Content Analysis of Global SC Research 2015

Benchmarking: An International Journal
A content analysis of global supply chain research

Hadiyan Wijaya Ibrahim, Suhaiza Zailani, Keah Choon Tan,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Hadiyan Wijaya Ibrahim, Suhaiza Zailani, Keah Choon Tan, (2015) "A content analysis of global
supply chain research", Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 22 Issue: 7, pp.1429-1462,
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-04-2013-0038
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by Indian Institute of Foreign Trade At 05:30 26 March 2019 (PT)
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-04-2013-0038
Downloaded on: 26 March 2019, At: 05:30 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 262 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2425 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2008),"Global supply chain risk management strategies", International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 38 Iss 3 pp. 192-223 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/09600030810866986">https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030810866986</a>
(2016),"Supplier development for sustainability: contextual barriers in global supply chains",
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 46 Iss 5 pp.
442-468 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2015-0300">https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJPDLM-12-2015-0300</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:446474 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm
A content analysis of global Analysis of

global supply
supply chain research chain research
Hadiyan Wijaya Ibrahim
School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia 1429
Suhaiza Zailani
Faculty Business and Accountancy, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Received 7 April 2013
Malaysia, and Revised 3 December 2013
Accepted 3 December 2013
Keah Choon Tan
Lee Business School, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to use content analysis to review the extensive supply chain
literature to summarize its past and current trends, and uncover existing gaps and opportunities for
future global supply chain research.
Design/methodology/approach – Since the study uses content analysis, several dimensions of the
literature were analyzed: research purpose, year of publication, journal name, methodology, theory building
or verification, country of study, sample industry, global or non-global issues, and article classification.
Findings – From a methodological point, the literature mostly consists of empirical and descriptive
studies with few exploratory articles. The review shows that global supply chains area relatively
“immature” or “new phenomenon” research topic that is gaining interest from practitioners and academics.
Research limitations/implications – It is hoped that by critically examining the extant literature,
the authors can clearly identify the challenges and state of global supply chain research to provide
supply chain researchers with a precise summary of the literature and directions for future studies.
Practical implications – This study also allows managers to recognize the methodologies and tools
that can be used to enhance their supply chains. It is believed that various strategies could be adopted
to create a robust global supply chain. In this respect, different industry sectors may require different
global strategies and different global practices.
Originality/value – The findings show that there is a shortage of empirical studies on global supply
chain strategies and outcomes, and most research focusses on supply chain practices and customer or
supplier relationships.
Keywords Literature review, Content analysis, Global supply chain
Paper type Literature review
1. Introduction
Globalization has restructured the business world and introduced the concept of a
global supply chain. Large and small companies alike have exploited their
opportunities to source from low-cost countries and sell internationally to reduce
production costs and expand revenue growth (Ruiz-Torres and Mahmoodi, 2008).
To respond to new market trends and demands, perceptive firms are increasingly
pursuing global supply chain strategies and operations to reduce costs and increase
productivity simultaneously (Reyes et al., 2002). Manuj and Mentzer (2008a, b) and
Tracey et al. (2005) suggest that active participation and seamless integration in a
global supply chain provide a source of competitive advantage that amounts to the
Benchmarking: An International
difference between the overall values created in the industry when the local firm Journal
operates in the global market and to the values if the local firm operates independently. Vol. 22 No. 7, 2015
pp. 1429-1462
In order to be competitive, companies must overcome the immense challenges of the © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1463-5771
current global trading environment, which raises the question concerning how these DOI 10.1108/BIJ-04-2013-0038
BIJ companies can use their competitive advantage in a global supply chain to compete
22,7 efficiently and effectively. In keeping up with the increased competitive pressure,
companies must find ways to improve their global supply chain operations. In other
words, globalization has restructured the business world and introduced the concept of
a global supply chain. Prasad and Sounderpandian (2003), and Balan et al. (2006) define
a global supply chain as a series of firms networking and outsourcing throughout the
1430 globe. Balan et al. (2006) also propose a supply chain management (SCM) index and
contend that countries that are below average in their SCM index should extensively
exploit the opportunities that are available for global supply chain implementation to
reduce the gap and improve their SCM index. Therefore, meticulously managing a
global supply chain is a vital strategy to remain viable in an intensely competitive
global market. Consequently, the study of global supply chains and how they can be
exploited to improve competitive advantage are becoming increasingly attractive to

academics and practitioners alike.
Although numerous articles on global supply chains have been published over the
last two decades, none have thoroughly reviewed the literature base to summarize
the stage of global supply chain research to provide future research direction on this
crucial topic. Thus, the purpose of this paper is twofold. First, this study intends to
extend previous work on global supply chains by providing a comprehensive literature
review that is greater in breadth and depth than previous studies. Within this objective,
this study specifically focusses on the SCM literature using Mentzer et al.’s (2001)
definition – SCM is the systematic and strategic coordination of traditional business
functions internally within an organization and externally across businesses within the
supply chain, for the purpose of improving the long-term performance of all the
business entities along the supply chain. The second goal is to analyze the existing
literature as it pertains to past and current trends to reveal existing gaps in the
literature. We hope that by summarizing the literature and identifying the gaps, it
provides supply chain academics and practitioners a clear knowledge of where the field
currently stands and the type of research that is needed to advance global SCM.
This paper comprises five sections. The introductory section provides a general idea
about the research topic and gaps of the study. Section 2 reviews the literature related
to global supply chains, structures, and different types of supply chain. Section 3
addresses the methodology and Section 4 discusses the findings of the data analysis.
Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusions and implications, and provides questions
and suggestions for future research.
2. Literature review
2.1 Global supply chains
Over the last few decades, globalization has continuously raised the competitive
pressure on manufacturers and service providers (Gereffi et al., 2005). In this
interdependent global market, multinational corporations have become the dominant
driving force of economic growth. In an attempt to cut costs, many multinational
corporations have outsourced their production functions. Although there are
undesirable implications of globalization, participation in global supply chains is a
necessary step for organizations to cut costs, acquire new technology, and/or expand
their market share (Gereffi, 1999). Globalization can help manufacturers from a
developing country enter foreign markets, earn foreign currency, diversify exports,
and, most importantly, they can acquire new technologies and capabilities. However,
failure to effectively manage global challenges can lead to dire consequences Analysis of
(Gunasekaran et al., 2008). For example, participants in a global supply chain must global supply
carefully manage the various factors, such as, among others, tariffs, duties, trade
barriers, currency exchange rates, and corporate income taxes. In addition, with the
chain research
globalization of the world economy, the diversity and environmental issues that
influence a firm’s global strategy and approach must be addressed (Kale, 2007).
The growth in globalization and the added management challenges it brings have 1431
motivated the interest of both academics and practitioners in global SCM. Prasad and
Babbar (2000) observe that there is an increased interest in global supply chain
research among leading operations management and logistics journals. SCM is not
simply a domestic management philosophy; it transcends national boundaries to
impose unique challenges on managers who design supply chains for existing and new
product lines (Meixell and Gargeya, 2005). Accordingly, the following subsections
discuss global supply chain issues.
2.2 Domestic vs global supply chains

The scope of SCM should include all value-added activities, including the extraction of
raw materials, sourcing, transportation, transformation processes, distribution channels,
and delivery to the end customers (Tan, 2001; Li and Lin, 2006a). Li and Lin (2006a)
propose a generic global supply chain model that does not differentiate global sourcing
and distribution from domestic sourcing and distribution. Vidal and Goetschalckx (1997),
however, emphasize that domestic supply chains are confined within a single country but
that factors affecting global supply chains, such as international trade rules, tariffs,
corporate income taxes, and location issues, must be addressed. The authors also
distinguish between domestic and international strategic production-distribution in terms
of a single country or a unified group of countries on the one hand, and multiple countries,
on the other hand, in relation to selecting vendors, locating plants, and warehouses.
Similarly, Sajadieh (2009) highlights the differences between domestic and global supply
chains in that the latter involves a company’s worldwide suppliers; large geographical
distances in a global context; increased transportation costs; and, last but not least,
complicated logistics because of the increased lead time in the supply chain, dissimilarities
in the culture, language, laws, and currency.
Global supply chains are inherently more complex and difficult to manage than
domestic supply chains (Dornier et al., 1998; MacCarthy and Atthirawong, 2003;
Sajadieh, 2009; Wood et al., 2002). Consequently, global supply chains are riskier than
domestic supply chains (Manuj and Mentzer, 2008b) because the former comprises
different taxes, duties, exchange rates, customs clearance, trade barriers, transfer
prices, and complex international transportation issues (Vidal and Goetschalckx, 1997).
Furthermore, other qualitative factors, such as government stability and the
infrastructure of a particular country are critical for global supply chains. Similarly,
Babbar et al. (2008) note that a global supply chain is too complex for a single firm to
manage the flow of materials and value-added activities along the entire supply chain.
In order to be viable in a supply chain, firms tend to compete in terms of cost, quality,
customer responsiveness, flexibility, and agility. Furthermore, firms must interact and
integrate with suppliers and customers. Their products must be conducive to being
shipped across wide geographical and national boundaries. Firms that are able to
manage their global supply chains successfully gain inimitable benefits, such as
increased financial performance, international network, market share, and operational
efficiency to extend their brand names in terms of products and services (Asree, 2010).
BIJ 2.3 Structure of a global supply chain
22,7 The existing global supply chain literature shows that research on leading factors,
practices, strategies, and global supply chain performance is still scanty (Asree, 2010;
Ghemawat and Hout, 2008; Manuj and Mentzer, 2008b; Rudberg and West, 2008).
Cagliano et al. (2008) claim that although global supply chains have evolved over the
last two decades, there is a lack of credible evidence in the literature. Although the term
1432 global supply chain has emerged in several reputable international journals, its
definition differs among them; however, the consensus is that the term refers to a
supply chain in the global context of today’s business landscape. Klassen and
Whybark (1994) define a global supply chain as a network of factories and material
sourcing on a worldwide basis, while others, such as Reyes et al. (2002), define the term
as synchronizing demand with supply across the supply chain to reduce uncertainty.
Motwani et al. (2000) define global SCM as an “integrating process, used to create and
sustain competitive advantage based on the delivery to the customer of basic and
unexpected services.” It is a strategy to optimize the flow of information and purchased
raw materials to the delivery of finished goods along the supply chain with the goals of
achieving a high level of productivity and quality (Muller, 1993).
The central role of global buyers is to procure high quality raw materials and
components at the lowest total cost. Global buyers are the intermediaries between
global consumers and local manufacturers, thereby inserting local industries into the
global supply chains (Kaplinsky and Readman, 2005). For many Asian firms, these
buyers were their key contacts to participate in global supply chains to acquire new
skills, knowledge, and technology (UNIDO, 2004). Global buyers not only assist local
firms to obtain the credit needed to expand their production, they also supply the
required technology in various forms like blueprints and specifications, information on
competing goods, production techniques, and guidance on design and quality.
Meanwhile, Motwani et al. (2000) stress that global supply chains play an important
role for organizations to achieve competitive advantage. Kale (2007) also notes that
global supply chains play a key role in a firm’s global competitiveness because of its
expanded global market and macroeconomic forces. In addition, changes in a
company’s traditional operations to meet global and functional integration provide new
opportunities to compete in the global markets (Lee, 2000).
Fawcett et al. (2008) claim that factors shaping the global environment and driving
global operations of multinational firms fall into four categories: global market
forces, technological forces, global cost forces, and political and macroeconomic forces.
A well-implemented global supply chain can capture these four forces to minimize cost
or delivery lead time in international trading (Motwani et al., 1998). Vidal and
Goetschalckx (1997) highlight that the rapid change in the global economy leads to the
homogenization of international scenarios and trade agreements, such as NAFTA, EU,
and ASEAN, which facilitate this process. Such agreements and trading unions
facilitate the implementation of global supply chains that are more effective and less
problematic. Vidal and Goetschalckx (1997) also explain that flows of cash and
information in a global setting are more difficult to coordinate than in a single country
situation. Consequently, new qualitative and quantitative tools must be designed for
the global setting. International logistics systems are easier to develop under stable and
uniform economic conditions. Indeed, Pontrandolfo et al. (2002) note that multinational
firms are good examples of global logistics systems that combine their production
systems with the added complexity of a global supply chain to connect several
nations with different currencies, import tariffs and fiscal systems. Another benefit of
integrating with a global supply chain is the ability to improve the negative Analysis of
consequences of globalization, such as sweatshop labor and the cutthroat pricing global supply
practices of large corporations (Mefford, 2006).
chain research
3. Review methodology
Li and Cavusgil (1995) suggest that there are three basic approaches to investigate the
state of knowledge in a field. The first approach is the Delphi method through which 1433
experts who are familiar with the area are surveyed. The second approach is
meta-analysis in which empirical studies on the subject are gathered, combined, and
statistically analyzed. The third approach is content analysis or a research method for
systematic, qualitative, and quantitative description of the manifest content of literature
in an area. This study uses content analysis to identify research gaps in the global supply
chain literature. Content analysis includes three major steps: analysis of articles,
definition of content within each category, and identify research gaps in the literature.
We summarize the content analysis steps undertaken in this study in Figure 1.
In step 1, this study searched for relevant supply chain articles in academic journals.
Our search focusses on journals in the areas of supply chains, logistics and
transportation, operations management, business/marketing, and general management
Time Horizon of Study

January 1990 to February 2012
Selection of Database
Step 1
Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, Emerald,

Inderscience and Wiley-Interscience
Selection of Journals
Search “supply chain” in Article Title
and select 211 articles
Dimensions which every research article

is analyzed such as 1) purpose of research,
2) year of publication, 3) journal name,
4) methodology, 5) theory building or
Step 2
verification, 6) country of study, 7) sample

industry, 8) global or non-global issues,
and 9) article classification
Analysis after classification of articles
Figure 1.
Step 3
Steps in content
Identify Research Gaps analysis
BIJ from January 1990 to February 2012 using the key words “supply chain.” The full
22,7 text of each article was reviewed to remove articles that were unrelated to supply
chains. Burgess et al. (2006), utilize a similar approach for selecting articles in their
studies.
Articles were collected from Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, Emerald, Inderscience,
and Wiley Interscience (or Blackwell Synergy), as the majority of well-refereed articles on
1434 industrial management are found in these databases. The choice of these outlets was
based on previous studies that identified and ranked these journals as making the highest
contribution to the supply chain and logistics discipline (e.g. Fawcett et al., 1995; Ferguson,
1983). This study discarded those articles not belonging to the abovementioned journals
as well as prefaces, editorial notes, book reviews, conference proceedings, public reports,
master’s theses, doctoral dissertations, and textbooks. While it is not possible to guarantee
that this search is exhaustive, we believe that the journals selected and articles reviewed
comprise a reasonably representative and comprehensive body of the research being
accomplished on supply chains. Our search yielded 211 articles pertaining to supply
chains. Since the study uses content analysis, several dimensions of the literature were
analyzed: research purpose, year of publication, journal name, methodology, theory
building or verification, country of study, sample industry, global or non-global issues,
and article classification. Vallet-Bellmunt et al. (2011) reveal that most of the content
analyses done on SCM were used to detect the methodology and scientific level of supply
chains as a discipline and were based on analysis of leading journals. We analyzed the
211 articles identified in this study based on these dimensions.
4. Results of literature review

Since a major purpose of this study is to examine the growth of global supply chain
research, the sample of 211 articles was separated into global and non-global supply
chain research based on the purpose of study. This broad classification provides a
preliminary clue on the growth of global supply chain research. Research growth in an
area can also be traced by using frequency analysis of articles published yearly. Out of
the 211 articles reviewed in this study, less than half (93 articles or 44 percent) of the
articles researched global supply chain issues. Hence, it is clear that global supply
chain research is not as predominant as local or domestic supply chain studies. Indeed,
since 1991, the number of non-global studies exceeds that of global supply chain
articles. Nonetheless, interest in global supply chain research has increased steadily
since 2005 (Figure 2).
As shown in Figure 2, the number of supply chain articles has been increasing
steadily since 2000. Sachan and Datta (2005), and Soni and Kodali (2011) notice a
gradual surge in supply chain research since 2000. In total, 51 supply chain articles
were published from 2000 to 2004, and another 91 articles were published in the next
five years from 2005 to 2009. Non-global supply chain studies peaked in 2008 but
declined noticeably over the next three years while global supply chain studies
continued to rise until 2010. Since 2012 contains publications for two months only, it is
premature to comment on whether the trend continues to rise or decline. Nonetheless, it
is reasonable to infer that interest in global supply chains did not start until 2000, as
there was almost no publication in the preceding years. A probable reason is
that scholars began to take notice of global supply chain challenges after the
September 11, 2001; incident that almost crippled many global supply chains. Since
then a series of terrorist attacks, natural disasters, industrial disputes, and wars have
provided frequent reminders that supply chain managers must be able to deal with
70 Analysis of
60
global supply
chain research
50
Number of Articles
40
1435
30
20
10
Figure 2.
Global and
0 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 non-global supply
Number of Jounral Published 4 14 21 16 30 16 17 12 13 11 9 10 8 3 2 5 4 9 2 1 2 2 chain-related
Non Global Issues / Local Issues 4 6 7 6 17 11 9 10 5 5 5 6 3 3 1 3 4 7 1 1 2 2
articles (1991-2012)
Global Issues 0 8 14 10 13 5 8 2 8 6 4 4 5 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 0 0
disruptions to their supply chains, as well as the day-to-day risks from routine supply
chain failure. The September 11 terrorist attack in the USA, for instance, heightened
awareness of supply chain risks and the vulnerability of the transportation and
logistics systems. Since then, the issue of supply chain risks has become a major
concern for many multinational corporations. Consequently, numerous journals
published a series of special issues on supply chain risks to provide policy implications
and future research directions in the context of supply chain risk management.
We summarized the journals for the 211 articles in Table AI, for detail refer to
Appendixes. The primary publication outlets for supply chain studies are the
International Journal of Production Economics, International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, International Journal of Logistics Research and
Applications, and Supply Chain Forum an International Journal, which, collectively,
published about 50 percent of the total number of articles. The considerable number of
articles published in the International Journal of Production Economics, is partially due to
a special issue on global supply chains published in 2010. Other prominent operations
management, business logistics, and management journals lagged behind in publishing
supply chain studies. We used Olsen and Ellram’s (1997) scheme to classify the
methodologies of the 211 supply chain studies along two widely adopted dimensions.
The first dimension separates the articles by theoretical or empirical focus, and the
second dimension separates the studies by prescriptive or descriptive emphasis. These
dimensions have been adopted by other literature review research (e.g. Croom et al., 2000;
Luo et al., 2001) because it allows for a reasonably comprehensive assessment of the
research approaches taken in the current body of literature concerning the subject by
highlighting both the basic methodology and the objective of the studies.
Malhotra and Grover (1998) state that there are six major research methodologies:
perspective, conceptual, descriptive, empirical, exploratory cross-sectional, and exploratory
longitudinal. Perspective research draws conclusions based on the perceptions of the
authors, and conceptual research describes the basic or fundamental concepts of a subject
area. Descriptive research describes, formulates, and makes a model of the research topic.
Empirical research is a methodology in which data are taken from a survey, case study,
BIJ literature review, and taxonomy or typology approach. Exploratory cross-sectional
22,7 research collects data at a single point in time whereas exploratory longitudinal research
collects data at two or more points over time from the same subject to monitor its response
before and after an experiment.
Researchers began to concentrate on global supply chain research over the last two
decades. Our literature review reveals that numerous global supply chain studies were
1436 published in the last 15 years. Many global supply chain issues and challenges have
been discussed in the literature in the forms of conceptual, empirical, and descriptive
papers. This observation is consistent with Malhotra and Grover (1998) who further
conclude that different quantitative methods have been used in the literature to
discuss global supply chain issues. Our summary in Table I shows that empirical
survey and exploratory cross-sectional study (40 percent) are the most widely used
research methodology in global supply chain studies, followed by conceptual paper

(22 percent), exploratory case study (19 percent), and empirical modeling (8 percent).
The exploratory longitudinal method is undoubtedly the least popular research method
in this area. This is not surprising as longitudinal study is innately difficult and costly
to conduct, especially in a business setting. Three papers in our sample of 211 studies
used more than one research methodology.
While less than 20 percent of the studies used a case study approach, case studies
can be a very useful and appropriate instrument for research on relationships as they
allow for in-depth, multi-perspective analysis to consider not only the perspective of
the research subjects within the study but also the interaction between subjects
(Frankel et al., 2005). Despite a relatively large number of supply chain articles
published in this area, papers providing comprehensive analysis that outline future
research directions are still limited.
Next, we analyze the contribution of each article to determine whether it is a theory
building or theory verification study. Flynn et al. (1990) differentiate theory building
from verification in that theory building studies propose new theory based on
hypothesis testing whereas theory verification studies use existing theory to validate
the results of a research. The latter includes studies that propose and then verify the
proposed theory. We summarize the results in Table II. Out of the 211 articles, 44 are
theory building studies and 107 are theory verification studies. The remaining
60 articles are mostly anecdotal research that did not use any theory. The small ratio of
theory building supply chain research indicates that the research topic is a relatively
Number of papers
Methodology GSC SC Total number of papers
Conceptual 25 22 47
Descriptive 3 2 5
Empirical (modeling) 11 7 18
Empirical (survey/exploratory cross-sectional) 24 61 85
Explanatory (exploratory longitudinal) 1 1 2
Exploratory (case study) 21 19 40
Table I. Perspective 5 6 11
Summary of Review 5 1 6
research Total 95 119 214a
methodology Note: aThree articles used mixed mode methodologies
young field compared to other business disciplines. Hence, there is a need to encourage Analysis of
conceptual and theory building research in this area. global supply
Various theories ranging from the popular resource-based view to the relatively
unknown customer value theory have been used to explain supply chain research.
chain research
Halldorsson et al. (2007) develop a theoretical reference to explain SCM based on
total cost analysis, network theory, and the resource-based view. They argue that
established theories are useful for explaining structural and management issues 1437
in supply chains. We summarize the theories used in our sample articles in Table III.
It is clear that most articles do not use any established theory to justify their
research framework. The most widely used theories are contingency, resource-based
view, and transaction cost. However, Melén and Nordman (2009) note that
internationalization theory is gaining popularity in supply chain research, especially
for marketing-related topics.

Research on supply chains has been done in almost every part of the world, but it
appears that the bulk of the studies are in advanced countries. Hence, it is imperative
to identify the under-researched countries or regions to encourage more studies in the
areas to improve supply chain strategies and practices. We summarize the results in
Table IV. An interesting observation is that earlier supply chain studies focussed
on developed regions, such as the USA, Europe, and Australia, whereas more
recent research in this area shows more effort to provide insights into global
supply chain practices in developing regions, particularly in Asia. The most
frequently researched countries in Asia are China, India, and Taiwan. The least
researched region is Africa with a single study since 1991. Some comparative
analyses have also been undertaken to offer a cross-country view of global supply
chains. A breakdown of this comprehensive analysis by geographical focus is
provided in Table IV.
Our next observation is that supply chain research appears to spread across many
industrial sectors (Table V). Although global supply chains are mostly applied in the
consumer industries, such as electronics, automotive, and telecommunications,
applications of global supply chains have also been used in other sectors, such as
agricultural, construction, marine transport, and the retail segment. Applications of
global supply chain practices are mostly by large, multinational corporations rather
than small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Finch (2004) believes that firm size plays a
key role in determining a firm’s business model and supply chain practices. Table V
shows that both global and non-global supply chain studies are not restricted to any
particular industry, but that the consumer electronic industry has attracted a large
proportion of the research. A credible reason is that most of the large consumer
electronics manufacturers, such as Apple Inc., Dells, and Intel, have outsourced their
manufacturing overseas. An effective and efficient global supply chain is needed to
move raw materials and sales information to overseas manufacturing facilities and
ship finished goods back to the consumers.
Theory building/verification Number of journals
Theory verification 107 Table II.

Theory building 44 Summary of
None or not specify 60 theory building/
Total 211 verification papers
BIJ Number of papers
22,7 Theory GSC SC Total number of papers
None or not specified 61 84 145

Resource-based view 8 6 14
Contingency theory 2 6 8
Transaction cost theory 3 4 7
1438 Organizational theory 1 4 5
Agency theory 1 4 5
Game theory 2 2 4
Internationalization theory 3 – 3
Value chain theory 1 1 2
Social capital 1 1 2
Theory of quality management 1 1 2
Theory of swift 1 1 2
Network theory 2 – 2
Institutional theory – 2 2
Organizational learning theory 1 1 2
Social network theory 1 – 1
International economics 1 – 1
Strategy-structure-performance 1 – 1
Political economy paradigm 1 – 1
Traditional agency theory 1 – 1
Theory of constraints – 1 1
Theory of limited rationality – 1 1
International marketing 1 – 1
Option pricing theory 1 – 1
Social-technical systems theory 1 – 1
Duality theory In programming 1 – 1
Classical decision theory – 1 1
Economic incentive theory 1 – 1
Theory of competence – 1 1
Theory of organizational capability – 1 1
Cluster theory 1 – 1
Strategic choice theory – 1 1
Multi-attribute utility theory – 1 1
Table III. Customer value theory 1 – 1
Summary of theories Notes: GSC, global supply chain; SC, non-global supply chain. 12 articles used more than one theory
used in study in the study
Geographical area Number of articles Percent
Africa 1 0.47
Asia 41 19.43
Australia 3 1.42
Europe 30 14.22
Table IV. Global 33 15.64
Geographical USA 42 19.91
distribution n/a 61 28.91
of articles Total 211 100%
Frequency of
Analysis of
industry cited global supply
No. Industry sub-sector GSC SC Total frequency chain research
1 Medical/medical equipment 4 7 11
2 Telecommunications/communication equipment 6 6 12
3 Rubber and plastic 3 9 12
4 Textiles/fiber/fashion industry 6 9 15 1439
5 Transportation and transport equipment manufacturing 6 9 15
6 Food/beverage manufacturing 7 10 17
7 Chemical 5 12 17
8 Global third-party logistics service providers (G3PLs)/3PL 2 10 12
9 Metals/metal refinery and stamping 7 11 18
10 Automotive industry 5 13 18
11 Machinery manufacturing 7 14 21
12 Computer/electronic equipment 9 13 22
13 Product/component/manufacturing industry 8 22 30
14 Electrical/electronic equipment and electronic parts 19 25 34
16 Others 39 63 102
15 None or not specified 32 38 70
Total 165 271 436a Table V.
Notes: GSC, global supply chain; SC, non-global supply chain. aTotal frequency exceeded 211 because Classification of
most studies addressed multiple industries industry sectors
4.1 Description of content classification scheme and results

Global supply chains are complicated network, as various members from several countries
are involved. Hence, global supply chains involve cross-border, inter-organizational
relationships among suppliers, government, intermediaries, local traders, and customers.
Given this complex view of global supply chains, our content analysis focussed on crucial
aspects of the literature to highlight these intricate relationships. More specifically, the
selected dimensions of global supply chains delineate why, how, and the consequences of
each study (Marasco, 2008). In order to clarify, organize and analyze the global supply
chain dimensions in the literature, this study adapted the contingency relationship model
developed by Ginsberg and Venkatraman (1985). The authors suggest that contingent
relationships within a system comprise three elements: input, process, and output. Input is
the context of the literature; process consists of global supply chain strategy and practices;
and output is the outcome of the study.
Context describes the environment within which the global supply chain operates.
It includes internal and external contextual factors. Internal context includes organizational
characteristics like operations and supply chain capabilities, human capital, and financial
resources, whereas external context is the macroeconomic environment, such as
infrastructure, competitiveness of the industry, political development and stability, and
currency exchange. Global supply chain strategy describes the overall corporate plan and
policy used to manage transnational sourcing, manufacturing, and logistics functions.
A firm’s global supply chain strategy can vary widely depending on several attributes,
such as the scope of activities involved, continuity, complexity, symmetry, and degree of
formalization. Global supply chain practices are the tactical level day-to-day activities that
a firm engages in to execute its global supply chain strategy. Outcome reflects the results of
a global supply chain. Global supply chain outcomes can be divided into internal outcomes
BIJ observed by supply chain participants directly involved with the activities and external
22,7 outcomes perceived at the supply chain level.
We summarized our content analysis of the literature by separating the articles into
each of the four groups in Table VI. The decision criterion for placing articles into a specific
group was primarily based on the key purpose or objective of the articles. During the
classification process, some articles were found to be multifaceted in that they addressed
1440 multiple dimensions (i.e. context, strategy, practices, and outcome) simultaneously.
Hence, a fifth category, comprehensive, was added to cover the “comprehensive” articles.
Marasco (2008) also categorizes his review of third-party logistics literature into five
groups – context, structure, process, outcomes, and comprehensive. Subsequently,
Maghsoudi and Zailani (2012) classify their literature review of humanitarian supply chain
articles into five categories based on Marasco’s (2008) framework.
The distribution of articles by content in Table VI shows that supply chain studies
that address context-related issues have drawn considerable attention among
researchers. In total, 17 of the 211 articles (8 percent) are devoted to the analysis of
influential factors affecting the internal and external contexts of a firm. Specifically,
these studies explore issues that affect the internal characteristics of an organization,
such as the strengths and weaknesses of top management, processes, technology and
capabilities, and resources, among others. Some common external contexts examined in
the literature include issues distinctive to the consumer electronic and automobile
industries. Several country characteristics, such as political stability, infrastructure,
and currency exchange were also addressed by the context-related studies. The next
group in Table VI addresses the implementation of supply chain strategy. Although
academics and practitioners alike have been stressing for years that a firm’s supply
chain must be managed strategically to enhance competitive advantage, only 8 percent
of the articles in our sample researched this important topic. However, supply chain
practices have been widely studied (70 percent), perhaps because data on practices are
easier to collect than information on strategy. Although, very often, top management
teams are reluctant to disclose their strategies, the practices are readily available to mid
or lower-level managers who are prime survey targets. Less than 10 percent of the
studies examined the outcomes of supply chain strategy and practices. The most
common outcome measure is supply chain performance. Lastly, 11 articles or about
5 percent of our sample examined supply chains on multiple dimensions of our content
analysis. Next, we proceed to identify gaps in the literature.
5. Discussion
A thorough literature review of a specific topic serves several important functions: to
provide a foundation or to situate research in reference to the larger body of existing
work in the field; to differentiate new research from what has been done; to identify
gaps in theory, methodology or results in the literature; and to demonstrate a high
level of scholarship by analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of a topic (Hart, 1998).
While not exhaustive, the 211 articles from 99 scientific publications reviewed in this
study were a good representative sample of the literature base. Our study is relevant to
those stakeholders who are interested in global supply chain research. There are seven
main findings of our content analysis: the evolution of supply chain and global supply
chain, methodologies, theories, industry focusses, regions and that related issues of
context, strategy, practices and outcomes.
First, we conclude that global supply chain studies lag behind non-global or
domestic supply chain studies. While our separation of the literature into global vs
Number
Group Journal classification by content Articles (percent)
Context Organization characteristics, industry Days (1994), Gunasekaran and Lyu (1997), Hong et al. (2006), Hung (2011), 17 (8%)
characteristics, and country characteristics Li (2011), Motwani et al. (1998), Ritchie and Brindley (2002), Sanders (2007), Sila
and Ebrahimpour (2003), Simatupang and Sridharan (2005, 2007, 2008),
Vonderembse et al. (2006), Walker et al. (2008), Walters (2008), and
Youn et al. (2011)
Supply chain Responsive strategy, lean strategy, Acar et al. (2010), Basnet et al. (2003), Cao et al. (2010), Cassivi et al. (2008), 17 (8%)
strategy and others Christopher et al. (2011), Cirtita and Glaser-Segura (2012), Dreyer et al. (2009),
Easton and Jarrell (1998), Biles et al. (2007), Grant (1996b), Hameri and Hintsa
(2009), Li and Lin (2006b), Lummus et al. (2008), Mehra and Inman (1992), Min
et al. (2005), Park et al. (1996), and Vanichchinchai and Igel (2011)
Supply chain Global logistics, collaboration, TQM/JIT, Ahn et al. (1999), Arnold et al. (2010), Arntzen et al. (1995), Auld (2010), Babbar 148
practices information sharing, risk management, et al. (2008), Balan et al. (2006), Barratt (2004), Barry (2004), Bartlett et al. (2007), (70%)
integration, visibility, technology, and others Bayo-Moriones et al. (2011), Beresford et al. (2005), Bernard (1996), Bernardes and
Hanna (2009), Bhatnagar and Teo (2009), Bhatnagar and Viswanathan (2000),
Bhattacharyya et al. (2010), Biehl (2007), Cagliano et al. (2008), Cao et al. (2008),
Chan and Qi (2003), Chen et al. (2007), Christopher et al. (2006), Chu and Lee
(2006), Closs and Mollenkopf (2004), Closs and Xu (2000), Cohen and Mallik
(1997), Corsten and Felde (2005), Cruz et al. (2006), Danese et al. (2012), Davis
(1993), De Vries et al. (1999), Demirbag et al. (2006), Ellinger (2000), Elmuti et al.
(2008), Enyinda and Gebremikael (2010), Fawcett et al. (2007), Fawcett and Scully
(1995), Flint (2004), Forker et al. (1997), Foster et al. (2011), Frohlich and
Westbrook (2001), Fullerton and McWatters (2001), Germain et al. (2008), Green
and Inman (2005), Grover et al. (2004), Gunasekaran and Irani (2010),
Gunasekaran et al. (2001), Hackman and Wageman (1995), Hafeez et al. (2002),
Hale (2003), Harvey and Richey (2001), Hertz and Alfredsson (2003), Hesse and
Rodrigue (2004), Hoegl and Wagner (2005), Horvath (2001), Hsieh and Chen
(2007), Huang and Keskar (2007), Ismail (2007), Janhonen (2008), Jiang et al. (2009),
Kakuro (2004), Kaleka (2002), Kaplan and David (1992), Kim and Lee (2010), Kim
et al. (2006), Kuei et al. (2001, 2008, 2011), Kumar et al. (2008), Lai et al. (2002), Lee
and Wilhelm (2010), Lee and Billington (1995), Levy (1995), Li and Lin (2006a),
(continued )
chain research
1441
global supply
Classification of
Analysis of
Table VI.
articles by content
BIJ
22,7
1442
Table VI.
Number
Group Journal classification by content Articles (percent)
Liargovas and Skandalis (2008b), Lockamy and James (1991), Manuj and Mentzer
(2008a, b), March (1991), Mazany (1995), Meixell and Gargeya (2005), Moberg
et al. (2002), Mollenkopf et al. (2010), Morash and Lynch (2002), Morgan et al.
(2004), Motwani et al. (2000), Nahm et al. (2006), Narasimhan and Mahapatra
(2004), Narasimhan et al. (2008), Neely et al. (1995), Olorunniwo and Li (2010),
Pandey et al. (2010), Park et al. (1996), Powell (1995), Prasad and Sounderpandian
(2003), Premus and Sanders (2008), Rabinovich et al. (1999), Reyes et al. (2002),
Ritchie and Brindley (2000, 2007), Rudberg and West (2008), Rugman
et al. (2009), Sanders (2007), Shamsuddoha et al. (2009), Shang and Marlow (2005),
Shore (2001), Soltani et al. (2011), Song and Panayides (2008), Song and Chatterjee
(2010), Soosay et al. (2008), Sousa et al. (2005), Spencer et al. (1996), Srikantha Dath
et al. (2010), Sriparavastu and Gupta (1997), Stank et al. (2005), Steinle and Schiele
(2008), Stewart (1995), Stock et al. (2000), Tan et al. (2006), Tan (2001, 2002),
Tavasszy et al. (2003), Thatte et al. (2008), Thomas and Barton (2007), Thun
(2010), Trkman and McCormack (2009), Tsai et al. (2009), Tsai and Lin (2009),
Tyan et al. (2003), Van Hoek (2001), Vereecke and Muylle (2006), Verma and
Tiwari (2009), Vidal and Goetschalckx (1997, 2001), Wagner and Bode (2008),
Wang et al. (2010), Whitten et al. (2012), Wu (2008a, b), Xu and Nozick (2009),
Yeniyurt (2003), Yeniyurt et al. (2005), Yoon and Sil (2004), Youngdahl and
Loomba (2000), Yusuf et al. (2007), Zailani et al. (2008), Zeng and Rossetti (2003),
and Zhou and Benton (2007)
Outcome Supply chain competitiveness and Agus and Hajinoor (2012), Andersen and Skjoett-Larsen (2009), Bassett and 18 (9%)
supply chain performance Gardner (2010), Bhatnagar and Sohal (2005), Chen et al. (2010), Dowlatshahi
(financial/operational performance) (2011), Gavirneni (2006), Mefford (2006), Modarress et al. (2000), Morash and
Lynch (2002), Pazirandeh (2011), Rao and Young (1994), Rouse and Putterill
(2003), Schoenherr (2010), Sheu (2008), Yigitbasioglu (2010), You et al. (2009),
and Zailani et al. (2009)
Comprehensive Mixed content Foroughi et al. (2004), Fynes et al. (2004), Jao-Hong (2011), Kumar et al. (2010), 11 (5%)
Madsen (2009), Matopoulos et al. (2007), Min and Guo (2004), Pontrandolfo et al.
(2002), Stratton and Warburton (2006), Tse and Tan (2011), and Tyan et al. (2003)
Total 211
(100%)
non-global supply chain studies is subjective, this study provides a robust insight into Analysis of
the dynamic evolution of global supply chain research since 1991. We also notice that global supply
non-global supply chain studies peaked in 2008 and have declined gradually since then.
However, it appears that interest in global supply chain studies continue to rise.
chain research
Another interesting finding from Table AI is that the period 2005-2009 has the highest
number (91 articles) of supply chain research published.
Second, having considered the importance of methodology, this study distinguishes 1443
articles that make conceptual contributions from those that make empirical
contributions. Similar to previous literature review studies in the field (e.g. Malhotra
and Grover, 1998; Burgess et al., 2006), we discover that empirical or survey-based
studies dominated supply chain research. A large portion of these empirical studies
examined supply chain practices. To some degree, this prevailing trend reflects not
only the relatively strong desire to uncover operational-level supply chain practices but
also the state of knowledge in the area, which has been characterized as being relatively
exploratory. In addition, the dominant research methods in supply chain research are
case-based and empirical modeling analyses that highlight the challenges of managing
global supply chains. The lack of theoretical contribution in the area, especially at the
strategic level, echoes a need to stimulate more supply chain strategy studies that are
useful for practitioners operating in a global environment. It is the strategy that guides
implementation of practices.
Third, there exists a large gap between theory building and theory verification studies.
The ratio of theory verification studies (51 percent) far exceeds the theory building
research (21 percent). Empirical supply chain research is growing rapidly, especially
during the period from 2005 to 2009. Theory verification research is the most popular
among supply chain researchers although theory building inquiry is also on the rise;
percent wise the rise is slow and gradual. Wallenbergburg and Weber (2005) show that
despite the tremendous progress in supply chain research, studies on theory building and
methodology still lacks focus. They argue that theory building would advance, as
evidenced in marketing research, through a rigorous empirical research approach.
However, a discipline can only mature if there is a balance between theory building and
theory verification studies because new theories should be generated and existing
theories must be verified (Soni and Kodali, 2011). Since supply chain research is a growing
discipline, there is insufficient evidence in the literature that highlights the importance of
theory building in SCM. Nevertheless, at some stage in the lifecycle of a discipline, the
ratio of theory verification studies should mark the maturity of that discipline.
Fourth, there are many theories in supply chain research that can help to develop
appropriate theoretical references to explain SCM based on total cost analysis, network
theory, and resource-based view, among others. Our analysis in Table V shows that a
wide range of theories has been applied in supply chain research over the last two
decades. However, it should be noted that each theory was applied in the context of the
individual study. We also conclude that most supply chain studies are anecdotal and do
not use any theoretical framework. In studies where theories were used, contingency,
resource-based view, and transaction cost are the common theoretical frameworks.
Fifth, Table V summarizes the industry sectors examined in the literature.
Consistent with observations in prior SCM literature reviews (e.g. Croom et al., 2000;
Burgess et al., 2006), this study reveals that most global supply chain research focusses
on a single industry instead of comparing supply chains across different industries.
Table VI shows that non-global supply chain research has focussed primarily on
consumer-oriented industries (such as food, drink, and textiles) and producer-oriented
BIJ sectors (automotive, machinery manufacturing, basic manufacturing, electrical and
22,7 electronic parts, computer equipment, and chemicals). The evidence suggests that the
orientation toward sectors where final consumers are key stakeholders is shared to a
considerable extent by global supply chain research. Specifically, 59 percent of the
literature focusses on consumer-oriented sectors including the food and commodity
sectors, whereas only 12 percent of the articles focus on producer-oriented sectors.
1444 The remaining 29 percent of the articles address a combination of the two sectors.
Sixth, empirical SCM research is mostly done in developed regions of North America
and Europe while only 4 percent of the research is conducted in developing countries.
However, as China and India are outsourcing hubs for global supply chains of apparel,
automobile, and electronic consumer goods, there is a pressing need to examine and
develop appropriate global supply chain models for these countries. Balan et al. (2006)
argue that a major reason for the lack of supply chain research in developing countries
is the lack of SCM knowledge among practitioners in the region. However, this
proposition is circumstantial and has not been scientifically proven. Finally, the
distribution of articles by content in Table VI shows that context, strategy, practices,
and outcome-related issues have attracted considerable attention among researchers,
resulting in significant contributions to global supply chain arrangements.
In this paper, we review the global supply chain literature using dimensions related to
emerging issues in supply chain globalization. We conclude that while the research
community has tackled some key global supply chain issues, few studies have addressed
global supply chain strategies and outcomes. Thus, we propose that global supply chain
research should address multiple supply chain design issues by extending models to
include strategies and outcomes.
5.1 Global supply chains as a competitive tool

Supply chains focus on all the value-adding activities to acquire raw materials and
subassemblies, to transform raw materials into finished goods, and then to transport
the finished goods to end users. SCM looks at every step, from raw materials
acquisition to distributing finished goods to end users, and includes disposing of the
packaging and recycling. The ultimate goal of SCM is to deliver maximum value to the
end user with the least possible total cost. Kotler et al. (2003) define value as the ratio of
what the customer gets to what he gives. Very similarly, Porter (1985) defines value as
the amount a buyer is willing to pay for what a firm provides him, and suggests the
supply chain is a guide for a firm to examine all the activities that it performs.
In analyzing the sources of competitive advantage, it is necessary to analyze how these
activities interact with different functional areas within a firm, and how they interact
with the processes of supply chain members. An effective global supply chain requires
that the processes of supply chain members are integrated across national borders to
remove non-value-adding activities. In addition, demand and members of the supply
chain to reduce the bullwhip effect must share forecast information. Wal-Mart, Toyota,
and Dell are good examples of how well-implemented global supply chains can be
used as an imitable strategic tool to gain competitive advantage in the marketplace
(Hult and Ketchen, 2006).
Since a firm’s activities are linked within the firm and to the activities of its suppliers
and customers, it is important for managers to understand that SCM contributes
strategically to a firm’s performance. Indeed, Porter (1985) states that value can be
created through linkages of a firm’s supply chain with the supply chains of external
organizations to drive down cost and improve performance.
Gereffi and Korzeniewicz (1994) develop a global supply chain model to tie the Analysis of
concept of a value-added chain directly to an organization. Their work not only stresses global supply
the need to integrate across firm boundaries, but also the growing role of global supply
chain buyers. Increasingly, many studies realize that global supply chains are aimed at
chain research
waste reduction and value creation, through cross-boundaries integration (Lee, 2000).
Creating value for customers is difficult if the focal firm and its supply chain members
fail to integrate. Usually, the best value supply chains are the most likely to prosper 1445
within today’s competitive global market.
6. Conclusion and limitations

Our research methodology has some limitations. Although our findings are based on
data that were collected from academic journals, we have excluded practitioner
publications. Next, although 211 articles were examined in this study, our sample is by
no means exhaustive and exclusive. However, we believe that this study is
comprehensive and we have reviewed all the major supply chain articles. The third
limitation is that we have used a 12-year time frame from 1991 to 2012. We believe that
very few supply chain articles were published prior to 1991. A fourth limitation is that
we have used the term “supply chain” to search the databases. It is likely that some
relevant articles have used a different term to describe the same phenomenon.
This study presents a review of global and non-global supply chain articles based
on Malhotra and Grover’s (1998) classification scheme. Our review shows that global
supply chains area relatively “immature” research topic that is gaining interest from
practitioners and academics. From a methodological point, the literature mostly
consists of empirical and descriptive studies with few exploratory articles. Since global
supply chains are still a relatively new phenomenon, we expect to see more research in
this area. In particular, as recommended by Atkinson (2004), Giunipero and Eltantawy
(2004), Tang (2006), and Wilson (2007), the use of technology, such as RFID and ERP, is
becoming an important facet of global supply chains. More research should be
conducted to learn how technology could be used to expedite transactions in global
supply chains. In addition, as risk can initiate from any stage in a supply chain, it is
imperative to include collaborative risk management in a firm’s global supply chain.
Future research should then be expanded to explore how collaborative risk
management can be integrated in a global supply chain. Another important aspect
relates to the various strategies that could be adopted to create a robust global supply
chain. In this respect, different industry sectors may require different global strategies
and different global practices. Global supply chain research that attempts to compare
strategies and practices throughout the chain is still limited, and, hence, more effort
should be directed accordingly.
References
Acar, Y., Kadipasaoglu, S. and Schipperijn, P. (2010), “A decision support framework for global
supply chain modelling: an assessment of the impact of demand, supply and lead-time
uncertainties on performance”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 48 No. 11,
pp. 3245-3268.
Agus, A. and Hajinoor, M.S. (2012), “Lean production supply chain management as driver
towards enhancing product quality and business performance: case study of
manufacturing companies in Malaysia”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 92-121.
BIJ Ahn, H.S., Jung, H.D., Ahn, B.H. and Rhee, S.K. (1999), “Supply chain competitiveness and
capabilities of constituent firms: an exploratory study of the Korean home appliance
22,7 industry”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 242-253.
Andersen, M. and Skjoett-Larsen, T. (2009), “Corporate social responsibility in global supply
chains”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 75-86.
Arnold, V., Benford, T., Hampton, C. and Sutton, S.G. (2010), “Competing pressures of risk and
1446 absorptive capacity potential on commitment and information sharing in global supply
chains”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 134-152.
Arntzen, B.C., Brown, G.G., Harrison, T.P. and Trafton, L.L. (1995), “Global supply chain
management at digital equipment corporation”, Interfaces, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 69-93.
Asree, S. (2010), “Challenges in the global supply chain: exploitation versus exploration strategy”,
unpublished PhD thesis, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH.
Atkinson, W. (2004), “Tagged: the risks and rewards of RFID technology”, Risk Management,
Vol. 51 No. 7, pp. 12-19.
Auld, G. (2010), “Assessing certification as governance: effects and broader consequences for
coffee”, The Journal of Environment & Development, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 215-241.
Babbar, S., Addae, H., Gosen, J. and Prasad, S. (2008), “Organizational factors affecting supply
chains in developing countries”, International Journal of Commerce and Management,
Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 234-251.
Balan, S., Vrat, P. and Kumar, P. (2006), “Assessing the challenges and opportunities of
global supply chain management”, International Journal of Value Chain Management,
Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 105-116.
Barratt, M. (2004), “Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 30-42.
Barry, J. (2004), “Supply chain risk in an uncertain global supply chain environment”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 9,
pp. 695-697.
Bartlett, P.A., Julien, D.M. and Baines, T.S. (2007), “Improving supply chain performance through
improved visibility”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 294-313.
Basnet, C., Corner, J., Wisner, J. and Tan, K.C. (2003), “Benchmarking supply chain management
practice in New Zealand”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 57-64.
Bassett, M. and Gardner, L. (2010), “Optimizing the design of global supply chains at Dow
AgroSciences”, Computers & Chemical Engineering, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 254-265.
Bayo-Moriones, A., Bello-Pintado, A. and Merino-Díaz-de-Cerio, J. (2011), “Quality assurance
practices in the global supply chain: the effect of supplier localization”, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 255-268.
Beresford, A., Pettit, S. and Whittaker, W. (2005), “Improving supply chain performance through
quality management in a global distribution environment”, International Journal of
Services and Operations Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 75-89.
Bernard, K.N. (1996), “Just-in-time as a competitive weapon: the significance of functional
integration”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 581-597.
Bernardes, E.S. and Hanna, M.D. (2009), “A theoretical review of flexibility, agility and
responsiveness in the operations management literature: toward a conceptual definition of
customer responsiveness”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 30-53.
Bhatnagar, R. and Sohal, A.S. (2005), “Supply chain competitiveness: measuring the impact of Analysis of
location factors, uncertainty and manufacturing practices”, Technovation, Vol. 25 No. 5,
pp. 443-456.
global supply
Bhatnagar, R. and Teo, C.C. (2009), “Role of logistics in enhancing competitive advantage: a value
chain research
chain framework for global supply chains”, International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 202-226.
Bhatnagar, R. and Viswanathan, S. (2000), “Re-engineering global supply chains: alliances 1447
between manufacturing firms and global logistics services providers”, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 13-34.
Bhattacharyya, K., Datta, P. and Offodile, O.F. (2010), “The contribution of third-party indices in
assessing global operational risks”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 46 No. 4,
pp. 25-43.
Biehl, M. (2007), “Success factors for implementing global information systems”, Communications
of the ACM, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 52-58.
Burgess, K., Singh, P.J. and Koroglu, R. (2006), “Supply chain management: a structured literature
review and implications for future research”, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 703-729.
Cagliano, R., Caniato, F., Golini, R., Kalchschmidt, M. and Spina, G. (2008), “Supply chain
configurations in a global environment: a longitudinal perspective”, Operations
Management Research, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 86-94.
Cao, L., Luo, D., Xiao, Y. and Zheng, Z. (2008), “Agent collaboration for multiple trading strategy
integration”, Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 361-370.
Cao, M., Vonderembse, M.A., Zhang, Q. and Ragu-Nathan, T. (2010), “Supply chain collaboration:
conceptualisation and instrument development”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 48 No. 22, pp. 6613-6635.
Cassivi, L., Hadaya, P., Lefebvre, E. and Lefebvre, L.A. (2008), “The role of collaboration on
process, relational, and product innovations in a supply chain”, International Journal of
e-Collaboration (IJeC), Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 11-32.
Chan, F.T.S. and Qi, H.J. (2003), “An innovative performance measurement method for supply
chain management”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 8 No. 3,
pp. 209-223.
Chen, H., Lin, C.W.R. and Yih, Y. (2007), “Production-distribution network design of a global
supply chain alliance from the key player’s perspective”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 245-265.
Chen, M.C., Yeh, C.T. and Chen, K.Y. (2010), “Development of collaborative transportation
management framework with web services for TFT-LCD supply chains”, International
Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Christopher, M., Peck, H. and Towill, D. (2006), “A taxonomy for selecting global supply chain
strategies”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 277-287.
Christopher, M., Mena, C., Khan, O. and Yurt, O. (2011), “Approaches to managing global
sourcing risk”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 1-28.
Chu, W.H.J. and Lee, C.C. (2006), “Strategic information sharing in a supply chain”, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 174 No. 3, pp. 1567-1579.
Cirtita, H. and Glaser-Segura, D.A. (2012), “Measuring downstream supply chain performance”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 299-314.
Closs, D.J. and Mollenkopf, D.A. (2004), “A global supply chain framework”, Industrial Marketing
BIJ Closs, D.J. and Xu, K. (2000), “Logistics information technology practice in manufacturing and
merchandising firms – an international benchmarking study versus world class logistics
22,7 firms”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 30
No. 10, pp. 869-886.
Cohen, M.A. and Mallik, S. (1997), “Global supply chains: research and applications”, Production
and Operations Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 193-210.
1448 Corsten, D. and Felde, J. (2005), “Exploring the performance effects of key-supplier collaboration:
an empirical investigation into Swiss buyer-supplier relationships”, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 445-461.
Croom, S., Romano, P. and Giannakis, M. (2000), “Supply chain management: an analytical
framework for critical literature review”, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Cruz, J.M., Nagurney, A. and Wakolbinger, T. (2006), “Financial engineering of the integration of
global supply chain networks and social networks with risk management”, Naval Research
Logistics (NRL), Vol. 53 No. 7, pp. 674-696.
Danese, P., Romano, P. and Bortolotti, T. (2012), “JIT-production, JIT-supply and performance:
investigating the moderating effects”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 112
No. 3, pp. 441-465.
Davis, T. (1993), “Effective supply chain management”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 34 No. 4,
pp. 35-46.
Day, G. (1994), “The capabilities of market-driven organizations”, The Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 37-52.
De Vries, G., Bertrand, J.W.M. and Vissers, J.M.H. (1999), “Design requirements for health care
production control systems”, Production planning & control, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 559-569.
Demirbag, M., Tatoglu, E., Tekinkus, M. and Zaim, S. (2006), “An analysis of the relationship
between TQM implementation and organizational performance: evidence from Turkish
SMEs”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 829-847.
Dornier, P.P., Ernst, R., Fender, M. and Kouvelis, P. (1998), Global Operations and Logistics: Text
and Cases, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
Dowlatshahi, S. (2011), “An empirical study of the ISO 9000 certification in global supply chain of
maquiladoras”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 215-234.
Dreyer, H.C., Alfnes, E., Strandhagen, O. and Thomassen, M.K. (2009), “Global supply chain
control: a conceptual framework for the global control centre”, Production Planning &
Control: The Management of Operations, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 147-157.
Easton, G.S. and Jarrell, S.L. (1998), “The effects of total quality management on corporate
performance: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Business, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 253-307.
Ellinger, A.E. (2000), “Improving marketing/logistics cross-functional collaboration in the supply
chain”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 85-96.
Elmuti, D., Minnis, W. and Abebe, M. (2008), “Longitudinal assessment of an integrated industrial
supply chain”, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 151-166.
Biles, J.J., Brehm, K., Enrico, A., Kiendl, C., Morgan, E., Teachout, A. and Vasquez, K. (2007),
“Globalization of food retailing and transformation of supply networks: consequences for
small-scale agricultural producers in southeastern Mexico”, Journal of Latin American
Geography, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 55-75.
Enyinda, C.I. and Gebremikael, F. (2010), “Multi-attribute global supply chain outsourcing risk
management: a sensitivity analysis approach”, International Journal of Business and
Economics Perspectives, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 16-35.
Fawcett, S. and Scully, J. (1995), “A contingency perspective of just-in-time purchasing: Analysis of
globalization, implementation, and performance”, International Journal of Production
global supply
Fawcett, S.B., Schultz, J.A., Francisco, V.T., Berkowitz, B., Wolff, T., Rabinowitz, P.W. and
chain research
Oliverius, R.O. (2008), “Using internet technology for capacity development in communities:
the case of the community tool box”, in Rothman, J., Erlich, J. and Tropman, J. (Eds), Strategies
of Community Intervention, Eddie Browers Publishing, Peosta, IA, pp. 263-281. 1449
Fawcett, S.E., Vellenga, D.B. and Truitt, L.J. (1995), “An evaluation of logistics and transportation
professional organizations, programs, and publications”, Journal of Business Logistics,
Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 299-314.
Fawcett, S.E., Osterhaus, P., Magnan, G.M., Brau, J.C. and McCarter, M.W. (2007), “Information
sharing and supply chain performance: the role of connectivity and willingness”, Supply

Ferguson, W. (1983), “An evaluation of journals that publish business logistics articles”,
Transportation Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 69-72.
Finch, P. (2004), “The supply chain risk management”, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 183-196.
Flint, D.J. (2004), “Strategic marketing in global supply chains: four challenges”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 45-50.
Flynn, B.B., Sakakibara, S., Schroeder, R.G., Bates, K.A. and Flynn, E.J. (1990), “Empirical research
methods in operations management”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 250-284.
Forker, L.B., Mendez, D. and Hershauer, J.C. (1997), “Total quality management in the supply
chain: what is its impact on performance?”, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1681-1702.
Foroughi, A., Kocakulah, M.C. and Perkins, W.C. (2004), “Performance metrics: key to success in
global supply chain management”, Journal of Transnational Management Development,
Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 35-45.
Foster, S.T. Jr, Wallin, C. and Ogden, J. (2011), “Towards a better understanding of supply chain
quality management practices”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 8,
pp. 2285-2300.
Frankel, R., Naslund, D. and Bolumole, Y. (2005), “The ‘white space’of logistics research: a look at
the role of methods usage”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 185-208.
Frohlich, M.T. and Westbrook, R. (2001), “Arcs of integration: an international study of supply
chain strategies”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 185-200.
Fullerton, R.R. and McWatters, C.S. (2001), “The production performance benefits from JIT
implementation”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 81-96.
Fynes, B., de Búrca, S. and Marshall, D. (2004), “Environmental uncertainty, supply chain
relationship quality and performance”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,
Vol. 10 Nos 4-5, pp. 179-190.
Gavirneni, S. (2006), “Price fluctuations, information sharing, and supply chain performance”,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 174 No. 3, pp. 1651-1663.
Gereffi, G. (1999), “International trade and industrial up-grading in the apparel commodity in
chain”, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 37-70.
Gereffi, G. and Korzeniewicz, M. (Eds) (1994), Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism,
Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J. and Sturgeon, T. (2005), “The governance of global value chains”,
Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 78-104.
BIJ Germain, R., Claycomb, C. and Dröge, C. (2008), “Supply chain variability, organizational
structure, and performance: the moderating effect of demand unpredictability”, Journal of
22,7 Operations Management, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 557-570.
Ghemawat, P. and Hout, T. (2008), “Tomorrow’s global giants: not the usual suspects”, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 11, pp. 80-88.
Ginsberg, A. and Venkatraman, N. (1985), “Contingency perspectives of organizational strategy:
1450 a critical review of the empirical research”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 421-434.
Giunipero, L.C. and Eltantawy, R.A. (2004), “Securing the upstream supply chain: a risk
management approach”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Grant, R. (1996b), “Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational
capability as knowledge integration”, Organization science, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 375-387.

Green, K.W. and Inman, R. (2005), “Using a just-in-time selling strategy to strengthen supply
chain linkages”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 43 No. 16, pp. 3437-3453.
Grover, S., Agrawal, V. and Khan, I. (2004), “A digraph approach to TQM evaluation of an
industry”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42 No. 19, pp. 4031-4053.
Gunasekaran, A. and Irani, Z. (2010), “Modelling and analysis of outsourcing decisions in global
supply chains”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 301-304.
Gunasekaran, A. and Lyu, J. (1997), “Implementation of just-in-time in a small company: a case
study”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 406-412.
Gunasekaran, A., Lai, K. and Edwin Cheng, T.C. (2008), “Responsive supply chain: a competitive
strategy in a networked economy”, Omega, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 549-564.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E. (2001), “Performance measures and metrics in a supply
chain environment”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21
Nos 1-2, pp. 71-87.
Hackman, J.R. and Wageman, R. (1995), “Total quality management: empirical, conceptual, and
practical issues”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 309-342.
Hafeez, K., Zhang, Y.B. and Malak, N. (2002), “Determining key capabilities of a firm using
analytic hierarchy process”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 76 No. 1,
pp. 39-51.
Hale, K. (2003), “The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on
firm performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 405-435.
Halldorsson, A., Kotzab, H., Mikkola, J.H. and Skjøtt-Larsen, T. (2007), “Complementary theories
to supply chain management”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 284-296.
Hameri, A.P. and Hintsa, J. (2009), “Assessing the drivers of change for cross-border supply
chains”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 39
No. 9, pp. 741-761.
Hart, C. (1998), Doing a Literature Review, Sage Publications, London.
Harvey, M.G. and Richey, R.G. (2001), “Global supply chain management: the selection of globally
competent managers”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 105-128.
Hertz, S. and Alfredsson, M. (2003), “Strategic development of third party logistics providers”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 139-149.
Hesse, M. and Rodrigue, J.P. (2004), “The transport geography of logistics and freight
distribution”, Journal of transport geography, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 171-184.
Hoegl, M. and Wagner, S.M. (2005), “Buyer-supplier collaboration in product development Analysis of
projects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 530-548.
global supply
Hong, P., Noh, J. and Hwang, W. (2006), “Global supply chain strategy: a Chinese market chain research
perspective”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 320-333.
Horvath, L. (2001), “Collaboration: the key to value creation in supply chain management”, Supply
Hsieh, L.F. and Chen, S.K. (2007), “A study of cross-functional collaboration in new product 1451
development: a social capital perspective”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality
Huang, S.H. and Keskar, H. (2007), “Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier
selection”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 105 No. 2, pp. 510-523.
Hult, G.T.M. and Ketchen, D.J. (2006), “Knowledge as a strategic resource in supply chains”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 458-475.

Hung, S.J. (2011), “An integrated system of activity-based quality optimisation and economic
incentive schemes for a global supply chain”, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 49 No. 24, pp. 7337-7359.
Ismail, S. (2007), “Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through
the lens of organizational theories: an empirical study”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 83-109.
Janhonen, H. (2008), “Planning of global sourcing from total acquisition cost perspective”,
International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 95-114.
Jao-Hong, C. (2011), “Inter-organizational relationships and information sharing in supply
chains”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 374-384.
Jiang, B., Baker, R.C. and Frazier, G.V. (2009), “An analysis of job dissatisfaction and turnover to
reduce global supply chain risk: evidence from China”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 169-184.
Kakuro, A. (2004), “Development of ‘Science TQM’, a new principle of quality management:
effectiveness of strategic stratiﬁed task team at Toyota”, International Journal of
Kale, S.U. (2007), “Global competitiveness: role of supply chain management”, paper presented at
the Conference on Global Competition & Competitiveness of Indian Corporate.
Kaleka, A. (2002), “Resources and capabilities driving competitive advantage in export markets:
guidelines for industrial exporters”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 31 No. 3,
pp. 273-283.
Kaplan, R.S. and David, P. (1992), “The balanced scorecard – measures that drive performance”,
Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp. 71-79.
Kaplinsky, R. and Readman, J. (2005), Globalisation and Upgrading: What can (and Cannot) be
Learnt from International Trade Statistics in the Wood Furniture Sector? Industrial and
Corporate Change, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 679-703.
Kim, D. and Lee, R.P. (2010), “Systems collaboration and strategic collaboration: their impacts on
supply chain responsiveness and market performance”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 41 No. 4,
pp. 955-981.
Kim, D., Cavusgil, S.T. and Calantone, R.J. (2006), “Information system innovations and supply
chain management: channel relationships and firm performance”, Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 40-54.
Klassen, R.D. and Whybark, D.C. (1994), “Barriers to the management of international
operations”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 385-396.
BIJ Kotler, P. (2003), Marketing Management, 11th ed., Prentice-Hall/Pearson Education, Englewood
Cliff, NJ.
22,7
Kuei, C., Madu, C.N. and Lin, C. (2011), “Developing global supply chain quality management
systems”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 15, pp. 4457-4481.
Kuei, C.H., Madu, C. and Lin, C. (2008), “Implementing supply chain quality management”, Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 19 No. 11, pp. 1127-1141.
1452 Kuei, C.H., Madu, C.N. and Lin, C. (2001), “The relationship between supply chain quality
management practices and organizational performance”, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 18 No. 8, pp. 864-872.
Kumar, N., Andersson, D. and Rehme, J. (2010), “Logistics of low cost country sourcing”,
International Journal of Logistics, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 143-160.
Kumar, P., Shankar, R. and Yadav, S.S. (2008), “Flexibility in global supply chain: modeling the
enablers”, Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 277-297.

Lai, K., Ngai, E. and Cheng, T. (2002), “Measures for evaluating supply chain performance in
transport logistics”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review,
Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 439-456.
Lee, C. and Wilhelm, W. (2010), “On integrating theories of international economics in the
strategic planning of global supply chains and facility location”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 124 No. 1, pp. 225-240.
Lee, H.L. (2000), “Creating value through supply chain integration”, Supply Chain Management
Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 30-36.
Lee, H.L. and Billington, C. (1995), “The evolution of supply-chain-management models and
practice at hewlett-packard”, Interfaces, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 42-63.
Levy, D.L. (1995), “International sourcing and supply chain stability”, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 343-360.
Li, J.W. (2011), “Comparing Kanban with CONWIP in a make-to-order environment supported by
JIT practices”, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 72-88.
Li, P.C. and Lin, B.W. (2006a), “Building global logistics competence with Chinese OEM
suppliers”, Technology in Society, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 333-348.
Li, S. and Lin, B. (2006b), “Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain
management”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1641-1656.
Li, T. and Cavusgil, S.T. (1995), “A classification and assessment of research streams in
international marketing”, International Business Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 251-277.
Liargovas, P.G. and Skandalis, K.S. (2008b), “Motivations and barriers of export performance: Greek
exports to the Balkans”, Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 377-392.
Lockamy, A. and James, F. (1991), “Using VAT analysis for determining the priority and location
of JIT manufacturing techniques”, The International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 1661-1672.
Lummus, R.R., Vokurka, R.J. and Krumwiede, D. (2008), “Supply chain integration and
organizational success SAM”, Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 56-64.
Luo, W., Van Hoek, R.I. and Roos, H.H. (2001), “Cross-cultural logistics research: a literature
review and propositions”, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications,
Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 57-78.
MacCarthy, B.L. and Atthirawong, W. (2003), “Factors affecting location decisions in
international operations – a Delphi study”, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 794-818.
Madsen, K.E. (2009), “Collaboration strategies for distributed teams a case study of CAD systems Analysis of
integration”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 39
No. 3, pp. 222-226.
global supply
Maghsoudi, A. and Zailani, S. (2012), “Humanitarian supply chain management: review of
chain research
literature and insights”, paper presented at Annual Nordic Logistics Research Network
Conference, Naantali.
Malhotra, M.K. and Grover, V. (1998), “An assessment of survey research in POM: from 1453
constructs to theory”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 407-425.
Manuj, I. and Mentzer, J.T. (2008a), “Global supply chain risk management”, Journal of Business
Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 133-155.
Manuj, I. and Mentzer, J.T. (2008b), “Global supply chain risk management strategies”, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 192-223.
Marasco, A. (2008), “Third-party logistics: a literature review”, International Journal of

March, J.G. (1991), “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning”, Organization
science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 71-87.
Matopoulos, A., Vlachopoulou, M., Manthou, V. and Manos, B. (2007), “A conceptual framework
for supply chain collaboration: empirical evidence from the agri-food industry”, Supply
Mazany, P. (1995), “A case study: lessons from the progressive implementation of just-in-time in a
small knitwear manufacturer”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Mefford, R.N. (2006), “Applying information technology in global supply chains: cultural and
ethical challenges”, International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 170-188.
Mehra, S. and Inman, R.A. (1992), “Determining the critical elements of just-in-time
implementation”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 160-174.
Meixell, M.J. and Gargeya, V.B. (2005), “Global supply chain design: a literature review and
critique”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 41
No. 6, pp. 531-550.
Melén, S. and Nordman, E.R. (2009), “The internationalisation modes of born globals:
a longitudinal study”, European Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 243-254.
Mentzer, J.T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Min, S., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D. and Zacharia, Z.G. (2001),
“Defining supply chain management”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 1-26.
Min, H. and Guo, Z. (2004), “The location of hub-seaports in the global supply chain network
using a cooperative competition strategy”, International Journal of Integrated Supply
Min, S., Roath, A.S., Daugherty, P.J., Genchev, S.E., Chen, H., Arndt, A.D. and Glenn, R. (2005),
“Supply chain collaboration: what’s happening?”, International Journal of Logistics
Moberg, C.R., Cutler, B.D., Gross, A. and Speh, T.W. (2002), “Identifying antecedents of
information exchange within supply chains”, International Journal of Physical Distribution
& Logistics Management, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 755-770.
Modarress, B., Ansari, A. and Willis, G. (2000), “Controlled production planning for just-in-time
short-run suppliers”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 1163-1182.
Mollenkopf, D., Stolze, H., Tate, W.L. and Ueltschy, M. (2010), “Green, lean, and global supply chains”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 40 Nos 1-2,
pp. 14-41.
BIJ Morash, E.A. and Lynch, D.F. (2002), “Public policy and global supply chain capabilities and
performance: a resource-based view”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1,
22,7 pp. 25-51.
Morgan, N.A., Kaleka, A. and Katsikeas, C.S. (2004), “Antecedents of export venture performance: a
theoretical model and empirical assessment”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 90-108.
Motwani, J., Larson, L. and Ahuja, S. (1998), “Managing a global supply chain partnership”,
1454 Logistics Information Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 349-354.
Motwani, J., Madan, M. and Gunasekaran, A. (2000), “Information technology in managing global
supply chains”, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 320-327.
Muller, E.J. (1993), “Key links in supply chain”, Distribution, Vol. 92 No. 10, pp. 52-56.
Nahm, A.Y., Vonderembse, M.A., Subba Rao, S. and Ragu-Nathan, T. (2006), “Time-based
manufacturing improves business performance-results from a survey”, International
Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 101 No. 2, pp. 213-229.

Narasimhan, R. and Mahapatra, S. (2004), “Decision models in global supply chain management”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 21-27.
Narasimhan, R., Kim, S.W. and Tan, K.C. (2008), “An empirical investigation of supply chain
strategy typologies and relationships to performance”, International Journal of Production
Neely, A., Gregory, M. and Platts, K. (1995), “Performance measurement system design:
a literature review and research agenda”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Olorunniwo, F.O. and Li, X. (2010), “Information sharing and collaboration practices in
reverse logistics”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 6,
pp. 454-462.
Olsen, R.F. and Ellram, L.M. (1997), “A portfolio approach to supplier relationships”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 101-113.
Pandey, V., Garg, S. and Shankar, R. (2010), “Impact of information sharing on competitive
strength of Indian manufacturing enterprises: an empirical study”, Business Process
Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 226-243.
Park, H.Y., Reddy, C.S., Geon-Cheol, S. and Eckerle, C. (1996), “Impact of the supplier certification
program in US firms”, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 2
Nos 2-3, pp. 107-118.
Pazirandeh, A. (2011), “Sourcing in global health supply chains for developing countries:
literature review and a decision making framework”, International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 364-384.
Pontrandolfo, P., Gosavi, A., Okogbaa, O.G. and Das, T.K. (2002), “Global supply chain
management: a reinforcement learning approach”, International Journal of Production
Porter, M.E. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance,
The Free Press, New York.
Powell, T.C. (1995), “Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical
study”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 15-37.
Prasad, S. and Babbar, S. (2000), “International operations management research”, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 209-247.
Prasad, S. and Sounderpandian, J. (2003), “Factors influencing global supply chain efficiency:
implications for information systems”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 241-250.
Premus, R. and Sanders, N.R. (2008), “Information sharing in global supply chain alliances”, Analysis of
Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 174-192.
global supply
Rabinovich, E., Windle, R., Dresner, M. and Corsi, T. (1999), “Outsourcing of integrated logistics chain research
functions: an examination of industry practices”, International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 353-374.
Rao, K. and Young, R.R. (1994), “Global supply chains: factors influencing outsourcing of logistics
functions”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 24 1455
No. 6, pp. 11-19.
Reyes, P., Raisinghani, M.S. and Singh, M. (2002), “Global supply chain management in the
telecommunications industry: the role of information technology in integration of supply
chain entities”, Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 48-67.
Ritchie, B. and Brindley, C. (2000), “Disintermediation, disintegration and risk in the SME global
supply chain”, Management Decision, Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 575-583.
Ritchie, B. and Brindley, C. (2002), “Reassessing the management of the global supply chain”,
Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 110-116.
Ritchie, B. and Brindley, C. (2007), “Supply chain risk management and performance: a guiding
framework for future development”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Rouse, P. and Putterill, M. (2003), “An integral framework for performance measurement”,
Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 8, pp. 791-805.
Rudberg, M. and West, B.M. (2008), “Global operations strategy: coordinating manufacturing
networks”, Omega, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 91-106.
Rugman, A.M., Li, J. and Oh, C.H. (2009), “Are supply chains global or regional?”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 26 Nos 4-5, pp. 384-395.
Ruiz-Torres, A. and Mahmoodi, F. (2008), “Outsourcing decision in manufacturing supply chains
considering production failure and operating costs”, International Journal of Integrated
Supply Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 141-158.
Sachan, A. and Datta, S. (2005), “Review of supply chain management and logistics
research”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 35
No. 9, pp. 664-704.
Sajadieh, M.S. (2009), “Global supply chain management”, in Farahani, R., Asgari, N. and
Davarzani, H. (Eds), Supply Chain and Logistics in National, International and
Governmental Environment: Concepts and Models, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 43-56.
Sanders, N.R. (2007), “An empirical study of the impact of e-business technologies on
organizational collaboration and performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25
No. 6, pp. 1332-1347.
Schoenherr, T. (2010), “Outsourcing decisions in global supply chains: an exploratory multi-
country survey”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 343-378.
Shamsuddoha, A., Ali, M.Y. and Ndubisi, N.O. (2009), “Impact of government export assistance
on internationalization of SMEs from developing nations”, Journal of Enterprise
Information Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 408-422.
Shang, K. and Marlow, P.B. (2005), “Logistics capability and performance in Taiwan’s major
manufacturing firms”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation
Review, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 217-234.
Sheu, J. (2008), “A hybrid neuro-fuzzy analytical approach to mode choice of global logistics
management”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 189 No. 3, pp. 971-986.
BIJ Shore, B. (2001), “Information sharing in global supply chain systems”, Journal of Global
Information Technology Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 27-50.
22,7
Sila, I. and Ebrahimpour, M. (2003), “Examination and comparison of the critical factors of total
quality management (TQM) across countries”, International Journal of Production
Simatupang, T.M. and Sridharan, R. (2005), “The collaboration index: a measure for supply
1456 chain collaboration”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Simatupang, T.M. and Sridharan, R. (2007), “The architecture of supply chain collaboration”,
International Journal of Value Chain Management, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 304-323.
Simatupang, T.M. and Sridharan, R. (2008), “Design for supply chain collaboration”, Business
Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 401-418.
Soltani, E., Azadegan, A., Liao, Y.Y. and Phillips, P. (2011), “Quality performance in a global
supply chain: finding out the weak link”, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 269-293.
Song, D.W. and Panayides, P. (2008), “Global supply chain and port/terminal: integration and
competitiveness”, Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 73-88.
Song, H. and Chatterjee, S.R. (2010), “Achieving global supply-chain competitiveness: evidence
from the Chinese auto component sectors”, Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 4 No. 2,
pp. 101-118.
Soni, G. and Kodali, R. (2011), “A critical analysis of supply chain management content in
empirical research”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 238-266.
Soosay, C.A., Hyland, P.W. and Ferrer, M. (2008), “Supply chain collaboration: capabilities for
continuous innovation”, International Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 160-169.
Sousa, R.T., Shah, N. and Papageorgiou, L.G. (2005), “Global supply chain network optimisation
for pharmaceuticals”, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 20, pp. 1189-1194.
Spencer, M., Daugherty, P. and Rogers, D. (1996), “Logistics support for JIT implementation”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 701-714.
Srikantha Dath, T.N., Rajendran, C. and Narashiman, K. (2010), “An empirical study on supply
chain management: the perspective of logistics service providers”, International Journal of
Logistics Systems and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Sriparavastu, L. and Gupta, T. (1997), “An empirical study of just-in-time and total quality
management principles implementation in manufacturing firms in the USA”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 17 No. 12, pp. 1215-1232.
Stank, T.P., Davis, B. and Fugate, B. (2005), “A strategic framework for supply chain oriented
logistics”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 27-45.
Steinle, C. and Schiele, H. (2008), “Limits to global sourcing? Strategic consequences of
dependency on international suppliers: cluster theory, resource-based view and case
studies”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 3-14.
Stewart, G. (1995), “Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply chain
excellence”, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 38-44.
Stock, G.N., Greis, N.P. and Kasarda, J.D. (2000), “Enterprise logistics and supply chain structure:
the role of fit”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 531-548.
Stratton, R. and Warburton, R.D.H. (2006), “Managing the trade-off implications of global
supply”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 103 No. 2, pp. 667-679.
Tan, E., Smith, G. and Saad, M. (2006), “Managing the global supply chain: a SME perspective”, Analysis of
Production planning & control, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 238-246.
global supply
Tan, K.C. (2001), “A framework of supply chain management literature”, European Journal of chain research
Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 39-48.
Tan, K.C. (2002), “Supply chain management: practices, concerns, and performance issues”,
Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 42-53.
Tang, C.S. (2006), “Perspectives in supply chain risk management”, International Journal of 1457
Tavasszy, L.A., Ruijgrok, C.J. and Thissen, M.J.M.P. (2003), “Emerging global logistics networks:
implications for transport systems and policies”, Growth and Change, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 456-472.
Thatte, A.A., Muhammed, S. and Agrawal, V. (2008), “Effect of information sharing and supplier
network responsiveness on time-to-market capability of a firm”, Review of Business

Thomas, A. and Barton, R. (2007), “Integrating local suppliers in a global supply network”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 490-512.
Thun, J.H. (2010), “Angles of integration: an empirical analysis of the alignment of internet based
information technology and global supply chain integration”, Journal of Supply Chain
Tracey, M., Lim, J. and Vonderembse, M. (2005), “The impact of supply-chain management
capabilities on business performance”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 179-191.
Trkman, P. and McCormack, K. (2009), “Supply chain risk in turbulent environments –
a conceptual model for managing supply chain network risk”, International Journal of
Tsai, M.T., Huang, Y.C. and Ma, R. (2009), “Antecedents and consequences of global
responsiveness: an empirical examination of MNCs in the global sourcing context”,
International Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 617-629.
Tsai, Y.L. and Lin, S.C.H. (2009), “Investigating global supply chain operations: an empirical
study of a Taiwanese company in Scotland”, paper presented at the International
Conference on Knowledge-Based Economy and Global Management, Tainan.
Tse, Y.K. and Tan, K.H. (2011), “Managing product quality risk in a multi-tier global supply
chain”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 139-158.
Tyan, J.C., Wang, F.K. and Du, T.C. (2003), “An evaluation of freight consolidation policies in
global third party logistics”, Omega, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 55-62.
UNIDO (2004), Inserting Local Industries Into Global Value Chains and Global Production
Networks: Opportunities and Challenges for Upgrading With a focus on Asia, United
Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna.
Vallet-Bellmunt, T., Martínez-Fernández, M.T. and Capó-Vicedo, J. (2011), “Supply chain
management: a multidisciplinary content analysis of vertical relations between companies,
1997-2006”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 40 No. 8, pp. 1347-1367.
Van Hoek, R.I. (2001), “The contribution of performance measurement to the expansion of third
party logistics alliances in the supply chain”, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 21 Nos 1-2, pp. 15-29.
Vanichchinchai, A. and Igel, B. (2011), “The impact of total quality management on supply chain
management and firm’s supply performance”, International Journal of Production
BIJ Vereecke, A. and Muylle, S. (2006), “Performance improvement through supply chain
collaboration in Europe”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
22,7 Vol. 26 No. 11, pp. 1176-1198.
Verma, A. and Tiwari, M. (2009), “Role of corporate memory in the global supply chain
environment”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 47 No. 19, pp. 5311-5342.
Vidal, C.J. and Goetschalckx, M. (1997), “Strategic production-distribution models: a critical
1458 review with emphasis on global supply chain models”, European Journal of Operational
Vidal, C.J. and Goetschalckx, M. (2001), “A global supply chain model with transfer pricing and
transportation cost allocation”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 129 No. 1,
pp. 134-158.
Vonderembse, M.A., Uppal, M., Huang, S.H. and Dismukes, J.P. (2006), “Designing supply chains:
towards theory development”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 100

No. 2, pp. 223-238.
Wagner, S.M. and Bode, C. (2008), “An empirical examination of supply chain performance along
several dimensions of risk”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 307-325.
Walker, H., Di Sisto, L. and McBain, D. (2008), “Drivers and barriers to environmental supply
chain management practices: lessons from the public and private sectors”, Journal of
Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 69-85.
Wallenbergburg, C.M. and Weber, J. (2005), “Structural equation modeling as a basis for theory
development within logistics & supply chain management”, in Kotzab, H., Seuring, S.,
Muller, M. and Reiner, G. (Eds), Research Methodologies in Supply Chain Management,
Physica-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 171-186.
Walters, P.G.P. (2008), “Adding value in global B2B supply chains: strategic directions and the
role of the internet as a driver of competitive advantage”, Industrial Marketing
Wang, W.Y.C., Chan, H.K. and Pauleen, D.J. (2010), “Aligning business process reengineering in
implementing global supply chain systems by the SCOR model”, International Journal of
Whitten, G.D., Green, K.W. Jr and Zelbst, P.J. (2012), “Triple-a supply chain performance”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 28-48.
Wood, D.F., Barone, A.P., Murphy, P.R. and Wardlow, D.L. (2002), International Logistics,
AMACOM/American Management Association, New York, NY.
Wu, W. (2008a), “Dimensions of social capital and firm competitiveness improvement: the mediating
role of information sharing”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 122-146.
Wu, Y. (2008b), “A mixed-integer programming model for global logistics transportation
problems”, International Journal of Systems Science, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 217-228.
Xu, N. and Nozick, L. (2009), “Modeling supplier selection and the use of option contracts for global
supply chain design”, Computers & Operations Research, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 2786-2800.
Yeniyurt, S. (2003), “A literature review and integrative performance measurement framework
for multinational companies”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 134-142.
Yeniyurt, S., Tamer Cavusgil, S. and Hult, G.T.M. (2005), “A global market advantage framework:
the role of global market knowledge competencies”, International Business Review, Vol. 14
No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Yigitbasioglu, O.M. (2010), “Information sharing with key suppliers: a transaction cost theory
perspective”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 40
No. 7, pp. 550-578.
Yoon, H.D. and Sil, S. (2004), “The logistical competitiveness of SMEs and global supply chain”, Analysis of
Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 53, pp. 163-171.
global supply
You, F., Wassick, J.M. and Grossmann, I.E. (2009), “Risk management for a global supply chain chain research
planning under uncertainty: models and algorithms”, AIChE Journal, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 931-946.
Youn, S., Yang, M.G., Hong, P. and Park, K. (2011), “Strategic supply chain partnership,
environmental supply chain management practices, and performance outcomes:
an empirical study of Korean firms”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 56, pp. 1-10. 1459
Youngdahl, W.E. and Loomba, A.P.S. (2000), “Service-driven global supply chains”, International
Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 329-347.
Yusuf, Y., Gunasekaran, A. and Dan, G. (2007), “Implementation of TQM in China and
organisation performance: an empirical investigation”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 18
No. 5, pp. 509-530.
Zailani, S., Ahmad, B.N. and Fernando, Y. (2009), “The influence of the dimensions of quality
information on buyer-supplier relationships in value chain management”, International
Journal of Value Chain Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 187-223.
Zailani, S., Premkumar, R. and Fernando, Y. (2008), “Factors influencing the effectiveness of
operation information sharing within supply chain channels in Malaysia”, Operations and
Supply Chain management: An International Journal, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 85-100.
Zeng, A.Z. and Rossetti, C. (2003), “Developing a framework for evaluating the logistics costs in
global sourcing processes: an implementation and insights”, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 33 No. 9, pp. 785-803.
Zhou, H. and Benton, W.C.J. (2007), “Supply chain practice and information sharing”, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 1348-1365.
Further reading
Gereffi, G. (1994), The Organization of Buyer-Driven Global Commodity Chains: How US Retailer
Shape Overseas Production Networks in Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism, Praeger
Publishers, Westport, CT.
Ju, T.L., Lin, B., Lin, C. and Kuo, H.J. (2006), “TQM critical factors and KM value chain activities”,
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 373-393.
Jüttner, U. (2005), “Supply chain risk management: understanding the business requirements
from a practitioner perspective”, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 16
No. 1, pp. 120-141.
Ketchen, D.J. (2007), “Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: the
case of best value supply chains”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 2,
pp. 573-580.
Paulraj, A., Lado, A.A. and Chen, I.J. (2008), “Inter-organizational communication as a relational
competency: antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer-supplier
relationships”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 45-64.
Shahin, A. (2011), “An Investigation on the influence of total quality management on financial
performance the case of boutan industrial corporation”, International Journal of Business
and Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 15, pp. 105-102.
Tu, Y. and Lu, M. (2009), “A conceptual framework for designing and building web-based
revenue-sharing collaboration systems (WRCS) in supply chain management”,
International Journal of Value Chain Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 4-19.
Wilson, M.C. (2007), “The impact of transportation disruptions on supply chain performance
review”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 43
No. 4, pp. 295-320.
BIJ Appendix
22,7
Pre- 2000- 2005- 2010-Feb
No Journals 2000 2004 2009 2012 Total
1 Administrative Science Quarterly 1 1

1460 2 Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies
and Applications 1 1
3 AIChE Journal 1 1
5 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1 1
6 Business Process Management Journal 2 2
7 Chinese Management Studies 1 1
8 Communications of the ACM 1 1
9 Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 1 1

10 Computers & Chemical Engineering 1 1
11 Computers & Operations Research 1 1
12 Decision Sciences 1 1 2
13 Decision Support Systems 1 1
14 International Journal of Forecasting 1 1
15 European Journal of Information Systems 1 1
16 European Journal of Operational Research 1 1 3 5
17 European Journal of Purchasing & Supply
Management 1 1 2
18 Growth and Change 1 1
19 Harvard Business Review 1 1
20 Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 1 1
21 Industrial Management & Data Systems 1 1
22 Industrial Marketing Management 6 1 7
23 Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2 2
24 Interfaces 2 2
25 International Business Review 2 2
26 International Federation for Information
Processing-Pub.-IFIP 1 1
27 International Journal of Business and Economics
Perspectives 1 1
28 International Journal of Business and Social Science 1 1
29 International Journal of Computer Integrated
Manufacturing 1 1
30 International Journal of Commerce and Management 1 1
31 International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC) 1 1
32 International Journal of Information Management 1 1
33 International Journal of Integrated Supply
Management 1 1 2
34 International Journal of Logistics 1 1
35 International Journal of Logistics Management 1 1
36 International Journal of Logistics Systems and
Management 1 1
37 International Journal of Operations & Production
Management 3 2 2 1 8
38 International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Table AI. Logistics Management 2 5 6 3 16
Number of supply 39 International Journal of Production Economics 1 5 1 7
chain articles
published
by journals (continued )
Pre- 2000- 2005- 2010-Feb
Analysis of
No Journals 2000 2004 2009 2012 Total global supply
40 International Journal of Production Research 3 5 4 13 25
chain research
41 International Journal of Productivity and Quality
Management 1 1
42 International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management 1 1 2 1461
43 International Journal of Service Industry
Management 1 1
44 International Journal of Services and Operations
Management 1 1
45 International Journal of Supply Chain Management 1 1
46 International Journal of Systems Science 1 1
47 International Journal of Technology Intelligence and

Planning 1 1
48 International Journal of Value Chain Management 4 4
49 International Marketing Review 1 1
50 Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 1 1
51 Journal of Business 1 1
52 Journal of Business Logistics 3 3
53 Journal of Cleaner Production 1 1
54 Journal of Enterprise Information Management 2 2
55 Journal of Global Information Technology
Management 2 2
56 Journal of International Business Studies 1 1
57 Journal of International Management 1 1
58 Journal of International Marketing 1 1
59 Journal of Latin American Geography 1 1
60 Journal of Management 1 1
61 Journal of Management Studies 1 1
62 Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2 1 3
63 Journal of Marketing 1 1
64 Journal of Marketing Management 1 1
65 Journal of Modeling in Management 1 1
66 Journal of Operations Management 4 6 10
67 Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 1 2 3
68 Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 1 1
69 Journal of Supply Chain Management 1 2 3
70 Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial
Engineers 1 1
71 Journal of the Operational Research Society 1 1
72 Journal of Transnational Management Development 1 1
73 Journal of Transport Geography 1 1
74 Logistics and Transportation Review 1 1
75 Logistics Information Management 2 1 3
76 Management Decision 1 1
77 Maritime Policy and Management 1 1
78 Marketing Intelligence & Planning 1 1
79 Naval Research Logistics (NRL) 1 1
80 Omega: The International Journal of Management
Science 1 2 3
(continued ) Table AI.

BIJ Pre- 2000- 2005- 2010-Feb
22,7 No Journals 2000 2004 2009 2012 Total
81 Operations and Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal 1 1
82 Operations Management Research 1 1
83 Organization Science 2 2
1462 84 Production and Operations Management 1 1
85 Production Planning & Control 2 1 3
86 Review of Business Research 1 1
87 S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal 1 1
88 Sloan Management Review 1 1
89 Strategic Management Journal 1 1
90 Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 1 5 5 2 13
91 Technology in Society 1 1
92 Technovation 1 1
93 The International Journal of Logistics Management 2 2
94 The International Journal of Production Research 1 1
95 The Journal of Environment & Development 1 1
96 The Journal of Marketing 1 1
97 Total Quality Management 1 1
98 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1 1
99 Transportation Research Part E: Logistics &
Transportation Review 1 1 2
Table AI. Grand total 30 51 91 39 211
Corresponding author
Professor Suhaiza Zailani can be contacted at: [email protected]
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]
This article has been cited by:
1. PratonoAluisius Hery, Aluisius Hery Pratono. Cross-cultural collaboration for inclusive global
value chain: a case study of rattan industry. International Journal of Emerging Markets, ahead of
print. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. El BazJamal, Jamal El Baz, LaguirIssam, Issam Laguir, StekelorumRébecca, Rébecca Stekelorum.
2019. Logistics and supply chain management research in Africa. The International Journal of
Logistics Management 30:1, 8-38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. FeizabadiJavad, Javad Feizabadi, MaloniMichael, Michael Maloni, GligorDavid, David Gligor.
2019. Benchmarking the triple-A supply chain: orchestrating agility, adaptability, and alignment.
Benchmarking: An International Journal 26:1, 271-295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. AzimifardArezoo, Arezoo Azimifard, MoosaviradSeyed Hamed, Seyed Hamed Moosavirad,
AriafarShahram, Shahram Ariafar. 2018. Designing steel supply chain and assessing the embedded
CO2 emission based on the input-output table by using DEMATEL method. Management Decision
56:4, 757-776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. MuralirajJ., J. Muraliraj, ZailaniSuhaiza, Suhaiza Zailani, KuppusamyS., S. Kuppusamy, SanthaC.,
C. Santha. 2018. Annotated methodological review of Lean Six Sigma. International Journal of
Lean Six Sigma 9:1, 2-49. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. D’AleoVittorio, Vittorio D’Aleo, SergiBruno S., Bruno S. Sergi. 2017. Does logistics influence
economic growth? The European experience. Management Decision 55:8, 1613-1628. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
7. RahmanFaried Kurnia, Faried Kurnia Rahman, TareqMohammad Ali, Mohammad Ali Tareq,
YunandaRochania Ayu, Rochania Ayu Yunanda, MahdzirAkbariah, Akbariah Mahdzir. 2017.
Maqashid Al-Shari’ah-based performance measurement for the halal industry. Humanomics 33:3,
357-370. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. O. Sivarak. Global Supply Chain in Asia 99-121. [Crossref]

Content Analysis of Global SC Research 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Content Analysis of Global SC Research 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Content Analysis of Global SC Research 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benchmarking: An International Journal

A content analysis of global supply chain research

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

A content analysis of global Analysis of

exploited to improve competitive advantage are becoming increasingly attractive to

2.2 Domestic vs global supply chains

Time Horizon of Study

Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, Emerald,

Dimensions which every research article

verification, 6) country of study, 7) sample

Analysis after classification of articles

4. Results of literature review

research methodology in global supply chain studies, followed by conceptual paper

for marketing-related topics.

Theory building/verification Number of journals

Theory verification 107 Table II.

None or not specified 61 84 145

Geographical area Number of articles Percent

4.1 Description of content classification scheme and results

5.1 Global supply chains as a competitive tool

6. Conclusion and limitations

Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 358-368.

capability as knowledge integration”, Organization science, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 375-387.

Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 458-475.

enablers”, Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 277-297.

Marasco, A. (2008), “Third-party logistics: a literature review”, International Journal of

Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 101 No. 2, pp. 213-229.

network responsiveness on time-to-market capability of a firm”, Review of Business

towards theory development”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 100

1 Administrative Science Quarterly 1 1

9 Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 1 1

47 International Journal of Technology Intelligence and

(continued ) Table AI.

You might also like