Tedarik Zinciri Risk Yönetimi içinYeni bir Çerçeve: Tedarik Zinciri Yönetimi Yetkinliği Modeli

Öz

Tedarik zinciri risk yönetimi, firmalar için en kuvvetli rekabetçilik araçlarından biri olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Dolayısıyla bu konu, özellikle son yıllarda araştırmacıların ilgisini çekmeye başlamıştır. Ancak literatürde, tedarik zinciri risk yönetimi, tedarik zinciri üyelerinin olgunluk seviyeleri ve yeterlilikleri göz önünde bulundurularaktan incelenmemiştir. Bu çalışma, tedarik zinciri risk yönetiminin farklı tedarik zinciri yönelimlerine göre değerlendirildiği yeni bir çerçeve geliştirmeyi ve böylece literatürede belirtilen açığa katkı sağlamayı hedeflemektedir. Çalışmada önerilen çerçeve “Tedarik Zinciri Yönetimi Yeterlilik Modeli” olarak isimlendirilmiştir. Bu model, firmaların farklı tedarik zinciri yönelimlerine göre beklenen tedarik zinciri risk yönetimi yeterliliklerini göstermek ve tanımlamak amacıyla yapılan ilk girişimdir. Bu model artan yönelim seviyeleri ile gelişen tedarik zinciri yapılarını göstermekle beraber şirketler arası pazarlama ve ilişkisel pazarlama amaçlarına da hizmet etmektedir. Ayrıca çalışmanın temel bulguları, tedarik zinciri yeterlilik seviyelerinin sürdürülebilirlik boyutunda da farklılık gösterebileceğini belirtmektedir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, uygulamacılara yön verecek ve araştırmacıları yeni çalışmalara teşvik edecek bulgular sağlamaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tedarik Zinciri Yönetimi, Risk Yönetimi, İş Süreç Yönelim

A New Framework For Supply Chain Risk Management Through Supply Chain Management Capability

Öz

Supply chain risk management is considered as one of the most powerful competitive tools for the companies. Therefore, the concept has caught the attention of researchers especially in the recent years. However, supply chain risk management has not been examined in the literature by considering the maturity and capability levels of supply chain members. This study aims to address this gap and develops a new framework on supply chain risk management which focuses on different supply chain orientation levels of the supply chains members. The framework proposed in this study is named as “Supply Chain Management Capability Model”. This model is the first attempt to illustrate the required supply chain risk management capabilities of companies for different supply chain orientation levels. This model presents developing supply chain structures with increasing orientation levels, which also serve for Business to Business (B2B) and relationship marketing purposes. The results of this study show that supply chain members’ capability levels also vary in terms of sustainability dimension. The results of the study provide relevant findings both to guide practitioners and motivate researchers to conduct further studies in this area

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Supply Chain Management, Risk Management, Business Process

Kaynakça

1. Akintoye, Akintola, McIntosh, George, and Fitzgerald, Eamon, ‘A survey of supply chain collaboration and management in the UK construction industry’, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2000, p. 159-168.
2. Anderson, James C., ‘Relationships in business markets: exchange episodes, value creation, and their empirical assessment’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23, No.4, 1995, p. 346-350.
3. Arnulf, Jan K., Dreyer Heidi C., and Grenness, Carl Erik, ‘Trust and knowledge creation: how the dynamics of trust and absorptive capacity may affect supply chain manage- ment development projects’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2005, p. 225-236.
4. Bahinipati, Bikram K., Kanda, Arun, and Deshmukh, S. G., ‘Coordinated supply manage- ment: review, insights, and limitations’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 12, No. 6, 2009, p. 407-422.
5. Blos et al., ‘Supply Chain Risk Management SCRM: A Case Study on the Automotive and Electronic Industries in Brazil’, Supply Chain Management-An International Journal, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2009, p. 247-252.
6. Boute, Robert, Dierdonck, Roland Van, and Vereecke, Ann, ‘Organising for supply chain management’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2011, p. 297-315.
7. Carlock, Danielle M., and Perry, Anali Maughan, ‘Exploring Faculty Experiences With E- Books: A Focus Group’, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2008, p. 244 – 254.
8. Christopher, Martin, and Lee, Hau, ‘Mitigating Supply Chain Risk through Improved Con- fidence’, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2004, p. 388-396.

9. Christopher, Martin, and Peck, Helen, ‘Building the Resilient Supply Chain’, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2004, p. 1-14.
10. Christopher, Martin, and Juttner, Uta, ‘Supply Chain Relationships: Making the Transition to Closer Integration’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2000, p. 5-23.
11. Corsten, Daniel, Gruen, Thomas, and Peyinghaus, Marion, ‘The effects of supplier-to-buyer identification on operational performance—An empirical investigation of inter-orga- nizational identification in automotive relationships’, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2011, p. 549-560.
12. Elkington, John, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21stCentury, (Gabriola Island: NewSociety Publishers, 1998).
13. Ellram, Lisa M., and Cooper, Martha C., ‘Supply Chain Management, Partnerships, and the Shipper- Third Party Relationship’, Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1990, p. 1-10.
14. Finch, Peter, ‘Supply chain risk management’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2004, p. 183-196.
15. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, and Pontrandolfo, Pierpaolo, ‘The organizational perspective in sup- ply chain management: an empirical analysis in Southern Italy’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2003, p. 107-123.
16. Hensher, D. A., and Puckett, S. M., ‘Power, Concession and Agreement in Freight Distribu- tion Chains: Subject to Distance-Based User Charges’ International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2008, p. 81-100.
17. Holweg, Matthias, and Pil, Frits K., ‘Theoretical perspectives on the coordination of supply chains’ Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2008, p. 389-406.
18. Huberman, A. M., and Miles, M. B., Handbook of Qualitative Research- Data Management and Analysis Methods, (edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1994), p. 428–444.
19. Hung et al., ‘Sharing Information Strategically in a Supply Chain: Antecedents, Content and Impact’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2011, p. 111-133.
20. Izushi, Hiro, and Morgan, Kevin, ‘Management of Supplier Associations: Observations from Wales’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1998, p. 75-91.
21. Jayaraman, Vaidyanathan, Ross, Anthony D., and Agarwal, Anurag, ‘Role of information technology and collaboration in reverse logistics supply chains’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2008, p. 409-425.
22. Johnston et al., ‘Effects of Supplier Trust on Performance of Cooperative Supplier Relation- ships’, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2004, p. 23–38.
23. Juttner, Uta, ‘Supply Chain Risk Management, Understanding The Business Requirements From a Practitioner Perspective’, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2005, p. 120-141.
24. Juttner, Uta, Peck, Helen, and Christopher, Martin, ‘Supply Chain Risk Management: Out- lining an Agenda for Future Research’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2003, p. 197-210.
25. Ketchen, David J., Hult, G. Tomas M., and Slater, Stanley F., ‘Toward greater understand- ing of market orientation and the resourceχbased view’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 9, 2007, p. 961-964.
26. Khan, Omera, and Burnes, Bernard, ‘Risk and supply chain management: creating a re- search agenda’, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2007, p. 197-216.
27. Krueger, R.A., and Casey, M.C., Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, (4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1990).
28. Kwon, IkχWhan G., and Suh, Taewon, ‘Factors affecting the level of trust and commitment in supply chain relationships’, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2004, p. 4-14.
29. Lee, Hau L., and Billington, Corey, ‘Managing Supply Chain Inventory: Pittfalls and Op- portunities’, Sloan Management Review, 1992, Vol. 33, No. 3i, p. 65-73.
30. Lee, Hau L., So, Kut C., and Tang, Christopher S., ‘The value of information sharing in a two-level supply chain’, Management science, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2000, p. 626-643.
31. Lambert, Douglas M., ‘Supply Chain Management’, Chap. 1 in, Supply Chain Management- Processes, Partnerships , Performance, (edited by Douglas M. Lambert, 1-23. Florida: Sup- ply Chain Management Institute, 2008).
32. Lee, Hau L., ‘Creating Value Through Supply Chain Integration’, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 4, No. 4, 2000, p. 30-36.
33. Lockamy III et al., ‘The Impact of Process Maturity and Uncertainty on Supply Chain Per- formance: An Empirical Study’, International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2008, p. 12-27.
34. Lockamy III, Archie, and McCormack, Kevin, ‘The development of a supply chain man- agement process maturity model using the concepts of business process orientation’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2004, p. 272-278.
35. Lorentz et al., ‘Supply Chain Development Priorities of Manufacturing Firms: Empirical Findings from a Finnish National Survey’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2011, p. 351-365.
36. Food Supply Chains’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 2,
37. No. 2, 1999, p. 161-174.
38. Van der Vorst et al., ‘E-business Initiatives in Food Supply Chains; Definition and Typol- ogy of Electronic Business Models’, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Ap- plications, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2002, p. 119-138.
39. Zacharia, Zach G., Nix, Nancy W., and Lusch, Robert F., ‘Capabilities that enhance out- comes of an episodic supply chain collaboration’, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2011, p. 591-603.
40. Zhao et al., ‘The Impact of Power and Relationship Commitment on the Integration Be- tween Manufacturers and Customers in a Supply Chain’, Journal of Operations Manage- ment, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2008, p. 368–388.
41. APPENDIX 1: LIST OF THE QUESTIONS FOR FOCUS GROUP STUDY
42. What firstly comes to your mind when you hear the concepts of supply chain or sup- ply chain management?
43. What are the factors that affect supply chain management?
44. How do you position the members of a supply chain?
45. What are the main factors affect the synchronization of supply chain members?
46. Do you think that there will be a change in today’s supply chain members’ integration level and in the future?
47. Can you explain your company’s relationship management practices with other sup- ply chain members?
48. What types of competences and attributes are achieved by the members of supply chain during the progress from Ad Hoc to Extended level?
49. Why trust is built up at Extended level? Are there any other factors effecting trust apart from transparency?
50. Would you prefer your company to move ahead the capability levels (from Ad Hoc to Extended)?
51. What are the negative effects of shifting up from Ad Hoc to Extended level?
52. How can you consider responsibilities and difficulties of supply chain members, while shifting up from Ad Hoc to Extended level?
53. Would you add any additional dimension to the model, why?