Abstract
Performance measurement can only help to identify the problems existing in the current supply chain, while it is helpless in exploring the root causes of these problems and thus choosing corresponding actions to improve supply chain performance. The conflict between the top-down strategy decomposition and the bottom-up implementation process is serious. Therefore, in order to overcome the above issues, it is very necessary to link strategic objectives to operations, which could help managers, especially those operating at a strategic level, to know more operational mechanism of supply chains. In this study, an integrated approach which employs analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) together is proposed for the linking strategic objectives to operations. Supply chain operations reference model is used to model the linkage of the strategic objectives and operational metrics in a hierarchical way. The AHP is used to analyze this metric hierarchy and determine weights of the metrics, and TOPSIS method is used to make a normalization of metric values having different units, so a comparison will be available. Proposed approach is applied to a problem of decision making process in a manufacturing company. Company managers found the application and results satisfactory and implementable in their decisions.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Akkermans, H., & Oorschot, K. V. (2002). Developing a balanced scorecard with system dynamics. In Proceeding of 2002 international system dynamics conference.
Alvarado K., Rabelo L., Moraga R., Quijada S. O., Gruber F., Sepulveda J. (2007) Application of SCOR to e-government: A case study. International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling 3(3): 99–114
Ayers J. (2001) Handbook of supply chain management. St. Lucie Press and APICS, USA
Banker R. D., Chang H., Janakiraman S. N., Konstans C. (2004) A balanced scorecard analysis of performance metrics. European Journal of Operational Research 154(2): 423–436
Bhagwat R., Sharma M. K. (2007) Performance measurement of supply chain management: A balanced scorecard approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering 53: 43–62
Bolstroff P. (2002) How does SCOR measure up?. Keeping SCOR 3: 22–25
Brans P., Vincke P., Mareschal B. (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: The promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research 24: 228–238
Chan F. T. S. (2003) Interactive selection model for supplier selection process an AHP. International Journal of Production Research 41: 3549–3579
Chan F. T. S., Qi H. J. (2002) A fuzzy basis channel-spanning performance measurement method for supply chain management. Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 216: 1155– 1167
Chan F. T. S., Qi H. J. (2003) An innovative performance measurement method for supply chain management. Supply Chain Management an International Journal 8(3): 209–223
Chang C.-W. (2010) Collaborative decision making algorithm for selection of optimal wire saw in photovoltaic wafer manufacture. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 18: 285–299
Cheng C. H. (1999) Evaluating weapon systems using ranking fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 107: 25–35
Chen S. J., Huang E. (2007) A systematic approach for supply chain improvement using design structure matrix. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 18: 285–299
Chen S. J., Hwang C. L. (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer, Berlin
Chen M. F., Tzeng G. H. (2004) Combining grey relation and TOPSIS concepts for selecting an expatriate host country. Mathematical and Computer Modeling 40: 1473–1490
Chryssolouris G., Makris S., Xanthakis V., Mourtzis D. (2004) Towards the internet based supply chain management for the ship repair industry. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 17(1): 45–57
Deng J. (1989) Grey information space. The Journal of Grey System 1(1): 103–117
Dubois D., Prade H. (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems. Academic Press, New York
Forrester J. W. (1961) Industrial dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Garcia-Cascales, M. S., & Lamata M. T. (2009). Multi-criteria analysis for a maintenance management problem in an engine factory: Rational choice. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 1–10.
Gintic Institute of Manufacturing Technology: (2000) SCOR version 3.1 details metrics calculation. Gintic Scm Center, USA
Gintic Institute of Manufacturing Technology: (2002) Measuring supply chain performance using a SCOR-based approach. Gintic Scm Center, USA
Gunasekaran A., Patel C., McGaughey R. E. (2004) A framework for supply chain performance measurement. International Journal of Production Economics 87: 333–347
Harrington H. J. (1991) Improving business processes. TQM Magazine 3(1): 499–507
Huang S. H., Sheoran S. K., Wang G. (2004) A review and analysis of supply chain operations reference (SCOR) model. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 9(1): 23– 24
Hwang C., Yoon K. (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and application. Springer, New York
Kaplan R. S., Norton D. P. (2001) Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I. Horizons 15(1): 87–104
Kaplan R. S., Norton P. D. (1992) The balanced scorecard measures that drives performance. Harvard Business Review 70(1): 71– 79
Makris S., Xanthakis V., Mourtzis D., Chryssolouris G. (2008) On the information modeling for the electronic operation of supply chains: A maritime case study. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 24: 140–149
Makris S., Zoupas P., Chryssolouris G. (2011) Supply chain control logic for enabling adaptability under uncertainty. International Journal of Production Research 49(1): 121–137
Malina, M., & Selto, F. (2004). Causality in performance measurement models. Naval Postgraduate School working paper. Naval Postgraduate School, USA.
Maskell B. H. (1991) Performance measurement for world class manufacturing. Productivity Press, USA
Mentzer J. T. (2000) Supply chain management. (1st ed.). Sage, USA
Mikhailov L. (2004) A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements. European Journal of Operational Research 159: 687–704
Min H., Zhou G. (2002) Supply chain modeling: Past, present and future. Computers & Industrial Engineering Journal 43: 231–249
Parkan C., Wu M. L. (1997) On the equivalence of operational performance measurement and multiple attribute decision making. International Journal of Production Research 35(11): 2963–2988
Rangone A. (1996) An analytical hierarchy process framework for comparing the overall performance of manufacturing departments. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 16(8): 104–119
Saaty T. L. (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15(3): 234–281
Saaty T. L. (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. Mc-Graw Hill, New York
Saaty T. L. (1990) An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 22: 3–13
Santos S. P., Belton V., Howick S. (2002) Adding value to performance measurement by using system dynamics and multicriteria analysis. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22(11): 1246–1272
Schniederjans M. J., Garvin T. (1997) Using the analytic hierarchy process and multi-objective programming for the selection of cost drivers in activity-based costing. European Journal of Operational Research 100(1): 72–80
Schoeneborn, F. (2003). Linking balanced scorecard to system dynamics. In Proceeding of 2003 international system dynamics Conference.
SCOR 5.0. (2000). SCOR 5.0 overview booklet, supply chain council editions. 2000 organisation avalaible on http://www.supply-chain.org/cs/root/home.
Shyjith K., Ilangkumaran M., Kumanan S. (2008) Multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. Journal of Quality In Maintenance Engineering 14(4): 375–386
Stefanovic D., Stefanovic N. (2008) Methodology for modeling and analysis of supply networks. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 19(4): 485–503
Stewart G. (1995) Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply chain excellence. Logistics Information Management 8(2): 38–44
Suwignjo P., Bititci U. S., Carrie A. S. (2000) Quantitative models for performance measurement system. International Journal of Production Economics 63(1): 231–241
Tan K. H., Platts K. (2003) Linking objectives to actions: A decision support approach based on cause effect linkages. Decision Sciences 34(3): 569–593
Tsai H. Y., Huang B. H., Wang A. S. (2008) Combining ANP and TOPSIS concepts for evaluation and performance of property-liability insurance companies. Journal of Social Sciences 4(1): 56–61
Varma S., Wadhwa S., Deshmukh S. G. (2008) Evaluating petroleum supply chain performance: Application of analytical hierarchy process to balanced scorecard. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 20(3): 343–356
Wang G., Huang S. H., Dismukes J. P. (2004) Product-driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Production Economics 91: 1–15
Wolstenholme, E. (1998). Balanced strategies for balanced scorecards: The role of system dynamics in supporting balanced scorecard and value based management. In Proceeding of 1998 international system dynamics conference.
Xua Z., Chena J. (2007) An interactive method for fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making. Information Sciences 177(1): 248–263
Young, S. H. & Tu, C. K. (2004). Exploring some dynamically aligned principles of developing a balanced scorecard. In Proceeding of 2004 international system dynamics conference.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kocaoğlu, B., Gülsün, B. & Tanyaş, M. A SCOR based approach for measuring a benchmarkable supply chain performance. J Intell Manuf 24, 113–132 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-011-0547-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-011-0547-z