Professional Documents
Culture Documents
E Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration - Implementation Issues and Challenges
E Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration - Implementation Issues and Challenges
E Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration - Implementation Issues and Challenges
net/publication/332031161
CITATIONS READS
0 5,029
1 author:
Sudhanshu Joshi
Doon University
68 PUBLICATIONS 307 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Sudhanshu Joshi on 27 March 2019.
Ioannis Manikas
University of Greenwich, UK
Dimitris Folinas
ATEI Thessaloniki, Greece
Managing Director: Lindsay Johnston
Editorial Director: Joel Gamon
Book Production Manager: Jennifer Yoder
Publishing Systems Analyst: Adrienne Freeland
Development Editor: Austin DeMarco
Assistant Acquisitions Editor: Kayla Wolfe
Typesetter: Alyson Zerbe
Cover Design: Jason Mull
Copyright © 2013 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher.
Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or
companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.
All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the
authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.
9
Chapter 2
E-Supply Chain Collaboration
and Integration:
Implementation Issues and Challenges
Sudhanshu Joshi
Doon University, India
ABSTRACT
Formulation of supplier integration strategy is essential to optimize the value chain. In the chapter, the
authors review the literature on integration of supplier relationship practices and its impact on opti-
mization of value chain. The review is based on e-collaborative framework for optimized value chain,
which comprises the supplier integration strategy, i.e., information sharing, e-business systems, and
policy-based supplier selection have positive influence on the long-term planning and supply chain
practices. The chapter reviews 368 articles on empirical research in e-collaboration and supply chain
management. It finds the majority of authors are using a combination of the entity of analysis, while still
focusing on the firm level rather than the network level. In this, another encouraging fact is that most
of the authors prefer to consider a combination of various elements of exchange in their analysis. The
potential limitation of the study is that it does not attempt to trace out trends using regression techniques.
The extension of this study could be statistically testing the figures observed in this chapter and setting
a grounded theory approach for future research in e-collaboration and supply chain.
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-3914-0.ch002
Copyright © 2013, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
focus (Fawcett and Magnan, 2002). SCM can be pressed through the Efficient Consumer Response
seen as an integrative, proactive approach (Mat- (ECR) movement. ECR encompasses multiple
thyssens and Van den Bulte, 1994) to manage the technological and managerial innovations which
total flow of a distribution channel to the ultimate aim to transform retailers, distributors, and
customer-like “a well-balanced and well-practiced manufacturers into more efficient inter-linked
relay team” (Cooper and Ellram, 1993). organizations placing special emphasis on col-
The advent of e-business has created several laboration (JIPOECR, 1995). One of the first
challenges and opportunities in the supply-chain forms of supply-chain collaboration has been the
environment. The Internet has made it easier to practice of Vendor-Managed Inventory (VMI) or
share information among supply-chain partners Continuous Replenishment Program (CRP), as it
and the current trend is to try to leverage the ben- is often called in the context of grocery retailing,
efits obtained through information sharing (also where the buyer shares demand information with
called visibility) across the supply chain to improve the supplier who, in turn, manages the buyer’s
operational performance, customer service, and inventory. The practice of Collaborative Planning
solution development (Swaminathan and Tayur, Forecasting and Replenishment (CPFR) has ex-
2003). A key feature of SCM is an early decision tended this collaboration to include the exchange
to reduce the number of suppliers in the chain (the of forecasts based on widely shared information
elimination of multiple sourcing) (Ellram, 1991) (usually Point-of-Sales [PoS] data and promotion
because maintaining close, intense relationships plans), having a more strategic focus and placing
can be very expensive in management effort more emphasis on the demand side. Primarily, For
(Cavinato, 1992; Langley and Holcomb, 1992). an effective Supply Chain in a FMCG Industry,
The intention is to have no more “partners” than the existing supplier relationship is combination
necessary and to work more closely, effectively, of 3Cs—Cooperation, Coordination and Col-
and over the longer term (Peck and Juttner, 2000; laboration and Open Market Negotiations among
Scott and Westbrook, 1991) with those who have suppliers (as mentioned in Figure 1), and there
the most critical impact on the overall operation is wide range of attributes covered under it,
(Cooper et al., 1997). including Price Based discussions, Adversarial
Giannakis and Croom (2004) propose an SCM relationships, Supplier selection and Contracts,
paradigm conceptual framework, the “3S Model” Information Exchanges using WIP Links and EDI
containing the synthesis of business resources and and Supply Chain Integration using Joint Planning
networks, the synergy between network actors and, and Technology Sharing.
the synchronization of operational decisions. The More specifically, the Supplier relationship
International Marketing and Purchasing Group’s practices including VMI/CRP has been imple-
dyadic interaction approach summarized by Kern mented at the level of the retailer’s central ware-
and Willcocks (2002), supply chain integration house, based on the daily sharing of the warehouse
reviewed by Fawcett and Magnan (2002) and, inventory report data and orders information. Most
networks of relationships described by Harland CPFR initiatives also focus on the central ware-
et al. (2001) and Kempainen and Vepsalainen house rather than on store replenishment, and deal
(2003) all suggest that exposing the relationship mainly with mid-/long-term replenishment plan-
management aspects of supply chain relationships ning for promotion items and new product intro-
and their impact on performance (Giannakis and ductions. The VMI/CRP practice has been exten-
Croom, 2004) is highly problematical. sively studied by researchers but mainly from the
In Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) perspective of evaluating the impact of informa-
sector, this collaboration aspect has been ex- tion sharing on supply-chain performance rather
10
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Figure 1. Supplier relationship based on cooperation, coordination, and collaboration (3C) (source:
adapted from Spekman et al., 1998)
than from the Information Technology (IT) imple- based on E-collaboration and Supply Chain
mentation perspective. practices was first appeared in 1994 (Dunn
Furthermore, studies on CPFR mainly define et al.1994). The year 2006 is chosen as the
it as a new practice and discuss its adoption or terminating point of data collection for
evaluate its business impact. Vendor-Managed providing a landmark to end data collection.
Inventory (VMI) is gradually becoming an im- Step 2: The articles were collected from four
portant element of supply chain management major management science publishers viz.
strategy of organizations. Ebscohost, Science Direct, Taylor & Francis,
Emerald Insight.
Step 3: Filtration of the search string “e-collab-
REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND oration and Supply chain” among selected
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY management and technology databases.
Burgess et al. (2006) and Soni et al. (2011)
A comprehensive and critical literature review of adopted similar approach for review based
empirical research work in the areas of Supply research.
chain management, e-Collaboration, Supply Chain Step 4: Flynn et al. (1990) explained that any
Integration, Customer Relationship Program empirical research article can have one or
(CRP), Vendor-Managed Inventory (VMI), Con- more of the following empirical research
tinuous Replenishment Program (CRP), Collab- designs viz. single case study, multiple case
orative Planning Forecasting and Replenishment study, panel study, focus group and survey.
(CPFR), and e-commerce, Point of Sale (PoS). A We selected empirical research articles from
Step-by-Step approach was adopted for literature the selected population of journals on the
review (also illustrated in Figure 2): similar lines.
Step 5: Classification of the articles is based on
Step 1: The assessment period of articles is be- following parameters: Empirical research
tween 1994 to 2006, a 12 year timeline was growth in SCM.
selected (based on availability of research ◦◦ Purpose of empirical research
work). The year 1994 was taken as the base ◦◦ Citation index per sub topic searched
year for data collection as the first research (see Tables 1 and 2)
11
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Figure 2. Literature review methodology (adopted from Soni and Kodali, 2011)
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT into the research subject and especially revealed
RELATIONSHIP the important part played by co-operation, co-
ordination and collaboration (C3 behavior) in
Within the supply chain, the need for much reducing the inherently negative effects of close
closer, long-term relationships is increasing due proximity and limited choice relationships (see
to supplier rationalization (Refer. Figure 2 and Figure 4).
Table 3) and globalization and more information The research specifically tested the well-ac-
about these interactions is required (Wilding & cepted Williamson’s economic organizations
Humphries, 2006). failure framework as a theoretical model through
Studies including Wilding & Humphries, 2006 which long-term collaborative relationships can
demonstrated that the existing theoretical model be viewed.
including Williamson’s economic organizations There is a strategic dimension into the network
failure framework could provide powerful insights of organizations (Refer Figure 3) that are involved
12
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
in the up-stream production and downstream dis- tion between supply chain members to ensure the
tribution processes and activities focused on the success as per objectives (Christopher, 2005; Hines
satisfaction of customers and maximization of both and Jones, 1996; Spekman et al., 1998). Supply
current and long-term profitability (Christopher, Chain Collaboration increases the scope of its
1992, 2005; Cox and Lamming, 1997; Harland, operations and minimizes the confliction among
1996a; Kempainen and Vepsalainen, 2003) the partners and act as tool to tackle operational
preliminary meant for reduction in inventory, to problems (Sako et al., 1994). For better profitabil-
increase customer service reliability and build a ity & performance close long-term relationships
competitive advantage for the channel (Boddy et between customers and suppliers is suggested
al., 2000; Cavinato, 1992; Fawcett and Magnan, (Giannakis and Croom, 2004).
2002; Hines and Jones, 1996). Lamming et al. (2001) cited that by instrumen-
From the Supply Chain Restructuring perspec- talising and developing the unique capabilities of
tive, vital feature for an effective Supply Chain is partnership, it is possible to create a guard from
to reduce the number of suppliers in the chain system-level forces. Supplier relationship manage-
(Ellram, 1991). The adverse relationship leads to ment is based on function of Partnership, whose
extensive loss in management objectives (Cavi- success depends upon the duration to build trust
nato, 1992; Langley and Holcomb, 1992). There (Sako et al., 1994). When mistrust is entrenched, a
was an immense need to be identified toward “lean shift from adversarial to co-operative relationship
partners” to work more closely, effectively and styles is extremely difficult. Moreover, Macbeth
for longer duration and its impact on overall op- and Ferguson (1994) and Kern and Willcocks
eration (Scott and Westbrook, 1991; Cooper et (2002) propose that despite the availability of
al., 1997; Peck and Ju ttner, 2000). Functional modern information systems, the practice of
framework was analyzed by Harlan, 1996 and managing supply chain players is wasteful of
Hines and Jones, 1996 between Japanese Lean resources and drags performance backwards
automotive Producers and their western counter- rather than promoting continuous improvement.
parts. Inter-organizational Strategic alliances Furthermore, Cooper et al. (1997) believe that
emerged as key tool of Confliction Resolution & achieving true supply chain integration is “a lofty
Competitive Intelligences (Anscombe and Kear- and difficult goal” and research indicates that
ney, 1994). Further extension to this study was companies continue to struggle to operationalise
giving by Bechtel and Jayaram (1997) and Perks SCM principles such that they support dynami-
and Easton (2000) who suggest that SCM provides cally changing business influences (Braithwaite,
business environment in which firm closely co- 1998). We conclude that since SCM appears to
operate rather than compete to achieve mutual implicitly require a move towards a limitation of
goals and are incentivized to join in collaborative the number of market players involved – small
innovation (Harland, 1996a). numbers, effective supply chain relationship
The concept of VMI as tool for strategic part- management presents a more complex set of
ners’ role to share confidential demand information challenges to achieve success.
and to cater uncertainty by replenishing inventory
orders (Cooper and Ellram, 1993; Lamming, 1993;
Benchtel and Jayaram, 1997). COLLABORATION CHALLENGES
Researchers explained Supply Chain Integra-
tion as an overview towards the need for closer Academics have used a number of approaches
relationships, including supplier’ trust, commit- within SCM research to capture perspectives
ment, co-operation, co-ordination and collabora- containing the key facets of inter-organizational,
13
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
14
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Empirical
Journal
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Research
Name
Articles
BPMJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 2 0 7
TR 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 6
CCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCMIJ 0 0 6 2 7 4 4 3 3 6 10 9 16 70
PPC 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 6 1 2 12
EJOR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 4 10
EJPSM 1 3 1 0 4 3 8 6 2 1 0 0 0 29
IJLM 0 1 2 3 1 1 0 4 2 1 5 5 4 29
IJLRA 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 4 5 5 4 27
IJOPM 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 6 4 3 4 5 6 32
IJPE 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 5 4 11 7 7 36
IJPR 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 4 1 2 7 1 17
IMDS 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 3 8
IMM 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 4 3 3 2 17
JMTM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 8
JOM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 5 2 2 9 5 27
JSCM 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 1 1 4 1 16
LIM 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 10
OMEGA 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 7
Total 1 6 13 8 13 19 25 26 37 35 60 62 63 368
operational, and inter-personal dynamics. Gianna- and Croom, 2004) is highly problematical. The
kis and Croom (2004) propose an SCM paradigm literature also contains examples of research
conceptual framework, the “3S Model” containing describing relationship behaviors between one/
the synthesis of business resources and networks, many buyers, one/many sellers and dominant
the synergy between network actors and, the market “players” in both public and private sec-
synchronization of operational decisions. The tor situations. Within the marketing literature
International Marketing and Purchasing Group’s Porter’s (1980) five forces model of competitive
dyadic interaction approach summarised by Kern advantage considers short-term, arms-length
and Willcocks (2002), supply chain integration competition and the exercise of market power by
reviewed by Fawcett and Magnan (2002) and, limiting competition through the creation of bar-
networks of relationships described by Harland riers to entry (Rugman and D’Cruz, 2000). Cox
et al. (2001) and Kempainen and Vepsalainen et al., (2000) alternatively see the combination
(2003) all suggest that exposing the relationship of resource utility and scarcity creating a power
management aspects of supply chain relationships regime in which the involved parties will employ
and their impact on performance (Giannakis adversarial/non-adversarial and arms-length/col-
15
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Table 3. Transaction alternative between businesses, consumers and governmental organizations (source:
Chaffey, 2012)
16
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Figure 4. Alternative strategies for modification of the e-business supply chain (source: Chaffey, 2012)
laborative arrangements depending on their rela- sector where major supermarkets such as Walmart
tive power positions (Refer Table 4). In the 1990s, with their own brands, fought “price wars” with
UK motor industry supply chains, employing global companies such as Coca Cola and Pepsi.
economic power was a driving objective to achieve Eventually, the balance of power was restored
the “vantage point” (Lamming, 1993). Examples to prevent intense, adversarial influence from
of small numbers or monopoly (Fishwick, 1993), destroying long-term relationships (Christopher,
and strong market power relationships between 2005). In the public sector, Harland et al., (2000)
dominant firms are also found within the retail revealed that UK health authority procurement
Technical Infrastructure
Sno. Partnering Arrangement Examples
Integration
Total Ownership Purchase of Booker(Distribution Company Iceland
Technical Issues in Merging
1 (More than 51% Equity in (Retailer), Since 1996 CISCO has made over 30
Company Systems
Company) Acquisition (not all SCM- Related)
Investment Stack Technical Issues in Merging Cisco has also made over 40 investment in hardware and
2
(Less than 49% Equity) Company Systems software suppliers.
Collaboration tools and Groupware Cable and Wireless, Campaq and Microsoft new
3 Strategic alliance
for new product development e-Business solution a-services.
4 Profit Sharing Partnership As above Arrangement sometimes used for IS outsourcing
See Above. Tools for managing
5 Long Term contract Service level Agreements (SLAs) ISPs have performance on SLAs with penalty Clauses.
Important
Permanent EDI or Internet EDI Links
6 Preferred Suppliers Tesco Information Exchange.
setup with Preferred partners
Tender issued intermediary or buyers’
7 Competitive Tendering Buyer arranged auctions
website
8 Short-term contract As above As above
Auctions at Intermediaries or buyers Business to Business Marketplaces,
9 Sport Markets and Auctions
website Example www.freemarkets.com
17
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
18
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
tices, unwillingness to share proprietary data and by balance and harmony. Moreover, this powerful
uncaring use of power were clearly evident and combination of behavioral variables can often lead
potentially capable of undermining relationship- to the discovery of even more successful ways
building (Humphries and Wilding, 2003; Faulkner to co-operate and new objects of co-operation
and de Rond, 2000; Palmer, 2001). (Doz and Baburoglu, 2000). C3 behaviour is,
The literature says comparatively based on therefore, essential to maintaining a successful
empirical research about the relationship dynamics business partnership (Metcalf et al., 1992; Rug-
within long-term, closely collaborative, dyadic man and D’Cruz, 2000), especially when linked
relationships. We hypothesized that this proximity with commitment to the achievement of shared,
could generate both positive and negative feedback realistic goals (Lewin and Johnston, 1997; Sheth
behaviors. Our research detected a spectrum of and Sharma, 1997).
these phenomena and the managers in many cases
clearly understood the limitations on their freedom
and were employing C3 behaviors to improve the DISCUSSION
performance of their partnerships. The literature
is generally aware of these dynamics but our This chapter, through a systematic and critical re-
contribution to theory is a research methodology view of e-collaborations and supply chain research
that allows them to be exposed in an integrated literature based on few parameter including Supply
manner and comes close to provide a balance of Chain Integration, Customer Relationship Pro-
results using Giannakis and Croom’s (2004) “3S” gram (CRP), Vendor-Managed Inventory (VMI),
SCM paradigm conceptual framework. Continuous Replenishment Program (CRP), Col-
laborative Planning Forecasting and Replenish-
ment (CPFR), Point of Sale (PoS) provides insights
PRACTICAL IMPLICATION into the growth of empirical research
OF E-COLLABORATIONS The review enables to brief present status of
e-SCM practices in the current set of existing
Humphries and Wilding (2004a) and Spekman literature. The gaps that were identified and the
et al. (1998) suggest that co-operative, co-co- significant findings of the review will be discussed
ordinating and collaborative behaviors involve in the subsequent part of this section.
working together/jointly to bring resources into
a required relationship to achieve effective opera- Findings
tions in harmony with the strategies/objectives
of the parties involved, thus resulting in mutual 1. Empirical research in Supply Chain based
benefit. McDonald et al. (1997) and Moorman e-collaborations is growing and shows
et al. (1992) view C3 behaviour as similar or highest growth during period of 2000-2004.
complementary, co-ordinate actions needed to Theory building is most popular among SCM
achieve mutual outcomes with reciprocation over researchers while theory verification is also
time and rather than pure exchange, are used to on the rise but percentage wise the rise is
create real value as an organisational competence very slow and gradual. Wallenbergburg and
know as “collaborative advantage”. Morgan and Weber (2005) pointed out that despite debate
Hunt (1994) and Oliver (1990) describe the im- in the field of logistics and SCM, research
portance of pursuing mutually beneficial interests on methodology and theory development
but additionally emphasize the fundamentally still lacks the focus. They also advocated
co-operative nature of business life characterized that theory development (or theory build-
19
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
ing) will advance, as shown in the field Parry et al. (2006) (to core competence
of marketing research, through a rigorous posted by developing closer supply chain
empirical research approach. relationships), etc.
2. In the review, 115 issues were identified 3. Harland (1996) distinguishes four main
out of which performance measurement, uses of the term “e-Collaboration in Supply
supply chain integration, status of SCM Chain”:
in a field or industry or nation, relation- a. Internal supply that integrates business
ship management, information sharing and functions involved in the flow of mate-
commitment, collaboration, strategy for- rials and information from the inbound
mulation, IT, green supply, quality, supply to the outbound end of the business;
chain practices, incentives, identification of b. E-Collaboration using web technol-
barriers for SCM, critical success factors, ogy as the management of supply
design of supply chain and selection of type relationships;
of supply chain were most visited issues by c. E-commerce as the management of
researchers. Many researchers have even inter-business chains, and
tried to analyze these often visited issues d. E-Commerce and Supplier/Vendor
by researchers. Many researchers have even Relationship as strategic management
tried to analyze these often visited focal is- of inter-business networks.
sues in their literature reviews, van der Vaart Among these four uses strategic manage-
and van Donk (2008) performed a review ment as a major function SCM is apparent.
on survey-based methodologies on supply Macbeth and Ferguson (1991), Cavinato
chain integration, similarly Fabbe-Costes (1999) and Bechtel and Jayaram(1997) had
and Jahre (2008) analyzed the relationship devoted their study explaining strategic na-
between performance of supply chain and ture of SCM and concluded that majority of
supply chain integration Issues like “status functions in SCM are performed at strategic
of SCM in a field, industry or nation” also level. On the other hand, the under-explored
gained appreciable attention in article by area of organizational behavior can also bring
Arlbjorn et al. (2008) (status of Nordic stronger theories in SCM as emphasized by
research in logistics and SCM), Bales et al. the works of various authors such as Ellram
(2008) (development of supply chain in aero- (1991) (industrial organization),Co and
space sector). Brun et al. (2008) (logistics Barro (2009) (stakeholders theory),Knoppen
and SCM in luxury fashion retail). Mangan and Christiaanse (2007) (supply chain
and Christopher (2005) (Supply chain partnering) and Wilding Willamson orga-
Management of future), McMullan (1996) nizational failure framework). According
(SCM practice in Asia-Pacific) and last but to Ketchen and Giunipero (2004), the idea
not least Sahay et al. (2003) (architerture of a supply chain organization has been pre-
of Indian supply chains). Also, relationship sented but this has yet to be systematically
management was widely researched in SCM investigated (Giunipero et al., 2008).
by various authors like Benton and Maloni 4. Regarding level of analysis at network level,
(2005) (power-driven buyer-seller relation- out of 80 records only nine were found to
ship), Boger et al. (2001) (supply chain be before year 2000. This trend implies
relationships in Polish pork sector), Kwon growing awareness among researcher about
and Suh (2004) (factors affecting trust and considering network level for analysis to get
commitment in supply chain relationships), optimum benefit in supply chain.
20
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
21
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
articles displayed any picture of measurement at empirical studies on them and hence help in
dyad (two articles), chain (five articles) or network promotion of their importance in Supply Chain
(13 articles) level. paradigm.
Future empirical studies must target inter-
organizational level more than intra-firm and
IMPLICATIONS FOR intra-functional scope at firm level only. Such
FUTURE RESEARCH studies must at least address “dyad” level with
inter-organizational scope and if possible the
This chapter presents new avenues of further complete “network” must be under scanner for
research in e-collaboration and supply chain man- analysis. The advantage associated with multi-
agement. The research findings and gaps lead to level analysis is that it gives integrated solutions.
following implications for future research. They Simatupang and Sridharan (2008) highlighted that
are discussed as follows: the chain members realize that integrated solutions
Researchers must focus on verifying already result in economy of scale that eventually lower
existing theories in Supplier relationship man- costs and enhance revenues (Bowersox, 1990;
agement and e-commerce as a huge amount of Buzzell and Ortmeyer, 1995). They also pointed
literature on theory building is accumulated and that supply chain collaboration with the design
must get verified. It is also emphasized that large of inter-organizational process improvements
body of Supply Chain Practices needs more stan- coupled with information systems is simply not
dardized terminology and constructs. According sufficient enough. Rather, one has to design supply
to Chen and Paulraj (2004), the existence of clear chain collaboration so as incorporate dynamics of
definitional constructs on which Supply Chain collaborative efforts.
Collaboration research is still lacking. This causes Ideally, every practical framework based on
a uneven research field that is open to the danger empirical study or any other relevant empirical
of a lack of generalization. In this context, the study must involve an element of performance
remarkable recommendation of Fabbe-Costes and measurement of respective “Entity of analysis”
Jahre (2008, p. 143) that in order to contribute to at “network” level considering all the possible
theory building we need to stabilize the vocabulary, “elements of exchange” at various echelons of
to agree on formal conceptual definitions, and to supply chain. Presently, such approach is lacking
define their properties clearly before measuring the empirical research thus future research efforts
anything. in this direction must take aforementioned aspect
Traditionally, SCM is an interlinked discipline, of performance measurement into consideration.
with influences from logistics and transporta- According to Charan et al. (2008), there is an
tion, operations management and materials and emerging requirement to focus on the performance
distribution management, marketing, as well as of the Supply Chain (SC) or network in which
purchasing and IT (Giunipero et al., 2008). It thus company is a partner. Such system can facilitate
addresses plethora of issues and among them some inter-understanding and integration among the
are often visited by empirical researchers while SC members. It is worthwhile to add essential
several other not frequently addressed issues like characteristics of performance measurement
Distribution Resource Planning (DRP), efficiency system given by Morgan (2004) that performance
of supply chain, power balance, risk management, measures must be linked with the strategy of an
supply chain security, conflict management, stra- organization, be part of integrated control system,
tegic alignment, visibility, virtual supply chain, have internal validity and enable proactive man-
etc. must be given more attention by performing agement; and second, the performance measure-
22
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
ment system must be dynamic, intra-connectable, found out that SCM research is still very much
focused and usable. confined in developed countries of America and
Sachan and Datta (2005) pointed out in their Europe, which is a discouraging. Also, perfor-
review that most of the multi-national FMCG firms mance measurement in a supply chain seems to be
are targeting developing and under developing an area of more exploration, especially, measuring
countries either as new market for their products performance at network or chain level.
or for sourcing the raw material due to low cost. The potential limitation of the study is that it
Research work in this area is not remarkable, there does not attempt to trace out trend using regres-
is a huge scope of research in this area. In our sion techniques neither it endeavors’ to test the
review too same fact is highlighted that very less hypothesis so as to establish a grounded theory,
empirical studies in the area of e-collaboration are that could lay down a perfect platform for future
published for developing and under developing research. It, however, succeeds in revealing the
countries. It is high time for the researchers to descriptive statistics behind various classes that
start focusing on these avenues of cost reduction addresses content of e-collaboration and sup-
and profit making. ply chain in empirical research. The extension
of this study could be statistically testing the
figures observed in this chapter and lay down a
CONCLUSION grounded theory approach for future research in
e-collaboration and supply chain.
The chapter reviewed 368 articles on empirical
research in e-collaboration and supply chain man-
agement, with primary focus of research on content REFERENCES
of Supply Chain based e-collaboration in articles.
The Chapter started with identifying empirical Bales, R. R., Maull, R. S., & Radnor, Z. (2004).
research articles out of 1,807 research articles and The development of supply chain management
found 368 empirical research articles, followed by within the aerospace manufacturing sector. Supply
classification of each of the selected articles into Chain Management: An International Journal,
nine classes. It highlights the growth of empiri- 9(3), 250–255. doi:10.1108/13598540410544944
cal research in e-collaboration and supply chain Bechtel, C., & Jayaram, J. (1997). Supply chain
management. Findings of chapter also initiate a management: A strategic perspective. Interna-
debate of theory building vs. theory verification tional Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1),
in e-collaboration and supply chain management 15–34. doi:10.1108/09574099710805565
and also brought inadequately addressed issues
into limelight. Classification of articles on basis Benton, W. C., & Maloni, M. (2005). The influ-
of entity of analysis, level of analysis and element ence of power driven buyer seller relationships
of exchange is found to be very instrumental in on supply chain satisfaction. Journal of Opera-
measuring length and breadth of empirical re- tions Management, 23(1), 1–22. doi:10.1016/j.
search in Supply Chain based e-collaborations. jom.2004.09.002
It was found out that more and more authors are
Boger, S., Hobbs, J. E., & Kerr, W. A.
using combination of entity of analysis. But still
(2001). Supply chain relationships in the
focus is on firm level rather than network level. In
Polish pork sector. Supply Chain Manage-
this, another encouraging fact is that most of the
ment: An International Journal, 6(2), 74–82.
authors prefer to consider combination of various
doi:10.1108/13598540110387573
elements of exchange in their analysis. It was also
23
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Bowersox, D. J. (1990). The strategic benefits of Chen, I. J., & Paulraj, A. (2004). Towards a
logistics alliances. Harvard Business Review, theory of supply chain management: The con-
68(4), 36–43. structs and measurements. Journal of Operations
Management, 22(2), 119–150. doi:10.1016/j.
Brun, A., Caniato, F., Caridi, M., Castelli, C.,
jom.2003.12.007
Miragliotta, G., & Ronchi, S. (2008). Logistics
& supply chain management in luxury fashion Christopher, M. (2005). Logistics & supply chain
retail: Empirical investigation of Italian firms. management: Creating value-adding networks.
International Journal of Production Economics, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Ltd.
114(2), 554–570. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.02.003
Co, H. C., & Barro, F. (2009). Stakeholder
Burgess, K., Singh, P. J., & Koroglu, R. (2006). theory and dynamics in supply chain collabora-
Supply chain management: A structured lit- tion. International Journal of Operations &
erature review and implications for future Production Management, 29(6), 591–611.
research. International Journal of Operations doi:10.1108/01443570910957573
& Production Management, 26(7), 703–729.
Cooper, M. C., & Ellram, L. M. (1993). Charac-
doi:10.1108/01443570610672202
teristics of supply chain management & the im-
Buzzell, R. D., & Ortmeyer, G. (1995). Chan- plications for purchasing & logistics strategy. The
nel partnerships streamline distribution. Sloan International Journal of Logistics Management,
Management Review, 36(3), 83–96. 4(2), 13–24. doi:10.1108/09574099310804957
Carter, C. R., & Ellram, L. M. (2003). Thirty-five Cooper, M. C., & Gardner, J. T. (1993). Building
years of the journal of supply chain management: good relationships – More than just partnering
Where we have been and where we going? The or strategic alliances? International Journal of
Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39, 27–39. Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
doi:10.1111/j.1745-493X.2003.tb00152.x 23(6), 14–26. doi:10.1108/09600039310044876
Cavinato, J. L. (1992). A total cost/value model Ellram, L. M., & Edis, O. R. V. (1996, September).
for supply chain competitiveness. Journal of A case study of successful partnering implemen-
Business Logistics, 13(2), 285–301. tation. International Journal of Purchasing &
Materials Management, 20-38.
Chaffey, D. (2012). E-business and e-commerce
management (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Fabbe-Costes, N., & Jahre, M. (2008). Sup-
Pearson Publication. ply chain integration and performance: A re-
view of the evidence. International Journal
Charan, P., Shankar, R., & Baisya, R. K.
of Logistics Management, 19(2), 130–154.
(2008). Analysis of interactions among the
doi:10.1108/09574090810895933
variables of supply chain performance mea-
surement system implementation. Business Fawcett, S. E., & Magnan, G. M. (2002). The
Process Management Journal, 14(4), 512–529. rhetoric and reality of supply chain integra-
doi:10.1108/14637150810888055 tion. Internal Journal of Physical Distribu-
tion & Logistics Management, 32(5), 339–361.
doi:10.1108/09600030210436222
24
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Flynn, B. B., Kakibara, S. S., Schroeder, R. G., Ketchen, D., & Giunipero, L. (2004). The in-
Bates, K. A., & Flynn, E. J. (1990). Empirical re- tersection of strategic management and supply
search methods in operations management. Jour- chain management. Industrial Marketing Man-
nal of Operations Management, 9(2), 250–284. agement, 33(1), 51–56. doi:10.1016/j.indmar-
doi:10.1016/0272-6963(90)90098-X man.2003.08.010
Giannakis, M., & Croom, S. R. (2004). Towards Knoppen, D., & Christiaanse, E. (2007). Sup-
the development of a supply chain management ply chain partnering: A temporal multidisci-
paradigm: A conceptual framework. Journal plinary approach. Supply Chain Management:
of Supply Chain Management, 40(2), 27–36. An International Journal, 12(2), 164–171.
doi:10.1111/j.1745-493X.2004.tb00167.x doi:10.1108/13598540710737343
Giunipero, L. C., Hooker, R. E., Matthews, S. C., Kwon, I. G., & Suh, T. (2004). Factors affect-
Yoon, T. E., & Brudvig, S. (2008). A decade of ing the level of trust and commitment in supply
SCM literature: Past, present and future implica- chain relationships. The Journal of Supply Chain
tions. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 44(1), Management, 40(2), 4–14. doi:10.1111/j.1745-
66–86. doi:10.1111/j.1745-493X.2008.00073.x 493X.2004.tb00165.x
Halldorsson, A., & Arlbjorn, J. S. (2005). Research Langley, J. C. Jr, & Holcomb, M. C. (1992). Creat-
methodologies in supply chain management ing logistics customer value. Journal of Business
– What do we know? In Kotzab, H., Seuring, Logistics, 13(2), 1–27.
S., Muller, M., & Reiner, G. (Eds.), Research
Macbeth, K. D., & Ferguson, N. (1991). Stra-
Methodologies in Supply Chain Management (pp.
tegic aspects of supply chain management.
107–122). Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 2(1), 8–12.
doi:10.1007/3-7908-1636-1_8
doi:10.1108/09576069110002699
Harland, C. M. (1996). Supply chain manage-
Mangan, J., & Christopher, M. (2005). Man-
ment: Relationships, chains and networks.
agement development and the supply chain
British Journal of Management, 7(1), 63–80.
manager of the future. International Journal
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.1996.tb00148.x
of Logistics Management, 16(2), 178–191.
Kempainen, K., & Vepsalainen, A. P. J. (2003). doi:10.1108/09574090510634494
Trends in industrial supply chains and net-
Matthyssens, P., & Van den Bulte, C. (1994).
works. Internal Journal of Physical Distribu-
Getting closer and nicer: Partnerships in the sup-
tion & Logistics Management, 33(8), 701–719.
ply chain. Long Range Planning, 27(1), 72–83.
doi:10.1108/09600030310502885
doi:10.1016/0024-6301(94)90008-6
Kern, T., & Willcocks, L. (2002). Exploring rela-
McMullan, A. (1996). Supply chain manage-
tionships in information technology outsourcing:
ment practices in Asia Pacific today. Inter-
The interaction approach. European Journal
national Journal of Physical Distribution
of Information Systems, 11, 3–19. doi:10.1057/
& Logistics Management, 26(10), 79–95.
palgrave/ejis/3000415
doi:10.1108/09600039610150479
25
A Review of E-Supply Chain Collaboration and Integration
Morgan, C. (2004). Structure, speed and salience: Simatupang, T. M., & Sridharan, R. (2008).
Performance measurement in the supply chain. Design for supply chain collaboration. Business
Business Process Management Journal, 10(5), Process Management Journal, 14(3), 401–418.
522–536. doi:10.1108/14637150410559207 doi:10.1108/14637150810876698
Parry, G., Graves, A., & James-Moore, M. (2006). Soni, G., & Kodali, R. (2011). A critical analysis
The threat to core competence posed by developing of supply chain management content in empirical
closer supply chain relationships. International research. Business Process Management, 17(2),
Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 238–266. doi:10.1108/14637151111122338
9(3), 295–305. doi:10.1080/13675560600859524
Swaminathan, J., & Tayur, S. (2003). Models for
Peck, H., & Juttner, U. (2000). Strategy and supply chains in e-business. Management Science,
relationships: Defining the interface in sup- 49(10). doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.10.1387.17309
ply chain contexts. The International Jour-
Van der Vaart, T., & van Donk, D. P. (2008). A
nal of Logistics Management, 11(2), 33–44.
critical review of survey-based research in supply
doi:10.1108/09574090010806146
chain integration. International Journal of Pro-
Quesada, G., Rachamadugu, R., Gonzalez, duction Economics, 111(1), 42–55. doi:10.1016/j.
M., & Martinez, F. L. (2008). Linking order ijpe.2006.10.011
winning and external supply chain integra-
Wilding, R., & Humphries, A. S. (2006).
tion strategies. Supply Chain Management:
Understanding collaborative supply chain
An International Journal, 13(4), 296–303.
relationships through the application of the
doi:10.1108/13598540810882189
Williamson organisational failure framework.
Sachan, A., & Datta, S. (2005). Review of sup- International Journal of Physical Distribu-
ply chain management and logistics research. tion & Logistics Management, 36(4), 309–329.
International Journal of Physical Distribution doi:10.1108/09600030610672064
& Logistics Management, 35(9), 664–704.
Zheng, J., Harland, C., Lamming, R., Johnsen,
doi:10.1108/09600030510632032
T., & Wynstra, F. (2000). Networking activities
Scott, C., & Westbrook, R. (1991). New stra- in supply networks. Journal of Strategic Market-
tegic tools for supply chain management. ing, 8, 161–181.
International Journal of Physical Distribu-
tion & Logistics Management, 21(1), 22–23.
doi:10.1108/09600039110002225
26