Page 1 of 19
ANZAM 2010
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND CAPABILITIES: A CASE OF
AN APPAREL SUPPLY CHAIN
Maqsood Memon
International Graduate School of Business, Division of Business, University of South Australia
[email protected].
Bruce Gurd
International Graduate School of Business Division of Business, University of South Australia
[email protected]
Sev Nagalingam
School of Advanced Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering, Division of Information
Technology, Engineering and the Environment, University of South Australia
[email protected]
ANZAM 2010
ABSTRACT
This paper explores the relationship between supply chain management (SCM) practices, supply chain
(SC) capabilities and competitive advantage from a resource-based perspective. Evidence from a single
company named Orangi suggests that SCM practices helps in the development of organizational resources
and SC capabilities of flexibility, responsiveness and coordination. Capabilities of SC processes and
activities assist achieving the objectives of profitability and customer service through valued services of
quick response (QR), vendor managed inventory (VMI) program, short lead time delivery, dedicated
production lines and warehousing services. It benefits customers for reduction of forecasting periods and
costs of markdowns, stock outs and inventories and also helped Orangi company for gaining competitive
advantage.
Keywords: Supply Chain Management, Capabilities, Competitive Advantage.
INTRODUCTION
Free trade and globalization not only has enhanced the competition for reaching the right market, at the
right time and with the right price but also provided opportunities for sourcing materials, semifinished
parts, skills, resources, technologies and capabilities at the optimum cost. SCM has emerged as strategic
tool to help organizations form inter-firm cooperative arrangements as they can share and combine
resources and capabilities for creation of value that each partner could not achieve if they acted alone
(Inkpen & Ross, 2001). Sharing of resources and capabilities in the form of material, information, funds,
finished and semifinished goods with engineered and organized activities are named as SCM practices.
The resource-based theory of strategy assumes that firms develop and control unique strategic resources
that help them sustain their competitive advantage (Widener, 2006).
This study uses a definition of competitive advantage based on the resource based view (RBV) of the
firm. SCM practices, partnership, collaborations and alliances are sources of competitive advantage
(Boddy, Macbeth & Wagner 2000; Cooper, Lambert & Pagh 1997; Lambert, Knemeyer & Gardner 2004;
Whipple, Frankel & Daugherty 2002). It is argued that organizations involved in such activities and
practices develop SC capabilities which help them to retain and sustain SCM partnership for long term
competitive advantage. This study identifies a company embedding structural resources of SC activities,
1
Page 2 of 19
Page 3 of 19
ANZAM 2010
processes, routines, and human resources’ skills, knowledge and coordination for development of SC
capabilities flexibility, responsiveness and coordination in order to deliver value to customer. The
customer receives this value in terms of maximizing profitability by reducing stock outs, markdowns,
high inventory costs at their distribution centre and point of sale. The purpose of this study is to explore
the relationship of SCM practices, SC capabilities and competitive advantage in an operational situation
of a firm. A qualitative case study research method is used for data collection from an apparel
manufacturing firm and its suppliers. In the past two decades many UK, Europe and US apparel
manufacturers relocated their facilities and operations to low labour cost countries and others shifted to a
combination of wholesaling or retailing with outsourcing becoming a competitive strategy for apparel
companies in UK, Europe and USA for gaining their market share (Agrawal & Farrell 2003; Appelbaum
& Christerson 1997). Apparel buyers are now looking beyond price, quality and delivery; these can only
help to qualify as a supplier. To be a long term partner of choice, apparel manufacturers need to be
capable to meet changing market needs and deliver long term valued service. This paper explores the SC
practices and capabilities of apparel manufacturing in a competitive situation. The unit of analysis of this
study is Orangi, and apparel manufacturer and examines capabilities and competitive advantage in a SCM
context.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Supply Chain Management (SCM)
Interest in SCM is immense but there is little consensus on the definition of SCM (New 1997; Lummus,
Krumwiede & Vokurka 2001; Mentzer et al 2001). Mentzer et al. (2001) attempted to overcome this
state of affairs by proposing a definition that is broad, not confined to any specific discipline area and
adequately reflecting the breadth of issues that are usually covered under this term:
“SCM is defined as systemic, strategic coordination of traditional business functions and the
tactics across these business functions within a particular company and across business within
the supply chain, for the purpose of improving the long term performance of the individual
companies and the supply chain as a whole” (Mentzer et al., 2001)
2
ANZAM 2010
The effective use of this philosophy requires that functional and supply chain partner activities are
integrated, aligned with company strategy and harmonized with organizational structure, process, culture,
incentives and people (Abell, 1999)
SCM Practices
SCM practices are organized groups of activities in an organization to promote effective management of
its supply chain (Koh, Demirbag, Bayraktar , Tatoglu & Zaim 2007; Li, Bhano Ragu-Nathan, RaguNathan & Subba Rao 2006). Activities in an organization are means of operational excellence and
customer satisfaction which can be sources of competitive advantage (Porter 1985; Hines 1993).
Koh et al. (2007) and Li et al.( 2006) described SCM practices including strategic supplier relationships,
customer relationships, information sharing, information quality, internal lean practices and
postponement. Croxton, Garcia-Dastugue, Lambert & Rogers (2001), Hong & Jeong (2006), Lambert &
Cooper (2000) and Tsang & Antony (2001) defined SCM practices in seven management processes of
customer relationship management, customer service management, demand management, order
fulfilment, manufacturing flow management, product development and commercialization, quality
management, and returns management. These SCM practices will be used as a reference in this study.
SC Capabilities and Resource-based View Theory
There is growing discussion about SCM, arguing that effective SCM is tool of competitive advantage.
Our definition of competitive advantage is based in the Resource-based View (RBV) of the firm. In this
paper we separate the concepts of resources and capabilities (Makadok, 2001). Barney (2007: 22) defined
them as:
“Resources are firm’s fundamental, financial, individual and organizational capital attributes,
while capabilities are those attributes of a firm that enable it to exploit its resources in
implementing strategies”
3
Page 4 of 19
Page 5 of 19
ANZAM 2010
Capabilities can be at the activity level, process level, functional level and firm level. They are developed
in functional areas by combining human, structural and physical resources at corporate level and can be
recognized with names such as reliable service, responsiveness, flexibility and short product development
cycles (Amit & Schoemaker, 1993). Resources can be a source of competitive advantage when a firm has
capability of deploying resources. Firms may have different level of performance even having the same
strategies and operating in similar market segments (Henderson & Cockburn 1994; Lawless, Bergh &
Wilsted 1989; Schroeder, Bates & Junttila 2002). A reason for performance difference can be differences
in capabilities at corporate and functional levels and such difference may have critical effect on corporate
performance (Narasimhan, Aram & Carter 2001). Ray, Barney & Muhanna (2004) summarize the
arguments that:
“In some cases, using resource-based theory to examine the economic implications of resources
and capabilities at the firm level can lead to misleading conclusions, and that process-level
analysis may be more appropriate”
There is growing consensus in strategy literature that business processes are the basic unit of competitive
advantage (Ray, Muhanna & Barney 2005) and alignment between process capability and corporate level
capability is critical (Kim, 2006). Supply chain capabilities can play a vital role in shaping the
competitive capability of the firm (Deshmukh 2001; Morash 2002; Shang & Sun 2004; Zhao, Droge &
Stank 2001). The above argument underlines the linkage between supply chain capabilities and corporate
capability and underscores that supply chain capability can be antecedent of competitive advantage.
Complex interdependent SC activities spread from the supplier end to the customer end, this complex and
diverse network of activities may be a reason for inference of numerous capability parameters.
Confounding definitions of supply chain capability in the literature emphasize the need to distinguish SC
capabilities from SC practices, activities, processes and performance attributes. These parameters are
discussed as price, quality, delivery and flexibility (Li et al. 2006; Skinner 1985; Tracey, Vonderembse &
Lim 1999). Morash (2002), Sánchez & Pérez (2005), Wu, Yeniyurt, Kim & Cavusgil (2006), and
4
ANZAM 2010
Yusuf, Gunasekaran, Adeleye & Sivayoganathan (2004) outlined SC capabilities as customer service,
flexibility, coordination, activity integration, information exchange, information system support and
responsiveness. These dimensions of capability can be classified in two major groups -1) logistics cost,
productivity, quality, price and delivery; 2) flexibility, responsiveness, coordination and integration.
Firms must first meet industry standards or minimum levels in the first group of quality, price and
delivery. However beyond these minimum standards or thresholds a firm will be able to create value to
customer through the second group (Kumar & Arbi 2008). Operational excellence can be aligned to the
strategic capability of cost leadership through integration while flexibility, responsiveness, coordination
and integration (internal and external) yield valued services to customers aligned to strategic capability of
differentiation (Kim 2006 and Morash 2002). Recognizing two broad SC capability dimensions of
operational excellence and value adding customer services, SC capabilities are recapped as flexibility,
responsiveness, coordination, integration and value to customer and these would be used for this study.
Exploring the evidence of SC capabilities as an antecedent of competitive advantage in SC practices
environment, it leads to following research question;
Research Question: How can SC capabilities help to enhance competitive advantage?
Following are the subsidiary questions for observing the evidence of SC capabilities;
•
What are SC process and routines in practice
•
How these practices support towards capability development
•
What SC capabilities are possessed by the company
RESEARCH METHOD
An exploratory qualitative case study research method was used. Limited studies use the case study
method for exploring the evidence of relationships of SCM practices, SC capabilities and competitive
advantage in operational situation of an organization. In depth interviews of executives of three SC
partner firms of an apparel manufacturing company, were conducted followed by site visits. Content
analysis method was used for collected qualitative data.
5
Page 6 of 19
Page 7 of 19
ANZAM 2010
The apparel industry is an important industry in which to study this research question. Apparel products,
being fashion related, have volatile and unpredictable demand; therefore, the failure of supply chain
management is often due to a mismatch between supply chain strategy and the nature of product demand
(Fisher 1997; Fernie & Sparks 2004). It results in a high risk of stock out and markdowns at the retail
level. Textile innovation and frequent changes in fashion trends results in a small forecast period and
small order size. This forces apparel manufactures to focus on strategic supply chain capabilities of quick
response (QR), vender managed inventory (VMI), continuous replenishment (CR) by reducing the
product life cycle and adoption of information technology tools and techniques for strategic collaboration
and integration.
Broadly there are three main partners in the apparel supply chain, buyer (brand name labels and retail
stores), manufacturers and fabric suppliers. Downstream apparel supply chain buyers are rich in resources
of capital, knowledge, information and technology. Upstream supply chain fabric suppliers are also rich
in capital, knowledge, information and technology and achieved substantial levels of success in SCM
practices. Mid-stream apparel manufacturers are predominantly SMEs; most of the big apparel
manufacturers have achieved a certain level of the success in SCM practices whereas SMEs are still
striving for success. Therefore it is vital to study a manufacturing SME operating in a supply chain
network with limited resources.
This is a case study of a Pakistani apparel company, Orangi, which has less resources of capital,
knowledge, technology and infrastructure compare to its downstream and upstream SC partners. It is very
challenging for apparel manufacturing SMEs to gain competitive advantage and remain partners in this
chain; therefore it is interesting to examine, how apparel SMEs gain competitive advantage and
partnership in the supply chain.
6
ANZAM 2010
FINDINGS
Orangi is an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of apparel. They get samples from their customer in
Europe already designed and developed, then source and develop fabric and trims in Pakistan, China,
Thailand and Hong Kong and manufacture the garments in own facility in Pakistan. The supply chain is
shown in figure 1.1(Appendix-A)
SCM Practices
The products fit Fisher’s (1997) categorisation of innovative products which change frequently and the
product life cycle is also short. Having short product life cycle time, its forecast period is also short and
hence control of production lead time is very important. Orangi broadly classify orders in two types. First
there are new style orders, which have never been produced before therefore fabric and trims are new and
need to be developed; hence material lead time will be longer similarly overall production lead time as
well. Second there are repeat style orders with shorter material lead time and overall production lead time.
Production lead time is 55 to 70 days for new style orders and 45 to 60 days for repeat style orders.
Minimum days and maximum days in both cases are due to local and imported fabrics used in orders; in
case of imported fabric, transportation time is more. After placing bulk orders the manufacturer develops
and sources fabric and trims with local and overseas suppliers according to the specifications of customer.
One of the executives of Orangi stated that:
“We have realized the changing need of market and improved our processes and shortened the
lead time although it is challenging to meet 55 to 70 days lead time for new style product when
only fabric supplier takes minimum 30 days, even than we serve our customer with on time
delivery performance of 98%”.
Major activities and lead time by product and fabric location are shown in Charts 1.1 to 1.4 (Appendix-B)
Orangi understands the unpredictable demand and short product life cycles and the high cost of
markdowns, stock out and inventories at point of sale. Realizing the cost issues, the company is
7
Page 8 of 19
Page 9 of 19
ANZAM 2010
successful in delivering valued services to its customers in UK by providing a service of managing
finished goods inventory at their warehouse in Pakistan, through a vendor managed inventory (VMI)
program which helps the customer by reducing the opportunity cost of stock outs and high cost of
markdowns and carrying of inventory. This program they use for repeat orders and delivery of products
with just two weeks lead time. Finished goods inventory is maintained according to actual sales
projections at point of sale. They pick, pack and ship the finished goods as they receive customer orders
and then issue production order to dedicated production line at shop floor for replenishment of goods by
stock keeping units (SKU). Similarly fabric and trims suppliers collaborate in the supply chain by keeping
grey (semifinished) fabrics and semifinished trims and reacting quickly by printing, dying the right
pattern and colour. Achieving flexibility in manufacturing, changing needs of customer supply chain
partners coordinate in sharing of information for integrated supply chain.
Supply Chain Capabilities
Value adding content of the apparel manufacturer is higher than other downstream and upstream partners
in apparel supply chain; while Orangi has less resources, capital and technology compare to other partners
in chain. Interviewees at Orangi said:
“We have been successful in getting good return of investment on human resource at all levels,
which is quite different compared to our competitors in this country. We have qualified people in all
departments and the customer is very comfortable in communicating directly with them. We are
among the pioneers for using Industrial Engineers for production floor support and training of
supervisors”.
Responsiveness of the company is observed in serving customer with VIM, QR program with compressed
lead times and alignment with customers changing needs for computer aided design/computer aided
manufacturing (CAD/CAM ) for patterns, samples and embroidery making, where customer exchange
design details in digital format.
8
ANZAM 2010
Page 10 of 19
Apparel manufacturing is considered to be a labour intensive industry and the major value adding
processes and sequence of processes of Orangi are cutting, embroidery, printing, sewing, washing and
packing, as shown in figure 1.1(Appendix-A). Sewing is a core process and the highest value adding
process. During interviews an executive said that;
“Our core competence is achieving high efficiency even with small order quantity by using skilled
technician and supervisors with the help of industrial engineers”
The company can produce small orders with shorter lead time with optimum efficiency and required
quality. Flexibility of capacity, order size, delivery lead time, packing types, is achieved by the company
by re-engineering the sewing process to a modular production system with incentive based pay;
improving capacity and production planning; effective pre-production preparation; shorten production
lead time by cutting non value adding activities and time of some activities and setting up buffer capacity
accommodate unpredictable demand.
Coordination with downstream and upstream partners is acknowledged in sample development, fabric
and trims development and approval process and sharing of inventory, sales, capacity and forecast
information as shown in table 1.1 (Appendix-C).
The company uses basic level information technology tools such as telephone, fax and e-mail through
internet and intra-net as medium of communication with internal and external supply chain partners for
exchange of order information (order forecasts, order details, manufacturing orders, order status, work in
progress), inventory information, and performance reports. Table 1.1 (Appendix-C) shows the type of
order information formally shared between partners and the mode of information exchange. The
information integration capability of the company is unsubstantial. Most information transfer (internal
and external) is through word of mouth, meetings and memos, which can be automated and can be
accessible to people who require it without request and efforts, extra resources are put to meet required
service level.
9
Page 11 of 19
ANZAM 2010
CONCLUSION
The study supports the argument that resource and capabilities complement each other; a firm can
strategically embed structural resources of processes, routines, SC practices and skilled human resources
which can help organizations for development of SC capabilities. This study suggests that operational
practices and services of VMI, QR, dedicated production lines, warehousing services, technology
alignment, and coordination services differentiate apparel manufacturing organizations with capabilities
of flexibility, responsiveness and coordination. These SC capabilities of the firm help their customers to
reduce costs of stock out, markdowns, high inventories at warehouses and point of sale - hence produce
value to the customer compared to marginal competitors in the country and region. Therefore study
reveals that firms engaged in producing low technology and less innovative products can achieve
differentiation through innovative valued services to their buyers for gaining competitive adventage and
buyers of such products can reduce costs of warehousing and inventories through SCM services. It is
found that having basic level of information integration and IT tools for sharing of information and
coordination, implies cost of extra resources and may undermine other SC capabilities.
10
ANZAM 2010
APPENDICES
Appendix-A
Figure 1.1 Supply Chain Flow of Orangi Company
11
Page 12 of 19
Page 13 of 19
ANZAM 2010
Appendix-B
Charts 1.1 to 1.4 showing major activities and lead time by product and fabric location are shown
in Charts 1.1 to 1.4.
Chart 1.1 Production Lead Time Before Improvement (Imported Fabric)
ACTIVITIES
LEAD TIME GANTT CHART
Total Lead Time
110 Days
Chart 1.2 Pr oduc tion Lead Time Before Improvem ent (Loc al Fabric)
ACTIV ITIES
LEAD TIM E GANTT CHART
Total Lead Time
90 Days
Order Processing
Orde r Processin g
15 Days
Fabric Supply
Trims Supply
60 Days
30 Days
Inspection of Material
Production
5 Days
30 Days
Chart 1.3 Production Lead Time After Improvement (I mported Fabric)
ACTIVITIES
LEAD TI ME GANTT CHART
Total Lead Time
70 Days
Order Processing
Fabric S upply
Trims Supply
Inspect ion of Material
Production
1 5 Da ys
Fabric Sup ply
Trims S up ply
Inspe ction of Mate rial
Product ion
40 Days
30 Da ys
5 Days
30 Days
Char t 1.4 Production Lea d Time After I mprovement (Loca l Fa br ic)
ACTIV ITIES
LE AD TIME G ANTT CHART
Tota l Lead Time
5 5 Days
Orde r P rocessing
5 Da ys
45 Days
Fab ric S up ply
20 Days
Trim s Su pp ly
In spect io n of M aterial
Prod uction
2 Da ys
18 Days
12
5 Da ys
30 Da ys
20 Days
2 D ays
18 Days
ANZAM 2010
Page 14 of 19
Appendix-C
Table 1.1 Information exchange between supply chain partners
From customer to Orangi company
Type of information
Frequency of information
sharing
Method/Tools of
information sharing
Order Forecasting
Confirm order
Quarterly
New-Minimum 55 days
before delivery date
Repeat-Minimum 45 days
before delivery date
Excel sheet by e-mail
By e-mail
Order details
3 days after conformation
Excel sheet by e-mail
Order design details
Maximum a week after
confirmation
After new product approval
MS office documents by
e-mail
MS office documents by
e-mail
Product development
From Orangi company to customer
Type of information
Frequency of information
sharing
Method / Tools of
information sharing
Production Planning
Monthly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Order status
Bi-weekly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Capacity
Quarterly
Excel sheet by e-mail
WIP
Bi-weekly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Finished goods inventory
Monthly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Packing List and shipment
details
Day of shipment
Excel sheet by e-mail
13
Page 15 of 19
ANZAM 2010
From Orangi company to supplier
Type of information
Frequency of information
sharing
Method/Tools of
information sharing
Order Forecasting
Quarterly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Confirm order
Overseas suppliers 45 days
Local supplier 30 days
Before delivery date
By e-mail
Purchase Orders
5 days after conformation
Excel sheet by e-mail
Product development
Not shared
From supplier to Orangi company
Type of information
Frequency of information
sharing
Method/Tool of
information sharing
Production Planning
Not shared
Order status
Bi-weekly
Capacity
Not Shared
WIP
Bi-weekly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Semi-finished goods
inventory
Monthly
Excel sheet by e-mail
Product development
1-weeks after order placement
for first laboratory sample
By courier and e-mail
Excel sheet by e-mail
14
ANZAM 2010
REFERENCES
Agrawal V & Farrell D (2003) Who wins in off shoring, The McKinsey Quarterly (4): 36-53.
Amit R & Schoemaker P (1993) Strategic assets and organizational rent, Strategic Management Journal
14: 33-46.
Abell D (1999) Competing today while preparing for tomorrow, Sloan Management Review 40 (3) 73-81.
Appelbaum R & Christerson B (1997) Cheap labor strategies and export-oriented industrialization: some
lessons from the Los Angeles, East Asia apparel connection, International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research 21: 202–217.
Barney J & Clark D (2007) Resource-based theory: creating and sustaining competitive advantage,
Oxford University Press, USA.
Boddy D, Macbeth D & Wagner B (2000) Implementing collaboration between organizations: an
empirical study of supply chain partnering, Journal of Management Studies 37: 1003-1018.
Cooper M, Lambert D & Pagh J (1997) Supply chain management: more than a new name for logistics,
The International Journal of Logistics Management 8: 1-14.
Croxton K, Garcia-Dastugue S, Lambert D & Rogers D (2001) The supply chain management processes,
The International Journal of Logistics Management 12: 13-36.
Deshmukh G (2001) Manufacturing strategy: literature review and some issues, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management 21 (7): 884-932.
Fernie J & Sparks L (2004) Logistics and retail management: insights into current practice and trends
from leading experts: Kogan Page Ltd.
Fisher Marshall L (1997) What is the right supply chain for your product, Harvard Business Review 75:
105-116.
Henderson R & Cockburn I (1994) Measuring competence?: Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical
research, Strategic Management Journal 15: 63-84.
Hines P (1993) Integrated materials management: the value chain redefined, International Journal of
Logistics Management 4: 13-22.
15
Page 16 of 19
Page 17 of 19
ANZAM 2010
Hong P & Jeong J (2006) Supply chain management practices of SMEs: from a business growth
perspective, Journal of Enterprise Information Management 19: 292-302.
Inkpen A & Ross J (2001) Why do some strategic alliances persist beyond their useful life? California
Management Review 44: 132-148.
Kim S (2006) The effect of supply chain integration on the alignment between corporate competitive
capability and supply chain operational capability, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management 26: 1084-1107.
Koh S, Demirbag M, Bayraktar E, Tatoglu E & Zaim S (2007) The impact of supply chain management
practices on performance of SMEs, Industrial Management and Data Systems 107: 103.
Kumar S & Arbi A (2008) Outsourcing strategies for apparel manufacture: a case study, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management 19 (1): 73-91.
Lambert D, Knemeyer A & Gardner J (2004) Supply chain partnerships: model validation and
implementation, Journal of Business Logistics 25: 21-42.
Lambert DM & Cooper MC (2000) Issues in supply chain management, Industrial Marketing
Management 29: 65-83.
Lawless M, Bergh D & Wilsted W (1989) Performance variations among strategic group members: An
examination of individual firm capability, Journal of Management 15: 649.
Li S, Ragu-Nathan B, Ragu-Nathan T & Subba Rao S (2006) The impact of supply chain management
practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance, Omega 34: 107-124.
Lummus R, Krumwiede D & Vokurka R (2001) The relationship of logistics to supply chain
management: developing a common industry definition, Industrial Management and Data
Systems 101: 426-431.
Makadok R (2001) Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent
creation, Strategic Management Journal 22: 387-401.
Mentzer J, DeWitt W, Keebler J, Min S, Nix N, Smith C & Zacharia Z (2001) Defining supply chain
management, Journal of Business Logistics 22: 1-26.
16
ANZAM 2010
Min S & Mentzer J (2004) Developing and measuring supply chain management concepts, Journal of
Business Logistics 25: 63-100.
Morash E (2002) Supply chain strategies, capabilities, and performance, Transportation journal 41: 3754.
Narasimhan R, ARAM J & Carter J (2001) An empirical examination of the underlying dimensions of
purchasing competence, Production and Operations Management 10: 1-15.
New S (1997) The scope of supply chain management research, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal 2: 15-22.
Porter M (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance, The Free Press,
New York.
Ray G, Barney J & Muhanna W (2004) Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage:
choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource-based view, Strategic
Management Journal 25: 23-37.
Ray G, Muhanna W & Barney J (2005) Information technology and the performance of the customer
service process: A resource-based analysis, Management Information Systems Quarterly 29: 4.
Sánchez A & Pérez M (2005) Supply chain flexibility and firm performance, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management 25: 681-700.
Schroeder R, Bates K & Junttila M (2002) A resource-based view of manufacturing strategy and the
relationship to manufacturing performance, Strategic Management Journal 23: 105-117.
Shang K & Sun L (2004) Taxonomy in logistics management: a resource-based perspective, International
Journal of Management 21: 149-165.
Skinner W (1985) The taming of lions: how manufacturing leadership evolved, 1780-1984, In Clark,
Hayes, Lorenz (Eds.) The uneasy alliance: Managing the productivity-technology dilemma, pp
63-110. The Harvard School Press, Boston, MA.
Tracey M, Vonderembse M & Lim J (1999) Manufacturing technology and strategy formulation: keys to
enhancing competitiveness and improving performance. Journal of Operations Management 17:
17
Page 18 of 19
Page 19 of 19
ANZAM 2010
411-428.
Tsang J & Antony J (2001) Total quality management in UK service organizations: some key findings
from a survey, Managing Service Quality 11: 132-141.
Whipple J, Frankel R & Daugherty P (2002) Information support for alliances: performance implications,
Journal of Business Logistics 23: 67-82.
Widener S (2006) Associations between strategic resource importance and performance measure use: the
impact on firm performance, Management Accounting Research 17: 433-457.
Wong C, Arlbjørn J & Johansen J (2005) Supply chain management practices in toy supply chains,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 10: 367-378.
Wu F, Yeniyurt S, Kim D & Cavusgil ST (2006) The impact of information technology on supply chain
capabilities and firm performance: A resource-based view, Industrial Marketing Management 35:
493-504.
Yusuf YY, Gunasekaran A, Adeleye EO & Sivayoganathan K (2004) Agile supply chain capabilities:
Determinants of competitive objectives, European Journal of Operational Research 159: 379392.
Zhao M, Droge C & Stank T (2001) The effects of logistics capabilities on firm performance: customerfocused versus information-focused capabilities, Journal of Business Logistics 22: 91-108.
18