Success Criteria Evaluation of Customer-Focused Meat Supply Chains

Yıl 2020, Cumhuriyet Armağan Sayısı, 425 - 438, 28.10.2020

Aylin Çalışkan

https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.726964

Cited By: 2

Öz

Food producers and retailers need to pay more attention to being customer-oriented in order to gain advantage and continue their activities in the highly competitive market. In order to improve market shares and avoid unnecessary supply chain operations, it is useful to be aware of, adopt and manage consumers' preferences and perceptions. The purpose of this study is to reveal the hierarchical structure of the success criteria of customer-focused meat supply chain management and to classify these criteria according to their impact strengths. To the aim, supply chain management related criteria affecting the meat purchase behavior of customers were compiled through literature review. Then, the relationships between these criteria were examined by Interpretive Structural Modeling and MICMAC analysis. As a result of the analyzes, a hierarchical model and dependent/independent classification are developed among the criteria that had complex relationships. According to the results obtained, it is determined that the packaging and traceability criteria are the criteria that have the highest impact power and the least impacted level from other criteria.

Müşteri Odaklı Et Tedarik Zincirlerinde Başarı Kriterlerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Gıda üreticileri ve perakendecileri rekabet yoğun modern pazarda rekabet avantajı elde edebilmek ve faaliyetlerini sürdürebilmek için müşteri odaklı olmaya daha fazla özen göstermek durumundadırlar. Tüketicilerin tercih ve algılarının farkında olabilmek, benimseyebilmek ve gerekli şekilde yönetebilmek; pazar paylarını iyileştirmek ve gereksiz tedarik zinciri operasyonlarından kaçınabilmek adına faydalıdır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, et tedarik zinciri yönetiminde müşteri odaklı olabilmek adına belirlenen başarılı kriterlerinin hiyerarşik yapısını ortaya koymak ve bu kriterleri etkileme ve etkilenme kuvvetlerine göre sınıflandırmaktır. Bu amaca yönelik literatür araştırmasıyla müşterilerin et satın alma davranışına etki eden kriterler tedarik zinciri yönetimiyle ilgili olacak şekilde derlenmiştir. Daha sonra bu kriterler arasındaki ilişkiler Yorumlayıcı Yapısal Modelleme ve MICMAC analizi ile incelenmiştir. Analizler sonucunda karmaşık ilişkilere sahip olan kriterler arasında hiyerarşik bir model geliştirilmiş ve bağımlı/bağımsız kriterler belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre ambalaj ve izlenebilirlik kriterlerinin diğer kriterleri en yüksek etkileme gücüne ve diğer kriterlerden en az etkilenme seviyesine sahip kriterler olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tedarik Zinciri, Tüketici Odaklı Lojistik, Tüketici Davranışı, Soğuk Zincir

Kaynakça

• Aung, M. M., & Chang, Y. S. (2014). Traceability in a food supply chain: Safety and quality perspectives. Food control, 39, 172-184.
• Banović, M., Grunert, K. G., Barreira, M. M., & Fontes, M. A. (2009). Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from Portugal. Food Quality and Preference, 20(4), 335-342.
• Birdir, K., & Hiçyakmazer, C. T. (2019). Otel İşletmelerinde Kırmızı Et Satın Alma ve Tedarik Sürecinin İncelenmesi. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 1142, 1158.
• Dobrucka, R. (2013). The future of active and intelligent packaging industry. Logforum, 9 (2): 103- 110. http://www.logforum.net/pdf/9_2_4_13. pdf (Erişim tarihi: 15.08.2018).
• du Plessis, H. J., & Gerrie, E. (2012). The significance of traceability in consumer decision making towards Karoo lamb. Food Research International, 47(2), 210-217.
• Et ve Süt Kurumu (2020). Et. https://www.esk.gov.tr/tr/10998/ET Erişim tarihi: 09.03.2020
• Font-i-Furnols, M., & Guerrero, L. (2014). Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: An overview. Meat science, 98(3), 361-371.
• Geesink, G., Robertson, J., & Ball, A. (2015). The effect of retail packaging method on objective and consumer assessment of beef quality traits. Meat science, 104, 85-89.
• Gracia, A., & de-Magistris, T. (2013). Preferences for lamb meat: A choice experiment for Spanish consumers. Meat science, 95(2), 396-402.
• Griffiths, J., James, R., & Kempson, J. (2000). Focusing customer demand through manufacturing supply chains by the use of customer focused cells: An appraisal. International Journal of Production Economics, 65(1), 111-120.
• Hobbs, J. E. (2016). Effective Use of Food Traceability in Meat Supply Chains. In Advances in Food Traceability Techniques and Technologies (pp. 321-335). Woodhead Publishing.
• Killinger, K. M., Calkins, C. R., Umberger, W. J., Feuz, D. M., & Eskridge, K. M. (2004). Consumer sensory acceptance and value for beef steaks of similar tenderness, but differing in marbling level. Journal of Animal Science, 82(11), 3294-3301.
• Lee, J. Y., Han, D. B., Nayga Jr, R. M., & Lim, S. S. (2011). Valuing traceability of imported beef in Korea: an experimental auction approach. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 55(3), 360-373.
• Liu, F., Lei, Y., Zhang, W., Sha, K., Li, H., Zhang, Z., ... & Sun, B. (2014). Effect of different packing on quality changes of hot boning beef during storage. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology (Beijing), 16(4), 102-108.
• Maltin, C., Balcerzak, D., Tilley, R., & Delday, M. (2003). Determinants of meat quality: tenderness. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 62(2), 337-347.
• Mancini, R. A., & Hunt, M. (2005). Current research in meat color. Meat science, 71(1), 100-121.
• Marian, L., Chrysochou, P., Krystallis, A., & Thøgersen, J. (2014). The role of price as a product attribute in the organic food context: An exploration based on actual purchase data. Food Quality and Preference, 37, 52-60.
• Merlino, V. M., Borra, D., Girgenti, V., Dal Vecchio, A., & Massaglia, S. (2018). Beef meat preferences of consumers from Northwest Italy: Analysis of choice attributes. Meat science, 143, 119-128.
• Miranda-De La Lama, G. C., Villarroel, M., Olleta, J. L., Alierta, S., Sañudo, C., & Maria, G. A. (2009). Effect of the pre-slaughter logistic chain on meat quality of lambs. Meat Science, 83(4), 604-609.
• Mohebalizadehgashti, F., Zolfagharinia, H., & Amin, S. H. (2020). Designing a green meat supply chain network: A multi-objective approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 219, 312-327.
• Pizzuti, T., Mirabelli, G., Grasso, G., & Paldino, G. (2017). MESCO (MEat Supply Chain Ontology): An ontology for supporting traceability in the meat supply chain. Food Control, 72, 123-133.
• Schnettler, B., Vidal, R., Silva, R., Vallejos, L., & Sepúlveda, N. (2009). Consumer willingness to pay for beef meat in a developing country: The effect of information regarding country of origin, price and animal handling prior to slaughter. Food Quality and Preference, 20(2), 156-165.
• Sharma, V. K., Chandna, P., & Bhardwaj, A. (2017). Green supply chain management related performance indicators in agro industry: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 1194-1208.
• Skandamis, P. N., & Nychas, G. J. E. (2002). Preservation of fresh meat with active and modified atmosphere packaging conditions. International journal of food microbiology, 79(1-2), 35-45.
• Taoukis, P., & Tsironi, T. (2016). Smart packaging for monitoring and managing food and beverage shelf life. In The stability and shelf life of food (pp. 141-168). Woodhead Publishing.
• Troy, D. J., & Kerry, J. P. (2010). Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat science, 86(1), 214-226.
• Van Wezemael, L., Caputo, V., Nayga Jr, R. M., Chryssochoidis, G., & Verbeke, W. (2014). European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claims: A multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments. Food Policy, 44, 167-176.
• Yamoah, F. A., & Yawson, D. E. (2014). Assessing supermarket food shopper reaction to horsemeat scandal in the UK. International Review of Management and Marketing, 4(2), 98-107.