A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains

[EN] Sustainability practice within supply chains remains in an early development phase. Enterprises still need tools that support the integration of sustainability strategy into their activity, and to align their sustainability strategy with the supplier selection process. This paper proposes a methodology using a multi-criteria technique to support supplier selection decisions by taking two groups of inputs that integrate sustainability performance: supply chain performance and supplier assessment criteria. With the proposed methodology, organisations will have a tool to select suppliers based on their development towards sustainability and on their alignment with the supply chain strategy towards sustainability. The methodology is applied to an agri-food supply chain to assess sustainability in the supplier selection process.The authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of Project GV/2017/065 'Development of a decision support tool for the management and improvement of sustainability in supply chains', funded by the Regional Valencian Government. Also, the authors acknowledge Project 691249, RUC-APS: Enhancing and implementing knowledge-based ICT solutions within high risk and uncertain conditions for agriculture production systems (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union according to funding scheme H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alarcón Valero, F.; Pérez Perales, D.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R. (2021). A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Central European Journal of Operations Research. 29:1231-1251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3S1231125129Agarwal G, Vijayvargy L (2012) Green supplier assessment in environmentally responsive supply chains through analytical network process. In: Proceedings international multiconference of engineers and computer scientists, Hong KongAgeron B, Gunasekaran A, Spalanzani A (2012) Sustainable supply management: an empirical study. Int J Prod Econ 140(1):168–182Akarte MM, Surendra NV, Ravi B, Rangaraj N (2001) Web based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process. J Oper Res Soc 52:511–522Alfaro Saiz JJ, Rodríguez R, Ortiz Bas A, Verdecho MJ (2010) An information architecture for a performance management framework by collaborating SMEs. Comput Ind 61:676–685Alfaro JJ, Ortiz A, Rodríguez R (2007) Performance measurement system for enterprise networks. Int J Prod Perform Manag 56(4):305–334Awasthi A, Govindan K, Gold S (2018) Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based approach. Int J Prod Econ 195:106–117Azadnia AH, Ghadimi P, Zameri M, Saman M, Wong KY, Heavey C (2013) An integrated approach for sustainable supplier selection using fuzzy logic and fuzzy AHP. Appl Mech Mater 315:206–221Azimifard A, Moosavirad SH, Ariafar S (2018) Selecting sustainable supplier countries for Iran’s steel industry at three levels by using AHP and TOPSIS methods. Resour Pol 57:30–44Bai C, Sarkis J (2010) Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies. Int J Prod Econ 124:252–264Bhagwat R, Sharma MK (2007) Performance measurement of supply chain management: a balanced scorecard approach. Comput Ind Eng 53(1):43–62Bititci US, Mendibil K, Martinez V, Albores P (2005) Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises. Int J Oper Prod Manag 25(4):333–353Brewer PC, Speh TW (2000) Using the balanced scorecard to measure supply chain performance. J Bus Logist 21(1):75–93Bullinger HJ, Kühner M, Hoof AV (2002) Analysing supply chain performance using a balanced measurement method. Int J Prod Res 40(15):3533–3543Chan FTS (2003) Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach. Int J Prod Res 41(15):3549–3579De Boer L, Labro E, Morlacchi P (2001) A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 7(2):75–89Degraeve Z, Labro E, Roodhooft F (2000) An evaluation of supplier selection methods from a total cost of ownership perspective. Eur J Oper Res 125(1):34–58Dobos I, Vörösmarty G (2014) Green supplier selection and evaluation using DEA-type composite indicators. Int J of Prod Econ 157(11):273–278Dou Y, Sarkis J (2010) A joint location and outsourcing sustainability analysis for a strategic offshoring decision. Int J Prod Res 48(2):567–592Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11:130–141Falatoonitoosi E, Leman Z, Sorooshian S (2013) Modeling for green supply chain evaluation. Math Probl Eng 2013:1–9Farzad T, Rasid OM, Aidy A, Rosnah MY, Alireza E (2008) AHP approach for supplier evaluation and selection in a steel manufacturing company. JIEM 1(2):54–76Ferreira LMDF, Silva C, Garrido Azevedo S (2016) An environmental balanced scorecard for supply chain performance measurement (Env_BSC_4_SCPM). Benchmark Int J 23(6):1398–1422Figge F, Hahn T, Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2002) The sustainability balanced scorecard: linking sustainability management to business strategy. Bus Strat Env 11:269–284Folan P, Browne J (2005) Development of an extended enterprise performance measurement system. Prod Plan Control 16(6):531–544Freeman J, Chen T (2015) Green supplier selection using an AHP-entropy-TOPSIS framework. Supply Chain Manag 20:327–340Genovese A, Koh L, Bruno G, Esposito E (2013) Greener supplier selection: state of the art and some empirical evidence. Int J Prod Res 51(10):2868–2886Ghodsypour SH, O’Brien C (1998) A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Int J Prod Econ 56–57:199–212Glock CH, Grosse EH, Ries JM (2017) Decision support models for supplier development: systematic literature review and research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 194:246–260Govindan K, Khodaverdi R, Jafarian A (2013) A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. J Clean Prod 47:345–354Govindan K, Rajendran S, Sarkis J, Murugesan P (2015) Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. J Clean Prod 98:66–83Gunasekaran A, Patel C, Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21(1/2):71–87Ho W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202:16–24Hsu CW, Hu AH (2009) Applying hazardous substance management to supplier selection using analytic network process. J Clean Prod 17(2):255–264Hsu CW, Kuo TC, Chen SH, Hu AH (2013) Using DEMATEL to develop a carbon management model of supplier selection in green supply chain management. J Clean Prod 56:164–172Huan SH, Sheoran SK, Wang G (2004) A review and analysis of supply chain operations reference (SCOR) model. Supply Chain Manag Int J 9(9):23–29Hutchins M, Sutherland JH (2008) An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions. J Clean Prod 16(15):1688–1698Igarashi M, Boer L, Magerholm Fet A (2013) What is required for greener supplier selection? A literature review and conceptual model development. J Purch Supply Manag 19(4):247–263Jimenez-Jimenez D, Martínez-Costa M, Sanchez Rodriguez C (2019) The mediating role of supply chain collaboration on the relationship between information technology and innovation. J Knowl Manag 23(3):548–567Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus Rev 70(1):71–79Luthra S, Govindan K, Kannan D, Kumar Mangla S, Prakash Garg C (2017) An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. J Clean Prod 140:1686–1698Maestrini V, Luzzini D, Maccarrone P, Caniato F (2017) Supply chain performance measurement systems: a systematic review and research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 183A:299–315Masella C, Rangone A (2000) A contingent approach to the design of vendor selection systems for different types of co-operative customer/supplier relationships. Int J Oper Prod Manag 20(1):70–84Miller GA (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 63:81–97Mohammed A, Harris I, Govindan K (2019) A hybrid MCDM-FMOO approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation. Int J Prod Econ 217:171–184Motevali-Haghighi S, Torabi SA, Ghasemi R (2016) An integrated approach for performance evaluation in sustainable supply chain networks (with a case study). J Clean Prod 137:579–597Nawaz W, Koç M (2018) Development of a systematic framework for sustainability management of organizations. J Clean Prod 171:1255–1274Nie X (2013) Green suppliers selecting based on analytic hierarchy process for biotechnology industry. In: Zhong Z (ed) Proceedings of the international conference on information engineering and applications. Springer, London, pp 253–260Nielsen IE, Banaeian N, Golińska P, Mobli H, Omid M (2014) Green supplier selection criteria: from a literature review to a flexible framework for determination of suitable criteria. In: Golinska P (ed) Logistics operations, supply chain management and sustainability. Springer, Cham, pp 79–99Noci G (1997) Designing ‘green’ vendor rating systems for the assessment of a supplier’s environmental performance. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 3(2):103–114Petersen KJ, Handfield RB, Ragatz GL (2005) Supplier integration into new product development: coordinating product, process and supply chain design. J Oper Manag 23:371–388Pishchulov G, Trautrims A, Chesney T, Gold S, Schwab L (2019) The voting analytic hierarchy process revisited: a revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection. Int J Prod Econ 211:166–179Popovic T, Kraslawski A, Barbosa-Póvoa A, Carvalho A (2017) Quantitative indicators for social sustainability assessment of society and product responsibility aspects in supply chains. J Int Stud 10(4):9–36Qorri A, Mujki Z, Kraslawski A (2018) A conceptual framework for measuring sustainability performance of supply chains. J Clean Prod 189:570–584Reefke H, Trocchi M (2013) Balanced scorecard for sustainable supply chains: design and development guidelines. Int J Prod Perform Manag 62(8):805–826Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkSaaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy process: what it is and how it is used. Math Model 9(3–5):161–176Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98Saaty TL, Ozdemir MS (2003) Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Math Comput Model 38(3–4):233–244Seuring S, Müller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16:1699–1710Shaik M, Abdul-Kader W (2011) Green supplier selection generic framework: a multi-attribute utility theory approach. Int J Sustain Eng 4(1):37–56Shi P, Yan B, Shi S, Ke C (2015) A decision support system to select suppliers for a sustainable supply chain based on a systematic DEA approach. Inf Technol Manag 16(1):39–49Superdecisions (2018) Tutorial on hierarchical decision models. Creative Decisions Foundation. https://www.superdecisions.com/sd_resources/v28_man03.pdf. Accessed 7 Jan 2018Thakkar J, Kanda A, Deshmukh S (2009) Supply chain performance measurement framework for small and medium scale enterprises. Benchmark Int J 16(5):702–723Theißen S, Spinler S (2014) Strategic analysis of manufacturer–supplier partnerships: an ANP model for collaborative CO2 reduction management. Eur J Oper Res 233(2):383–397Tseng ML, Lim M, Wong WP (2015) Sustainable supply chain management: a closed-loop network hierarchical approach. Ind Manag Data Syst 115(3):436–461Uysal F (2012) An integrated model for sustainable performance measurement in supply chain. Proc Soc Behav Sci 62:689–694Valenzuela L, Maturana S (2016) Designing a three-dimensional performance measurement system (SMD3D) for the wine industry: a Chilean example. Agric Syst 142:112–121Verdecho MJ, Alfaro-Saiz JJ, Rodriguez-Rodriguez R, Ortiz-Bas A (2012) A multi-criteria approach for managing inter-enterprise collaborative relationships. Omega 40:249–263Virender P, Jayant A (2014) A green supplier selection model for an agriculture-machinery industry. Int J Appl Eng Res 9(5):597–605Weber CA, Current JR, Benton WC (1991) Vendor selection criteria and methods. Eur J Oper Res 50(1):2–18Xu L, Kumar DT, Madan Shankar K, Kannan D, Chen G (2013) Analyzing criteria and sub-criteria for the corporate social responsibility-based supplier selection process using AHP. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(1–4):907–916Xu Z, Qin J, Liu J, Martínez L (2019) Sustainable supplier selection based on AHP Sort II in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Inf Sci 483:273–293Zaklad A, McKnight R, Kosansky A, Piermarini J (2004) The social side of the supply chain. Ind Eng 36(2):40–44Zhe S, Wong NT, Lee LH (2013) Using data envelopment analysis for supplier evaluation with environmental considerations. In: International systems conference, OrlandoZimmer K, Fröhling M, Schultmann F (2016) Sustainable supplier management: a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. Int J Prod Res 54(5):1412–144

THE MEASURING FRAMEWORK OF OUTSOURCING SUCCESS: A SOCIAL EXCHANGE PERSPECTIVE

Outsourcing has become a buzz word in strategic management as the competition of modern business is the competition among business networks. The reviews on the measure of outsourcing success are conceptually fragmented due to different theories that have been applied in different studies. The overall aim of this paper is to develop an integrated framework in measuring the performance of services outsourcing. The framework is derived from Social Exchange Theory. Each party responsibility in dyadic relationship over outsourcing success is examined. This is followed by the identification of the mediating effect of compatibility between partners, and moderating effect of partnership quality to the aforementioned relationship. Outsourcing performance is proposed to be evaluated from the perspectives of tactical, strategic and behavioral dimensionsBuyer related factors, Compatibility, Outsourcing, and Partnership quality, Services ,Supplier related factors

A decision-making approach for investigating the potential effects of near sourcing on supply chain

Purpose - Near sourcing is starting to be regarded as a valid alternative to global sourcing in order to leverage supply chain (SC) responsiveness and economic efficiency. The present work proposes a decision-making approach developed in collaboration with a leading Italian retailer that was willing to turn the global store furniture procurement process into near sourcing. Design/methodology/approach - Action research is employed. The limitations of the traditional SC organisation and purchasing process of the company are first identified. On such basis, an inventory management model is applied to run spreadsheet estimates where different purchasing and SC management strategies are adopted to determine the solution providing the lowest cost performance. Finally, a risk analysis of the selected best SC arrangement is conducted and results are discussed. Findings - Switching from East Asian suppliers to continental vendors enables a SC reengineering that increases flexibility and responsiveness to demand uncertainty which, together with decreased transportation costs, assures economic viability, thus proving the benefits of near sourcing. Research limitations/implications - The decision-making framework provides a methodological roadmap to address the comparison between near and global sourcing policies and to calculate the savings of the former against the latter. The approach could include additional organisational aspects and cost categories impacting on near sourcing and could be adapted to investigate different products, services, and business sectors. Originality/value - The work provides SC researchers and practitioners with a structured approach for understanding what drives companies to adopt near sourcing and for quantitatively assessing its advantage

Supply chain integration strategies in fast evolving industries

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to define the "fast evolving industry" (FEI) and its supply chain management (SCM) challenges. The authors review and structure the literature regarding integration strategies and implementation methods to develop a strategic decision-making framework for SCM in the FEI. Design/methodology/approach - The authors conduct a review of SCM literature, including supply chain strategy, supply chain integration (SCI), agile and responsive supply chain and SCM for innovative and fast-changing industries. The authors develop a conceptual model and a decision-making framework and use four mini cases to provide support for the model and framework. Findings - The FEI, characterised by a high level of innovation and differentiation, short products/services lifecycle and high variety, is yet to be fully defined. Inherent uncertainty in FEI supply systems makes SCM in these industries a complex but strategic task for their managers. The framework and the model offered in this study, which employ a core competency concept and provide risk management strategies, offer a strategic tool for managers and scholars in the field to optimise their integration strategies and to operationalise integration decisions. Originality/value - Little research has been published on transferable and cross-industrial SCM in FEIs. This paper defines the FEI and its resource-related concerns and then offers a conceptual model and a strategic decision-making framework for SCI in FEIs

Understanding Trade-offs in the Supplier Selection Process: The Role of Flexibility, Delivery, and Value-added Services/Support

In this study, we present, based on econometric choice modeling framework, how manufacturing managers/executives trade-off between cost, delivery, flexibility, and service features in the supplier selection process for commodity raw materials, given acceptable quality. Empirical data for this study was collected from manufacturing organizations in Europe (Germany, France, Italy, and UK) using a computer-based supplier selection discrete choice survey. Each survey instrument contained 16 supplier selection choice sets, which compared 23 attributes of the current suppliers with a ‘‘new’’ potential supplier. The attributes of new suppliers were varied across two to four levels using established factorial experimental design procedures. The resultant multinomial logit models show the relative impact of cost, flexibility, delivery and service features on supplier selection

A framework for the successful implementation of food traceability systems in China

Implementation of food traceability systems in China faces many challenges due to the scale, diversity and complexity of China’s food supply chains. This study aims to identify critical success factors specific to the implementation of traceability systems in China. Twenty-seven critical success factors were identified in the literature. Interviews with managers at four food enterprises in a pre-study helped identify success criteria and five additional critical success factors. These critical success factors were tested through a survey of managers in eighty-three food companies. This study identifies six dimensions for critical success factors: laws, regulations and standards; government support; consumer knowledge and support; effective management and communication; top management and vendor support; and information and system quality

The Knowledge Application and Utilization Framework Applied to Defense COTS: A Research Synthesis for Outsourced Innovation

Purpose -- Militaries of developing nations face increasing budget pressures, high operations tempo, a blitzing pace of technology, and adversaries that often meet or beat government capabilities using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies. The adoption of COTS products into defense acquisitions has been offered to help meet these challenges by essentially outsourcing new product development and innovation. This research summarizes extant research to develop a framework for managing the innovative and knowledge flows. Design/Methodology/Approach – A literature review of 62 sources was conducted with the objectives of identifying antecedents (barriers and facilitators) and consequences of COTS adoption. Findings – The DoD COTS literature predominantly consists of industry case studies, and there’s a strong need for further academically rigorous study. Extant rigorous research implicates the importance of the role of knowledge management to government innovative thinking that relies heavily on commercial suppliers. Research Limitations/Implications – Extant academically rigorous studies tend to depend on measures derived from work in information systems research, relying on user satisfaction as the outcome. Our findings indicate that user satisfaction has no relationship to COTS success; technically complex governmental purchases may be too distant from users or may have socio-economic goals that supersede user satisfaction. The knowledge acquisition and utilization framework worked well to explain the innovative process in COTS. Practical Implications – Where past research in the commercial context found technological knowledge to outweigh market knowledge in terms of importance, our research found the opposite. Managers either in government or marketing to government should be aware of the importance of market knowledge for defense COTS innovation, especially for commercial companies that work as system integrators. Originality/Value – From the literature emerged a framework of COTS product usage and a scale to measure COTS product appropriateness that should help to guide COTS product adoption decisions and to help manage COTS product implementations ex post

Transmission losses cost allocation in restructed electricity market environment

During these recent decades, the restructuring system of electricity market has been taken places around the whole world. Due to the restructuring (deregulation), the electrical power system has been divided into three separates categories according to the function. First stage of power system is the generation companies (GENCOs), followed by transmission companies (TRANSCOs) and distribution companies (DISCOs). The competitive environment will be handling by a non-profit entity, independent system operator (ISO) that functioning as the system securities that have to make sure that the power system continues to operate in a stable and economical manner. However, restructuring system can give effect during the energy transmission. One of the transmission issues is regarding the power losses. To overcome the losses, generators must generate more power. The issue regarding the transmission losses in deregulated system is how to allocate it to the user and charge them in fair ways as in for instance the pool trading model, it is hard to trace the power contribution and losses of each user in transmission line. In addition, the users didn’t want to pay the losses, it means that the ISO have to responsible for the losses and it will be unfair to put the responsible to ISO alone. Therefore, in this project, the allocation of transmission losses and loss cost methods which are the pro-rata and proportional sharing method will be investigated. Comparison between those methods will be done in order to identify which types of method that reflect an efficient and fair way to distribute the cost of the transmission losses to the user. These chosen methods will be tested on IEEE bus system

Supply chain integration strategies in fast evolving industries

Purpose – We aim to define the ‘fast-evolving-industry’ (FEI) and its supply chain management (SCM) challenges. We review and structure the literature regarding integration strategies and implementation methods to develop a strategic decision-making framework for SCM in the FEI. Design/methodology/approach – We conduct a review of SCM literature, including supply chain strategy, supply chain integration (SCI), agile and responsive supply chain and SCM for innovative and fast-changing industries. We develop a conceptual model and a decision-making framework and use four mini cases to provide support for the model and framework. Findings – The FEI, characterised by a high level of innovation and differentiation, short products/services lifecycle and high variety, is yet to be fully defined. Inherent uncertainty in FEI supply systems makes SCM in these industries a complex but strategic task for their managers. The framework and the model offered in this study, which employ a core competency concept and provide risk management strategies, offer a strategic tool for managers and scholars in the field to optimise their integration strategies and to operationalise integration decisions. Original Value – Little research has been published on transferable and cross-industrial SCM in Fast Evolving Industries (FEIs). This paper defines the FEI and its resource-related concerns and then offers a conceptual model and a strategic decision-making framework for SCI in FEIs

Reprint of "Decision support models for supplier development: Systematic literature review and research agenda"

The continuing trend towards sourcing components and semi-finished goods for less vertically integrated manufacturing systems globally leads to a dramatic increase in supply options for companies. To ensure that companies benefit from the potentials global sourcing offers, supplier-buyer relationships need to be managed efficiently. Due to the decreasing share of value-adding activities provided in-house, suppliers are more and more considered as an essential contributor to the buying company's competitive position. Consequently, to realize and sustain competitive advantages, companies try to establish institutionalized long-term relationships to their most important suppliers and to actively improve the productivity and performance of their supplier base. To support supplier development in practice, researchers have developed decision support models that provide assistance in selecting and implementing suitable supplier development activities. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive and systematic overview of decision support models for supplier development and to develop a research agenda that helps to identify promising areas for future research in this area. First, typical applications for supplier development as well as potential development measures that can be adopted to improve the performance of suppliers are identified. Secondly, a systematic literature review with a focus on decision support models for supplier development is conducted. Based on the analysis of the literature, we define a research agenda that synthesizes key trends and promising research opportunities and thus highlight areas where more decision support models are needed to foster supplier development initiatives in practice