“CHALLENGES FACED IN MATERIAL HANDLING

MANAGEMENT AT MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES”

PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by
AMAL DHAS APOLLO
K Reg. No – P22BA016
Batch 2022 -2024
In partial fulfillment for the award of the
degree Of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Under the supervision and guidance of

Guide Name,

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

BHARATH INSTITUTE OF HIGHER EDUCATION
AND RESEARCH
Selaiyur, Chennai – 73.
 NOVEMBER 2023
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES
BHARATH INSTITUTE OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND
RESEARCH
Selaiyur, Chennai – 73

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project report on “CHALLENGES FACED IN

MATERIAL HANDLING MANAGEMENT AT MANUFACTURING
INDUSTRIES”is a bonafide work submitted by AMAL DHAS APOLLO K in partial
fulfillment of the degree of Master of Business Administration in the Department of
Management Studies, Bharath Institute Of Higher Education And Research during 2022-2024.
This certificate is issued based on the declaration by the candidate.

Dr.S.PRAVEENKUMAR

Dr.MAGDALENE PETER

INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER

Company Certificate

An NGO registered under Societies Registration Act XXI, 1860 as a national NGO. Regn.
No.S/ 792/Dstt.south/2012.

INTERNSHIP OFFER LETTER

Joining date: 05/11/2023

Dear AMAL DHAS APOLLO . K,

We are pleased to offer you INTERNSHIP in Umeed-a drop of hope (NGO). The duration of
internship will be 1 month starting from the date of your joining. We expect your personal
dedication and accountability towards the organisation in all
the advice, action and results as you provide being a representative of our organisation. We
would also ask for your commitment and dedication.

In return, we are committed to providing you with every opportunity to the highest level of your
ability and potential. You will receive a certificate on completion of the internship tenure.

As discussed during the telephonic interview, this is an unpaid internship so there will be no
stipend but you will get perks such as Certificate of completion, LOR, Medal/trophy to best
performers.

Again, congratulations and we are looking forward to work with you all If u have any query feel
free to contact: 9773653860/8448661797

Sincerely,
 CERTIFICATE OF THE SUPERVISOR

I, certify that the Project titled “Challenges faced in material

handling management at manufacturing industries” for the Degree of

Master of Business Administration by AMAL DHAS APOLLO K (REGISTER

No. P22BA016 ) is the record of research work carried out by him during

the period of ( No of Month) 2017 under my guidance and supervision and

that this work has not formed the basis for the award of any degree,

diploma, associate-ship, fellowship, titles in this or any other University or

other similar institutions of higher learning.

Place :

Date : Supervisor
 DECLARATION

I, AMAL DHAS APOLLO K (REGISTER No. P22BA016 ), declare that

the Dissertation entitled “Challenges faced in material handeling

management at manufacturing industries” submitted by me during the

period 2022 -2023 under the guidance of DR.A.BALAMURUGAN and has

not formed the basis for the award of any degree diploma, associate-ship,

fellowship, titles in this or any other University or other similar institutions of

higher learning.

Place: Chennai AMAL DHAS APOLLO K

Date: P22BA016
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to express my heart full thanks to, Dr. J. Sundeep Aanand, President and Dr

Sweetha Sundeep Aanand, Managing Director, Bharath Institute Of Higher Education

And Research, for their encouragement that we are receiving for our academic career.

I am also indebted to Dr J Hammed Hussain, Dean Engineering who encouraged me at

each and every step of this project work

I express my sincere thanks to Dr S Praveen Kumar, Head of the Department,

Department of Management Studies, I devote my thanks to esteemed (Guide name),

for their encouragement and the valuable guidance throughout the project work.

I thank my company guide, NAME, Designation Company name for his support to complete

this project.

My love, affection and thanks to my parents for their impeccable support and constant

encouragement that took me a long way in completing my project.

I also thank all my friends for their help and support during the course of the project.
 8

ABSTRACT

Author Aswin rawthor

Title Supply Chain Management Practices .

Year 2023

Language English

Pages 46 + 5 Appendices

Name of Supervisor RIYA NAYAK

The study sought to investigate the supply chain practices, adopted by the various
supply chain partners, in a food supply chain which consists of small enterprises. This
is because the inefficiencies in both unique sectors cause hikes in food prices that may
lead to the collapse of small enterprises.

Supply chain practices such as internal and external integration, information sharing,
lean production and traceability were examined.

A questionnaire was used as the research instrument for this descriptive case study
approach because the context of the phenomenon being investigated in order to
address the research question. The findings indicate that the focal firms collaborate
more with their suppliers than with customers. This is primarily attributed to
information asymmetry between the focal firm and the customers. The
recommendations suggest that there must be effective collaboration between all the
supply chain members in order to improve both internal and external integration
which will reduce costs and improve transparency and traceability processes needed
for a food supply chain.
 CHAPTER PAGE
TITLE NO.
NO.
ABSTRACT 9

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES 5

1 1
S
1.1 .Background of study 6
1.2 .Statement of the problem 7
1.3 .Objectives of the study 8
1.4 .Research questions 8

1.5 .Scope of the study 8

1.6 . Significance of the study 9
1.7 Limitation of study 10
1.8 Organisation of study 10
1.9 Summary of introductory 11
2
2.3supply chain
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 11
2.1 Overveiw of key concepts 11
2.2 Small and medium size enterprses 11
2.3 Supply chain 12
2.4 Supply chain management 15
2.5 Supply chain risk management 19
. 2.6 Supply chain integration 22
2.7 Summary of reveiw 25
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
27
28

3.1 Research Design

3.2.Population of simple size of the study 29

3.3. Data collection 30
3.4. Questionnaire Design 31
3.5. Reliability and Validity 31
3.6.Summary of Methodology 31
4 EMPERICIAL STUDY 31
4.1 Intoduction of case study findings 32

4.2 Breif description of the supply chain 34

4.3Adoption of traditional 40
4.5 The Reliability

4.4 Adoption of emerging 44

10
11
12
 13

Background of the study

Finland is a pro-entrepreneurial economy with 99.7% of its businesses characterized

as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Small and medium-sized enterprises
serve as the backbone of many economies and Finland is no exception to this fact.
The value added by SMEs from 2012 through to 2016 is double that of those of large
corporations in Finland, which had an increase of 7.2% (European Commission,
2018). Also, the share of employment of these small and medium-sized enterprises in
Finland
 14

increased their contribution to the employment sector by 6% from 2010 to 2015.

These statistics enabled the economy to maintain its competitiveness in the Small
Business Act principle areas documented by the European Commission. Another
business sector that is interesting to note is the food industry; which is a unique
market, given recent consumer awareness on food quality, safety, impact on the
environment and its effects on a healthy lifestyle.

The food industry is also characterized by “seasonality, supply spikes and

perishability” (Behzadi, O’Sullivan, Olsen and Zhang, 2018). As at 2012, Staniskis
states that, the demand for food had tripled, yet still unable to meet the amount
needed for human consumption. Singh, Shukla and Mishra (2018) state that in order
to attract customers, firms must offer high-quality food at a relatively lower price.
Inefficiencies in the operations of supply chains is outlined as a contributory factor to
the high food prices in EU member states (Bukeviciute, Dierx, & Ilzkovitz, 2009).
These include supply chain partners that are involved with the production, processing
and transportation of the food product.

Studies such as Wiengarten et al. (2011), Trienekens et al. (2012), Murphy and Adair
(2013), Beske et al. (2014) and Govindan (2018) reiterate the importance of supply
chain management practices to food industry stakeholders in other geographical
regions. Both the SME and food sectors operate in an uncertain and competitive
environment which affect their profitability.

Statement of the problem

The present literature on supply chain management practices is usually focused on

large corporations to the neglect of small and medium-sized enterprises. SMEs are
often noted to fail within the first 5 years of operation (OECD, 2000). In addition to
the gap which shows the exclusion of SMEs, current studies are focused on the
manufacturing firms in China.
 15

Combining the importance of SMEs and the food industry warrants a study into the
practices of enterprises that ensure food is moved from the farms to the table and how
the collaborative effort of members of a supply chain sustain their competitive
advantage and customer satisfaction.

In addition to the literature that show that supply chain management practices
positively impact organizational performance, this study seeks to explore supply
chain management practices in SMEs in the food industry in Finland using a single
food supply chain.

Objectives of the study

The objective of the research is to explore the extent of adoption of supply chain
management (SCM) practices employed in a food supply chain within an SME. The
specific objectives of the study are:

1. To provide insight for the development of a supply chain design suited for
SMEs.
2. To investigate the SCM practices adopted by the various supply chain partners
in a food supply chain.

Research questions

The study will use a case study approach to address the following research questions:

1. What are the supply chain management practices adopted by a small

enterprise in the food industry?
2. What are the supply chain integration issues faced by a small enterprise in the
food industry?

Scope of the study

This research is a descriptive case study to be used to explore the supply chain
management practices of a food supply chain in Finland. Thus, the respondents of the
 16

questionnaire will be limited to the employees of food enterprise (firm X) and its
suppliers and customers. The food supply chain consists of agricultural producers,
processors, logistic companies, distributors and final consumers.

Significance of the study

The contributions of supply chain practices to organizational performance and

competitive advantage cannot be understated. This study contributes to academia,
policy formulation and practice. The focus of this study is a supply chain that belongs
to both the SME and food sector which is the main gap in literature and practice that
this research seeks to fill. The government and policy makers for both the
entrepreneurial and food sectors will be encouraged to train workers in those sectors
on the benefits of supply collaboration in order to reduce food prices and increase
profitability.

The study seeks to provide empirical evidence on the business practices in both the
food industry and the SME sector in order to uncover practices overlooked by
managers in a typical food supply chain. The findings of this paper provide useful
information on the supply chain management (SCM) practices adopted by firms to
increase their competitive advantage. These will serve as managerial guidelines
because they are proven techniques found to improve supply chain performance.

Limitations of the study

Several challenges were encountered while conducting the study which could serve as
avenues for further research. Firstly, the adoption of the case study approach limited
the sample to a single supply chain in the food sector: a Finnish food production
company, which is in this case is a small enterprise. This sample is limited by the
respondents of the supply chain which involves a small number of employees given
the employment capacity of SMEs. Also, the research design was intended to collect
data from different levels of ranks of the supply chain. However, the data collection
was constrained with time and low response rate from the targeted respondents.
Further
 17

researchers could contact the farmers’ associations, agro-processing firm, and retail
and distribution centres. Another point to note is the exploratory nature of the case
method which restricts statistical generalization. This study attempted to use
triangulated data by administering the questionnaire to employees of firms in the
same supply chain who do business with the focal company. No access to financial
records of the firms used in the study meant that this study could not quantitatively
examine the impact of supply chain on financial performance.

Organization of the study

The thesis is divided into five sections. The introductory section mainly provides the
background of the study, the problem statement, research objectives and questions.
The literature review explains the key concepts which relate to supply chain processes
and their importance to organizational performance and competitive advantage. The
methodology of the thesis comprising of the population, sample size, method of data
collection and analysis are outlined. The findings of the study is presented and
discussed in the chapter preceding the concluding section. The last section includes
the summary of the entire work, conclusions arrived from the findings and the
recommendations that can be adopted by practitioners in the food industry.

Summary of Introductory Chapter

This chapter acquaints us with the background, research problem, objectives,
questions, scope and limitations of the thesis. The three main challenges that affect
the food industry show that supply chain practices are important for the success of
SMEs. The entire structure of the thesis is also stated. The next chapter discusses the
relevant literature concerning supply chain and the various practices.
 18

LITERATURE REVIEW

Overview of key concepts

An overview of the key concepts addressed in this research is discussed in this

section. The definitions deemed appropriate to document the SCM practices adopted
by supply chain partners of the food industry are presented. The concepts include
small and medium-sized enterprises, supply chain, supply chain management, supply
chain risk management, supply chain integration, lean, resilient and green
management practices.

The importance of the adoption of supply chain processes into the operations of an
enterprise is to achieve organizational performance and sustain its competitive
advantage. Organizational performance may come in the form of growth in market
share, return on investment, sales growth, and profitability. In general, the dimensions
along which competitive advantage is achieved and sustained are price or cost,
quality, delivery dependability, time to market and product innovation.

Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs)

There are various definitions of SMEs (Kherbach & Mocan, 2016) which is based on
several criteria such as the number of employees of the firm in question, annual
turnover, total assets and ownership of the enterprise.

OECD (2000) characterized enterprises based on the turnover or and the employment
capacity of the firm. Their report also states that the categorization of firms as SMEs
differ based on a country’s criteria. For example, the European Commission (2011)
refers to firms with employees’ strength between 100 and 499 as medium-sized
enterprises; small enterprises have an employee capacity between 10 and 99; and
micro enterprises have less than 9 employees. According to WTO (2016), most
countries label firms with 50 to 250 employees as medium-sized and those with 10 to
49 employees as small enterprises. Any firm with up to 10 employees is classified as a
microenterprise. This study uses the criterion suggested by WTO (2016) and
European Commission (2018).
 19

SMEs make up a greater part of the private sector which drive both entrepreneurial
and economic growth. These enterprises serve as a source of employment, good
products and services and contribute to the gross domestic product of the country.
SMEs cut across a variety of industries such as agriculture, food processing, trade and
service. According to Chapman, Lawrence and Helms (2000), SMEs already play
vital roles in supply chains and already adopt an integrated approach in operation.

The notion that large corporations’ benefit from the adoption of SCM practices is
prevalent in empirical literature. This is attributable to these practices which enable
the corporations reduce costs and deliver better goods and services to consumers.
Given this background, SMEs can also take advantage of the benefits of SCM to
mitigate their risk of failure, reduce costs and sustain their competitive advantage.
This informed the focus of this study - which is a small enterprise in the food
industry.

Supply Chain

The typical supply chain involves timely flow of materials, relevant information and
products across members of the supply chain. Older studies such as Lee and
Billington (1995), describe a supply chain as a “network of production and
distribution sites”.
Guide, Jayaraman and Linton’s definition of supply chain extends from the sourcing
of raw materials, to manufacturing, to distribution and to the disposal of the goods
(2003). A simple supply chain is depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2 sourced from
Rebula de Oliveira, Marins, Rocha, and Salomon (2017) and Chen and Paulraj (2004)
respectively. Figure 1 shows flow of raw materials from the supplier to the central
firm and the movement of the finished goods from the central firm to the customers.
 20

Figure 1.

Basic supply chain.

This study is focused on the small enterprises in the food industry. Folkerts and
Koehorst (1998) define a food supply chain as “a set of interdependent companies that
work closely together to manage the flow of goods and services along the value-added
chain of agricultural and food products, in order to realize superior customer value at
the lowest possible costs.” This supply chain considers all the processes undertaken to
get food on the table. The food industry is quite dynamic given that the preferences
and tastes of consumers influence the demand of food products (Van Donk,
Akkerman, & Van der Vaart, 2008; Baker & Smyth, 2012).

The food industry is plagued with risks that come with perishability, seasonality and
supply spikes, adverse weather conditions, diseases and pests (Behzadi et al., 2018).

Figure 2 illustrates the variety of products in different markets - the agricultural, food
processing and distribution sectors (Bukeviciute et al., 2009). The diagram is aptly
described by Simchi-Levi et al., (1999) as a network of interdependent suppliers,
manufacturers, distribution centers, and retailers that collaborate.
 21

Extant literature on supply chain argues that its adoption reduces the cost, increases
the profitability and sustains the competitive advantage of enterprises profitable. An
important characteristic of supply chain is the interconnectedness it provides the
partners of the supply chain which enables them depend on each other to deliver
superior service to consumers (Kamalahmadi & Parast, 2016). The entire food supply
chain is responsible for the safety and high-quality of food thus the “supply chain is
as strong as its weakest member”.
 22

Figure 2.

A schematic diagram of a food supply chain.

Supply Chain Management (SCM)

Tang (2006) refers to SCM as “the management of material, information and financial
flows through a network of organizations (i.e., suppliers, manufacturers, logistics
providers, wholesalers/ distributors, retailers) that aims to produce and deliver
products or services for the consumers. It includes the coordination and collaboration
of processes and activities across different functions such as marketing, sales,
production, product design, procurement, logistics, finance, and information
technology within the
 23

network of organizations.” SCM considers the upstream and downstream relations

with the stakeholders in a supply chain (Li, Ragu-Nathan, Ragu-Nathan, & Rao,
2006).

The term “supply chain management” was introduced by Oliver and Webber (1982)
to replace the concept of logistics which ensures that goods and services are provided
at the right time. However, SCM is an extension of the logistics concept which
incorporates integration into the business operations of enterprises (Cooper, Lambert,
& Pagh, 1997). Therefore, SCM is not a replacement of logistics. It is imperative to
distinguish between logistics management and supply chain management given that
the two concepts are related. Christopher (2005) defines logistics management as “the
process of strategically managing the procurement, movement and storage of
materials, parts and finished inventory (and the related information flows) through the
organization and its marketing channels in such a way that current and future
profitability are maximized through the cost-effective fulfilment of orders.”

The benefits of SCM is captured in Figure 3 adapted from Li et al.(2006). The

adoption of SCM practices is expected to improve on the competitive advantage and
organizational performance of the individual firms and the supply chain as a whole.
This diagram can also serve as the case propositon for this study.

Proposition: The adoption of supply chain practices positively impact on a firm’s

competitive advantage and organizational performance.

The focus of the study is to provide the foundation for the formulation of both
theoretical and quantitative models to help improve the SCM practices of supply
chains. This will in turn help to sustain competitive advantages; especially lower
prices of food products in order to impact the survival of SMEs.
 SCM Practices Competitive Advantage

Strategic Supplier Price/ cost

17
Partnership Customer Quality

Relationship Delivery Dependability Product Innovation

Time to Market
Level of Information Sharing

Quality of Information

Organizational Performance

Market performance

Financial performance

Figure 3.

Benefits of supply chain management practices.

The constructs of SCM practices are supplier and customer relationship, level and
quality of information sharing and postponement. Both supplier and customer
relationship involve collaboration between the focal firm and its suppliers and
customers and the sharing of timely, relevant and credible information to smoothen
the business processes.

Chapman et al., (2000) and Chin, Hamid, Rasli and Baharun, (2012) suggest that the
strategic relationship between SMEs and their suppliers and customers have helped
sustain the competitiveness of SMEs even in the face of supply chain risks. This
enables the firms compete on value and improves upon the overall performance of the
supply chain (Li, Fan, Lee, & Cheng, 2015). This collaboration ensures that the
supply chain members can effectively meet the business requirements (Stevens,1989;
Charka & Jaju, 2014).

Jaharuddin, Mansor and Yaakob (2016) ague that information is important for SMEs
as inadequate credible information lowers the level of integration which increases
their risk of failure. Information holds the supply chain together in fostering
collaboration and joint decision-making.
 18

Information sharing is vital to the supply chain because the dissemination of accurate,
timely, adequate, credible and operational data is needed in order to improve both
product and material flows in the supply chain (Van Donk, Akkerman, & Van der
Vaart, 2008). Constraints to information sharing which include low level of
information quality and incompatibility of information systems reduce the potential
positive impact of information sharing on the effectiveness of supply chain
integration (Ali, Babai, Boylan, & Syntetos, 2017). Information sharing is enabled by
IT through facilitating the transmission of real time relevant operational information.
Supplier relationships which are long-term positively affect performance directly and
indirectly through information sharing (Prajogo & Olhager, 2012). The study by
Nyaga, Whipple and Lynch (2010) using 370 buyers and 250 suppliers indicate that
information sharing contribute to improved satisfaction and the performance of
enterprises that engage in collaborative relationships.

Li et al. (2006) lists the competitive advantage that supply chain members enjoy as
price or cost, quality, delivery dependability, product innovation and time to market.
Cost is the first priority in a risk mitigation strategy developed by Kirilmaz and Erol
(2017) to reduce the risks in supply manangement. Theft, fragility of goods, long
transportation routes may affect the delivery of the products to the end-user. The
occurrence of such activities will reduce customer satisfaction which means that the
reliability of the delivery is crucial to supply chains.

Nature contributes to a longer supply lead time in some situtaions (Behzadi et al.,
2018). The other activities in the food supply chain such as harvesting and food
processing may be affected during fluctuations in the supply of farm produce. This
explains why the time to market dimension must be delicately handled to reduce
delay which disrupts the business processes of members of the supply chain.

The firms experience organizational performance in the form of increased production,

reduced inventory and cycle time, increased market share and profitability.
Competitive advantage is achieved when a firm is perceived to deliver better goods
and services of
 19

higher value than that of competitors. This implies that the customer would be
satisfied and improve upon that strategic relationship (Qorri, Mujkic, & Kraslawski,
2018).

The resource-based view and agency theory are the theoretical paradigms of supply
chain that this study considers. Barney (1991) proposes that the resources and
capabilities of a firm are necessary for their contribution to the creation and
sustenance of competitive advantages enjoyed by supply chain members. This is
known as the the resource-based view. The agency theory describes a situation where
a principal delegates work to an agent. This is important as most of the practices
adopted by the SC are collaborative and involves the sharing of information, funds
and goods to necessitatte action by the SC members (Zsidisin & Ellram, 2003).

Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM)

Although SCM practices are to facilitate the effective management of a firm (Koh,
Demirbag, Bayraktar, Tatoglu, & Zaim, 2007), the risks that affect supply chains are
many. This informs the need for supply chain risk management. Supply chain risks
come in the form of disruptions that affect supply chain activities. Christopher (2004)
categorizes risks as “process and value stream related, assets and infrastructure
related, organizational and interorganizational risks, environmental risks”. Which
explains the sources of the risks. The risks that affect supply chain include credit
crunch, natural disasters, adverse weather conditions, fire, IT failure and uncertainty
with demand, yield capacity and input cost. There are risks that affect supply and
demand while another group of risks are disruptions caused by external factors
(Kleindorfer & Saad, 2005). For food supply chains, quality risks are of utmost
impotance as consumers are interested in quality and safety of the edible products
they purchase (Van Rijswijk & Frewer, 2008; Ting, Tse, Ho, Chung, & Pang, 2014;
Zondag, Muellerb, & Ferrin, 2017). The risks of food supply chain are increased
because of their perishability (Behzadi et. al, 2018).
 20

Supply chain risks lower profitability, operational efficiency and other compettive
advantages (Hunt, Craighead, & Ketchen Jr., 2010; Mensah & Merkuryev, 2014).
These risks affect the short-term performance of supply chains (Tang, 2006).

The mitigation approach involves the management of supply, demand, product and
information. The mitigation strategy can be made efffective by combining SCM and
SCRM (Li et al., 2015). SCRM allows firms to proactively prepare to reduce the
impact of risks that occur as one collaborates with supply chain members (Wu &
Blackhurst, 2009; Beske et al., 2014).

Figure 4

The concept of Supply chain Risk Management. Blos, Quaddus, Wee, & Watanabe
(2009)

According to Chapman (2006), SCRM involves identifying, assessing, analyzing and

treating risks. Supply chain risk management is defined as the “implementation of
strategies to manage both every day and exceptional risks along the supply chain
based on continuous risk assessment with the objective of reducing vulnerability and
ensuring continuity” (Wieland & Wallenburg, 2012). Figure 4 which was sourced
from Blos, Quaddus, Wee, and Watanabe (2009) shows a Venn Diagram which
portrays the
 21

concept of supply chain risk management. The diagram shows SCRM as an

intersection which combines risk management and supply chain management in its
function. The risk management is to help take care of the risks that supply chain face
even though supply chain management practices have beeen adopted.

Enterprises must identify the sources of the risks that disrupt the smooth performance
of their supply chain. This is largely due to the negative impact that the risks pose to
the firm’s competitive advantage and organizational performance. Risk analysis
involves identifying, measuring, evaluating, mitigating, monitoring and controlling
risks (Kirilmaz & Erol, 2017). Risk analyis and control helps the stakeholders of the a
supply chain make well-informed decisions which influence the response to
uncertainties (Heckmann, Comes, & Nickel, 2015). The level of likelihood of
occurrence and impact of identified risks is assessed to inform the mitigation
approach. There are risks which could be avoided and others that could be controlled
to reduce their probability of occurrence. Other risks are also shared by the members
of the supply chain.

The risks emanating from the upstream level of the supply chain are very disruptive
(Rajesh & Ravi, 2015). Global sourcing and lean production expose the supply chains
to vulnerability (Christopher & Peck, 2004). In light of the impact of such risks,
choosing a resilient supplier will help the firm sustain its competitive advantage. Most
firms reduce supplier risks by increased outsourcing (Giannakis & Papadopoulos,
2016). Recent SCM practices such as just in time and lean production, shorter product
cycle and lead times make the SC prone to high risks. When one supply chain partner
achieves his goal, it may expose other partners to higher risks thus there is a need for
collaboration to mitigate the effect of such risks (Fan, Li, Sun, & Cheng, 2017).
Diversifying the sources of supply is used in SCRM especially when cost is not the
only consideration in the selection of suppliers. All risks in the supply chain are
important because the supply chain is as strong as its weakest member.
 22

Kirilmaz and Erol (2017) suggest the following for mitigating suppliers’ risk:

1. “Creating the minimum cost procurement plan via linear programming.

2. Performing risk analysis and identifying the risk profiles of suppliers.
3. Determination of the product quantity to be transferred in proportion to the
supplier risk profile.
4. Product transfer from a risky supplier to a relatively less risky (reliable)
supplier via a network model.
5. Creating the new cost and risk-based procurement plan.”

Using data from 350 Chinese manufacturing firms, Fan et al. (2017) find that Supply
Chain Risk Management impact risk information sharing and risk analysis and
assessment positively. Shared SCRM strategy improve on the financial performance
of supply chain members as evidenced by a study using data collected from 350
manufacturing firms (Li et al., 2015). The findings of Lavastre, Gunasekaran and
Spalanzani (2012) suggest that the exchange of timely and credible information and
collaboration with SC partners leads to effective SCRM using data collected from 142
managers in 50 French companies.

2.1.5 Supply Chain Integration (SCI)

There is a need for strategic collaborative partnerships between supply chain members
in order to synchronize business processes to fulfil customer demand (Lambert,
Cooper, & Pagh, 1998; Pearcy, Parker, & Guinipero, 2008). This is referred to as
supply chain integration (SCI) or supply chain collaboration. In order for SCM to be
effective, there is a need to integrate the activities of the supply chain partners (Tang
& Musa, 2011).

SCI is “the degree to which a manufacturer strategically collaborates with its supply
chain partners and collaboratively manages intra- and inter-organizational processes,
in order to achieve effective and efficient flow of products and services, information,
money and decisions, to provide maximum value to the customer” (Flynn, Huo, &
Zhao, 2010). The intra-organizational process is carried out within the functional
 23

departments of an organization and is referred to as internal integration. Externally,

integration is carried out either upstream with suppliers or downstream with
customers through inter-organizational collaboration. This implies that there are three
constructs of SCI which are: customer integration, supplier integration, and internal
integration.

Figure 4 which is sourced from Chen and Paulraj (2004) shows the integration that
occurs within the internal supply chain and how the flow of information goods and funds
is passed unto supply chain members.

Figure 5.

Internal and external supply chain.

Internal and external integration affect the performance indicators of a firm

differently. The impact of supplier or customer integration on a firm’s operational and
financial performance could vary significantly (Schoenherr & Swink, 2012). Through
integration, firms get to leverage on the resources of their supply chain partners (Cao
& Zhang, 2011). SCI also improves efficiency, flexibility, competitive advantage and
performance (Flynn et al., 2010; Nyaga et al., 2010; Qi, Huo, Wang, & Yeung, 2017).
Zhao, Feng and Wang (2015) investigate the impact of integration on financial
 24

performance on 195 Chinese firms. They find that there is an inverted - U shaped
relationship between integration and financial performance. Flynn et al.(2010) also
find that customer and internal integration affect the performance of an enterprise
more than supplier integration. For the food industry, Kumar et al., (2017) find a
positive correlation between SCI and supply chain performance.

Even though SCI leads to superior performance and increases the responsiveness of
the partners to market needs (Cao & Zhang, 2011; Wiengarten, Humphreys, Gimenez,
& McIvor, 2016), there are problems associated with SCI. The nature of SCI is
timeconsuming, may involve conflict of interest, opportunistic behaviour and be
constrained by an inflexible firm culture. Silvestre, Monteiro, Viana, and de
SousaFilho (2018) suggest that collaboration between stakeholders may also heighten
the risk of corruption.

The collaborative nature of SCI enables the supply chain partners to access important
information and resources available to the supply chain (Huo, 2012). Sharing of
information translates into higher levels of supply chain integration when it is applied
to both supplier and customer relationships. Information sharing influences
competitive advantage through cost reduction, improved supply chain stakeholder
relationships and improved sales. (Lee, So , & Tang , 2000; Zhou & Benton , 2007;
Kocoglu, Imamoglu, Ince, & Keshin, 2011). Information integration implies that
sharing information must be better coordinated to swiftly respond to disruptions
(Prajogo & Olhager, 2012).

Information technology facilitates the sharing of real time operational information to

improve upon decisions made by the supply chain partners which reduces costs
related to inventory and supply chain disruptions (Lee et al., 2000). The findings of
Sheu, Yen and Chae (2006) suggest that supply chain partners effectively collaborate
with improved IT platforms which promotes participation.
 25

Lean, Resilient, and Green Management Practices

These three paradigms are the latest approaches used by firms to remain competitive
and sustainable in dynamic markets (Govindan, Azevedo, Carvalho, & Cruz-
Machado, 2014). Lean and green practices are important as they both encourage waste
elimination internally and across the entire supply chain (Fliedner & Majeske, 2010;
Azevedo, Carvalho, Duarte, & Cruz-Machado, 2012).

Firms that adopt lean practices emphasize reduction in waste and ensure fewer
disruptions in the distribution of goods and information. The lean supply chain uses
the just-in-time approach which involves the delivery of products when it is needed
and typically in small batches. The just-in-time incorporates time constraints into the
supply chain strategy Thus, this results in an overall cost reduction through lower
storage costs, product quality, less delivery time, optimal use of resources
(Marhamati, Azizi, & Marhamati, 2017). Qi et al.(2017) find that 604 manufacturers
in China prioritize cost, quality and delivery strategies in their lean supply chains.

Ponomarov and Holcomb (2009) describe supply chain resilience as “the adaptive
capability of the supply chain to prepare for unexpected events, respond to disruptions
and recover from them by maintaining continuity of operations at the desired level of
connectedness and control over structure and function”. There is a dichotomy in the
way resilience is perceived. According to Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016), resilience
is characterised by the enterprise’s capability to be both proactive and reactive in the
resolution of supply chain disruptions.

Resilience should be developed at the firm level to overcome supply chain

vulnerabilities. The strategies of resilient firms consider innovation, valuation and
partnerships (Winston, 2014). Resilient supply chains are able to reduce the impact of
supply chain risks on their “productivity, revenue, profitability and competitive
advantage” (Mensah & Merkuryev, 2014). According to Fiksel, Polyviou, Croxton,
and Pettit (2015) and Behzadi et al. (2018), supply chain resilience complements
SCRM. Mensah and Merkuryev (2014) developed a strategy to make supply chain
management
 26

resilient; which includes string corporate culture, lean production, the six sigma
strategy and flexibility.

Green practices involve “integrating environmental thinking into supply-chain

management, including product design, material sourcing and selection,
manufacturing processes, delivery of the final product to the consumers as well as
end-of-life management of the product after its useful life” (Srivastava, 2007).
According to Ahi and Searcy (2013), the green approach is a component of
sustainable supply chain practices which focuses on the environment. The amount of
wastage in the food supply chain can be reduced by using re-usable containers for
packaging. Dubey et al. (2017) concludes that in order to be recognized as a green
firm, the technologies and product development must project as green brand. Carbon
dioxide emissions are a problem for supply chains given the importance of
transportation to the supply chain (Ji, Gunasekaran, & Yang, 2014).

Sustainability issues are an emerging area in supply chain literature (Beske et

al.,2014; Fahimnia, Tang, Davarzani, & Sarkis, 2015). Sustainability relates to
“economic practices which meet the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (World Commission on
Environment and Development, 1987). Sustainable supply chains are concerned with
economic, environment and social issues (Seuring & Müller, 2008). Govindan et al.
(2014) examine the effect of lean, resilient and green supply chain practices on the
sustainability of the Portuguese automotive industry. Their study finds that waste
elimination, SCRM and cleaner production influence the sustainability of supply
chains.

Two concepts prevalent in the food industry are traceability and transparency. The
adoption of both practices assures consumers of guaranteed food safety and quality.
Traceability distinguishes the quality attributes of the food products. It involves
tracking the food product from the farm to fork using unique identification for the
supplier, buyer and the product (Dabbene, Gay, & Tortia, 2014; Pizzuti & Mirabelli,
 27

2015). Consumers want safe, healthy and consistent good quality food products
(Trienekens et al., 2012). Products that are non-complaint can easily be identified and
traced to avert food contamination and crises.

Summary of Literature Review

The literature review of this thesis consists of the definitions, importance and findings
of the extant literature on the concepts of small and medium sized enterprises, supply
chains and their management, supply chain risk management, supply chain
integration, lean, resilient, and green supply chain practices. The research
methodology is discussed in the following chapter.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This project takes the form of both qualitative and quantitative research which
addresses the questions of what, where, why and how in order to build or disprove
theories by using a real-world case study. The quantitative part of this study is
structured that, analyses were made on the number of respondents of the research
questionnaire distributed to the company in question. Case studies help build theories
(Zondag et al., 2017) by providing in-depth knowledge on the topic of interest
(Ellram, 1996). Yin (2014) suggests the use of a descriptive case study design when
the context of the phenomenon is relevant to address the research question. Studies
such as that of Seuring and Müller (2008), also argue for the use of case studies to
develop models in supply chains. Moreover, Patton (2002) proposes that if the
findings of a study is not generated through statistical techniques, it qualifies as
qualitative research.

Population and Sample Size of the Study

The purposeful random sampling procedure which is primarily purposive sampling

will be used in the implementation of this case study. According to Neuman
(2011),
 28

purposive sampling are effective for exploratory research because the researcher
decides the approapriateness of the sample to address the research objectives. The use
of a random sample involves the use of random respondents in order to control
researcher bias which may exist during the data collection process.

The target population of interest for this study is the food industry in Finland. This
research uses non-probability sampling in the selection of the firms’ order achieve its
objectives (Patton, 2002). For the purpose of this research, the focus of the study is
the SMEs in the food industry. This is unique because of the dynamic nature of the
food industry, the demands of consumers and the risks involved.

The target respondents will spread across the various levels of supply chain
management categorized by upstream (suppliers), the focal enterprise and
downstream levels (distributors and consumers). According to Cooper and Ellram
(1993), a focal company leads and takes charge of the collaboration among the
members of the supply chain. Concentrating on only the focal company to analyze
SCM practices can be considered as bias thus the inclusion of the other supply chain
partners (Silvestre et al., 2018).

Data Collection

According to Pizzuti and Mirabelli (2015), the supply chain partners in a typical food
supply chain are the agricultural producers, processors, logistic companies,
distributors and final consumers. The employees of these categories of supply chain
partners will serve as the target respondents of this research. The typical respondents
for such a study are employees in the productions, operations, logistics and finance
departments. The IT manager is included because business need to be electronically
connected in order ensure effective supply chain integration.

The main instrument for data collection will be a questionnaire developed from a
review of literature on supply chain management practices. The questionnaire will be
 29

distributed across the food supply chain. The data used in this case study is primary
data as it is retrieved from the respondents by the same researcher.

Questionnaire Design

The questionnaire was informed by literature on supply chain management. The main
questions were adopted from Li et al. (2005) to ensure content validity. The research
instrument consists of empirically validated and reliable constructs that is used to
investigate how firms adopt supply chain management practices. There are 62
questions categorized into 10 dimensions focusing on different practices that may
improve the supply chain performance of small enterprises.

A semi-structured interview may be used as a follow up to delve into the critical issues
that may arise after the administration of the questionnaire. A 6-point and 7-point
Likert scale is used to indicate the extent to which the respondent perceives the level
of adoption of traditional and emerging supply chain management practices
respectively. The Likert scale is an ordinal scale used to rate the extent to which
respondents agree or disagree with a statement. The 6-point and 7-point Likert scale
are depicted in Table 1.

Table 1.

Likert scale and measures.

6-point 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 =
strongly agree, 6 = not applicable

7-point 1 = no impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = minor impact, 4 =

moderate impact, 5 = major impact, 6 = critical impact, 7= catastrophic
impact
 30

Reliability and Validity

According to Patton (2002), reliability and validity are crucial dimensions used to
ascertain the quality of research. Reliability is concerned with the measurements
whiles validity pertains to the methodology used; which translates into the quality of
the findings of the study.

As mentioned in the data collection section of this chapter, the data collection
involves the self-administered questionnaire adopted from Li et al. (2006) in order to
answer the questions of this descriptive case study. Therefore, the paradigm assumed
by this study can be considered as positivism which is context independent and
objective in the exploration of research problem. Creswell and Miller (2000) state that
the paradigm asssumed by a researcher influences the validity of a study. The validity
of the study can be improve upon using triangulation via the different sources through
which the data is collected. The use of respondents from different supply chain
partners will serve this purpose. The reliability of a study is also argued to be the
consequence of its validity.

Summary of Methodology
This chapter explains the choice of research methodology, the design of the research
process including the sample, questionnaire, reliability and validity issues. The
descriptive case study approach best fits as the qualitative research methodology that
can fulfil the research objectives. The purposeful random sampling is chosen as the
procedure used to determine the sample size and the administration of questionnaires
will be used for data collection.

EMPERICAL STUDY

Introduction of the case study findings

This chapter presents the findings gathered from the administration of questionnaires
to the employees to the firms selected in a typical food supply chain which are also
 31

small enterprises. First, a description of the firms and respondents are provided to
give an overview of the firms involved and how pertinent their responses are to
understand the operations of a food supply chain in Finland. Secondly, the responses
on the adoption of traditional supply chain practices are presented followed by that of
emerging supply chain practices that are associated sustainability.

Drawing on literature on supply management practice, this study explored the supply
management practices that are adopted by a food supply chain. Enterprises operate on
some level of uncertainty which affects their level of survival. Combining this with
the vulnerabilities of the food industry makes room for an interesting case study.

Implementation of the Research

The research was conducted using data from a food supply chain in Finland. The data
was collected from employess of the focal company, supplier and a customer. In the
collection of the data, we requested the participation of the employees of the selected
firm. Given the sensitive nature of the responses and its impact of the firm in
question, we assured the anonymity of the respondents to reduce bias and increase the
truthfulness and accuracy of the responses.

An important issue to address is the nature of the firms involved: The firms being
small enterprises meant that the pool of respondents would be limited as compared to
other studies which involved big corporations. As a reminder, small enterprises have
less than 50 employees who may not be present at a particular point in time. 10
questionnaires were sent to each supply chain partner in this particular food supply
chain under investigation. Upon the completion of the data collection process, there
were 10 usable questionnaires which represent a response rate of 33%. As shown in
Table 2, 6 of the respondents were from the focal firm, Company X and 2 each from
the Supplier and Customer.
 32

Brief description of the supply chain

A Finnish food small enterprise, Company X was strategically selected because it has
been in operation for over two decades given the rate of failure of SMEs and the
vulnerabilities of the food industry. Table 2 shows the information pertaining the type
of respondents and how long they have worked with the firms under scrutiny.

Table 2: General information about the firms in the food supply chain
Company X Customer Supplier

Frequency 6 2 2
Percent 60% 20% 20%
Department Production Operations & Logistics
Number of years More than 15 years
the firm been in
operation

Number of years More than 3 1 to 3 years More than 3 years

employed by the years
firm

Number of 5 to 10 More than 10 Less than 5

regular suppliers

The respondents for Company X and Supplier are employees who have worked for
their enterprises for more than three years and belong to the production and
operations department respectively. The employees of Customer have worked with
production department from one to three years.

The input of the food supply chain includes onions, plantain, milk, flour, German and
Finnish meat. The food products offered by Company X consists of meat balls, pan
 33

steak, chicken loaf, fish and Finnish pie. Both raw materials and food products of this
supply chain are standardized and affordable as compared to competitors. The food
products offered by the members of the supply chain are affordable which translates
from the lower costs.

Figure 5 is a depiction of the which of the firms employs the services of an in-house
supply chain manager given the importance of supply chain integration to both the
operational and financial performance of the firms involved. 2 out of the 3 (67%)
firms have an in-house supply chain manager. Company X and their supplier employ
the services of an in-house supply chain manager while the customer has outsourced
this important function needed in the food supply chain.

Does the firm have a supply chain manager?

33%

Company X & Supplier Yes

Customer No

67%

Figure 6

Does the firm have a supply chain manager?

Adoption of Traditional SCM practices

The adoption of traditional supply chain management practices is discussed by

providing the findings with respect to each supply chain partner in the order of
Company X, Supplier and Customer. Table 3 presents the average numerical reponses
 34

of the respondents with regards to particular questions on supply chain practices. This
section discusses the implications of the reponses presented in Table 3.

The findings show that Company X considers the quality of supplies and delivery
dependability in the choice of supplier over the cost and innovativeness of the
product. The suppliers are not involved in the creation of new products even though
there is some level of supplier integration.

Figure 7 shows that this supply chain sources some of its inputs from foreign
counterparts. 67% of the firms involved, Company X and Customer use both
domestic and foreign suppliers to procure food products while the Supplier only uses
domestic suppliers as the source of their raw materials.

Table 3

The extent of adoption of traditional supply chain practices.

Company X Supplier Customer

Supplier partnership

Quality 4 6 6

Price/ cost 3 6 6

Innovative product 3 6 6

Delivery dependability 4 6 6

Problems with the supply chain are

resolved with the suppliers
4 6 6
The quality of the products are
improved upon with input from your
firm
5 6 6
 35

The key suppliers are involved in the

planning activities of the firm
3 6 6
The key suppliers are involved in the
development of new products
1 6 6
Customer (distributor) relationship

The firm measures and evaluates

customers’ feedback
4 5 4
The firm measures and
evaluates customers’ satisfaction 4 5 4
The firm has measures in place to
help customers’ seek assistance
6 4 4

Information sharing

The firm informs its customers of

issues affecting the business
6 6 6
The firm informs its customers of its
core business processes
6 6 6
The firm and its customers update
each other about events that affect
the business relationship
4 4 6
Information quality

The information exchanged between

the firm and its suppliers are timely
5 6 6
The information exchanged between
the firm and its suppliers are complete
4 6 6
 36

The information exchanged between

the firm and its suppliers are reliable
4 6 6
The information exchanged between
the firm and its customers are timely
4 4 3
The information exchanged between
the firm and its customers are
complete
4 4 3
The information exchanged between
the firm and its customers are reliable
4 5 5
Postponement

The final product of the firm is

customized to meet the needs of the
customers
5 6 6
The final product is delayed until the
firm receives the specific orders from
the customers
1 6 6
Price/cost

We offer competitive prices 5 4 6

We are able to offer prices as low or

lower than our competitors
4 3 6
Quality

We are able to compete based

on quality
5 5 5
 37

We offer products that are

highly reliable
5 5 5
We offer products that are
very durable
3 6 6
We offer high quality products to
our customer
5 5 5
Delivery dependability

We deliver the kind of

products needed
5 5 6
We deliver customer order on time 5 5 6

We provide dependable delivery 4 4 6

Product innovation

We provide customized products 4 6 6

We alter our product offerings to

meet client needs
4 6 6
We respond well to customer demand
for “new” feature
4 6 6
Time to market

We deliver product to market quickly 5 6 6

We are first in the market in

introducing new products
3 6 6
We have time-to-market lower than
industry average
3 6 6
 38

We have fast product development 4 6 6

Note: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly

agree, 6 = not applicable

With regards to customer integration, Company X does not share confidential

information with their customers. The findings suggests that the firm has a stronger
supplier relationship than customer relationship given that feedback from customers
is limited. This may pose a problem considering that high food quality is demanded
by consumers. The adoption of traceability is necessary to inform concerned
consumers about the history of the food product from ‘farm to fork’ (Pizzuti &
Mirabelli, 2015) and guarantee food safety (Beske et al., 2014 ; Dabbene et al., 2014).
Animal welfare and the impact of agro-food processing on the environment also
raises concerns by the government (Trienekens et al., 2012).

Type of suppliers

33%

67%

Company X & Customer Both Domestic & Foreign suppliers Supplier Domestic suppliers

Figure 4

Types of suppliers
 39

The Supplier procures its raw materials preferably from domestic suppliers and
supplies Company X with milk, flour and oil. The respondents of the Supplier
corroborate the responses of that of their customer, Company X. The Supplier limits
the kind of information relayed to their customers in order not to lose the business
transaction to another competitor. Zhao et al., (2015) find that too little supply chain
integration affects the financial performance of the enterprises involved. There is also
an improvement in supply chain risk management when firms in a supply chain
engage in information sharing on risks (Li et al.,2015).

The standardization of both raw materials and food products implies that
postponement in the production is reduced to minimal and greatly influenced by the
perishability of food. The affordability of food products offered relates with their
standardization which is necessary because of little or no differentiation in the sector
except for branding. This feature of the food supply chain aligns with Beske et al.,
(2014) who state that the food industry is often characterized by mass production.

The downstream partner of this supply chain is the Customer who has outsourced the
supply chain function of its business operations. This implies that this Customer does
not directly deal with the focal company, Company X. Nonetheless, the quality of
information provided to this second-tier customer is low but reliable. This Customer,
in relating to the consumers of the food products of the supply chain, handles
complaints and provide feedback.

There is a standard operating procedure which ensures that in the event of delay of the
products, the supply chain partner notifies the other partners with three to five
working days. Therefore, to a large extent, delivery dependability between the
Supplier and Company X is assured. Given that the supply chain function of the
Customer is outsourced and the low level of customer integration, the impact of delay
cannot be perceived and included in the findings of this case study.

Studies such as Cao and Zhang (2011) and Lavastre et al., (2012) emphasize
integation with both suppliers and customers so as to leverage on their expertise and
resources to
 40

reduce the impact of risks. Ali et al., (2017) also argue that information sharing among
supply chain partners may be restricted due to low level of trust, information quality
and incompatibility of information systems. It is also important to note that the prices
of food products can be lowered by improving the collaboration in the supply chain
(Singh et al., 2018).

Adoption of Emerging SCM practices

Lean, resilient, and green management practices are the emerging fields in the supply
chain literature. The responses from the data collection suggests that the listed
practices would have moderate to catastrophic impact on their respective enterprise’s
performance.

Food quality issues would have the greatest adverse effect on the performance of the
food supply chain. Bad smell, bad flavor, discoloration and packaging issues affect
the quality of the food product. Transparency in the food supply chain informs the
consumer of history of food product. Identifying food as “genetically modified,
nongenetically modified, ethical, organic, low carbon, free of religious constraints” is
necessary to promote transparency in the food supply chain. The need for
transparency emphasizes the significance of information quality and sharing which
appears to be low in the focal company and customer relationship. According to the
responses, natural disasters, dangerous work environment and product boycott would
have the same catastrophic impact on the food supply chain as quality issues. There is
a need for high quality food which is safe and affordably priced.

Table 4.
 41

The impact of supply chain practices on the firm performance.

SCM practices Company X Customer Supplier

Dangerous work environment 7 7 7

Natural disasters 7 7 7

Food quality issues 7 7 7

Unethical treatment of animals 6 6 6

Unfair wages 6 6 6

Establishment of emergency scenarios 6 6 6

Adoption of agro-food traceability 6 6 6

Sanctions and penalties for misconducts 6 6 6

Safety stocks – internal or external 5 6 6

Equipment malfunctions 5 6 6

Innovation 5 6 6

Corruption / Price-fixing accusations 5 6 5

Unexpected risks 5 5 5

Use of standard recyclable containers 4 5 6

Delivery delays 5 5 5

Product boycotts 4 5 5

Expected risks 3 5 5

Pollution/ Product waste 3 5 5

Demand volatility 4 4 4

Note: 1 = no impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = minor impact, 4 = moderate

impact, 5 = major impact, 6 = critical impact, 7= catastrophic impact
 42

Impact of adoption

8
 43

Demand volatility
Pollution/ Product waste
Expected risks
Product boycotts
Delivery delays
Use of standard recyclable containers
Unexpected risks
Corruption / Price-fixing accusations
Innovation
Equipment malfunctions

Safety stocks – internal or external

Sanctions and penalties for misconducts
Adoption of agro-food traceability
Establishment of emergency scenarios
Unfair wages
Unethical treatment of animals
Food quality
issues Natural
disasters
Dangerous work environment

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Figure 8.
 44

The impact of supply chain practices on the firm performance.

Note: 1 = no impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = minor impact, 4 = moderate

impact, 5 = major impact, 6 = critical impact, 7= catastrophic impact

A resilient supply chain establishes emergency scenarios to reduce potential

disruptions in the supply chain which may come in the form of expected or
unexpected risks, equipment malfunctions, demand volatility, and delivery delays.
Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016) propose that “the adaptive capability of a supply
chain to reduce the probability of facing sudden disturbances, resist the spread of
disturbances by maintaining control over structures and functions, and recover and
respond by immediate and effective reactive plans to transcend the disturbance and
restore the supply chain to a robust state of operations”.

The impact that food quality issues, dangerous work environment, natural disasters
and would be disastrous to a food supply chain. Food quality issues would have the
greatest adverse effect on the performance of the food supply chain. Bad smell, bad
flavor, discoloration and packaging issues affect the quality of the food product.
Transparency in the food supply chain informs the consumer of history of food
product. Identifying food as “genetically modified, non-genetically modified, ethical,
organic, low carbon, free of religious constraints” is necessary to promote
transparency in the food supply chain. The need for transparency emphasizes the
significance of information quality and sharing which appears to be low in the focal
company and customer relationship. There is a need for high quality food which is
safe and affordably priced. Supply chain partners do not have control over natural
disasters and the devastating impact it has on the food industry. However, measures
can be put in place in a joint risk management strategy to limit the effect on the
quality and delivery of the food products. Dangerous work environment can be
prevented through the adherence of industry safety standards.

In the event where sustainable, ethical and green SCM practices are not adopted, the
consequences for the supply chain partners is adverse especially if brought to light to
 45

consumers. Unethical treatment of animals, improper disposal of waste which lead to

pollution and price fixing accusations and corruption may lead to product boycott if
not managed properly and stopped (Silvestre et al., 2018).

The reliability and validity of this case study

According to Johnson and Christensen (2008), case studies provide an in-depth and
rich description of a phenomena in a particular context. This research was carried out
focusing on a food supply chain which consists of small enterprises in Finland to
offer practitioners, academic scholars and policy makers with information on this
unique supply chain.

Stenbacka (2001) states that “the concept of reliability is even misleading in

qualitative research. If a qualitative study is discussed with reliability as a criterion,
the consequence is rather that the study is no good”. However, studies such as
Creswell and Miller (2000) argue that the paradigm choice of the researcher validates
the study.

Triangulation is another means of improving the reliability and validity of qualitative

studies (Golafshani, 2003). Therefore, data was collected from different respondents
in three different supply chain partners in order to control bias and improve upon the
objectiveness of the answers which is needed to address the research problem. The
positivist paradigm stance of the researcher is thus reflected.

Summary of Findings
The details of the data collection process, brief description of the firms and
respondents that provide the data to enrichen this case study of a Finnish food supply
chain. Several tables and figures that present the extent of adoption of both
traditional and emerging
 46

SCM practices are presented. The summary, conclusions and recommendations made
as a result of the findings gathered are provided in the next chapter.
45
 48

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Concluding Chapter

The previous chapters discussed the background and justification of the study,
relevant concepts and theories that explain supply chain practices, the case study
methodology and the findings gathered from the data collection.

In this section, the summary, conclusions and recommendations for managers and
researchers of this research are outlined.

Summary

To recapitulate, this thesis extends supply chain to SMEs which fills a gap in
literature and practice (Markides, 2007). The findings of this study contribute to the
extant literature on food supply chains which consists of SMEs.

The findings of the study agree with Ziggers and Trienekens (1999) that collaboration
and coordination in the food industry is needed because food supply chain involves a
series of value-adding activities from farm to fork. Therefore, the case proposition
that the adoption of supply chain management practices positively impact on a firm’s
competitive advantage and organizational performance is supported by the data
collected in this study.

Company X is more concerned about the relationship with its suppliers because of the
impact of cost and delays from the supplier could have on its productivity in the
shortterm and profitability in the long-term.

Product innovation is minimized in this food supply chain probably due to the low
level of collaboration and integration with customers.

Supply chain resilience is different from risk management as the focus is on the
capability of the firm to respond to uncertainties (Christopher & Peck, 2004).
Suppliers
 49

can easily introduce resilience into supply chain and improve their risk management
culture improves resilience.

Conclusion

This research paper is a case study of a food supply chain in Finland made up of
SMEs. In order to address the research question which inquired the level of adoption
of SCM practices, a questionnaire was administered.

This study concludes that the level of trust in the supplier-customer relationship is
low thus the low level of information sharing, and limited amount of information
relayed to supply chain partners. In addition to the low information sharing, the level
of product innovation in the food supply chain is minimal because of the
standardization involved in mass production. Mass production also means that there is
limited postponement in the supply chain process.

Recommendations

The findings of this case study suggests the following strategies which are appropriate
for dealing with the inefficiencies discovered in the data collected from employees of
the food suppy chain.

The managerial implications of the case study which is to help reduce food prices and
ensure food security as stated in the research problem is as follows:

1. There is the need to design a supply chain to include all partners of the food
supply chain.
2. Effective collaboration with both upstream and downstream supply chain
partners is a necessary and effective approach of reducing the impact of
disruptions and helps to leverage on their resources.
 50

3. There is a need for a joint supply chain risk management to reduce the adverse
effect of disruptions on the productivity and profitability of the independent
enterprises in the supply chain. Firms must adapt and prepare response to
changes to the dynamic business environment of the food industry.
4. In order to stay relevant and be in operations for a long time, high quality of
food products must be prioritized and complemented with transparency and
traceability to cater for concerned consumers of food products.
5. Firms should adopt resilient practices in order to mitigate the effect of the
disruptions in the food sector which could lead to the loss in productivity and
ultimately, business faiilure if not managed properly.

With regards to scholarly work, the limitations of the case study create avenues for
future research. The study could be replicated across several sectors while focusing
on the small and medium-sized enterprises. Also, assessing and quantifying the risks
and their impact in a detailed case study would prove to be beneficial to the food
supply chain. Another could be an in-depth study into the adoption of lean, resilient
and sustainable practices and their impact on the organizational performance.

REFERENCES

Ahi, P., & Searcy, C. (2013). A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and
sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production 52 (2013), 52, 329341.

Ali, M., Babai, M., Boylan, J., & Syntetos, A. (2017). Supply chain forecasting when
information is not shared. European Journal of Operational Research, 260, 984-994.

Azevedo, S., Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2012). Influence of green and lean
upstream supply chain management practices on business sustainability. IEEE Trans. Eng.
Manag., 59(4), 753-765.
 51

Baker, A., & Smyth, S. (2012). Managing opportunism in value-added supply chains: Lessons
from organics. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 24(1), 22-46.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of

Management, 17(1), 99–120.

Behzadi, G., O’Sullivan, M., Olsen, T., & Zhang, A. (2018). Agribusiness supply chain risk
management: A review of quantitative decision models. Omega, 79, 21–42.

Beske, P., Land, A., & Seuring, S. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management practices and
dynamic capabilities in the food industry: A critical analysis of the literature. International
Journal of Production Economics, 152, 131–143.

Bukeviciute, L., Dierx, A., & Ilzkovitz, F. (2009). The functioning of the food supply chain and
its effect on food prices in the European Union. Directorate-General for Economic and
Financial Affairs - European Commission.

Cao, M., & Zhang, Q. (2011). Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage
and performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29, 163–180.

Chapman, R. (2006). Simple Tools and Techniques for Enterprise Risk Management.
Chichester: Wiley.

Chapman, S., Lawrence, P., & Helms, M. (2000). Do small businesses need supply chain
management? IIE Solutions, 8,, 8, 31-34.

Charka, P., & Jaju, S. (2014). Supply chain performance measurement system: an overview.
Perform. Supply Chain Model. International Journal of Business, 6(1), 40-60.

Chen, I., & Paulraj, A. (2004). Towards a theory of supply chain management: The constructs
and measurements. Journal of Operations Management, 22, 119-150.

Chin, T., Hamid, A., Rasli, A., & Baharun, R. (2012). Adoption of supply chain management in
SMEs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65, 614-619.

Christopher, M. (2004). Creating Resilient Supply Chains. Logistics Europe, 14-21.

Christopher, M. (2005). Logistics and supply chain management: Creating value-added

networks (3 ed.). Harlow, England: Prentice Hall.

Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal
of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1-13.

Cooper, M., & Ellram, L. (1993). Characteristics of supply chain management and the
implications for purchasing and logistics strategy. International Journal of Logistics
Management, 4(2), 13-24.
 52

Cooper, M., Lambert, D., & Pagh, J. (1997). Supply chain management: More than a new
name for logistics. International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1), 1-14.

Creswell, J., & Miller, D. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into
Practice, 39(3), 124-131.

Dabbene, F., Gay, P., & Tortia, C. (2014). Traceability issues in food supply chain
management: A review. Biosystems Engineering, 120, 65-80.

Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Childe, S., Shibin, K., & Wamba, S. (2017).
Sustainable supply chain management: framework and further research directions. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 142, 1119-1130.

Ellram, L. (1996). The use of the case study method in logistics research. Journal of Business
Strategy, 17(2), 93-138.

European Commission. (2011). Enterprise and Industry - Small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs), SME Definition.

European Commission. (2018, May 25). 2017 SBA Fact Sheet. (Ref. Ares (2018) 2717562).
European Commission.

Fahimnia, B., Tang, C. S., Davarzani, H., & Sarkis, J. (2015). Quantitative models for managing
supply chain risks: A review. European JournalofOperationalResearch, 247, 1-15.

Fan, H., Li, G., Sun, H., & Cheng, T. (2017). An information processing perspective on supply
chain risk management: Antecedents, mechanism, and consequences. International Journal
of Production Economics, 185, 63–75.

Fiksel, J., Polyviou, M., Croxton, K., & Pettit, K. (2015). From risk to resilience: learning to deal
with disruption. MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter issue.

Fliedner, G., & Majeske, K. (2010). Sustainability: The new lean frontier. Production
Inventory Management, 46(1), 6-13.

Flynn, B., Huo, B., & Zhao, X. (2010). The impact of supply chain integration on performance:
A contingency and configuration approach. Journal of Operations Management, 28, 58-71.

Folkerts, H., & Koehorst, H. (1998). Challenges in international food supply chains: vertical
co-ordination in the European agribusiness and food industries. British Food Journal,
100(8), 385-388.

Giannakis, M., & Papadopoulos, T. (2016). Supply chain sustainability: A risk management
approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 171, 455–470.
 53