史密斯（2007）寫了一篇有關企業從事穩定食品供應并與農業、商業相接，以此增加產品附加值、滿足消費者需求的文章。影響供應量的三個因素如下：價格、商品及知識。而其影響程度取決于供應鏈的種類。然而，全球食品銷售是標準化規范的，降價、運輸及存儲問題無法回避，而知識及其影響力僅僅限制商品供應鏈。食品制造商不斷要求其供應商保持最低的“企業社會責任感”來幫助他們維持商譽。根據史密斯的觀點，靠近生產商的企業更能維持穩定、高質量的原材料供應。而供應商與農戶關系越和諧，便越能減少產品浪費問題，且更能采取和諧友好的生產模式。以上研究所采用的方法論包括產品生命周期分析、碳排放量分析、生態足跡法、財務支出影響分析、“食物里程”分析、HACCP研究、生命周期思考、利益相關者溝通以及調查研究。

 

Smith (2007) wrote a paper which reviewed opportunities to businesses to engage in sustainable food supply chain and link them with agricultural and business practices with the end goal to add value and satisfy consumer needs and wants efficiently. Three things influence flow of supply chain: money; goods and knowledge. The level of influence is based upon the type of supply chain. However knowledge and influence only trickle along commodity supply chains, where food is sold according to standardized specification worldwide, lower costs are incurred and there is ease of transport and storage .Food manufacturers are increasingly asking their suppliers to maintain minimum 'Corporate Social Responsibility' to help maintain brand reputation. According to Smith the food business benefit from reliable supply chain of high quality raw material which is usually located near manufacturing facility. Good relationships between suppliers and farmers also help reduce waste and employ environment friendly methods. The methods for the chosen study were lifecycle analysis; carbon accounting material flow analyses; ecological foot printing; converting impacts into financial costs; food miles; HACCP studies; life cycle thinking; stakeholder dialogue and surveys. Life cycle analysis was useful for supply chain analyses of processing, manufacturing and distribution with direct insights into eco efficiency and waste management. HACCP was useful for mapping supply chains. Stakeholder dialogue and surveys was used for highlighting problem areas. It was concluded that the discussed options available to businesses to create sustainable supply chains will create benefits for them.

 

Moin and Salhi (2007) gave an overall view of Supply Chain management but mainly focused on Inventory Routing area. It has been increasingly important for companies to achieve supply chain management by integrating various processes in a supply chain in order to gain competitive advantage. The paper focuses on distribution logistics and inventory control and their inter-relationship. In order to allocate inventory to selected customer the routing cost is needed so that marginal profit can be calculated. In turn the delivery cost depends upon vehicle routes. To integrate this inter-relationship is challenge faced by businesses, since it conflicts the aim of supplier which is to satisfy customers but maintain low distribution cost. This problem is called Inventory Routing Problem (IRP). The models used in the paper are single-period model, multi period and infinite horizon models are used followed by Stochastic IRP model. Single period model. Single period model was the first to integrate inventory allocation by treating a single-item, single period problem with random demands at retailers. The objective was to minimize single period expected cost of transportation, inventory and storage cost. In multi period model the long term effects of short term planning was considered as single period model were considered sub problems and a mixed inter programming model was proposed. Infinite horizon function had the objective to minimize the long run or mean average costs. In this demand is assumed constant and deterministic and review policies for inventory is incorporated in recent models. In Stochastic IRP probability of customer usage is calculated. The demand is considered hypothetical. The paper concluded stating most activities within IRP depend upon time horizon. Stochastic model was considered the most useful in real life but can be complex. Multi period models are found more efficient than single period but the question that arises is that how can long term information be integrate with short term and vice versa. The infinite horizon models are found to be computationally efficient and capable of solving large customers.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Kulp and Lee et al (2004) stated that to improve supply chain performance information integration between manufacturer and retailers through information sharing, synchronized replenishment, and collaborative product design and development was important. A conceptual framework was established in which information integration was related to manufacturer profitability. Intermediate performance measures that increased revenue and reduced costs were identified: wholesale prices and stock out levels. Controlling for company size, the retail price, the unit holding cost, and the unit distribution cost, wholesale prices are expected to be positively associated with profit margin. Assuming all else equal, manufacturer tries to reduce stock out levels and increase wholesale prices, thus increasing profits. The empirical analysis focused on food and consumer packaged industry. The aim of the framework was to ensure competitiveness, reduce costs and increase revenues. A survey instrument was used to collect data regarding division characteristics, information sharing, and collaborative strategies. Interviews were conducted with 12 executives responsible for partnerships at Warner-Lambert, Procter and Gamble, Dominicks, Fleming Industries, Wawa Stores, Sky Chefs, and Stop and Shop. The survey was done via 30-45 minute telephone interview with senior executive who was responsible for information exchange. To test the effect of information sharing and collaborative planning on manufacturer performance, they made a comparison with level of adoption of the initiatives between groups and next used regression analyses to test conceptual framework. After comparison it was found out that "the percentage of firms that share consumer and store information in the average profit margins group is significantly higher than the percentage of firms that share information in the below-average profit margins group". This means information sharing is positively related to profit margins. After regression analysis it was found that information sharing on store inventory level was positively associated with profit margin but information sharing on retailer warehouse inventory level or consumer is not.

 

Sha and Che(2006) stated that it an effective production and distribution strategy for supply chain network could result in high customer satisfaction. Therefore they introduced a multi phased mathematical approach called 'hybrid multi-phase-based genetic algorithm' (HMGA) for supply chain network design. It is based on genetic algorithms (GAs), the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), and the multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) which will help satisfy customer and supplier preferences at each level of supply chain network. The basic objective is to decide which corporation will be included? Who supplies whom? The three models are based upon real world consideration of objectives and constraints. An integrated algorithm which combines the GA, the AHP, and the MAUT was formed. This was based on five phases. The first phase evaluated efficiencies of potential corporations based on yield rate, capacity, and demand factors by using the GA. In second phase, corporations with a high yield rate based on the results of phase 1 were selected. The third phase used AHP to calculate the priorities of each assessment criterion which is the performance index for selecting partners. The fourth phase used the MAUT to construct the integrated utility function. The fifth phase used GA to select corporations found in second phase and appraised their performances. The results showed that the HMGA model provided better solution to solve the supply chain network problem.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Khouja (2003) stated that coordination between different members in supply chain is crucial for supply chain management. Synchronization of supply chain could be achieved through just-in-time approach. But Khouja identified that complete synchronization cannot be achieved by every company so they tend to lose in terms of cost. That is why he developed an algorithm for optimal synchronization of supply chain. For the model he used Economic Delivery and scheduling problem (ELDSP) model and analyze simple supply chain dealing with single component and multiple component. For single component an independent solution was formed which minimizes total cost and there is no restriction that the cycle time of supply members should be equal. For multiple component developed an efficient heuristic algorithm for

 

solving the ELDSP, and tested the performance of the algorithm. The results showed that it may be costly for some members to implement synchronized inventory because optimal independent cycle times are usually decreasing. The following are ways to achieve optimal synchronization:

 

Increasing or decreasing the per unit holding cost by extending delayed payment options to different members of the chain; Increasing or decreasing the ordering cost; Increasing or decreasing the per unit cost for members of the chain using transfer prices.

 

Hall and Potts (2003) stated that although supply chain management of inventory have been discussed before, the benefits and challenges of supply chain scheduling models have not been discussed before. They identified the problems faced by members in supply chain in scheduling, batching, and delivery. One was batch availability, under which a job only becomes available for later processing or dispatch to the customer when the entire batch of which it is a part has been processed. Second is job availability in which a job becomes available once it has been processed. This paper uses the batch availability assumption. They provided algorithms for scheduling jobs on machines and forming batches for delivery that can assist a supplier in minimizing the cost of meeting a manufacture's requirement. They showed total system cost reductions which can be achieved by cooperation.

 

Ritchie and Brindley (2007) believe that risks which are related to supply chain pose many challenges to risk management departments in companies. The aim for the paper was to evaluate those risks such as sources, nature, uncertainty in demand and provide supply chain risk management tools. An overall supply chain management framework was constructed consisting of five components: management influencers, decision maker characteristics, risk management responses and performance outcomes. For the framework research and literature of previous years was reviewed and variables were identified. A longitudinal study was done to see whether risk assessment and proactive supply chain have a significant effect on organizational performance. The evidence collected by quantitative and qualitative method was presented in a case study form. The case helped in observation of changing patterns of risk management of performance and its effect on supply chain members. The results showed that structures, systems, information sharing, interactions, personal exchanges and trust are viewed as important components in risk management process.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Ramdas and Spekman (2000) research focus was on whether innovative -product supply chains differ in terms of practices, thinking, and performance dimensions from functional product supply chains. Three hypotheses were formed. Firstly, "innovative-product supply chains and functional-product supply chains will differ in their use of various supply-chain practices and in the reasons for engaging in supply-chain management." Secondly, "high performers among innovative product supply chains will use practices that enhance revenues to a greater extent than high performers among functional product supply chains." Thirdly, "the supply-chain practices and reasons for engaging in supply-chain management that distinguish high performers from low performers will be different for functional- and innovative-product supply chains." Surveys were sent out to 22 supply chains across six industries: life sciences, oil and gas, consumer products, agricultural and food processing, utilities and manufacturing. Six variables were identified: inventory, time, order, fulfillment, quality, customer focus and customer satisfaction. They concluded that for effective supply chain management also depends on product types. Functional product and innovative product supply chain differ in practices used as well as mindset. Practices that generate high revenues are used more by high performers in innovative-product supply chain than functional-product supply chain.

 

Maloni and Brown (2006) stated that the food industry is facing public criticism on Corporate Social Responsibility issues. The purpose of the research was to analyze previous researches and develop a conceptual framework of supply chain CSR which would include the following components: animal welfare, biotechnology, environment, fair trade, health and safety, and labor and human rights. General supply chain CSR issues such as community and procurement are also considered. The framework showed that CSR research provides a basis from which food companies can immediately gain awareness about CSR supply chain issues. The companies can use the research to perform audit, assess standards, minimize costs of implementing CSR approach. Sustainability in supply chain can also be achieved.

 

Chen et al. (2005) examined inventories of American manufacturing companies between 1981 and 2000. Their inventory holding periods were reduced from 91 to 81 days. According to them it was because of Just in time method. The research was conducted to find out whether these inventories were actually reduced and whether these are desirable. Inventory Days measure was used to find out how many days does it take for the inventory to turnover; Inventory-to-sales ratio and inventory-to-asset ratio was used. It was concluded that the reduction did not happen due to macroeconomic factors, nor by shift of inventory from public to private firms. Also firms with high inventory have poor stock market performance whereas forms with low inventory have high stock market performance. However firms with low inventory have ordinary performance level. Today manufacturing firms that focus on coordination between suppliers and retailers can reduce their finished goods inventory.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Mohtadi and Kinsey (2005) studied three issues. First, food industry has been the market leader in information technology (IT) initiatives in years. Second, industry's thin profit margin could render cost savings if electronic commerce is adopted. Third, the structure of companies today n their evolution in gaining market advantages was possible through adoption of information technology. The research helped understand the implication of new digital economy on information sharing of food industry's supply chain. Game theory, hypothesis and prediction were used to arrive at a solution. They developed "a model of information sharing in the food industry that applies to both types of market structures. It begins with the independent retailer model where market power resides with the supplier, and draws out the implications of this market structure for in-formation sharing processes. It then expands the base model by considering many suppliers serving a single retailer, applicable to a world where market power resides with the retailer. Most interestingly, the extended model is robust by being able to explain both industry trends within an integrated formulation, reducing to the base-model when the number of suppliers (n) falls to one." After applying game theory, the authors arrived on the three propositions. First, "retailers with market power can better absorb the adverse effects of demand and supply shocks due their price setting ability in coping with unexpected shocks." Second, "retailers' expected profits and orders are adversely affected by unanticipated supply and demand shocks." Third, "a monopolistic supplier acts opportunistically by increasing the supply price it charges the retailer (c*), when it has more information on the final demand facing the retailer." It was found out that although sharing information leads to reduction in procurement and demand uncertainties, only large retailers share information not small food retailers. Withholding information leads to retailer stuck in bad equilibrium.

 

Gupta and Narasimhan (2001) stated that it is important for companies to estimate current profitability at each customer level to distinguish between profitable ones from less profitable ones. The issue that arose was that this can be complex to achieve when an intermediary such as distributor is added in a supply chain because the cost to retailer increases. A general model of current period customer profitability was developed to relate customer profitability to customer characteristics in a supply chain. Data was taken from a large distributor that supply to grocery and other retail business. It was found out that adoption of information-technology based on methodologies such as customer profitability analysis enables firm to collect more customer specific data. Warehousing and storage cost might increase or increase in a decreasing rate. The measurement and methodology proposed will help future researchers' better track specific costs and profits.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Cachon and Fisher (2000) studied the value of shared information in a model with one supplier, N similar retailers, and stationary stochastic consumer demand. The purpose of this research is to test the belief that industry sharing real time information improves supply chain performance, by rigorously measuring the value of information sharing and comparing this value to two other sources of supply chain improvement: reducing lead times and increasing delivery frequency by reducing shipment batch sizes. They compared a traditional information policy that does not use information sharing with the full information sharing policy. They conducted a numerical study and found out that supply chain costs lowered by 2.2% with full information policy than traditional policy, cutting lead time by half and cutting batch size in half on average leads to reduction in supply chain cost by 22%. They also used situational based lower bound over all feasible policies. They came with the result that "a retailer's demand information is most valuable when the retailer's inventory approaches a level that should trigger the supplier to order additional inventory, but this is also precisely when the retailer is likely to submit an order. Hence, just as the retailer's demand information becomes most valuable to the supplier, the retailer is likely to submit an order, thereby conveying the necessary information with-out explicitly sharing demand data." Information sharing has value when demand is uncertain and helps supplier to detect shifts in the demand process. Information sharing is only valuable when capacity is flexible enough to respond to the information.

 

Harrison's and New's (2002) paper reports a major survey into the relationship between corporate strategy, supply chain strategy and supply chain performance management are reported. Five clearly defined groups are identified: Supply Chain Leaders, Strong and Weak Players, Lagging Players and Non-players. A very large number of questionnaires were distributed to possible target participants around 5500. 258 useable questionnaires were returned from senior managers responsible for supply chain operations in manufacturing businesses. The questionnaire was targeted at senior managers with responsibility for supply chain operations within their business unit. The major issue to be investigated in survey was current state of supply chain strategy in the different businesses and the relative importance of supply chain strategy in achieving competitive advantage in the marketplace. The results were that out of 18 respondents 7% respondents thought that supply chain was an important aspect in achieving competitive advantage. But their own supply chain was poorly designed. Most of these eighteen business units had made low or only moderate investment in supply chain infrastructure and IT investment in support of supply chain operation. Supply chain leaders regard their supply chains as key elements in their corporate strategy and perceive them to be very important for competitive advantage, both now and in the future. Strong players plan only modest further investment in IT support in the future. Weak players stated that they have a supply chain strategy that is non-existent, poorly defined or at best has only some elements defined but lacks detail. They also rate the link between their supply chain technology and their supply chain strategy as very weak, weak or at best only moderate. Lagging players similar to weak players but they rated the importance of their current supply chain strategy to achieving competitive advantage at best as only moderately important. Non-players do not regard their supply chains as a very important element of their corporate strategy. This group reported the relevance of supply chain strategy to their corporate strategy as either marginally important or just important.