A review of factors influencing collaborative relationships

[EN] Collaboration is a term commonly used to refer to a type of inter-organizational relationship. However, in real business assessments, many collaborative relationships fail due to the lack of understanding of the factors influencing collaboration sustainability. For this reason, enterprises, prior to engage to a collaborative relationship, need to understand further which the main factors influencing collaboration relationships are, how they are structured and how they interact so that decision makers that desire to engage in a collaborative relationship/network focus not only on improving performance indicators but also on the factors that influence the results of those performance indicators. The purpose of this paper is to present a critical literature review of factors influencing collaborative relationships in order to perform a comparative study of the works for identifying main strengths and gaps for future research.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R. (2011). A review of factors influencing collaborative relationships. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 362:535-542. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23330-2_58S535542362Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Galeano, N., Molina, A.: Collaborative networked organizations - Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises. Computers & Industrial Engineering 57, 46–60 (2009)Simatupang, T.M., Wright, A.C., Sridharan, R.: Applying the theory of constraints to supply chain collaboration. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 9(1), 57–70 (2004)Sabath, R.E., Fontanella, J.: The Unfulfilled Promise of Supply Chain Collaboration. Supply Chain Management Review (July/August 2002)Kampstra, R.P., Ashayeri, J., Gattorna, J.L.: Realities of supply chain collaboration. The International Journal of Logistics Management 17(3), 312–330 (2006)Supply Chain Management Review (SCMR) and Computer Sciences Corporation, CSC (2004);The second annual global survey of supply chain progress, www.csc.com/Busi, M., Bititci, U.S.: Collaborative performance management: present gaps and future research. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 55(1), 7–25 (2006)Lockamy, A., McCormack, K.: The development of a supply chain management process maturity model using the concepts of business process orientation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 9(4), 272–278 (2004)Lejeune, M.A., Yakova, N.: On characterizing the 4 C’s in supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management 23(1), 81–100 (2005)Fiske, A.P.: Relativity within Moose (“Mossi”) culture: four incommensurable models for social relationships. Ethos 18, 180–204 (1990)Danese, P.: Collaboration forms, information and communication technologies, and coordination mechanisms in CPFR. International Journal of Production Research 44, 3207–3226 (2006)Birnbirg, J.C.: Control in interfirm co-operative relationships. Journal of Management Studies 25(4), 421–428 (1998)Boddy, D., Macbeth, D., Wagner, B.: Implementing collaboration between organizations: an empirical study of supply chain partnering. Journal of Management Studies 37(7), 1003–1018 (2000)Handfield, R.B., Bechtel, C.: Trust, power, dependence, and economics: can SCM research borrow paradigms? International Journal of Integrated Supply Chain Management 1(1), 3–32 (2004)Wilson, D.T.: An integrated model of buyer-seller relationships. In: Working Paper, Institute for the Study of Business Markets. The Pennsylvania State University, State College (1995)Bowersox, D.J., Closs, D.J., Stank, T.P.: How to Master cross-enterprise Collaboration. Supply Chain Management Review (July/August 2003)Barratt, M.: Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 9(1), 30–42 (2004)Min, S., Roath, A.S., Daugherty, P.J., Genchev, S.E., Chen, H., Arndt, A.D.: Supply chain collaboration: what’s happening? The International Journal of Logistics Management 16(2), 237–256 (2005)Simatupang, T.M., Sridharan, R.: An integrative framework for supply chain collaboration. The International Journal of Logistics Management 16(2), 257–274 (2005)Burgess, K., Singh, P.: A proposed integrated framework for analysing supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 11(4), 337–344 (2006)Gruat La Forme, F., Botta Genoulaz, V., Campagne, J.: A Framework to analyse Collaborative Performance. Computers in Industry 58, 687–697 (2005)Giannakis, M.: Performance Measurement of Supplier Relationships. Supply Chain Management; An International Journal 12(6), 400–411 (2007)Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D.: The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing 58, 20–38 (1994)Mohr, J., Spekman, R.: Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques. Strategic Management Journal 15(2), 135–152 (1994)Zineldin, M., Jonsson, P.: An examination of the main factors affecting trust/commitment in supplier-dealer relationships: an empirical study of the Swedish wood industry. The TQM Magazine 12(4), 245–256 (2000)Coote, L.V., Forrest, E.J., Tam, T.W.: An investigation into commitment in non-Western industrial marketing relationship. Industrial Marketing Management 32, 595–604 (2003)Wu, W.T., Chiag, C.Y., Wu, Y.J., Tu, H.J.: The influencing factors of commitment and business integration on supply chain management. Industrial Management & Data Systems 104(4), 322–333 (2004)Kwon, I.K., Suh, T.: Trust, commitment and relationships in supply chain management: path analysis. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 10(1), 26–33 (2005)Geyskens, I., Steemkamp, J.B., Scheer, L.K., Kumar, N.: The effects of trust and interdependence on relationship commitment: A trans-Atlantic study. International Journal of Research in Marketing 13, 303–317 (1996)Pimentel Claro, D., Borin de Oliviera Claro, P., Hagelaar, G.: Coordinating collaborative joint efforts with suppliers: the effects of trust, transaction specific investment and information network in the Dutch flower industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 11(3), 216–224 (2006)Cheng, J.H., Yeh, C.H., Tu, C.W.: Trust and knowledge sharing in green supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 13(4), 283–295 (2008)Matopoulos, A., Vlachopoulou, M., Manthou, V., Manos, B.: A conceptual framework for supply chain collaboration: empirical evidence from the agri-food industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 12(3), 177–186 (2007)Handfield, R.B., Bechtel, C.: The role of trust and relationship structure in improving supply chain responsiveness. Industrial Marketing Management 31, 367–382 (2002

Performance management in collaborative networks: difficulties and barriers

[EN] Global competitiveness obliges to enterprises to collaborate in many processes such as new product and services development in order to shorten the lifecycle, development and commercialization. Therefore, the competence has drifted from an individual focus to a supply chain management one and, from some years, to a collaborative enterprises network approach. It is common to find frameworks for measuring/managing the performance within extended enterprises, supply chains, virtual enterprises, etc. However, few authors deal with a higher level: the collaborative networks one. This concept of enterprises management set up bigger difficulties regarding not only from a conceptual and structural point of view but also considering both the design and posterior development of systems capable of managing the performance achieved in this type of organizations. This work describes both the main difficulties and barriers when trying to apply performance management concepts to collaborative networks. In this sense, it is highlighted the weaknesses of the existing intra-organizational frameworks that cannot be projected, as they are conceived, to manage performance within collaborative networks.Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ. (2011). Performance management in collaborative networks: difficulties and barriers. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 362:133-139. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23330-2_15S133139362Hausman, W.H.: Supply chain performance metrics. The practice of supply chain management: Where theory and application converge. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)Coughlan, P., Coughlan, D.: Action research: action research for operations management. International Journal of Operation and Productions Management 22(2), 220–240 (2002)Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: The balanced scorecard. Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 71–79 (January/February 1992)Bourne, M.: Designing and implementing a balanced performance measurement system. Control - Official Journal of the Institute of Operations Management, 21–24 (July/August 1999)Neely, A., Adams, C.: Perspectives on Performance. The Performance Prism’ Web Site of Neely A (2001), www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/som/cbp/adn.htmHronec, S.M.: Vital Signs. Amacom, New York (1993)Bititci, U.S., Mendibil, K., Martinez, V., Albores, P.: Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 25(4), 333–353 (2005)Folan, P., Browne, J.: Development of an extended enterprise performance measurement system”. Production Planning & Control 16(6), 531–544 (2005)Gaiardelli, P., Saccani, N., Songini, L.: Performance measurement systems in the after-sales service: an integrated framework. International Journal of Business Performance Management 9(2), 145–171 (2007)Alfaro, J.J., Ortiz, A., Rodríguez, R.: Performance measurement system for Enterprise Networks. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 56(4), 305–334 (2007)Romero, D., Galeano, N., Molina, A.: A conceptual Model for Virtual Breeding Environments Value System. In: Camarinha-Matos, L., Afsarmanesh, H., Novais, P., Analide, C. (eds.) Establishing the Foundation of Collaborative Networks. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Msanjila, S.S., Afsarmanesh, H.: Trust analysis and assessment in virtual organization breeding environments. International Journal of Production Research 46(5), 1253–1295 (2008)Bititci, U., Turner, T., Mackay, D., Kearney, D., Parung, J., Walters, D.: Managing synergy in collaborative enterprises. Production Planning & Control 18(6), 454–465 (2007)Chalmeta, R., Grangel, R.: Performance Measurement Systems for Virtual Enterprise Integration. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 18(1), 73–84 (2005)Francisco, R.D., Azevedo, A.: Dynamic Performance Management In Business Networks Environment. In: Digital Enterprise Technology. Springer, US (2007)Busi, M., Bititci, U.S.: Collaborative performance management: Present gaps and future research. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 55(1), 7–25 (2006)Rodriguez, R., Ortiz, A., Alfaro, J.: Fostering collaborative meta-value chain practices. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 22(5), 385–394 (2009)Rodriguez, R.R., Gomez, P., Franco, D., Ortiz, A.: Establishing and keeping inter-organisational collaboration: Some lessons learned. International Federation for Information Processing 1, 214–222 (2007)Leseure, M., Shaw, N., Chapman, G.: Performance measurement in organisational networks: an exploratory case study. International Journal of Business Performance Management 3(1), 30–46 (2001

A review on intellectual capital concepts as a base for measuring intangible assets of collaborative networks

[EN] This work presents a revision of the main definition and significances of the term Intellectual Capital, as it is an important issue of study. Once the main scientific works related to Intellectual Capital are presented and their main contributions highlighted, this work shows how it has been attempted to measure the Intellectual Capital at both individual enterprises and collaborative networks, as a source of meaningful information to make decisions. The paper evidences the lack of works that have successfully dealt with measuring Intellectual Capital at the collaborative networks level, highlighting the main barriers and what a proper measuring framework should address at this level.Rodríguez Rodríguez, R.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ. (2011). A review on intellectual capital concepts as a base for measuring intangible assets of collaborative networks. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 362:41-47. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23330-2_5S4147362Penrose, E.T.: The theory of the growth of the firm. John Wiley, New York (1959)Edvinsson, L., Malone, M.S.: IC: the Proven Way to Establish Your Company’s Real Value by Measuring Its Hidden Values. Piatkus, London (1997)Sveiby, K.E.: The New Organizational Wealth: Managing & Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco (1997)MERITUM Guidelines. Guidelines for Managing and Reporting on Intangibles, Madrid (2002)International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). Intangible Assets, International Accounting Standards No. 38 revised. IASB, London (2004)Marr, B.: Perspectives on IC: Multidisciplinary Insights into Management, Measurement, and Reporting. Elsevier, Boston (2005)Hall, R.: The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal 2, 135–137 (1992)Edvinsson, L., Sullivan, P.H.: Developing a model for managing intellectual capital. European Management Journal 14, 356–365 (1996)Brooking, A.: IC: Core Assets for the Third Millennium Enterprise. Thompson Business Press, London (1996)Roos, J., Roos, G., Dragonetti, N.C., Edvinsson, L.: IC: Navigating the New Business Landscape. Macmillan, London (1997)Stewart, T.A.: IC: The New Wealth of Organisations. Doubleday/Currency, New York (1997)Bontis, N., Dragonetti, N.C., Jacobson, K., Roos, G.: The knowledge toolbox: a review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources. European Management Journal 17, 391–402 (1999)Kannan, G., Aulbur, W.G.: IC: Measurement effectiveness. Journal of IC 5, 389–413 (2004)Nordika Project. Measuring and Reporting IC: Experiences, Issues, and Prospects. OECD, Paris (2002)Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 71–79 (January/February 1992)Lynch, R.L., Cross, K.F.: Measure Up! The Essential Guide to Measuring Business Performance. Mandarin, London (1991)Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Measuring the Strategic Readiness of Intangible Assets. Harvard Business Review 82, 167–176 (2004)Alfaro Saiz, J.J., Rodriguez-Rodriguez, R., Ortiz Bas, A., Verdecho, M.J.: An information architecture for a performance management framework by collaborating SMEs. Computers in Industry 61, 676–685 (2010)Busi, M., Bititci, U.S.: Collaborative performance management: present gaps and future research. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 55, 7–25 (2006)Angerhofer, B.J., Angelides, M.C.: A model and a performance measurement system for collaborative supply chains. Decision Support Systems 42, 283–301 (2006)Gaiardelli, P., Saccani, N., Songini, L.: Performance measurement of the after-sales service network – Evidence from the automotive industry. Computers in Industry 58, 698–708 (2007)Gruat, F.A., La Forme, V., Campagne, J.P.: A Framework to analyse Collaborative Performance. Computers in Industry 58, 687–697 (2007

How to achieve dynamic and flexible performance management systems for collaborative processes

[EN] One of the main characteristics of successful collaborative networks is their ability to continuously reformulating their processes. The, they can quickly get adapted to environment needs and therefore define more competitive processes. One of biggest weaknesses of Performance Management Systems (PMS) when dealing with collaborative processes associated to collaborative networks, is their low degree of both dynamicity and flexibility to get adapted to the changes that such collaborative processes experiment. The main changes that can take place are, among others, small or large modifications of the own processes, entrance and/or exit of new participants in the process, incorporation and/or elimination of processes, changes in objectives and/or strategies of processes of some participant, or even of the whole collaborative network, etc. All this brings continuous modifications over the components that conform the PMS. Then, it is necessary to structure certain mechanisms that will provide with both dynamicity and flexibility to the PMS. Otherwise, these PMS will become obsolete in the short-time and will be not useful anymore. Further, these PMS will not measure properly performance and then they will become ineffective, becoming the source of troubles. Scientific literature shows that most of the works that deal with PMS dynamicity and flexibility are focused on intra-organizational contexts, leaving almost apart the collaborative networks ambit. This work analyses those aspects that prevent to the PMS to be dynamic and flexible when applied to manage the performance of collaborative networks. In addition, we discuss and analyse several mechanisms that should be incorporated into the PMS, making them more dynamic and flexible.Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R. (2013). How to achieve dynamic and flexible performance management systems for collaborative processes. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 408:639-647. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40543-3_67S639647408Matopoulos, A., Vlachopoulou, M., Manthou, V., Manos, B.: A conceptual framework for supply chain collaboration: empirical evidence from the agri-food industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 12(3), 177–186 (2007)Barrat, M.: Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 9(1), 30–42 (2004)Alfaro, J.J., Rodriguez-Rodriguez, R., Verdecho, M., Ortiz, A.: Business process interoperability and collaborative performance measurement. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 22(9), 877–889 (2009)Franco, R.D., Ortiz, A.: Soporte a la ejecución de procesos de negocio extendidos para la planificación de la producció. In: Proceedings of the X Congreso de Ingeniería de Organización, Valencia, vol. I, pp. 255–262 (2006)Ghalayini, A., Noble, J.S., Crowe, T.J.: An integrated dynamic performance measurement system for improving manufacturing competitiveness. International Journal of Production Economics 48, 207–225 (1997)Waggoner, D., Neely, A.D., Kennerley, M.P.: The forces that shape organisational performance measurement systems: An interdisciplinary review. International Journal of Production Economics 60(61), 53–60 (1999)Bititci, U.S., Turner, T., Begemann, C.: Dynamics of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 20(6), 692–704 (2000)Kennerley, M., Neely, A.: Measuring performance in a changing business environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 23(2), 213–229 (2003)Kennerley, M., Neely, A., Adams, C.: Survival of the fittest: measuring performance in a changing business environment. Measuring Business Excellence 7(4), 37–43 (2003)Najmi, M., Fan, I., Rigas, J.: A framework to review performance measurement systems. Business Process Management Journal 11(2), 109–122 (2005)Salloum, M.: Towards dynamic performance measurement system: a framework for manufacturing organizations. Thesis, Mälardalen University, Västeras, Sweden (2011

A Conceptual Framework to Manage Resilience and Increase Sustainability in the Supply Chain

[EN] The challenges of global economies foster supply chains to have to increase their processes of collaboration and dependence between their nodes, generating an increase in the level of vulnerability to possible impacts and interruptions in their operations that may affect their sustainability. This has developed an emerging area of interest in supply chain management, considering resilience management as a strategic capability of companies, and causing an increase in this area of research. Additionally, supply chains should deal with the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental, and social dimensions) by incorporating the three types of objectives in their strategy. Thus, there is a need to integrate both resilience and sustainability in supply chain management to increase competitiveness. In this paper, a systematic literature review is undertaken to analyze resilience management and its connection to increase supply chain sustainability. In the review, 232 articles published from 2000 to February 2020 in peer-reviewed journals in the Scopus and ScienceDirect databases are analyzed, classified, and synthesized. With the results, this paper develops a conceptual framework that integrates the fundamental elements for analyzing, measuring, and managing resilience to increase sustainability in the supply chain. Finally, conclusions, limitations, and future research lines are exposed.This study was supported by the Valencian Government in Spain (Project AEST/2019/019).Zavala-Alcívar, A.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ. (2020). A Conceptual Framework to Manage Resilience and Increase Sustainability in the Supply Chain. Sustainability. 12(16):1-38. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166300S1381216Roberta Pereira, C., Christopher, M., & Lago Da Silva, A. (2014). Achieving supply chain resilience: the role of procurement. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(5/6), 626-642. doi:10.1108/scm-09-2013-0346Pettit, T. J., Fiksel, J., & Croxton, K. L. (2010). ENSURING SUPPLY CHAIN RESILIENCE: DEVELOPMENT OF A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK. Journal of Business Logistics, 31(1), 1-21. doi:10.1002/j.2158-1592.2010.tb00125.xPettit, T. J., Croxton, K. L., & Fiksel, J. (2013). Ensuring Supply Chain Resilience: Development and Implementation of an Assessment Tool. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(1), 46-76. doi:10.1111/jbl.12009Ponis, S. T., & Koronis, E. (2012). Supply Chain Resilience: Definition Of Concept And Its Formative Elements. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 28(5), 921. doi:10.19030/jabr.v28i5.7234Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699-1710. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020Qorri, A., Mujkić, Z., & Kraslawski, A. (2018). A conceptual framework for measuring sustainability performance of supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 189, 570-584. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.073Verdecho, M.-J., Alarcón-Valero, F., Pérez-Perales, D., Alfaro-Saiz, J.-J., & Rodríguez-Rodríguez, R. (2020). A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 29(4), 1231-1251. doi:10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3Edgeman, R., & Wu, Z. (2016). Supply chain criticality in sustainable and resilient enterprises. Journal of Modelling in Management, 11(4), 869-888. doi:10.1108/jm2-10-2014-0078Marchese, D., Reynolds, E., Bates, M. E., Morgan, H., Clark, S. S., & Linkov, I. (2018). Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Science of The Total Environment, 613-614, 1275-1283. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086Ahern, J. (2012). Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: the promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design. Landscape Ecology, 28(6), 1203-1212. doi:10.1007/s10980-012-9799-zRamezankhani, M. J., Torabi, S. A., & Vahidi, F. (2018). Supply chain performance measurement and evaluation: A mixed sustainability and resilience approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 126, 531-548. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.09.054Shashi, Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., & Ertz, M. (2019). Managing supply chain resilience to pursue business and environmental strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1215-1246. doi:10.1002/bse.2428Ivanov, D. (2017). Revealing interfaces of supply chain resilience and sustainability: a simulation study. International Journal of Production Research, 56(10), 3507-3523. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1343507Fahimnia, B., & Jabbarzadeh, A. (2016). Marrying supply chain sustainability and resilience: A match made in heaven. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 91, 306-324. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2016.02.007Ruiz-Benitez, R., López, C., & Real, J. C. (2019). Achieving sustainability through the lean and resilient management of the supply chain. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 49(2), 122-155. doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-10-2017-0320Pavlov, A., Ivanov, D., Pavlov, D., & Slinko, A. (2019). Optimization of network redundancy and contingency planning in sustainable and resilient supply chain resource management under conditions of structural dynamics. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-019-03182-6Khot, S. B., & Thiagarajan, S. (2019). Resilience and sustainability of supply chain management in the Indian automobile industry. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 339-348. doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2019.4.002Roostaie, S., Nawari, N., & Kibert, C. J. (2019). Sustainability and resilience: A review of definitions, relationships, and their integration into a combined building assessment framework. Building and Environment, 154, 132-144. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.02.042Davoudabadi, R., Mousavi, S. M., & Sharifi, E. (2020). An integrated weighting and ranking model based on entropy, DEA and PCA considering two aggregation approaches for resilient supplier selection problem. Journal of Computational Science, 40, 101074. doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2019.101074Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., & Cruz Machado, V. (2011). Lean, agile, resilient and green: divergencies and synergies. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 2(2), 151-179. doi:10.1108/20401461111135037Wang, Z., & Zhang, J. (2019). Agent-based evaluation of humanitarian relief goods supply capability. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 36, 101105. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101105Alikhani, R., Torabi, S. A., & Altay, N. (2019). Strategic supplier selection under sustainability and risk criteria. International Journal of Production Economics, 208, 69-82. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.11.018Zahiri, B., Zhuang, J., & Mohammadi, M. (2017). Toward an integrated sustainable-resilient supply chain: A pharmaceutical case study. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 103, 109-142. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2017.04.009Aboah, J., Wilson, M. M. J., Rich, K. M., & Lyne, M. C. (2019). Operationalising resilience in tropical agricultural value chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24(2), 271-300. doi:10.1108/scm-05-2018-0204Statsenko, L., & Corral de Zubielqui, G. (2020). Customer collaboration, service firms’ diversification and innovation performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 85, 180-196. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.09.013Duong, L. N. K., & Chong, J. (2020). Supply chain collaboration in the presence of disruptions: a literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 58(11), 3488-3507. doi:10.1080/00207543.2020.1712491Bhamra, R., Dani, S., & Burnard, K. (2011). Resilience: the concept, a literature review and future directions. International Journal of Production Research, 49(18), 5375-5393. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.563826Heckmann, I., Comes, T., & Nickel, S. (2015). A critical review on supply chain risk – Definition, measure and modeling. Omega, 52, 119-132. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2014.10.004Hohenstein, N.-O., Feisel, E., Hartmann, E., & Giunipero, L. (2015). Research on the phenomenon of supply chain resilience. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 45(1/2), 90-117. doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-05-2013-0128Kamalahmadi, M., & Parast, M. M. (2016). A review of the literature on the principles of enterprise and supply chain resilience: Major findings and directions for future research. International Journal of Production Economics, 171, 116-133. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.10.023Ali, A., Mahfouz, A., & Arisha, A. (2017). Analysing supply chain resilience: integrating the constructs in a concept mapping framework via a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 22(1), 16-39. doi:10.1108/scm-06-2016-0197Umar, M., Wilson, M., & Heyl, J. (2017). Food Network Resilience Against Natural Disasters: A Conceptual Framework. SAGE Open, 7(3), 215824401771757. doi:10.1177/2158244017717570Stone, J., & Rahimifard, S. (2018). Resilience in agri-food supply chains: a critical analysis of the literature and synthesis of a novel framework. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 23(3), 207-238. doi:10.1108/scm-06-2017-0201Colicchia, C., Creazza, A., Noè, C., & Strozzi, F. (2019). Information sharing in supply chains: a review of risks and opportunities using the systematic literature network analysis (SLNA). Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24(1), 5-21. doi:10.1108/scm-01-2018-0003Annarelli, A., & Nonino, F. (2016). Strategic and operational management of organizational resilience: Current state of research and future directions. Omega, 62, 1-18. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.08.004Behzadi, G., O’Sullivan, M. J., Olsen, T. L., & Zhang, A. (2018). Agribusiness supply chain risk management: A review of quantitative decision models. Omega, 79, 21-42. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2017.07.005Kochan, C. G., & Nowicki, D. R. (2018). Supply chain resilience: a systematic literature review and typological framework. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 48(8), 842-865. doi:10.1108/ijpdlm-02-2017-0099Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 125, 285-307. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.001Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207-222. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00375Rousseau, D. M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D. (2008). 11 Evidence in Management and Organizational Science: Assembling the Field’s Full Weight of Scientific Knowledge Through Syntheses. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 475-515. doi:10.5465/19416520802211651Zimmer, K., Fröhling, M., & Schultmann, F. (2015). Sustainable supplier management – a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. International Journal of Production Research, 54(5), 1412-1442. doi:10.1080/00207543.2015.1079340Natarajarathinam, M., Capar, I., & Narayanan, A. (2009). Managing supply chains in times of crisis: a review of literature and insights. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(7), 535-573. doi:10.1108/09600030910996251Tang, C., & Tomlin, B. (2008). The power of flexibility for mitigating supply chain risks. International Journal of Production Economics, 116(1), 12-27. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.07.008Kleindorfer, P. R., & Saad, G. H. (2009). Managing Disruption Risks in Supply Chains. Production and Operations Management, 14(1), 53-68. doi:10.1111/j.1937-5956.2005.tb00009.xChristopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the Resilient Supply Chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1-14. doi:10.1108/09574090410700275Wu, T., Huang, S., Blackhurst, J., Zhang, X., & Wang, S. (2013). Supply Chain Risk Management: An Agent-Based Simulation to Study the Impact of Retail Stockouts. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 60(4), 676-686. doi:10.1109/tem.2012.2190986Fang, H., & Xiao, R. (2013). Resilient closed-loop supply chain network design based on patent protection. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology, 48(1), 49. doi:10.1504/ijcat.2013.055566Gong, J., Mitchell, J. E., Krishnamurthy, A., & Wallace, W. A. (2014). An interdependent layered network model for a resilient supply chain. Omega, 46, 104-116. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2013.08.002Mari, S., Lee, Y., & Memon, M. (2014). Sustainable and Resilient Supply Chain Network Design under Disruption Risks. Sustainability, 6(10), 6666-6686. doi:10.3390/su6106666Bueno-Solano, A., & Cedillo-Campos, M. G. (2014). Dynamic impact on global supply chains performance of disruptions propagation produced by terrorist acts. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 61, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2013.09.005Costantino, F., Gravio, G. D., Shaban, A., & Tronci, M. (2014). Replenishment policy based on information sharing to mitigate the severity of supply chain disruption. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 18(1), 3. doi:10.1504/ijlsm.2014.062119Kristianto, Y., Gunasekaran, A., Helo, P., & Hao, Y. (2014). A model of resilient supply chain network design: A two-stage programming with fuzzy shortest path. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(1), 39-49. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.009Raj, R., Wang, J. W., Nayak, A., Tiwari, M. K., Han, B., Liu, C. L., & Zhang, W. J. (2015). Measuring the Resilience of Supply Chain Systems Using a Survival Model. IEEE Systems Journal, 9(2), 377-381. doi:10.1109/jsyst.2014.2339552LOH, H. S., & THAI, V. V. (2015). Cost Consequences of a Port-Related Supply Chain Disruption. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 31(3), 319-340. doi:10.1016/j.ajsl.2015.09.001Torabi, S. A., Baghersad, M., & Mansouri, S. A. (2015). Resilient supplier selection and order allocation under operational and disruption risks. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 79, 22-48. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2015.03.005Cardoso, S. R., Paula Barbosa-Póvoa, A., Relvas, S., & Novais, A. Q. (2015). Resilience metrics in the assessment of complex supply-chains performance operating under demand uncertainty. Omega, 56, 53-73. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.03.008Salehi Sadghiani, N., Torabi, S. A., & Sahebjamnia, N. (2015). Retail supply chain network design under operational and disruption risks. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 75, 95-114. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2014.12.015Dixit, V., Seshadrinath, N., & Tiwari, M. K. (2016). Performance measures based optimization of supply chain network resilience: A NSGA-II + Co-Kriging approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 93, 205-214. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2015.12.029Liu, F., Song, J.-S., & Tong, J. D. (2016). Building Supply Chain Resilience through Virtual Stockpile Pooling. Production and Operations Management, 25(10), 1745-1762. doi:10.1111/poms.12573Fahimnia, B., Jabbarzadeh, A., & Sarkis, J. (2018). Greening versus resilience: A supply chain design perspective. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 119, 129-148. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2018.09.005Hasani, A., & Khosrojerdi, A. (2016). Robust global supply chain network design under disruption and uncertainty considering resilience strategies: A parallel memetic algorithm for a real-life case study. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 87, 20-52. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2015.12.009Azhmyakov, V., Fernández-Gutiérrez, J. P., Gadi, S. K., & Pickl, S. (2016). A Novel Numerical Approach to the MCLP Based Resilent Supply Chain Optimization. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(31), 137-142. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.12.175Ivanov, D., Sokolov, B., Solovyeva, I., Dolgui, A., & Jie, F. (2016). Dynamic recovery policies for time-critical supply chains under conditions of ripple effect. International Journal of Production Research, 54(23), 7245-7258. doi:10.1080/00207543.2016.1161253Jabbarzadeh, A., Fahimnia, B., Sheu, J.-B., & Moghadam, H. S. (2016). Designing a supply chain resilient to major disruptions and supply/demand interruptions. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 94, 121-149. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2016.09.004Babich, V., Burnetas, A. N., & Ritchken, P. H. (2007). Competition and Diversification Effects in Supply Chains with Supplier Default Risk. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 9(2), 123-146. doi:10.1287/msom.1060.0122Bogataj, D., Aver, B., & Bogataj, M. (2016). Supply chain risk at simultaneous robust perturbations. International Journal of Production Economics, 181, 68-78. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.09.009Wang, X., Herty, M., & Zhao, L. (2015). Contingent rerouting for enhancing supply chain resilience from supplier behavior perspective. International Transactions in Operational Research, 23(4), 775-796. doi:10.1111/itor.12151Zeng, B., & Yen, B. P.-C. (2017). Rethinking the role of partnerships in global supply chains: A risk-based perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 185, 52-62. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.004Lücker, F., & Seifert, R. W. (2017). Building up Resilience in a Pharmaceutical Supply Chain through Inventory, Dual Sourcing and Agility Capacity. Omega, 73, 114-124. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2017.01.001Fattahi, M., Govindan, K., & Keyvanshokooh, E. (2017). Responsive and resilient supply chain network design under operational and disruption risks with delivery lead-time sensitive customers. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 101, 176-200. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2017.02.004Kırılmaz, O., & Erol, S. (2017). A proactive approach to supply chain risk management: Shifting orders among suppliers to mitigate the supply side risks. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 23(1), 54-65. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2016.04.002Li, H., Pedrielli, G., Lee, L. H., & Chew, E. P. (2016). Enhancement of supply chain resilience through inter-echelon information sharing. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 29(2), 260-285. doi:10.1007/s10696-016-9249-3Otto, C., Willner, S. N., Wenz, L., Frieler, K., & Levermann, A. (2017). Modeling loss-propagation in the global supply network: The dynamic agent-based model acclimate. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 83, 232-269. doi:10.1016/j.jedc.2017.08.001Rezapour, S., Farahani, R. Z., & Pourakbar, M. (2017). Resilient supply chain network design under competition: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 259(3), 1017-1035. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.11.041Ledwoch, A., Yasarcan, H., & Brintrup, A. (2018). The moderating impact of supply network topology on the effectiveness of risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 197, 13-26. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.12.013Al-Othman, W. B. E., Lababidi, H. M. S., Alatiqi, I. M., & Al-Shayji, K. (2008). Supply chain optimization of petroleum organization under uncertainty in market demands and prices. European Journal of Operational Research, 189(3), 822-840. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.06.081Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., & Sokolov, B. (2017). Scheduling of recovery actions in the supply chain with resilience analysis considerations. International Journal of Production Research, 56(19), 6473-6490. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1401747Das, K. (2019). Integrating Lean, Green, and Resilience Criteria in a Sustainable Food Supply Chain Planning Model. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences, 4(2), 259-275. doi:10.33889/ijmems.2019.4.2-022Das, K. (2018). Integrating resilience in a supply chain planning model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 35(3), 570-595. doi:10.1108/ijqrm-08-2016-0136Arora, V., & Ventresca, M. (2018). Modeling topologically resilient supply chain networks. Applied Network Science, 3(1). doi:10.1007/s41109-018-0070-7Almeida, J. F. de F., Conceição, S. V., Pinto, L. R., de Camargo, R. S., & Júnior, G. de M. (2018). Flexibility evaluation of multiechelon supply chains. PLOS ONE, 13(3), e0194050. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0194050Mancheri, N. A., Sprecher, B., Deetman, S., Young, S. B., Bleischwitz, R., Dong, L., … Tukker, A. (2018). Resilience in the tantalum supply chain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 129, 56-69. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.018Namdar, J., Li, X., Sawhney, R., & Pradhan, N. (2017). Supply chain resilience for single and multiple sourcing in the presence of disruption risks. International Journal of Production Research, 56(6), 2339-2360. doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1370149Rozhkov, M., & Ivanov, D. (2018). CONTINGENCY PRODUCTION-INVENTORY CONTROL POLICY FOR CAPACITY DISRUPTIONS IN THE RETAIL SUPPLY CHAIN WITH PERISHABLE PRODUCTS. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11), 1448-1452. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.311Sabouhi, F., Pishvaee, M. S., & Jabalameli, M. S. (2018). Resilient supply chain design under operational and disruption risks considering quantity discount: A case study of pharmaceutical supply chain. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 126, 657-672. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.10.001Zavitsas, K., Zis, T., & Bell, M. G. H. (2018). The impact of flexible environmental policy on maritime supply chain resilience. Transport Policy, 72, 116-128. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.09.020Mitra, K., Gudi, R. D., Patwardhan, S. C., & Sardar, G. (2009). Towards resilient supply chains: Uncertainty analysis using fuzzy mathematical programming. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 87(7), 967-981. doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2008.12.025Lücker, F., Seifert, R. W., & Biçer, I. (2018). Roles of inventory and reserve capacity in mitigating supply chain disruption risk. International Journal of Production Research, 57(4), 1238-1249. doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.15041

Performance measurement in SMEs: systematic literature review and research directions

[EN] The purpose of this paper is double. First, the research about performance measurement (PM) in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) will be analysed in order to know its evolution. Next, the research gaps in the business context of these companies will be identi¿ed. This paper presents a systematic literature review of 131 articles of PM in SMEs between 2006 and 2019. A conceptual framework is proposed to characterize the studies according to three factors: (1) purpose of the approach; (2) scope of PM; and (3) business context in which the studies are articulated. The reviewed papers were selected from Scopus and Web of Science databases. For this study, we considered the works conducted in the manufacturing sector, and excluded those that focused on the services sector. The results show that most of the studies are concentrated in the context of individual company, on the other hand networks, clusters, and supply chains have received less attention. The information collected herein identi¿es research gaps that have not been dealt with in detail and are transformed into guidelines to be dealt with by new future speci¿c works in the domain of PM in SMEs.Rojas-Lema, X.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ. (2021). Performance measurement in SMEs: systematic literature review and research directions. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 32(15-16):1803-1828. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2020.1774357S180318283215-1

Project portfolio selection for increasing sustainability in supply chains

[EN] Sustainability practices impact on the competitiveness of organizations. Enterprises need approaches that both support the implementation of these practices by helping to define the strategic elements of sustainable supply chains and prioritize projects to increase profitability. The purpose of this paper is to propose an approach using the Analytic Hierarchy Process that supports the portfolio project decision by aligning the project selection process to the strategic objectives of a supply chain that pursue sustainability. This approach will benefit enterprises to prioritize projects that have the highest impact on the sustainability strategy of the supply chain over time. The approach has been applied to an Agri-food supply chain.Authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of the Project GV/2017/065 "Development of a decision support tool for the management and improvement of sustainability in supply chains" funded by the Regional Government of Valencia.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Pérez Perales, D.; Alarcón Valero, F. (2020). Project portfolio selection for increasing sustainability in supply chains. Economics and business letters. 9(4):317-325. https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.9.4.2020.317-325S3173259

A methodology to increase the level of the "Effective communication" competence in Master degree

[EN] One of the main objectives of the competences evaluation program in universities is to increase the level that their students have in these competences. There are descriptive guides recommending procedures for assessing these competencies and also to collect evidence of such assessments that help to evaluate the progress made. However, it is not so common to use active methodologies to guide this process from a practical and systemic point of view. This paper describes a methodology that helps to increase the level of competence "effective communication" in its oral dimension focused on the master students. The methodology consists of a series of phases that allow improving step by step and incrementally the level of competence acquired. It also describes the recommended assessment procedure to assess the progress and the set of associated actions that the student must follow to improve the competence. The methodology is designed to allow an individualized monitoring of the progress of each student based on the predefined objectives and takes into account their initial level. The methodology will be applied during the next academic year in a course of the master in Advanced Engineering Production, Logistics and Supply Chain at the Higher Technical School of Industrial Engineering (Universitat Politècnica de València).This work has been developed within the research project called ¿Use of software applications for training and assessing the UPV transversal competence ¿effective communication¿ in bachelor and master¿ (Ref. PIME-A16-16) funded by the Vice-Rectorate for Studies, Quality and Accreditation at Universitat Politècnica de València.Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Gómez-Gasquet, P.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R. (2017). A methodology to increase the level of the "Effective communication" competence in Master degree. ICERI Proceedings. 5974-5978. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2017.1562S5974597

Using an ANP performance management framework to manage the development of transversal competences in University degrees

[EN] Organisations are concerned about measuring the performance of the product/service they deliver to their customers. In all types of organisations, if a proper performance assessment is to be developed, it should be measured in different dimensions. At University, the new study programs include the development and assessment of transversal competences due to their importance in enhancing the abilities and improving the employability of students. The achievement of transversal competences can be assessed in different levels/stages; for example, the 1st and 2nd years of a Bachelor's degree; the 3rd and 4th years of a Bachelor's degree and at Master's level. The purpose of this paper is to integrate the research into performance management in organisations to develop an approach consisting of four components (a methodology, a solid and integrated performance management framework, graphical diagrams and quantitative techniques) to assess and manage the achievement of transversal competences through the different levels of study using a consolidated approach. The proposal uses the Analytic Network Process (ANP) to model dependences and feedback among the elements of the competences.This work has been developed within the research projects "Use of software applications for training and assessing the UPV transversal competence "effective communication" in bachelor and master" (Ref. PIME/2016/A/16) and "Development of a social network for the design, follow-up, assessment and multi-disciplinary coordination of the TFG and TFM" (Ref.: PIME/2017/A/018) funded by the Vice-Rectorate for Studies, Quality and Accreditation at Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R.; Gómez-Gasquet, P. (2021). Using an ANP performance management framework to manage the development of transversal competences in University degrees. Central European Journal of Operations Research. 29:1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-020-00693-7S12429Aczél J, Saaty TL (1983) Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgement. J Math Psychol 27(1):93–102Alfaro JJ, Ortiz A, Rodríguez R (2007) Performance measurement system for enterprise networks. Int J Product Perform Manag 56(4):305–334AQSUC (2009) Guía para la evaluación de competencias en el área de ingeniería y arquitectura. AQSUC. Accessed www.aqu.cat/publicacions/Begičević N, Divjak B, Hunjak T (2010) Decision-making on prioritization of projects in higher education institutions using the analytic network process approach. CEJOR 18(3):341–364Bititci US, Mendibil K, Martinez V, Albores P (2005) Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises. International J Oper Product Manag 25(4):333–353Blanco Fernández A, Learreta Ramos B, Alba Ferré E, Asensio Castañeda E, Blanco Archilla Y, Bonsón Aventín M, Castaño Perea E, Escribano Otero JJ, García García MJ, Lara Bercial PJ, Merino Jiménez AJ, Pintor Pirzkal H, Jiménez Rodríguez RM, Terrón López MJ (2009) Desarrollo y Evaluación de competencias en educación superior. Narcea Universitaria, MadridBoateng P, Chen Z, Ogunlana SO (2015) An analytical network process model for risks prioritisation in megaprojects. Int J Project Manage 33:1795–1811Choi CR, Jeong HY (2019) Quality evaluation for multimedia contents of e-learning systems using the ANP approach on high speed network. Multimedia Tools and Applications (Article in press https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-019-7351-8)Diaz-Balteiro L, González-Pachón J, Romero C (2017) Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: a critical review. Eur J Oper Res 258:607–616Folan P, Browne J (2005) Development of an extended enterprise performance measurement system. Product Plann Control 16(6):531–544Forman E, Peniwati K (1998) Aggregating individual judgements and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 108:165–169García García MJ, Terrón López MJ, Blanco Archilla Y (2009) Desarrollo de recursos docentes para la evaluación de competencias genéricas. XV Jornadas de Enseñanza Universitaria de Informática, BarcelonaGómez-Gasquet P, Verdecho MJ, Rodríguez-Rodríguez R, Alfaro-Saiz JJ (2018) Formative assessment framework proposal for transversal competencies: application to analysis and problem-solving competence. J Ind Eng Manag 11(2):73–89González J, Wagenaar R (2003) Tuning educational structures in Europe. Universidad de Deusto, BilbaoHo W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):16–24Ibarra Sáiz MS (2010) INevalCO: INnovación en la EVALuación de COmpetencias Diseño y desarrollo de procedimientos e instrumentos para la evaluación de competencias entornos de aprendizaje mixtos/virtuales con la participación de los estudiantes en los títulos de grado. Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cádiz, CádizICE (2015) Transversal competences rubrics. Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación. Universitat Politècnica de València, Internal documentsIlgin MA, Gupta SM (2010) Environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery (ECMPRO): a review of the state of the art. J Environ Manage 91:563–591Jablonsky J (2016) Efficiency analysis in multi-period systems: an application to performance evaluation in Czech higher education. CEJOR 24:283–296Jonsson A, Svingby G (2007) The use of scoring rubrics: reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Res Rev 2:130–144Kadoić N, Begičević N, Divjak B (2018) A new method for strategic decision-making in higher education. CEJOR 26(3):611–628Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard–measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus Rev 70(1):71–79Masmitjà JA (2013) Rúbricas para la evaluación de competencias. Ediciones OctaedroRodrigues Lima-Junior F, Ribeiro Carpinetti LC (2017) Quantitative models for supply chain performance evaluation: a literature review. Comput Ind Eng 113:333–346Rodríguez Gómez G (2009) EvalHIDA: evaluación de competencias con herramientas de interacción dialógica asíncronas (foros, blogs y wikis). Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Cádiz, CádizSaaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkSaaty TL (1996) The analytic network process: decision making with dependence and feedback. RWS Publications, PittsburghSaaty TL (2001) Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications, PittsburghSeyhan S, Mehpare T (2010) The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications. Manag Decis 48(5):775–808Sonseca A, Sahuquillo O, Martínez-Casas J, Carballeira J, Denia FD, Ródenas JJ (2015) Assessment of oral and written communication competences in the European higher education area: a proposal of evaluation methodologies. In: 1st International conference on higher education advances (HEAd’15), pp 2–9Tang HWV (2018) Modeling critical leadership competences for junior high school principals: a hybrid MCDM model combining DEMATEL and ANP, Kybernetes (Article in press https://doi.org/10.1108/k-01-2018-0015)UPV (2014) Dimensiones competenciales. Marco UPV de definición y evaluación de adquisición de competencias. Vicerrectorado de Estudios, Calidad y Acreditación. Downloaded 20 October, 2014, http://www.upv.es/contenidos/ICEP/info/DimensionesCompetenciales.pdfVerdecho MJ, Alfaro-Saiz JJ, Rodriguez-Rodríguez R, Ortiz Bas A (2012) A multi-criteria approach for managing inter-enterprise collaborative relationships. OMEGA 4:249–263Verdecho MJ, Rodríguez-Rodríguez R, Alfaro-Saiz JJ (2015) Evaluación de la competencia transversal UPV “comunicación efectiva” en máster. In: International conference innodoct’15Villa A, Poblete M (2007) Aprendizaje basado en competencias. Una propuesta para la evaluación de las competencias genéricas. Vicerrectorado de Innovación y Calidad de la Universidad de Deusto: Ediciones MensajeroYang YPO, Shieh HM, Leu JD, Tzeng G (2008) A novel hybrid MCDM model combined with DEMATEL and ANP with applications. Int J Oper Res 5(3):160–16

A methodology to assess the generic competence "Analysis and Problem solving" in master degree

[EN] The Universitat Politecnica de Valencia (UPV) has considered the development and assessment of generic competences in the curricula of its undergraduate and graduate degrees. Specifically, thirteen generic competences have been defined and introduced within all the curricula. These generic competences are to be assessed within the specific activities developed through the courses. For that purpose, the UPV has designed an institutional project called "UPV transversal competences" in order to guide the general implementation of the generic competencies in the degrees. This paper emerges from the work developed within a specific educational project designed in coherence with the institutional UPV project that studies the "analysis and problem solving" competence in master degree. Instructors have experience in the assessment and development of specific competences but, most of them, still need tools that aid to assess the degree of development of generic competences due to its novelty in the curricula. In order to fill this gap, this paper presents a structured methodology to design and develop assessment procedures and instruments of the "analysis and problem solving" generic competence. This methodology has been applied during the academic year 2015-2016 to assess the "analysis and problem solving" competence in the "Technologies and Software Applications for Supply Chain Management" course which belongs to the Master in Advanced Engineering Production, Logistics and Supply Chain at the Higher Technical School of Industrial Engineering. This paper discusses main results and conclusions obtained from the application. These results are of two types: results of the assessment of the specific competence in the course and results of the questionnaire passed to the students to know their point of view regarding the whole experience.This work has been developed within the research project called "Assessment of UPV generic competence "problem analysis and resolution" in master students" (Ref.: PIME-A7-15) funded by the Vice-Rectorate for Studies, Quality and Accreditation at Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Gómez-Gasquet, P.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ. (2016). A methodology to assess the generic competence "Analysis and Problem solving" in master degree. ICERI Proceedings. 7506-7511. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2016.0712S7506751