–81
Cooper, M.C., Lambert, D.M. and Pagh, J.D. (1997), “Supply chain management: more than a new name for logistics”, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1–14
Cox, A. (1999), “Power, value and supply chain management”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 167–175
Cousins, P., Lamming, R., Lawson, B. and Squire, B. (2008), Strategic Supply Management: Principles, Theory and Practice, Pearson Education Limited, Essex
Dyer, H.J. (2000), Collaborative Advantage: Winning through Extended Enterprise Supplier Networks, Oxford University Press, New York, NY
Giannoccaro, I. and Pontrandolfo, P. (2004), “Supply chain coordination by revenue sharing contracts”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 89 No. 2, pp. 131–139
Gibson, C.B. and Birkinshaw, J. (2004), “The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 209–226
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and McGaughey, R.E. (2004), “A framework for supply chain performance measurement”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 333–347
Kannan, V.R. and Tan, K.C. (2010), “Supply chain integration: cluster analysis of the impact of span of integration”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 207–215
Lambert, D.M. and Cooper, M.C. (2000), “Issues in Supply Chain Management”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29, pp. 65–83
Lambert, D.M., Cooper, M.C. and Pagh, J.D. (1998), “Supply Chain Management: implementation issues and research opportunities”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1–20
Lettice, F., Wyatt, C. and Evans, S. (2010), “Buyer-supplier partnerships during product design and development in the global automotive sector: who invests, in what and when?”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 127 No. 2, pp. 309–319
Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T.S. and Subba Rao, S. (2006), “The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance”, Omega, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 107–124
Mentzer, J.T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Min, S., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D. and Zacharia, Z.G. (2001), “Defining supply chain management”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 1–25
Min, S., Roath, A.S., Daugherty, P.J., Genchev, S.E., Chen, H., Arndt, A.D. and Richey, R.G. (2005), “Supply chain collaboration: what’s happening?”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 237–256
Spekman, R.E. and Davis, E.W. (2004), “Risky business: expanding the discussion on risk and the extended enterprise”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 414–433
Wakolbinger, T. and Cruz, J.M. (2011), “Supply chain disruption risk management through strategic information acquisition and sharing and risk-sharing contracts”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 13, pp. 4063–4084

Further Reading

Andersen, M. and Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009), “Corporate social responsibility in global supply chains”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 75–86
Lee, H.L. and Billington, C. (1992), “Managing supply chain inventory: pitfalls and opportunities”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 65–73