MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2031679748 · doi:10.1108/13598541111103494

Measures for auditing performance and integration in closed‐loop supply chains

2011· article· en· W2031679748 sur OpenAlexaff
Adrián E. Coronado Mondragón, Chandra Lalwani, Christian E. Coronado Mondragon

Notice bibliographique

RevueSupply Chain Management An International Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueSustainable Supply Chain Management
Établissements canadiensUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Mots-clésSupply chainComputer scienceSupply chain managementAuditService managementCompetence (human resources)BusinessProcess managementSupply chain risk managementIndustrial organizationRisk analysis (engineering)MarketingEconomicsAccounting

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose In a growing number of competitive sectors with closed‐loop supply chains, the reverse component has become an inherent part of the business, not to mention a core competence; hence the need to have performance measures that can be used to provide an accurate diagnosis of the state of the supply chain by addressing both its forward and its reverse components. It is also important to identify the level of existing integration between parties, as this has been associated with supply chain performance. This paper seeks to address this issue. Design/methodology/approach Elements gathered from the literature reviewed are used to present a set of measures that can be applied for auditing purposes in: the forward supply chain; product returns and reverse logistics; flows of materials and information and integration between supply chain tiers. To illustrate the use of the proposed set of measures for auditing purposes a case study involving a major European mobile phone network operator was analysed using the operator's own brand of handsets characterised for having a closed‐loop supply chain. Findings The proposed set of measures for auditing purposes provide an overall picture of the performance of a closed‐loop supply chain by revealing high levels of stock for the products analysed, consequence of the difficulty to generate accurate forecasts and the accumulation of high quantities of product prior to launch. Also the methodology presented in this paper identifies links between product returns (faulty and non‐faulty) to operations in the forward component of the supply chain (design, sourcing, manufacturing and forecasting) and also indicates how performance is affected because of integration. Research limitations/implications The proposed set of measures for auditing purposes is relevant to closed‐loop supply chains which are related to products with short life cycles and during their lifetime can experience faulty and non‐faulty returns. The scope of the study presented may look limited; however, the application of the performance measures presented in this research can become a fundamental component of larger audit exercises. Further research should be carried out with supply chains on products with lifetime cycles that span long periods of time. Practical implications For industry sectors with closed‐loop supply chains, the availability of a set of measures that address the forward and reverse components plus integration can provide a detailed picture of the performance of value streams over traditional approaches to measurement that focus on only one component of the supply chain. The set of measures has the potential to be used to achieve better customer service and reduction in costs involving shipping, warehousing, labour and call centres. Originality/value The contribution of this research on closed‐loop supply chains is a methodology that defines performance measures for auditing purposes of the forward and reverse components of supply chains and assists in assessing the importance of integration between different tiers of supply chains.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,462
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,004
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,244
Écart entre enseignants0,219 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations88
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSupply Chain Management An International JournalMême sujetSustainable Supply Chain ManagementTravaux en français237 207