Strategy Planning and Management for Logistics Companies with BSC and GF-AHP

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 53 - 73, 01.03.2013

Ziyi Gao Emrah Bulut Shengteng Huang Shigeru Yoshıda

Öz

Traditional performance assessment is mainly based on financialaspects, but the significance of non-financial aspects such as customersatisfaction or innovation becomes important factors for business successespecially in service areas. The aim of this paper is to investigate theappropriate strategy and performance measurement in logistics companiesby using the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) method with fuzzy AHP (FAHP)approach to ensure comprehensive performance analysis of both financialand non-financial aspects. Since the major customer of logistics companiesare traders and manufactures, they provide a series of transportationsolution or other logistics activities. In this paper, the relative algorithm isproposed to measure each dimension of BSC. According to theirsignificance level, all dimensions are ranked to pay attention respectivelyfor the selection of the strategy of the logistic companies. The weight ofeach technical criterion which is important for the strategy of logisticscompanies is found to calculate the relative weight of each dimension ofBSC. The most important measures of each BSC dimension are return oninvestment, safety and reliability, administrative performance, employeesatisfaction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Strategy selection, logistics companies, balancescorecard, fuzzy AHP.

BSC VE GF-AHP İLE LOJİSTİK ŞİRKETLERİ İÇİN STRATEJİ PLANLAMA VE YÖNETİMİ

Öz

Klasik performans değerlendirmesi çoğunlukla finansal beklentilerüzerine kuruludur, fakat finansal olmayan faktörler, örneğin tüketicimemnuniyeti veya yenilik-değişim, şirketlerin başarılı olmasında özellikleservis alanlarında önemli olmaya başladı. Bu çalışmanın amacı DengeliSonuç Kartı (Balanced Scorecard-BSC) ve bulanık analitik hiyerarşi sürecimetodları kullanılarak lojistik şirketleri için finansal ve finansal olmayanfaktörler göz önünde bulundurularak uygun strateji ve performans ölçümünüaraştırmaktır. Başlıca lojistik şirketlerinin müşterileri alıcı ve üreticilerolduğundan dolayı, lojistik şirketleri farklı ulaşım yolları ve çözümlerisağlarlar. Bu makalede, BSC’ın her bir boyutunun ölçülmesi için görelialgoritma önerildi. Her bir boyut için elde edilen önem derecelerine göre,boyutların hepsi derecelendirilerek lojistik şirketleri için strateji seçimibelirlenmeye çalışıldı. Lojistik şirketlerinin strateji seçimi için önemli olanher bir teknik kriterin ağırlıkları hesaplanarak BSC’ın boyutları için göreceliağırlıklar bulundu. Stratejik öneme sahip kriterler sırasıyla yatırım getirisi,emniyet ve güvenirlilik, idari performans, çalışan memnuniyetidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Strateji seçimi, lojistik şirketleri, dengeli sonuçkartı (Balance Scorecard), bulanık analitik hiyerarşi süreci

Kaynakça

• ABRAN, A. and BUGLIONE, L. (2003). A multidimensional performance model for consolidating Balanced Scorecards, Advances in Engineering Software, Vol.34, pp.339-349.
• ACKERMANN, I. (2002). Using the Balanced Scorecard for Supply Chain ManagementPrerequisites, Integration Issues and Performance Measures, Univ. der Bundeswehr.
• AGUARON, J. and MORENO-JIMENEZ, J. M. (2003). The Geometric Consistency Index: Approximated Thresholds, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 147, pp.137-145.
• BHAGWAT, R. and SHARMA, M. K. (2007). Performance measurement of supply chain management: A balanced scorecard approach, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 53, pp.43-62.
• BOURNE, M. and NEELY, A. D. (2003). Implementing Performance Measurement Systems: a literature review, International Journal of Business Performance Management, Vol. 5, pp.1-24.
• BREWER, A. M. and HENSHER, D. A. (2001). Identifying the Overarching Logistics Strategy of Business Processes: An Exploratory Analysis, International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, Vol.4, No.1, pp.1-41.
• BREWER, P.C. and SPEH, T.W. (2000). Using the Balanced Scorecard to measure supply chain performance. Journal of Business Logistics, Vol.21, No.1.
• BRUNS, W. (1998). Profit as a Performance Measure: Powerful Concept, Insufficient Measure, Performance Measurement-Theory and Practice: The First International Conference on Performance Measurement, Cambridge, July, pp. 14-17.
• BUCKLEY, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 17, pp. 233-247.
• CHANG, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the Extent Analysis Method on Fuzzy AHP, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 95, pp. 649-655.
• CRAWFORD, G. and WILLIAMS, C. (1985). A Note on the Analysis of Subjective Judgment Matrices, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 29, pp. 387-405.
• DAĞDEVİREN, M., YAVUZ, S. and KILINÇ, N. (2009). Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, pp. 814381
• DUMOND, E. J. (1994). Making Best Use of Performance Measures and Information, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14, pp.16-31.
• DURU, O., HUANG, S. T., BULUT, E. and YOSHIDA, S. (2011). Multi-layer Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Approach for Improving the Comprised Quality Satisfaction under the Agency Problem: A 3D QFD Design for the Asset Selection Problem in the Shipping Industry, Quality and Quantity, doi: 10.1007/s11135-0119653DURU, O., BULUT, E. and YOSHIDA, S. (2012). Regime Switching Fuzzy AHP Model for Choice-varying Priorities Problem and Expert consistency prioritization: A Cubic Fuzzy-priority Matrix Design, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, pp. 4954-4964.
• ECCLES, R.G. (1991). The Performance Measurement Manifesto, Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp.131-137.
• EVANSET, H., ASHWORTH, G., CHELLEW, M.D and TOWERS, D. (1996). Exploiting Activity-based Information: Easy as ABC. Manage. Account, Vol.74, No. 7, pp.24-29.
• HOWARD, R. and DAN, M. (2011). Integrate the Triple Bottom Line into your Strategy with the Balanced Scorecard, Sustainable Opportunities Summit.
• HUANG, S.T., BULUT, E., DURU, O. and YOSHIDA, S. (2012). Service Quality Evaluation of International Logistics Company: An Empirical Case Using QFD Approach, Proceeding of IAME 2012 Conference, Taipei, Taiwan.
• IHS FAIRPLAY, Insight for Profitable Shipping, Vol. 376, Issue 6707, 18 Oct, 2012.
• IHS FAIRPLAY, Insight for Profitable Shipping, Vol. 375, Issue 6693, 12 Jul, 2012.
• KAPLAN, S. R. and NORTON, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70, No. 1, pp. 71-79.
• KAPLAN, S. R. and NORTON, D. P. (2000). Having Trouble with Your Strategy? Then Map It, Harvard Business Review, Vol.75, No. 5, pp. 167-176.
• LEEM, B., HONG, M., KANG, J. and YIM, B. J. (2007). Modeling the Metrics for Measuring the Performance on Logistics Centers by BSC and ANP in Korean Context, In Proceedings of Int. Conf. Manage. Eng. Technol., Portland. State University Press: pp. 241224
• LYNCH, R. L. and CROSS, K. F. (1991). Measure Up: Yardsticks for Continuous Improvement, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge.
• MOLLENKOPF, D. and DAPIRAN, G. P. (2005). The Importance of Developing Logistics Competencies: A Study of Australian and New Zealand firm, International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, Vol.8, No.1, pp. 1-14.
• NEELY, A. D. (1999). The Performance Measurement Revolution: Why Now and Where Next, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol.19, No.2, pp. 205-228.
• NEELY, A. D. and ADAMS, C. (2000). Perspectives on Performance: The Performance Prism, Gee Publishing, London.
• ROBLEDO, M. A. (2001). Measuring and Managing Service Quality: Integrating Customer Expectations, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 2, No.
• TUNA, O. and SİLAN, M. (2002). Freight Transportation Selection Criteria: An Empirical Investigation of Turkish Liner Shipping, Proceeding of IAME 2002 Conference, Panama.