Anda di halaman 1dari 24

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-5855.

htm

Modelling the SCM enablers: an integrated ISM-fuzzy MICMAC approach


S.J. Gorane and Ravi Kant
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, India
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the supply chain management enablers (SCMEs) and establish relationships among them using interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and nd out s driving and dependence power of enablers, using fuzzy MICMAC (Matriced Impacts Croise e a un Classement) analysis. Multiplication Applique Design/methodology/approach A group of experts from industries and academics was consulted and ISM is used to develop the contextual relationship among various SCMEs for each dimension of SCM implementation. The results of ISM are used as an input to fuzzy MICMAC analysis, to identify the driving and dependence power of SCMEs. Findings This paper has identied 24 key SCMEs and developed an integrated model using ISM and the fuzzy MICMAC approach, which is helpful to identify and classify the important SCMEs and reveal the direct and indirect effects of each SCME on the SCM implementation. The integrated approach is developed, since the ISM model provides only binary relationship among SCMEs, while fuzzy MICMAC analysis provides precise analysis related to driving and dependence power of SCMEs. Research limitations/implications The weightage for ISM model development and fuzzy MICMAC are obtained through the judgment of academicians and a few industry experts. It is only subjective judgment and any biasing by the person who is judging the SCMEs might inuence the nal result. A questionnaire survey can be conducted to catch the insight on these SCMEs from more organizations. Practical implications This study has strong practical implications, for both practitioners as well as academicians. The practitioners need to concentrate on identied SCMEs more cautiously during SCM implementation in their organizations and the top management could formulate strategy for implementing these enablers obtained through ISM and fuzzy MICMAC analysis. Originality/value This is rst kind of study to identify 24 SCMEs and further, to deploy ISM and fuzzy MICMAC to identify and classify the key SCMEs that inuence SCM implementation in the organization. Keywords Supply chain management, SCM enablers, Interpretive structural modeling, Fuzzy MICMAC Paper type Research paper

Modelling the SCM enablers

263
Received 2 August 2012 Revised 22 October 2012 Accepted 5 November 2012

1. Introduction Supply chain management (SCM) has become widely recognized as an important contributor to strategic success, helping organizations to meet the challenges of an increasingly competitive and dynamic environment (Sundram et al., 2011). It has been recognized that understanding and practicing SCM has become an essential prerequisite to staying in the competitive market. SCM includes all the activities, functions and facilities involved in the ow and transformation of goods and services from the material stage to the end-user (Chopra and Meindl, 2007). The SCM aims to integrate the various structures and processes of the supply chain (SC), facilitating and

Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics Vol. 25 No. 2, 2013 pp. 263-286 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1355-5855 DOI 10.1108/13555851311314059

APJML 25,2

264

coordinating the ow of goods and services and the ow of information necessary to provide the value that customers demand. The challenge for organizations today is not just to take up a SCM initiative, but to implement it successfully, as the future shall see a war between SCs (Varma et al., 2006). The competition in many organizations in the future will revolve around SC development. The SC can be developed by strengthening SC network like upstream, downstream and lateral suppliers producing goods, services or other value adding activities. SCM implementation requires identication of supply chain management enablers (SCMEs). Many researchers have discussed various SCMEs which helps organization to achieve better organizational performance. But mere identications of SCMEs is not adequate, successful SCM implementation requires identication of interrelationship between various SCMEs and nd out the SCMEs having strong driving power (SCMEs which helps to achieve other SCMEs) and dependence power (SCMEs which are largely dependent on other SCMEs). The interrelationship between various SCMEs and driving and dependence power can be obtained through interpretive structural s Multiplication Applique e a modeling (ISM) model and fuzzy Matriced Impacts Croise un Classement (MICMAC) analysis. ISM is a well established methodology for identifying relationships among specic items which dene a problem or an issue (Wareld, 1974; Sage, 1977). Therefore, in this research, SCMEs have been analyzed using the ISM and fuzzy MICMAC approach, which provides the interrelationships of various SCMEs, their driving and dependence power. The opinions from a group of experts were used in developing the relationship matrix, which is later used in the development of the ISM model. In this paper, 24 SCMEs have been identied on the basis of literature review and the opinions of experts from academia and industry experts. The main objectives of this paper is to identify the SCMEs, and establish relationships among the identied SCMEs using ISM, and nd out driving and dependence power of SCMEs using fuzzy MICMAC analysis. 2. Literature review The challenges for organizations today are not just to take up a SCM initiative but to implement it successfully. From the literature it has been observed that, SCM implementation reduces SC wide costs, improve customer service levels, improve organizational performance, increases trust among SC partners, value creation, increase revenues, focus on core competencies, achieve advantage over competitors, etc. (Chin et al., 2004). However, such an initiative can be a failure unless one is aware of various SCMEs. SCMEs can be dened as organizational activity to enhance efciencies of SCM in an organization (Fawcett et al., 2008). The group of SCMEs plays important role in SCM implementation namely, human related factors, technological factors, strategic planning, organization culture, supply chain practices (SCPs) and organizational performance measurement (Table I). The organizations are aware of the importance of all the SCMEs but fall short of implementation due to lack of top management support, resistance to share critical information, lack of resources, lack of information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, unclear organization objectives, etc. (Pagell et al., 2005). Human resource is considered a critical SCME which inuences the employees behavior of bringing constructive benets to an organization (Erdem et al., 2003).

SCMEs Human resource

Sub-constitutes of SCMEs Employee empowerment Employee motivation Employee education training Teamwork and trust among employee Employee involvement Information sharing among SC partners Trust among SC partners SC collaboration ICT infrastructure Training related to information technology

Literature support Fotopoulos and Psomas (2009), Mahapatra and Khan (2006), Zhang et al. (2000), Kanji and Wallace (2000), Antony et al. (2002), Samat et al. (2006), Lakhal et al. (2006) Antony et al. (2002), Brah et al. (2000), Sila et al. (2006), Lakhal et al. (2006), Khamalah and Lingaraj (2007), Singh et al. (2006a), Qu (2009), Ferrer et al. (2010), Alam (2010) Foogooa (2008), Maheshwari et al. (2010), Kamaruddin and Udin (2009), Ambrose et al. (2008), Gonzalez et al. (2010), Catt et al. (2008), Balocco et al. (2009), Perego et al. (2011), Doomun (2008), Bose et al. (2008), Gunasekaran and McGaughey (2002), Lu and Julian (2007) Antony et al. (2002), Brah et al. (2000), Sila et al. (2006), Singh et al. (2006b), Wright and Anthony (2011) Bernon et al. (2011), Jack et al. (2010), Kumar et al. (2009), ElTayeb et al. (2010), Nunes and Bennett (2010), Padma et al. (2008), Borade and Bansod (2010), Kauremaa et al. (2009), Tanskanen et al. (2009), Agndal and Nordin (2009), Wu and Park (2009), Whitten et al. (2010), Giunipero et al. (2005), Salaheldin (2005), Green Jr et al. (2011), Smart et al. (2010), Visich et al. (2009), Chung et al. (2008), Thakkar et al. (2008), Grant and Banomyong (2010), Childerhouse et al. (2011) Singh et al. (2006b), Bhagwat and Sharma (2007), Kustin (2010)

Modelling the SCM enablers

265

Organisational culture

SC technology

Strategic planning

Supply chain practices (SCPs)

Top management support Financial resources Strategic alliance Vendor managed inventory JIT Outsourcing Third party logistics (3PL) Radio frequency identication (RFID) Reverse logistics (RL) Green SCM

Organisational performance Operational performance measurement Customer satisfaction Financial performance

Table I. SCMEs and literature support

Competitiveness cannot be achieved without developing the skills and competence of employees. The skill development of employee may attained by means of providing training and education to employee, maintaining safe and pleasant working environment, treats all employees fairly and consistently, encourages participation through teambuilding, open communication and mutual respect, etc. (Prowse and Prowse, 2010). Through all these effort the employees commitment towards the organization may increase. Committed employees tend to be more willing to make personal sacrices for their organizations (Chang and Lee, 2006). In addition, highly committed employees are more likely to achieve goals (Senik and Verdier, 2008; Kuo et al., 2010).

APJML 25,2

266

In a technology driven society, getting information quickly is important for all SC members. ICT have made it possible through providing frequent and real-time information sharing among SC partners (Kamaruddin and Udin, 2009). Information sharing not only strengthens buyer-supplier relationship but also reduce production lead time (Zhang et al., 2000). Most organizations have invested considerable capital to build ICT namely, enterprise resource planning (ERP), electronic data interchange (EDI), customer relationship management (CRM) and SCM software, which are capable of capturing accurate, real-time information regarding forecasts, inventory, delivery, quality, etc. (Patterson et al., 2003). Mere building ICT infrastructure cannot improve information sharing across the SC. Many managers are simply unwilling to share valuable information. Few managers view information as a power, they reserve needed information. Lack of willingness to share information is actually a greater barrier to SC integration (Fawcett et al., 2009). The organization culture is important SCME accounting for success or failure during SCM implementation. The organization culture facilitates management of its relationships with its customers, suppliers, distributors, institutions and other groups of interest (Cambra-Fierro and Polo-Redondo, 2008). The organization culture involves top management support, information sharing, strategic alliance and trust among SC partners, SC collaboration, etc. A good relationship with SC partners can develop strategic alliance and trust among SC partners (Hong et al., 2010). Trust is among the most essential SCME in cultivating collaborative relations and developing strong, mutually benecial relationships capable of achieving competitive advantage (Fawcett et al., 2008). The success of SCM in any organization is determined by effective implementation of SCPs. SCPs is dened as the set of activities adopted to improve the performance of an individual organization and to improve the performance of the entire SC (Li et al., 2005). Any activities within the SC that improves the overall performance of the organization can be treated as SCPs. SCPs described by the various authors are, supplier partnership, customer relationship, ICT, green SCM, outsourcing, etc. Performance measurement (PM) is the key SCME during successful SCM implementation. Measuring the organizational performance stimulate to continuous improvement, improves and enhance the process of SC, provides necessary information for management feedback, diagnose and solve the organizational problems (Gunasekaran et al., 2005). Many authors discussed the nancial indicator as the PM indicator and manufacturing organizations continue to use nancial performance measures. For successful SC implementation the organization must implement balance PM system which includes operational PM, customer performance and nancial PM. 3. ISM methodology and model development ISM was rst proposed by J. Wareld in 1973 to analyze the complex socioeconomic systems. ISM enables individuals or groups to develop a map of the complex relationships between the many elements involved in a complex situation. Its basic idea is to use experts practical experience and knowledge to decompose a complicated system into several sub-systems (elements) and construct a multilevel structural model. ISM is often used to provide fundamental understanding of complex situations, as well as to put together a course of action for solving a problem. Many researchers

have used ISM methodology to impose order and direction on the complexity of relationships among elements of a system (Table II). The various steps involved in the ISM methodology are as follows: (1) Identication of element: the elements of the system are identied which are relevant to the problem or issue and identied with a group problem-solving technique like brain storming sessions, Delphi method or opinion from academician and industry expert. (2) Contextual relationship: from the elements identied in step 1, a contextual relationship is identied among each element with respect to whom pairs of elements would be examined. After resolving the elements and the contextual relationship, a structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM) is prepared based on pair-wise comparison of element of the system under consideration. (3) Reachability matrix is developed from the SSIM and the matrix is checked for transitivity. The transitivity of the contextual relation is a basic assumption made in ISM. It states that if enabler A is related to B and B is related to C, then A is necessarily related to C. (4) The reachability matrix obtained in step (3) is converted into the canonical matrix format by arranging the elements according to their levels. (5) From the canonical matrix form of the reachability matrix a directed graph is drawn by means of vertices or nodes and lines of edges and the transitive links are removed based on the relationships given in the reachability matrix. The resultant digraph is converted into an ISM by replacing enabler nodes with statements. 3.1 Structural self-interaction matrix The SCMEs in this paper are derived theoretically on the basis of literature review and the opinions of experts from academia and industry. Some SCMEs are extracted from the work of those who have explored SCM in general or have addressed a particular enabler in detail. Group of experts constitutes six academicians in the area of SC and six SCM managers from manufacturing organizations were consulted in identifying the nature of contextual relationships among the SCMEs (Table III). For analyzing SCMEs in developing SSIM, the following four symbols have been used to denote the direction of relationship between enablers (i and j):

Modelling the SCM enablers

267

Author Mandal and Deshmukh (1994) Singh et al. (2003) Jharkharia and Shankar (2004) Ravi et al. (2005) Faisal et al. (2006) Kant and Singh (2009)

Details Identies relationships among vendor selection criteria Develop interdependence among KM variables To evolve mutual relationships among IT based enablers of SCM To model the reverse logistics variables found in computer hardware SCs To evolve mutual relationships among the enablers of risk mitigation To develop mutual relationship among knowledge management variables

Table II. ISM as reported in literature

268

APJML 25,2

SCME code Name of SCMEs V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V X V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V X V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V X A A A A A A A A V V V V V V V V V V V V A X X X X X X V V V V V V V V V V V V A X X X X X V V V V V V V V V V V V A X X X X V V V V V V V V V V V V A X X X V V V V V V V V V V V V A X X V V V V V V V V V V V V A X V V V V V V V V V V V V A V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V X V V V V V

SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME

Table III. Structural self-interaction matrix 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 V O O A O O A A 8 V O O A O O X 7 V O O A O O 6 V V V A X 5 4 3 2 V V V V V V O V V A

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Top management support Employee empowerment Employee motivation Organisation culture Teamwork and trust among employee Employee involvement ICT infrastructure Employee education training Financial resources Information sharing among SC partners Strategic alliance Trust among SC partners Operational performance measurement Vendor managed inventory (VMI) Just in time manufacturing ( JIT) Outsourcing Third party logistics (3PL) Radio frequency identication (RFID) Reverse logistics (RL) Green SCM (GSCM) SC collaboration SC dynamism Financial performance measurement Customer satisfaction

(1) (2) (3) (4)

V A X O

SCME i will help to achieve SCME j. SCME j will help to achieve SCME i. SCME i and j will help to achieve each other. SCME i and j are unrelated.

Modelling the SCM enablers

The following would explain the use of the symbols V, A, X, and O in SSIM (Table III): . SCME 1 helps to achieve SCME 2. This means that enabler namely top management support will help to achieve enabler employee empowerment. Thus, the relationship between SCME 1 and 2 is denoted by V in the SSIM. . SCME 9 can be achieved by SCME 8. This means that enabler namely, nancial resources would help achieve employee education and training. Thus, the relationship between SCME 9 and 8 is denoted by A in the SSIM. . SCME 5 and 6 help achieve each other. This means that enabler namely; teamwork and trust among employee and employee involvement help achieve each other. Thus, the relationship between SCME 5 and 6 is denoted by X in the SSIM. . No relationship exists between employee involvements (SCME 6) and ICT infrastructure (SCME 7) and hence the relationship between SCME 6 and 7 is denoted by O in the SSIM. 3.2 Initial reachability matrix The SSIM has been converted into a binary matrix, called initial reachability matrix (Table IV) by substituting V, A, X and O by 1 and 0 as per given case. The substitution of 1 and 0 are as per the following rules: . If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is V, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the ( j, i) entry becomes 0. . If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is A, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the ( j, i) entry becomes 1. . If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is X, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the ( j, i) entry also becomes 1. . If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is O, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the ( j, i) entry also becomes 0. After incorporating the transitivity as mentioned in step 3 of the ISM technique, the nal reachability matrix is shown in Table V. 3.3 Level partitions From the nal reachability matrix, the reachability set and antecedent set for each SCMEs are found. The reachability set includes SCME itself and others which it may help to achieve, similarly the antecedent set consists of SCME itself and the other SCMEs which help in achieving it. Then, the intersection of these sets is derived for all SCME. The SCMEs for which the reachability and intersection sets are same is the top-level SCMEs in the ISM hierarchy. The top-level SCMEs in the hierarchy would not help achieve any other SCMEs above its own level. Once the top-level SCMEs are identied (Table VI), it is separated out from the other SCMEs. Then, the same process

269

APJML 25,2

SCME code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

270

Table IV. Initial reachability matrix

is repeated to nd out the SCME in the next level. This process is continued until the level of each SCMEs are found (Table VII). These levels help in building the diagraph and the nal model. 3.4 Building the ISM model From the nal reachability matrix (Table V), the structural model is generated. If there is a relationship between the SCMEs i and j, this is shown by an arrow which points from i to j. This graph is called a directed graph, or digraph (Figure 1). After removing the transitivity the digraph is nally converted into the ISM-based model (Figure 2). The details of ISM model is presented in Section 5. 4. ISM fuzzy MICMAC analysis For developing the ISM model, the relation between two SCMEs is denoted by 0 and 1. If there is no relationship between two SCMEs then it is denoted by 0 and if there is relationship between two SCMEs then it is denoted by 1. From Table V, the relationship between SCME 1 and SCME 2, SCME 1 and SCME 3, SCME 1 and SCME 9 having equal importance and denoted by binary number 1. However, the relationship between these SCMEs cannot be always equal. Some relations may be strong, some may be especially strong and some relations may be better. To overcome this drawback of ISM model, the fuzzy ISM is used for the MICMAC analysis. The ISM Fuzzy MICMAC analysis is carried out as per following procedure.

SCME code 1 2 3 4 SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1a 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1a 1a 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1a 1a 1a 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 1a 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1a 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Modelling the SCM enablers

271

Note: aIndicate transitivity

Table V. Final reachability matrix

4.1 Binary direct relationship matrix A binary direct reachability matrix (BDRM) is obtained by examining the direct relationship among the SCME in the ISM as given in Table IV. From Table IV the diagonal entries are converted to zero. The BDRM so derived, is shown in Table VIII. 4.2 Development of fuzzy direct relationship matrix Conventional MICMAC analysis considers only binary type of relationship, however this paper uses fuzzy set theory (FST) to increase the sensitivity of MICMAC analysis. In fuzzy MICMAC, an additional input of possibility of interaction between the SCMEs is introduced. The possibility of interaction can be dened by qualitative consideration on 0-1 scale and is given in Table IX. Again the opinion of same academician and industry expert as mentioned in Section 3.1 are considered to rate the relationship between two SCMEs (Table IX). The values for the relationship between two SCMEs are then superimposed on the BDRM (Table VIII) to obtain a fuzzy direct relationship matrix (FDRM). The FDRM is given in Table X. 4.3 Fuzzy MICMAC stabilized matrix The FDRM is taken as the base to start the process. The matrix is multiplied repeatedly until the hierarchies of the driver power and dependence stabilize. The multiplication process follows the principle of fuzzy matrix multiplication (Kandasamy, 2007).

272

APJML 25,2

SCME code 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 19, 20, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 18, 19, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20,

SCME 1 SCME 2 SCME 3 SCME 4 SCME 5 SCME 6 SCME 7 SCME 8 SCME 9 SCME 10 SCME 11 SCME 12 SCME 13 SCME 14 SCME 15 SCME 16 SCME 17 SCME 18 SCME 19 SCME 20 SCME 21 SCME 22 SCME 23 SCME 24

Table VI. Partitioning of reachability matrix: rst iteration


Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Level 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 21, 22, 13, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 20, 22, 21, 22, 13, 22, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 23, 24 1 24 1, 2 24 1, 3 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 24 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 24 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 24 1, 9 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 21 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 15, 16, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 1 2 3 10 6 6 7, 8 7, 8 9 4, 10 11 12, 21 13, 22 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 18, 19, 20 12, 21 13, 22 23, 24 23, 24 I I

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 2, 4, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 6, 4, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 4, 7, 8, 4, 7, 8, 4, 7, 8, 9, 4,

SCME code 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 13, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 13, 22, 23, 24 23, 24 23, 24 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 1, 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 21 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24

Reachability set

Antecedent set

Intersection set 1 2 3 10 6 6 7, 8 7, 8 9 4, 10 11 12, 21 13, 22 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 12, 21 13, 22 23, 24 23, 24

Level IX VIII VIII VI VII VII VII VII VIII VI V IV II III III III III III III III IV II I I

SCME 1 SCME 2 SCME 3 SCME 4 SCME 5 SCME 6 SCME 7 SCME 8 SCME 9 SCME 10 SCME 11 SCME 12 SCME 13 SCME 14 SCME 15 SCME 16 SCME 17 SCME 18 SCME 19 SCME 20 SCME 21 SCME 22 SCME 23 SCME 24

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 2, 4, 5, 6, 3, 4, 5, 6, 4, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 4, 7, 8, 4, 7, 8, 4, 7, 8, 9, 4,

Modelling the SCM enablers

273

Table VII. Level of SCMEs

APJML 25,2

23

24

13

22

274
14 15 16 17 18 19 20

12 11

21

10

Figure 1. Digraph depicting the relationship among SCMEs

Fuzzy matrix multiplication is basically a generalization of Boolean matrix multiplication. According to FST, when two fuzzy matrices are multiplied the product matrix is also a fuzzy matrix. Multiplication follows the given rule: C A; B max kminaik ; bkj where A aik and B bkj

A stabilized matrix is shown in Table XI. The driving power of the SCME in fuzzy MICMAC is derived by summing the entries of possibilities of interactions in the rows, and the dependence of the SCME is determined by summing the entries of possibilities of interactions in the columns. 5. Findings and discussions In this paper, 24 SCMEs have been identied on the basis of literature review and the opinions of experts from academia and industry experts. The interrelations between the various SCMEs were obtained from academician and group of industry experts. With the help of ISM methodology, ISM model was developed. From Figure 2, it has been observed that top management support is at the rst level of the ISM model. The top management support leads to employee empowerment and motivation.

Financial Performance Measurement

Customer Satisfaction Index

Modelling the SCM enablers

Operational performance Measurement

Responsive SC

275
VMI JIT Outsourcing 3PL RFID RL GSCM

Trust among SC Partners

SC Collaboration

Strategic Alliance

Organization Culture

Information Sharing among SC partners

Teamwork and Trust among Employee

Employee Involvement

ICT Infrastructure

Employee Education Training

Employee Empowerment

Employee Motivation

Financial Resources

Top Management Support

Figure 2. ISM-based model of SCMEs

The management attitude will provide the sufcient nancial resources to the organization. The employee empowerment, motivation and nancial resources constitute the level 2 of ISM model. The level 3 constitutes teamwork, trust, employee involvement and training, ICT infrastructure. The employee involvement supports the employee teamwork and trust and vice versa. While employee education and training and ICT infrastructure mutually supports each other. The organization culture and information sharing among SC partner forms level 4 of ISM model. The better organization culture steers frequent information sharing among SC partner. The information sharing builds trust and nally both leads to strategic alliance (level 5) among SC partners. The strategic alliance drives the SC collaboration by building trust (level 6) among SC partners. All the six levels of ISM model helps toward successful implementation of SCPs namely, VIM, JIT, outsourcing, 3PL, RFID, RL, and GSCM (level 7). If all the seven levels of SCMEs are implemented in the organization then responsive SCM and organizational performance measurement leads customer satisfaction and nancial performance (levels 8 and 9).

APJML 25,2

SCME code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

276

Table VIII. Binary direct reachability matrix

Table IX. Possibility of numerical value of the reachability

Possibility of reachability Value

No 0

Very low 0.1

Low 0.3

Medium 0.5

High 0.7

Very high 0.9

Complete 1

The second objective of this paper was to analyze the driving and dependence power of the SCMEs that inuence the SCM implementation in an organization through fuzzy MICMAC analysis. In fuzzy MICMAC analysis the SCMEs are classied into four clusters (Figure 3). The rst cluster consists of the autonomous SCMEs that have weak driver power and weak dependence. These SCMEs are relatively disconnected from the system, with which they have only few links, which may be strong. Second cluster consists of the dependent SCMEs that have weak driving power but strong dependence. Third cluster has the linkage SCMEs that have strong driving power and also strong dependence. These SCMEs are unstable and any action on these SCMEs will have an effect on others and also a feedback on themselves. Fourth cluster includes the independent SCMEs having strong driving power but weak dependence. The analysis of fuzzy MICMAC is as follows. 5.1 Autonomous SCMEs The driving-dependence power diagram (Figure 3) indicates that there are no autonomous SCMEs in the process of SCM implementation. Autonomous SCMEs are weak drivers and also weak dependent. The autonomous SCMEs are relatively

SCME code 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.7 0.9 0 0.9 0.9 0 0.7 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.7 0.9 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.9 0.9 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0.7 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0.7 0 0 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.5 0.3 0.7 0 0 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.5 0.3 0.7 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.5 0.3 0.7 0 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 0.3 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.5 0 0.7 0.3 0 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0.5 0.7 0 0 0.7 0.9 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.7 0 0 0 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0.5 0 0 0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0.7

24 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 0

SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Modelling the SCM enablers

Table X. Fuzzy direct reachability matrix

277

278

APJML 25,2

SCME code 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.1 0.9 0.7 0.9 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.1 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.7 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.7 0.5 0 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.0 10.8 16.3 13.3 12.1 12.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 9.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 9.5

SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SCME SUM

Table XI. Fuzzy MICMAC stabilized matrix 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 SUM 17.5 13.6 14.0 11.3 12.2 13.1 12.5 12.5 13.6 11.3 8.7 7.4 1.9 5.8 6.0 5.8 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 7.8 1.9 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 9.5 13.5 10.4 14.5 17.9 18.1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7

0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Dependence Power CLUSTER I AUTONOMOUS ENABLERS CLUSTER II DEPENDENT ENABLERS CLUSTER IV DRIVER ENABLERS CLUSTER III LINKAGE ENABLERS

Modelling the SCM enablers

279

Driving Power

Figure 3. Cluster of SCMEs

disconnected from the system. Hence, they do not have much inuence on the system. Therefore, among the 24 selected SCMEs, all the SCMEs have much inuence in the SCM implementation. Hence, top management cannot take lightly any of these SCMEs, if they are very serious to make SCM successful. 5.2 Dependent SCMEs Trust among SC partners (SCME 12), operational performance measurement (SCME 13), VMI (SCME 14), JIT (SCME 15), outsourcing (SCME 16), 3PL (SCME 17), RFID (SCME 18), RL (SCME 19), GSCM (SCME 20), SC collaboration (SCME 21), SC dynamism (SCME 22), nancial performance measurement (SCME 23) and customer satisfaction (SCME 24) are weak drivers but are strongly dependent on the others (Figure 3). They are seen at the top of the ISM hierarchy (Figure 2), therefore considered as important SCMEs. Their strong dependence indicates that they require all the other SCME to minimize the effect of these SCMEs during SCM implementation. The management should therefore accord high priority in tackling these SCMEs. Besides, tackling these SCMEs, management should also understand the dependence of these SCMEs on lower level of the ISM. 5.3 Linkages SCMEs There are no SCMEs in the linkage category that has a strong driving power and also a strong dependence (Figure 3). Any change occurring to these SCMEs will have an effect on others and also a feedback on themselves. Hence, these SCMEs are unstable in nature which may affect the successful SCM implementation in the organizations either

APJML 25,2

in positive or negative way. The absence of any linkage SCMEs in this study indicates that no SCMEs are unstable among all the 24 SCMEs chosen in this study. 5.4 Independent SCMEs The driving power and dependence diagram (Figure 3) indicates that independent SCMEs such as top management support (SCME 1), employee empowerment (SCME 2), employee motivation (SCME 3), organization culture (SCME 4), teamwork and trust among employee (SCME 5), employee involvement (SCME 6), ICT infrastructure (SCME 7), employee education training (SCME 8), nancial resources (SCME 9), information sharing among SC partners (SCME 10) and strategic alliance (SCME 11). Thus, management needs to address these SCMEs more cautiously and may be treated as the root cause of all the SCMEs. It has been observed that these SCMEs help to achieve SCMEs which appear at the top of ISM hierarchy. Therefore, it can be anecdotal that management should work out strategies to facilitate these independent SCMEs for successful SCM in an organization. Those SCMEs possessing higher driving power in the ISM need to be taken care on priority basis because there are few other dependent SCMEs being affected by them. 6. Conclusions and scope for future research Nowadays, competition among organizations is becoming keen and no longer between organizations and organizations, but SCs to SCs. One of the primary goals of a SCM is to enhance the efciency of the organizations such that it is able to satisfy its customers. To achieve this objective, it is necessary to identify the various SCMEs and analyses it. There exists a variety of SCMEs for SCM implementation in an organization. This paper has identied 24 key SCMEs by reviewing a number of research articles. It is moreover evident that no single SCMEs would be self-determining for SCM implementation in an organization, therefore, it becomes more important to identify the relationship of SCMEs with each other. ISM methodology is used to develop relationship among various SCMEs for each dimension of SCM implementation. The results of ISM are used as an input to fuzzy MICMAC analysis to identify the driving and dependence power of SCMEs. In this research work, integrated model of SCMEs is developed using ISM and fuzzy MICMAC approach, which may be helpful to SC managers to employ this model in order to identify and classify the important SCMEs for their needs and to reveal the direct and indirect effects of each SCME on the SCM implementation. The integrated approach is developed, as in ISM models, the relationship between two SCMEs are specied by binary number. However, the relationship between the SCMEs cannot be always equal, some relations may be strong, some may be very strong and some relations may be better. To overcome this drawback of ISM model, the fuzzy relationship is used to predict the relationship between the SCMEs. Further the result of Table XI was analyzed using MICMAC analysis for precise analysis of driving and dependence power of SCMEs. This is rst kind of study that identied 24 SCMEs and further, ISM and fuzzy MICMAC have been deployed to identify and classify the key SCMEs that inuence SCM implementation in the organization. The nding of paper provides important guidelines for both practitioners as well as the academicians. The practitioners need to concentrate on these SCMEs more cautiously during SCM implementation in

280

their organizations. On the other hand, academicians may be encouraged to categorize different other issues, which are important in addressing these SCMEs. ISM model (Figure 2) identies the hierarchy of actions to be taken by practitioners in order to maximize the effect of these SCMEs in order to implement SCM successfully. The fuzzy MICMAC analysis (Figure 3) indicates the category of the SCMEs which needs attention by practitioners according to their dependence power and driving power. Practitioners should concentrate on those SCMEs which have higher driving power because these SCMEs should be emphasized for effective and successful SCM implementation. These higher driving SCMEs are root cause for the other SCMEs which have higher dependence. Once these higher driving power SCMEs are identied, the top management could formulate strategies for enhancing their effects during SCM implementation. The weightage for ISM model development and fuzzy MICMAC are obtained through the judgments of academician and few industry experts. It is only subjective judgment and any biasing by the person who is judging the SCMEs might inuence the nal result. A questionnaire survey can be conducted to catch the insight on these SCMEs from more industries. Further, structural equation modeling (SEM) can be used for the statistical validation of developed hypothetical model.
References Agndal, H. and Nordin, F. (2009), Consequences of outsourcing for organizational capabilities some experiences from best practice, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 316-34. Alam, I. (2010), Does service innovation process differ across cultures?, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 460-72. Ambrose, E., Marshall, D., Fynes, B. and Lynch, D. (2008), Communication media selection in buyer-supplier relationships, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 360-79. Antony, J., Leung, K., Knowles, G. and Gosh, S. (2002), Critical success factors of TQM implementation in Hong Kong industries, International Journal of Quality & Reliability, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 551-66. Balocco, R., Mogre, R. and Toletti, G. (2009), Mobile internet and SMEs: a focus on the adoption, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 109 No. 2, pp. 245-61. Bernon, M., Rossi, S. and Cullen, J. (2011), Retail reverse logistics: a call and grounding framework for research, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 484-510. Bhagwat, R. and Sharma, M.K. (2007), Performance measurement of supply chain management: a balanced scorecard approach, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 43-62. Borade, A.B. and Bansod, S.V. (2010), Study of vendor-managed inventory practices in Indian industries, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 21 No. 8, pp. 1013-38. Bose, I., Pal, R. and Ye, A. (2008), ERP and SCM systems integration: the case of a valve manufacturer in China, Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 233-41. Brah, S.A., Wong, J.L. and Rao, B.M. (2000), TQM and business performance in the service sector: a Singapore study, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 11, pp. 293-312.

Modelling the SCM enablers

281

APJML 25,2

282

Cambra-Fierro, J.J. and Polo-Redondo, Y. (2008), Creating satisfaction in the demand-supply chain: the buyers perspective, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 211-24. Catt, P.M., Barbour, R.H. and Robb, D.J. (2008), Assessing forecast model performance in an ERP environment, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108 No. 5, pp. 677-97. Chang, S.C. and Lee, M.S. (2006), Relationships among personality traits, job characteristics, job satisfaction and organizational commitment an empirical study in Taiwan (The) Business Review, Cambridge, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 201-7. Childerhouse, P., Deakins, E., Bohme, T., Dennis, R., Towill, D.R., Stephen, M., Disney, S.M. and Banomyong, R. (2011), Supply chain integration: an international comparison of maturity, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 531-52. Chin, K., Tummala, V.M.R., Jendy, P.F. and Leung, X.T. (2004), A study on supply chain management practices the Hong Kong manufacturing perspective, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 505-24. Chopra, S. and Meindl, P. (2007), Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation, Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 3-25. Chung, J., Sternquist, B. and Chen, Z. (2008), Japanese retail-buyer-supplier relationships: does performance matter?, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 55-75. Doomun, M.R. (2008), Multi-level information system security in outsourcing domain, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 849-57. ElTayeb, T.K., Zailani, S. and Jayaraman, K. (2010), The examination on the drivers for green purchasing adoption among EMS 14001 certied companies in Malaysia, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 206-25. Erdem, F., Ozen, J. and Atsan, N. (2003), The relationship between trust and team performance, Work Study, Vol. 52 No. 7, pp. 337-40. Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2006), Supply chain risk mitigation: modelling the enablers, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 535-52. Fawcett, S.E., Magnan, G.M. and McCarter, M.W. (2008), Benets, barriers, and bridges to effective supply chain management, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 35-48. Fawcett, S.E., Wallin, C., Allred, C. and Magnan, G. (2009), Supply chain information-sharing: benchmarking a proven path, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 222-46. Ferrer, M., Santa, R., Hyland, P.W. and Bretherton, P. (2010), Relational factors that explain supply chain relationships, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 419-40. Foogooa, R. (2008), IS outsourcing a strategic perspective, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 858-64. Fotopoulos, C.B. and Psomas, E.L. (2009), The impact of soft and hard TQM elements on quality management results, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 150-63. Giunipero, L.C., Pillai, K.G., Chapman, S.N. and Clark, R.A. (2005), A longitudinal examination of JIT purchasing practices, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 51-70. Gonzalez, R., Gasco, J. and Llopis, J. (2010), Information systems outsourcing: a Delphi study from Spain, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 244-63.

Grant, D.B. and Banomyong, R. (2010), Design of closed-loop supply chain and product recovery management for fast-moving consumer goods: the case of a single-use camera, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 232-46. Green, K.W. Jr, Inman, R.A. and Birou, L.M. (2011), Impact of JIT-selling strategy on organizational structure, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 111 No. 1, pp. 63-83. Gunasekaran, A. and McGaughey, R. (2002), Information technology/information systems in 21st century manufacturing, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 75 Nos 1/2, pp. 1-6. Gunasekaran, A., Williams, H.J. and McGaughey, R.E. (2005), Performance measurement and costing system in new enterprise, Technovation, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 523-33. Hong, P., Tran, O. and Park, K. (2010), Electronic commerce applications for supply chain integration and competitive capabilities an empirical study, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 539-60. Jack, E.P., Powers, T.L. and Skinner, L. (2010), Reverse logistics capabilities: antecedents and cost savings, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 228-46. Jharkharia, S. and Shankar, R. (2004), IT enablement of supply chains: modelling the enablers, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 53 No. 8, pp. 700-12. Kamaruddin, N.K. and Udin, Z.M. (2009), Supply chain technology adoption in Malaysian automotive suppliers, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 385-403. Kandasamy, W.B.V. (2007), Elementary Fuzzy Matrix, Theory and Fuzzy Models for Social Scientists, Automaton, Los Angeles, CA, ProQuest Information & Learning (University of Microlm International). Kanji, G.K. and Wallace, W. (2000), Business excellence through customer satisfaction, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 No. 7, pp. 979-98. Kant, R. and Singh, M.D. (2009), Knowledge management implementation: modeling the variables, International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 342-61. Kauremaa, J., Smaros, J. and Holmstrom, J. (2009), Patterns of vendor-managed inventory: ndings from a multiple-case study, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 29 No. 11, pp. 1109-39. Khamalah, J.N. and Lingaraj, B.P. (2007), TQM in the service sector: a survey of small business, Total Quality Management, Vol. 18 No. 9, pp. 973-82. Kumar, S., Dieveney, E. and Dieveney, A. (2009), Reverse logistic process control measures for the pharmaceutical industry supply chain, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 188-204. Kuo, T., Ho, L. and Wu, Y. (2010), The factors inuencing employees attitudes in high-tech environment, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 No. 7, pp. 1054-72. Kustin, R.A. (2010), Performance and standardization of Australian, Japanese and US rms, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 447-59. Lakhal, L., Pasin, F. and Limam, M. (2006), Quality management practices and their impact on performance, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 625-46.

Modelling the SCM enablers

283

APJML 25,2

284

Li, S., SubbaRao, S., Ragu-Nathan, T.S. and Ragu-Nathan, B. (2005), Development and validation of a measurement instrument for studying supply chain management practices, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 618-41. Lu, V.N. and Julian, C.C. (2007), The internet and export marketing performance: the empirical link in export market ventures, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 127-44. Mahapatra, S.S. and Khan, M.S. (2006), A methodology for evaluation of service quality using neural networks, Proceedings of the International Conference on Global Manufacturing and Innovation, July 27-29, pp. 1-9. Maheshwari, B., Kumar, V. and Kumar, U. (2010), Delineating the ERP institutionalization process: go-live to effectiveness, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 744-71. Mandal, A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (1994), Vender selection using interpretive structural modelling, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 52-9. Nunes, B. and Bennett, D. (2010), Green operations initiatives in the automotive industry an environmental reports analysis and benchmarking study, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 396-420. Padma, P., Ganesh, L.S. and Rajendran, C. (2008), A study on the ISO 14000 certication and organizational performance of Indian manufacturing rms, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 73-100. Pagell, M., Katz, J.P. and Chwen, S. (2005), The importance of national culture in operations management research, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 371-94. Patterson, K.A., Grimm, C.M. and Corsi, T.M. (2003), Adopting new technologies for supply chain management, Transportation Research, Part E, Vol. 39, pp. 95-121. Perego, A., Perotti, S. and Mangiaracina, R. (2011), ICT for logistics and freight transportation: a literature review and research agenda, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 457-83. Prowse, P. and Prowse, J. (2010), Whatever happened to human resource management performance?, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 145-62. Qu, R. (2009), The impact of market orientation and corporate social responsibility on rm performance: evidence from China, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 570-82. Ravi, V., Shankar, R. and Tiwari, M.K. (2005), Productivity improvement of a computer hardware supply chain, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 239-55. Sage, A.P. (1977), Interpretive Structural Modelling: Methodology for Large-Scale Systems, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp. 91-164. Salaheldin, I.H. (2005), JIT implementation in Egyptian manufacturing rms: some empirical evidence, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 354-70. Samat, N., Ramayah, T. and Saad, N.M. (2006), TQM practices, service quality, and market orientation-some empirical evidence from a developing country, Management Research News, Vol. 29 No. 11, pp. 713-28.

Senik, C. and Verdier, T. (2008), Entrepreneurs, social networks and work values of ethnic minorities in France, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 29 No. 7, pp. 610-29. Sila, I., Ebrahimpour, M. and Birkholz, C. (2006), Quality in supply chains: an empirical analysis, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 491-502. Singh, A., Narain, R. and Yadav, R.C. (2006a), A survey on relationships and cultural issues in supply chain management practices in Indian organisations, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 256-78. Singh, A., Narain, R. and Yadav, R.C. (2006b), Benchmarking and performance measurement of supply chain management practices: a survey of Indian organisations, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 313-34. Singh, M.D., Shankar, R., Narain, R. and Agarwal, A. (2003), An interpretive structural modelling of knowledge management in engineering industries, Journal of Advances in Management Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 28-40. Smart, A.U., Bunduchi, R. and Gerst, M. (2010), The costs of adoption of RFID technologies in supply networks, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 423-47. Sundram, V.P.K., Ibrahim, A.R. and Govindaraju, V.G.R.C. (2011), Supply chain management practices in the electronics industry in Malaysia consequences for supply chain performance, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 834-55. Tanskanen, K., Holmstrom, J., Elfving, J. and Talvitie, U. (2009), Vendor-managed-inventory (VMI) in construction, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 29-40. Thakkar, J., Kanda, K. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2008), Supply chain management in SMEs: development of constructs and propositions, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 97-131. Varma, S., Wadhwa, S. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), Implementing supply chain management in a rm: issues and remedies, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 223-43. Visich, J.K., Li, S., Khumawala, B.M. and Reyes, P.M. (2009), Empirical evidence of RFID impacts on supply chain performance, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 1290-315. Wareld, J.W. (1974), Developing interconnected matrices in structural modelling, IEEE Transactions on Systems Men and Cybernetics, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 51-81. Whitten, D., Chakrabarty, S. and Wakeeld, R. (2010), The strategic choice to continue outsourcing, switch vendors, or back source: do switching costs matter?, Information & Management, Vol. 47, pp. 167-75. Wright, O. and Anthony, G.A. (2011), Trust and commitment within franchise systems: an Australian and New Zealand perspective, Asia Pacic Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 486-500. Wu, L. and Park, D. (2009), Dynamic outsourcing through process modularization, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 225-44. Zhang, Z., Waszink, A. and Wijngaard, J. (2000), An instrument for measuring TQM implementation for Chinese manufacturing companies, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 730-55.

Modelling the SCM enablers

285

APJML 25,2

286

About the authors S.J. Gorane is a research scholar at the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, India. He is doing his PhD in the area of Supply Chain Management. He has about six years of industry experience and 12 years of teaching and research experience. Dr Ravi Kant is currently working as an Assistant Professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, India. He obtained his PhD in the area of Knowledge Management and Supply Chain. His areas of research interest include knowledge management, supply chain management and production and operation management. He has about seven years of experience in industry, teaching and research. He is an Engineering graduate and hold an M. Tech in Industrial Engineering & Management. He has published more than 50 papers in international journals and conferences. Ravi Kant is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: ravi792002@yahoo.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints