Performance assessment of internal logistics for service companies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.redin.16639Keywords:
Internal Logistics, performance measurement, organizational diagnosis, services sector, multicriteria constructivist methodsAbstract
The present research aims to propose a model for evaluating the performance of the internal logistics for a service company, based on Multicriteria Constructivist methods, towards a systematic mapping of the current context situation, aiming to find opportunities to improve its processes. It was found that, considering the difficulties of managing logistics flows, the method allows assisting in the identification, organization, measurement and integration of the variables through a systemic and participatory manner. As practical implications, it was provided conditions for the company to measure its actions, sustaining indexes for goal setting and periodic assessments. This research also presents the importance of this type of methodology for the provision of logistics services, a subject underexplored in the scientific literature, especially when using constructivist approaches.
Downloads
References
P. Drucker. Management. Revised edition. Ed. Harper Business. New York, USA. 2008. pp. 608.
M. Porter. On Competition. Updated and expanded edition. Ed. Harvard Business Press. Watertown, USA. 2009. pp. 544.
C. Grönroos. Service Management and Marketing: Customer Management in Service Competition. 3rd ed. Ed. Wiley. New York, USA. 2007. pp. 496.
J. Fitzsimmons, M. Fitzsimmons. Services Administration. 6th ed. Ed. Bookman. Porto Alegre, Brazil. 2010. pp. 584.
I. Plumb, A. Zamfir. “New Hypothesis on Service Management Within the Global World”. Theoretical and Applied Economics. Vol. 18. 2011. pp. 121-128.
R. Ballou. Business Logistics: Supply Chain Management. 4th ed. Ed. Prentice Hall. Lebanon, USA. 2003. pp. 816.
J. Bastidas, J. Gómez, J. Cabrera. “Modelo para la priorización dinámica de despachos de vehículos utilizando el processo analítico jerárquico”. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia. Vol. 48. 2009. pp. 201-215.
D. Bowersox, D. Closs, M. Cooper. Supply Chain Logistics Management. 4th ed. Ed. McGraw-Hill. Columbus, USA. 2012. pp. 496.
N. Slack, R. Chambers, R. Johnston, A. Betts. Operation and process management: principles and practice for strategic impact. 2nd ed. Ed. Prentice Hall. Lebanon, USA. 2008. pp. 560.
D. Kalenatic, L. Méndez, K. Valbuena, L. Rodriguez. “Metodología de planeación logística baseada en gestión de proyectos y dinámica de sistemas en empresas prestadoras de servicios”. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia. Vol. 58. 2011. pp. 208-218.
Concil of Logistics Management. Facts on the global supply chain. Available on: http://www.cscmp.org./ media-center/facts-global-supply-chain. Accessed: July 4, 2013.
A. Gunasekaran, C. Patel, R. McGaughey. “A framework for supply chain performance measurement”. International Journal of Production Economics. Vol. 87. 2004. pp. 333-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2003.08.003
M. Sharma, R. Bhagwat. “An integrated BSC-AHP approach for supply chain management evaluation”. Measuring Business Excellence. Vol. 11. 2007. pp. 57-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040710820755
M. Shi, W. Yu. “Supply chain management and financial performance: literature review and future directions”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. Vol. 33. 2013. pp. 1283- 1317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2012-0112
P. Taticchi, F. Tonelli, R. Pasqualino. “Performance measurement of sustainable supply chains: a literature review and a research agenda”. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. Vol. 62. 2013. pp. 782-804. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2013-0037
B. Roy. Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding. Ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, Netherlands. 1996. pp. 293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1
L. Ensslin, G. Montibeller, S. Noronha. Decision Support: Methodology for Structuring Problems and Multicriteria Evaluation of Alternatives. 1st ed. Ed. Insular. Florianópolis, Brazil. 2001. pp. 296.
S. Hatefi, S. Torabi. “The common weight MCDADEA approach to construct composite indicators”. Ecological Economics. Vol. 70. 2010. pp. 114-120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.08.014
C. Gomes, L. Gomes. Managerial decision making: Multicriteria Approach. 4th ed. Ed. Atlas. São Paulo, Brazil. 2012. pp. 360.
P. Meyer, A. Olteanu. “Formalizing and solving the problem of clustering in MCDA”. European Journal of Operational Research. Vol. 227. 2013. pp. 494-499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.01.016
A. Guitouni, J. Martel. “Tentative guidelines to help choosing an Appropriate MCDA method”. European Journal of Operational Research. Vol. 109. 1998. pp. 501-521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00073-3
S. Hronec. Vital Signs. 1st ed. Ed. Pearson. Upper Saddle River, USA. 1994. pp. 256.
C. Barlett, S. Ghoshal. Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. 2nd ed. Ed. Harvard Business Press. Watertown, USA. 2002. pp. 416.
T. Saaty, L. Vargas. Methods, concepts & applications of the Hierarchy Process. 2nd ed. Ed. Springer. New York, USA. 2012. pp. 396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3597-6
M. Bazerman, D. Moore. Judgment in Managerial Decision Making. 6th ed. Ed. Wiley. New York, USA. 2004. pp. 288.
R. Keeney, H. Raifa. Decision with Multiple Objectives, Preferences and Value Trade Offs. 1st ed. Ed. Wiley. New York, USA. 1976. pp. 592.
J. Hiatt, T. Creasey. Change Management: The People Side of Change. 2nd ed. Ed. Prosci Inc. Loveland, USA. 2012. pp. 148.
T. Davenport, J. Harris. Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning. 1st ed. Ed. Harvard Business School Press. Watertown, USA. 2007. pp. 240.
M. Oliveira, M. Bertucci. “The small and medium enterprise and information management”. Information and Society. Vol. 13. 2003. pp. 1-16.
A. Beal. Strategic information management. 1st ed. Ed. Atlas. São Paulo, Brazil. 2004. pp. 144.
G. Rummler, A. Brache. Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart. 3rd ed. Ed. Wiley. New York, USA. 2012. pp. 256.
S. Snell, G. Bohlander. Managing Human Resources. 16th ed. Ed. Cengage Learning. Independence, USA. 2012. pp. 864.
K. Laudon, J. Laudon. Management Information Systems. 8th ed. Ed. Prentice Hall. Lebanon, USA. 2004. pp. 480.
M. Christopher. Logistics and Supply Chain Management. 4th ed. Ed. FT Press. Upper Saddle River, USA. 2011. pp. 288.
F. Rosa, S. Ensslin, L. Ensslin, R. Lunkes. “Environmental disclosure management: a constructivist case”. Management Decision. Vol. 50. 2012. pp. 1117-1136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211238364
R. Lacerda, L. Ensslin, S. Ensslin. “The performance measurement framework in portfolio management: A constructivist case”. Management Decision. Vol. 49. 2011. pp. 648-668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111126530
R. Bruggemann, L. Carlsen. “Multi-criteria decision analyzes. Viewing MCDA Both in terms of process and aggregation methods: Some thoughts, motivated by the paper of Huang, Keisler and Linkov”. Science of The Total Environment. Vol. 425. 2012. pp. 293- 295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.02.062
M. Koksalan, J. Wallerius, S. Zionts. Multiple criteria decision making: from early history to the 21st century. 1st ed. Ed. World Scientific Publishing Company. New York, USA. 2011. pp. 200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/8042
L. Gomes, M. Araya, C. Carignano. Decision making in complex scenarios: Introduction to discrete methods of multicriteria decision. 1st ed. Ed. Cengage Learning. São Paulo, Brazil. 2003. pp. 168.
R. Stolt, L. Ensslin. “Avaliação de pilotos da Very Light Jets utilizando-se a MCDA-C”. Conexão SIPAER. Vol. 1. 2009. pp. 85-103.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Antioquia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
The material published in the journal can be distributed, copied and exhibited by third parties if the respective credits are given to the journal. No commercial benefit can be obtained and derivative works must be under the same license terms as the original work.
Twitter