Outline. Introduction. Introduction. Channel Service Supply Chain Modeling and Performance Measurement with A Taiwan Conveniences Store Case Study

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Full text

(1)

Channel

Service

Supply

Chain

Modeling

and

Performance

Measurement

with

A

Taiwan

Conveniences

Store

Case

Study

Authors:

Hong

Ͳ

Pin

Tsai,

Ming

Ͳ

Chuan Chiu

2014/1/18

1

The 17

th

Decision Analysis Symposium (DAS2014)

Outline

Introduction

Literature

Review

Methodology

Case

study

Discussion

&

Conclusion

2

Introduction

3

GDP of

Service industry

in

Taiwan

Introduction

4

“Service

Ͳ

oriented”

become

dominant.

Backstage

support

is

very

important,

by

the

support

of

supply

chain,

company

could

generate

more

profit.

However,

there

were

several

research

to

discuss

service

differentiation

and

service

innovation.

(2)

Literature

Review

What

is

Supply

Chain?

A

supply

chain

is the

context

in

which

goods,

services

and

information

flow

from

the

earliest

supplier

to the

end

user.“

(Baltacioglu et

al.,2007)

Supply

chain

classification

Manufacturing

Ͳ

oriented

V.S.

Service

Ͳ

oriented

5

Literature

Review

6

Manufacturing

supply

chain

process

Service

supply

chain

process

Comparison

Supply

Chain

Type

Manufacturing

supply

chain

Service

supply

chain

Customer

Attention

Less

emphasized

Emphasized

Supply

chain

length

Long

Short

Supply

chain

type

Pull

and

push

Pull

Literature

Review

Performance

Evaluation

Criteria

Supply

Chain

type

Criteria

Manufacturing

Service

Same

Cost

Flexibility

Pro

Þ

tability

Literature

Review

Performance

Evaluation

Criteria

Supply

Chain

type

Criteria

Manufacturing

Service

Different

Inventory

level

Cycle

time

Lead

time

Productively

Defectives

rate

Queuing

time

Convenience

Responsiveness

Assurance

Empathy

Tangibles

(3)

Literature

Review

9

Service

Supply

Chain

Model

(Ellram et

al.,

2004)

Literature

Review

10

Supplier

provider

Service

Customer

Demand

Management

Customer

Relationship

Management

Supplier

Relationship

Management

ServiceDelivery

Service

Performance

Management

Capacity Management

Order

Process

Management

IUE

Ͳ

Service

Supply

Chain

Model.

(Baltacioglu et

al.,2007)

Research

Question

Research

Gap

Most

models

provide

the

framework

without

specific

approach.

There

were

still

several

drawbacks.

e.g.

How

company

mange

supply

chain?

What

management

criteria

should

be

includes

to

measure?

This

study

develops

service

supply

chain

model

that

could

provide

systematic

method

to

fill

up

the

gap.

11

Methodology

The

proposed

method

considers

two

directions

(supply

side

and

demand

side)

Utilize

the

fuzzy

number

to

translate

linguistic

meaning.

Compromise

programing

is

applied

to

solve

multi

Ͳ

objective

model.

(4)

Evaluation

criteria(

Supply

planning

)

13

ServiceQuality Responsiveness Reliability Tangible Assurance Empathy Competiveness Relativemarket share SalesGrowth Customer Loyalty Electronic commerce integration System Connection degree Supportdegree Dataopen degree System compatibility degree Costof integration system Flexibility Coordination degree

Extrabonusfor

serviceprovider Innovativeness Cycletimeof servicerenew Performanceof theinnovation process

Evaluation

criteria(

Demand

planning

)

14

• Convenience

• Tangible

• Reliability

• Responsiveness

• Assurance

• Empathy

• Innovativeness

Service

Performance

• Product

price

• Service

price

Price

Supply &

Demand

planning

process

Data

collection

• Interview

the

experts

and

the

customers

Fuzzy

AHP

•Decide

criteria

weights

•Assess

suppliers

and

service

provider.

Output

• Implement

service

level

of

service

provider

and

suppliers

Service

supply

chain

Modeling

This

is

a

multi

Ͳ

objective

model,

the

parameters

are

following:

ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ܰ

are

possible

supplier

of

a

certain

service,

݅ א ܫ

ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ܰ

are

possible

services

that

provided

by

a

certain

supplier

ǡ ݆ א ܬ

Decision

variable:

(5)

Notation

17

ܲ

௜௝

is

profit

of

service

j

provided

by

supplier

i

ܵܵ

௜௝

is

satisfaction

of

company

to

supplier

i

which

provided

service

j

(supplier)

ܮܵ

is

the

lowest

satisfaction

for

service

j

ܳ

௜௝

is

the

number

of

times

that

supplier

i

is

capable

to

provide service

j

every

year

ܦ

is

the

demand

number

of

times

of

service

j

every

year

ܦܵ

is

the

satisfaction

of

customer(demand)

ܶܨܥ

is

the

total

fixed

cost

for

the

company

ܶܥ

is

the

tanning

cost

ܦܥ

is

the

decorating

cost

ܥܴܮ

is

the

decided

customer

relationship

care

level

of

the

company

Objective

function

18

ƒš

ൌ σ

௠௜ୀଵ

σ

௡௝ୀଵ

ܲ

௜௝

כ ܺ

௜௝

כ ܳ

௜௝

כ ܥܴܮ െ ܶܨܥሺͳሻ

ݓ݄݁ݎ݁݅ ൌ ͳǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ݉Ǣ ݆ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ݊

ƒš

ൌ σ

௠௜ୀଵ

σ

௡௝ୀଵ

ܵܵ

௜௝

כ ܺ

௜௝

൅ ܦܵሺʹሻ

ݓ݄݁ݎ݁ǡ ݅ ൌ ͳǡ Ǥ Ǥ ǡ ݉Ǣ ݆ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ݊

Constraints

19

σ

௠௜ୀଵ

ܺ

௜௝

൒ ͳǡ ݅ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ݉Ǣ ݆ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ݊

ሺ͵ሻ

σ

௠௜ୀଵ

ܳ

௜௝

כ ܺ

௜௝

൒ ܦ

ǡ

‹ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ Ǣ Œ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ሺͶሻ

σ

௡௝ୀଵ

ܳ

௜௝

כ ܺ

௜௝

൑ ܳ

‹ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ Ǣ Œ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ሺͷሻ

ܵܵ

௜௝

൒ ܮܵ

‹ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ Ǣ Œ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡ ሺ͸ሻ

ൌ ൅ ሺ͹ሻ

Optimizing

Service

Supply

Chain

Compromise

programming

(Yu

and

Zeleney,

1974)

20

‹ †

ൌ ሾσ

ݓ

כ

୤೔௫ כି୤ ೔୶ ୤೔୶כ ௣ ௡ ௜ୀଵ

భ ೛

(8)

s.t.

š ൑ „

š ൒ Ͳ

ݓ

:

weight

of

objective

i

ݓ݄݁ݎ݁Ͳ ൏ ݓ

൏ ͳ

,

σ ݓ

ൌ ͳǡ ݅ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ݌ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ͵ǡ ǥ λ

݂

ǣ ܲݎ݋݂݅ݐǢ ݂

ǣ ܵܽݐ݅ݏ݂ܽܿݐ݅݋݊

(6)

Case

study

Convenience store company (F

Ͳ

company)

The

second

largest

convenience

store

company

in

Taiwan (28.9%)

2,800 stores

3 main existent services

18 suppliers are evaluated

21

Case

study

Ͳ

Survey

Candidate

22

50% 33%

17%

Education

Master College Junior

50% 33%

17%

Position

Manager Storemanager Sectionmanager 17% 33% 50%

Working

Years

3~5 5~9 9ј

Supply

Side(6

experts)

Case

study

Ͳ

Survey

Candidate

Demand

Side(30

customers)

7% 20% 10% 7% 10% 13% 30% 3%

Occupation

Traditionalindustry InformationTechnology Business Leisure&service Medicine&bioͲtech Governmentofficial Student Others 47% 30% 23%

Age

20~30 30~40 40~50 60% 40%

Gender

Male Female

Discussion

If

F

Ͳ

company

wants

to

increase

more

satisfaction,

it

might

sacrifice

many

profits.

(7)

Discussion

Green: best

suppliers

due

to

the

characteristic

of

robust.

Blue:

those

suppliers

should

be

terminated

contract

first.

25

Conclusion

This

research

systematically

evaluates

both

supply

and

demand

sides

to

improve

the

overall

performance.

Either

side

could

enhance

customer

experience.

This

model

could

provide

suggestions

for

decision

makers

in

supplier

selection.

To

provide

a

new

way

to

construct

channel

service

supply

chain.

26

Conclusion

Future

work

Investigate

more

factors

to

better

evaluate

the

performance

of

service

supply

chain.

Consider

the

interactions

among

different

services

Find

the

customer

relationship

function

that

would

aid

company

to

make

decision

accurately.

27

Q&A

28

(8)

Reference

• Arlbjørn,J.S.,Freytag,P.V.,&deHaas,H.(2011).Servicesupplychainmanagement:Asurveyofleanapplicationinthemunicipal sector.

InternationalJournalofPhysicalDistribution&LogisticsManagement,41(3),277Ͳ295.

• Baltacioglu,T.,Ada,E.,Kaplan,M.D.,Yurtand,O.,&Cem Kaplan,Y.(2007).Anewframeworkforservicesupplychains.TheService

IndustriesJournal,27(2),105Ͳ124.

• Büyüközkan,G.,Çifçi,G.,&Güleryüz,S.(2011).StrategicanalysisofhealthcareservicequalityusingfuzzyAHPmethodology.Expert

SystemswithApplications,38(8),9407Ͳ9424.

• Beamon,B.M.(1998).Supplychaindesignandanalysis:Modelsandmethods.Internationaljournalofproductioneconomics, 55(3),281Ͳ

294.

• Bruce,M.,Daly,L.,&Towers,N.(2004).Leanoragile:asolutionforsupplychainmanagementinthetextilesandclothing

industry?InternationalJournalofOperations&ProductionManagement, 24(2),151Ͳ170.

• Charnes,A.,Cooper,W.W.,&Rhodes,E.(1978).Measuringtheefficiencyofdecisionmakingunits.Europeanjournalofoperational

research,2(6),429Ͳ444.

• Cho,D.W.,Lee,Y.H.,Ahn,S.H.,&Hwang,M.K.(2012).Aframeworkformeasuringtheperformanceofservicesupplychain

management.Computers&IndustrialEngineering,62(3),801Ͳ818.

• Coello,C.A.C.,Pulido,G.T.,&Lechuga,M.S.(2004).Handlingmultipleobjectiveswithparticleswarmoptimization.Evolutionary

Computation,IEEETransactionson,8(3),256Ͳ279.

• Cook,J.S.,DeBree,K.,&Feroleto,A.(2001).FromRawMaterialstoCustomers:SupplyChainManagementintheServiceIndustry.SAM

AdvancedManagementJournal,66(4),14Ͳ22.

• Chang,D.Y.(1996).ApplicationsoftheextentanalysismethodonfuzzyAHP.European journalofoperationalresearch,95(3),649Ͳ655.

• Doney,P.M.,Barry,J.M.,&Abratt,R.(2007).TrustdeterminantsandoutcomesinglobalB2Bservices.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,

41(9/10),1096Ͳ1116.

• DeWaart,D.,&Kemper,S.(2004).Fivestepstoservicesupplychainexcellence. SupplyChainManagementReview, 8(1),28Ͳ35.

• Ellram,L.M.,Tate,W.L.,&Billington,C.(2004).Understandingandmanagingtheservicessupplychain.JournalofSupplyChain

Management,40(4),17Ͳ32.

• Fitzgerald,L,Johnston,R,Brignall,TJ,Silvestro,R,&Voss,C.(1991).PerformanceMeasurementinServiceBusinesses.London: Chartered

InstituteofManagementAccountants.

• Gaudreault,J.,Forget,P.,Frayret,J.M.,Rousseau,A.,Lemieux,S.,&D'Amours,S.(2010).DistributedOperationsPlanningInTheLumber

SupplyChain:ModelsAndCoordination.InternationalJournalofIndustrialEngineering:Theory,ApplicationsandPractice, 17(3).

29

Reference

• Gunasekaran,A.,Patel,C.,&McGaughey,R.E.(2004).Aframeworkforsupplychainperformancemeasurement.Internationaljournalof

productioneconomics, 87(3),333Ͳ347.

• Grant,R.M.(2010).Contemporarystrategyanalysisandcases:textandcases.Wiley.com.

• Hersh M.Seymour.(2009).Chainofcommand.NewYork:HarperCollins.

• Huang,S.H.,Uppal,M.,&Shi,J.(2002).Aproductdrivenapproachtomanufacturingsupplychainselection.SupplyChainManagement:

AnInternationalJournal, 7(4),189Ͳ199.

• Meyera,M.H.,&DeToreb,A.(2001).Perspective:CreatingaplatformͲbasedapproachfordevelopingnewservices.JournalofProduct

InnovationManagement,18(3),188Ͳ204.

• Min,H.,&Zhou,G.(2002).Supplychainmodeling:past,presentandfuture.Computers &IndustrialEngineering, 43(1),231Ͳ249.

• Mohaghar,A.,Fathi,M.R.,&Jafarzadeh,A.H.(2013).ASupplierSelectionMethodUsingARͲDEAandFuzzyVIKOR.InternationalJournal

ofIndustrialEngineering:Theory,ApplicationsandPractice,20(5Ͳ6).

• Neely,A.D.,Adams,C.,&Kennerley,M.(2002).Theperformanceprism:Thescorecardformeasuringandmanagingbusinesssuccess:

PrenticeHallFinancialTimesLondon.

• Patel,M.H.,Wei,W.,Dessouky,Y.,Hao,Z.,&Pasakdee,R.(2009).ModelingandSolvinganIntegratedSupplyChainSystem.International

JournalofIndustrialEngineering:Theory,ApplicationsandPractice, 16(1),13Ͳ22.

• Sengupta,K.,Heiser,D.R.,&Cook,L.S.(2006).Manufacturingandservicesupplychainperformance:acomparativeanalysis.Journalof

SupplyChainManagement,42(4),4Ͳ15.

• Simonovic,S.P.,&Burn,D.H.(1989).AnimprovedmethodologyforshortͲtermoperationofasinglemultipurposereservoir.Water

ResourcesResearch,25(1),1Ͳ8.

• Wang,G.,Huang,S.H.,&Dismukes,J.P.(2004).ProductͲdrivensupplychainselectionusingintegratedmultiͲcriteriadecisionͲmaking

methodology.Internationaljournalofproductioneconomics, 91(1),1Ͳ15.

• Xue,L.,Ray,G.,&Sambamurthy,V.(2013).TheimpactofsupplyͲsideelectronicintegrationoncustomerserviceperformance.Journalof

OperationsManagement,31(6),363Ͳ375.

• Yasin,M.M.,&Gomes,C.F.(2010).Performancemanagementinserviceoperationalsettings:aselectiveliteratureexamination.

Benchmarking:AnInternationalJournal,17(2),214Ͳ231.

• Yu,P.L.,&Leitmann,G.(1974).Compromisesolutions,dominationstructures,andSalukvadze's solution.JournalofOptimizationTheory

andApplications,13(3),362Ͳ378.

30

Supplier

Purchasing

Internal

users

Finance

Ultimate

Customer

Capacity Management

Demand

Management

Customer

Relationship

Management

Supplier

Relationship

Management

Information

Criteria

Subcriteria Description

Service

Performance(b1)

Convenience(b11) It‘seasyforcustomerstogetserviceandproviders providelocalizedservicesandcommodity Tangible(b12) Iftheenvironmentiscleanandproperlydecorated Reliability(b13) Provider’sdependablyabilityandaccuratelytoperformthepromisedservice Responsiveness(b14) Willingnesstohelpcustomers

Assurance(b15) Knowledgeandcourtesyofpersonnelandtheir abilitytoinspiretrustandconfidence

(9)

Case

study

33

National

brand

product

service

Criteria SubͲcriteria

A1 0.128 A11 0.129 A12 0.206 A13 0.122 A14 0.168 A15 0.375 A2 0.352 A21 0.406 A22 0.224 A33 0.37 A3 0.154 A31 0.157 A32 0.365 A33 0.307 A34 0.126 A35 0.045 A4 0.284 A41 0.432 A42 0.568 A5 0.082 A51 0.624 A52 0.376

Private

brand

product

service

Criteria SubͲcriteria

A1 0.136 A11 0.144 A12 0.183 A13 0.167 A14 0.154 A15 0.352 A2 0.329 A21 0.415 A22 0.259 A33 0.326 A3 0.146 A31 0.15 A32 0.357 A33 0.304 A34 0.132 A35 0.057 A4 0.291 A41 0.687 A42 0.313 A5 0.098 A51 0.702 A52 0.298

Electronic

commerce

service

Criteria SubͲcriteria

A1 0.242 A11 0.167 A12 0.172 A13 0.175 A14 0.231 A15 0.255 A2 0.216 A21 0.458 A22 0.315 A33 0.227 A3 0.207 A31 0.147 A32 0.2 A33 0.237 A34 0.212 A35 0.204 A4 0.106 A41 0.412 A42 0.588 A5 0.229 A51 0.467 A52 0.533

Result

of

evaluation

34

Weight

Profit

(NT

Million)

Satisfaction

Profit

Satisfaction

0.1

0.9

31327

0.574

0.3

0.7

35415

0.558

0.5

0.5

35707

0.555

0.7

0.3

35707

0.555

0.9

0.1

35707

0.555

Original

30159

0.557

35

Weight

National

brand

product

service

Private

brand

product

service

Electronic

commerce

service

Profit

Satisfaction

0.1

0.9

a1,a2,a5

b1,b2,b4

c2,c3,c4

0.3

0.7

a1,a2,a3

b1,b2,b5

c1,c3,c4,c5

0.5

0.5

a1,a2,a3

b1,b2,b5

c1,c3,c5,c6

0.7

0.3

a1,a2,a3

b1,b2,b5

c1,c3,c5,c6

0.9

0.1

a1,a2,a3

b1,b2,b5

c1,c3,c5,c6

Original

a3,a4

b1,b2,b5

c1,c3,c4

Figure

Updating...

References

Updating...

Related subjects :