Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to analyse papers studying the link between supply chain integration (SCI) and performance, and to discuss reported empirical evidence relating to this fundamental question for logistics and supply chain management. Design/methodology/approach -A systematic analysis of 38 papers published in nine important journals in logistics, supply chain and operations management during the period 2000-2006 is offered. Using a multidimensional framework to sort and classify selected papers, structured results are provided for the purpose of contributing to discussion of the topic. Findings -More SCI does not always improve performance. Definitions and measures of SCI and performance are diverse to the extent that a conclusion such as "the more (SCI) the better (the performance) cannot be drawn". On the contrary more empirical research, with use of clear definitions and good measures, are needed. The conclusions drawn from the analytical literature review provide a basis from which further research can be developed, both in respect of research approaches, definitions of main concepts and the choice of theoretical basis. Research limitations/implications -Additional journals could be included. The framework could be more detailed. More details on SCI and performance measures, as well as the items used in the papers, could be provided and discussed. Practical implications -Results encourage researchers and practitioners to be more cautious concerning SCI and its impact on performance and to have a more conscious and differentiated view of SCI. Originality/value -Through a rigorous analysis of prevailing research, the paper questions a common assumption in business logistics and SCM. Propositions for further research are suggested.

PurposeIn the literature authors state that there is a positive relation between supply chain integration (SCI) and performance. They claim that this relation is widely discussed and supported empirically. Other authors, however, suggest that integration might be more difficult in practice than in theory, that it should be differentiated and that it is more rhetoric than reality. As integration has been core of logistics and supply chain management since the 1980s, the purpose of this paper is to investigate these somewhat contradictory statements and analyse prior studies regarding definitions and measures of integration and performance as well as the reported empirical evidence on their relation.Design/methodology/approachBased on an extensive and systematic review of integration articles within four highly ranked academic journals in logistics, supply chain and operations management, this paper presents and discusses the results of prior empirical studies on relations between integration and performance.FindingsThe analysis of the relevant articles indicates that empirical evidence cannot permit to clearly conclude and that integration as well as performance is defined, operationalised and measured in different and often limited ways. This might be a problem and the paper concludes with a provoking question of whether SCI might be the Emperors' New Suit of business.Originality/valueThe paper's departure point is a controversial hypothesis: the contribution of SCI is not as obvious as logistics and supply chain researchers usually think. The rigorous selection and analysis of previous studies contributes with systematic knowledge within an important question.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to increase understanding of the use of standards and modularity for improving responsiveness in the humanitarian context. Design/methodology/approach – Based on a conceptual framework and a systematic literature review, the authors conducted a longitudinal, explorative case on the Emergency Response Unit (ERU) concept in the International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent Society (IFRC), focussing particularly on the Health ERU in the Norwegian Red Cross. Findings – The authors found that the ERU concept makes use of many types of standards that complement and influence each other, and that the focus on modularity is increasing due to a growing need for responsiveness. Main challenges are trade-offs between autonomy and adaptability to the context resulting in more modularization which may be in danger of breaking the concept. Research limitations/implications – Results from this study could be refined by surveying staff involved in all types of ERU deployments. To explore the generalizability of the findings and test the propositions developed, more studies should be conducted. Practical implications – The study provides more understanding of the use of standards and modularity for improving responsiveness. Practitioners can use the framework as a check-list to identify potential means for improvements. The case can be used for training, discussions, and reflections. The research feeds into IFRC’s and NORCROSS ongoing work to their global response tools. Social implications – The results of the study can support improvements in humanitarian supply chains, thereby providing affected people with cost-efficient, rapid, and better-adapted responses. Originality/value – The authors develop a framework for categorization of standards and modularity in the humanitarian context. The authors provide the first empirical study on how humanitarian organizations use standards and modularity to improve responsiveness concluding with a set of propositions on how the concepts are linked.

PurposeConsidering the importance of supply chain integration (SCI) in literature and the increasing outsourcing of logistics, this paper aims to study the role of logistics service providers (LSPs) in supporting SCI and clients' performance.Design/methodology/approachThis research is based on a two‐step approach: a literature review on supply chain integration (SCI) and performance regarding how LSPs are taken into account; and an analysis of web sites of LSPs concerning how they communicate their role and whether they themselves consider they have a role in improving the SCI and performance of their clients. Results are then discussed in view of some major works on third party logistics.FindingsSome surprising conclusions are drawn. Among the analysed articles very few take LSPs into consideration. The web site analysis shows LSPs varying in their communication. Some do not consider SCI as part of their job, others balance between being pure “resource providers” and taking the riskier role of “supply chain designers”. The analysis of the roles LSPs can play in supply chains enriches the understanding of the SCI phenomenon.Research limitations/implicationsIn this paper SCI performance papers are analysed. A review of papers on LSPs could be another relevant starting point. The web site analysis concerns LSPs' communication. Further research could complement with the shippers' perspectives.Practical implicationsResults suggest different dimensions to structure LSPs' strategies vis‐à‐vis clients' SCI and performance.Originality/valueThe main contributions of this paper are questioning and analysing what role LSPs play in SCI and performance, and expanding the framework for SCI studies.

International audienceMost logistics and supply chain management studies take a “systems view”, where all elements are to be understood by how they affect/are affected by other elements with which they interact. Supply chain integration requires that elements be adapted to each other. However, the literature suggests that there may be trade-offs between previous and present adaptations and future adaptability. A case is used to illustrate such trade-offs and the relevance of choice of system borders when such trade-offs are analysed. In logistics, the view on what the relevant system borders are has changed over the years, from local optimisations to a “network view”. The paper contributes to the understanding of system boundaries, integration problems and complementarities between chain and network approaches in logistics. Conclusions regarding further research are drawn. In particular, the paper challenges the optimisation question and change of management levels, comparing the prevailing chain view with a wider network view

Abstract:Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore the empirical reality of environmental scanning practices in sustainable supply chain management contexts. In particular it tests and extends a conceptual framework proposed by Fabbe-Costes et al. (2011).Design and methodology -The empirical data for this research were obtained from 45 semistructured interviews with key informants, combined with a discussion of the main results with a focus group of supply chain experts. These data are compared with the literature and brought to bear on the framework.Findings -The research finds both breadth and depth in the scope of sustainability scanning practices of the respondents and provides evidence of multi-level scanning, with all respondents describing scanning activity at the societal level. It further demonstrates the adoption of multiple and diverse scanning targets at all levels in the conceptual framework. The articulation and ranking of scanning targets for sustainable SCM at all levels informs the development of priorities for practice. The paper also makes some observations about the boundaries of the scanning process.Practical implications -The results provide managers with guidance about what to scan in sustainable supply chain contexts. The validated framework can serve as a practical tool to assist managers with the organization and prioritization of their environmental scanning activities.Originality/Value -The paper is among the first to address the role of environmental scanning in sustainable supply chain contexts. It highlights the need for a multi-level framework for such scanning activities and opens up a debate about their implementation.

No abstract

PurposeTo empirically examine the usefulness and value of supply chain mapping (SC mapping), which has been neglected despite its importance in research and practice.Design/methodology/approachBased on three combined theoretical perspectives, we conducted a case study on a car manufacturer's managers mapping their downstream supply chain (SC). We conducted semi-structured interviews and a mapping exercise with them, followed by a focus group.FindingsWe find differences between individual and corporate SC maps and between how managers define the outbound SC, the SC map they draw and what they say when mapping. The three theoretical perspectives allow us to enrich SC mapping thinking. We focus on boundary objects to formulate propositions. SC mapping and maps are discussed with respect to contemporary SCs and SCM.Research limitations/implicationsBased on a single case study on one firm's outbound SC. Research could be expanded to the company's external partners and follow the development and use of maps in real time.Practical implicationsHighlights the usefulness and difficulties of SC mapping, for individuals and organisations. For the company, it opens avenues for further development and use of SC mapping to improve inter-functional and inter-organisational collaboration.Social implicationsConfirms the need for SC mapping competences in SCM and consequently the usefulness of teaching SC mapping courses in logistics and SCM programs.Originality/valueHighlights the usefulness of SC mapping and rekindles interest in SC mapping and maps in SCM. Introduces boundary objects into SCM research.