Successful integrated logistics management ties all logistics activities together in a system which simultaneously works to minimize total distribution costs and maintain desired customer service levels [1]. Over time, the concept has evolved to encompass more than the integration of logistics functions. Today, integrated logistics is generally considered to include planning, allocating, and controlling the financial and human resources committed to manufacturing support and purchasing operations as well as physical distribution [2]. It is likely that an even broader perspective will become commonplace as more businesses place greater emphasis on supply chain management.Supply chain management refers to "the physical network that begins with the supplier and ends with the customer"[3]. As such, supply chain management requires both internal functional integration and external integration. Internally, supply chain management involves working to achieve a seamless integration of logistics with other functional areas. The business philosophy also requires that trading partners and service companies "jointly plan, execute, and co-ordinate logistical performance" [4]. Both types of integration are necessary in order to improve channel-wide performance.The current research was undertaken in order to gain a greater understanding of issues relating to logistics integration. Specifically, survey research was used to assess the level of logistical integration among US firms and to determine whether a linkage exists between implementation of the integrated logistics concept and a firm's logistical performance.

No abstract

Fast and flexible low-cost data processing and information systems have transformed business operations. Through enhanced information availability, leading manufacturers have accelerated the flow of their products to create competitive advantage based on speed. These companies have developed methods to channel the power of information in order to use organizational resources more effectively and facilitate the management of activities both within and outside the company [1,2]. Internally, interactions between areas such as production and sales can be more closely co-ordinated with the aid of information support. Externally, information availability can result in enhanced service and promote better relationships with supply chain partners. Planning and scheduling systems have been used to manage operations throughout the pipeline. Subsequent reductions in production setup times, lot sizes, and inventory levels have yielded productivity and efficiency improvements [3,4].Changes have been especially dramatic with respect to logistics. Today, logistics is a high-tech process dependent upon information to support planning, operations, and control throughout a firm's supply chain [5][6][7]. In 1992, logistics costs represented approximately 11 per cent of the US gross domestic product[8]. Logistics' 11 COMPUTERIZATION: SUPPORTING INTEGRATION Computers and information are critical to achieving integration.

Changing business conditions are likely to influence the supplier evaluation process and, thus, the relevance of selection criteria should be periodically reconsidered. In order to explore this issue, an empirical study of logistics executives' perceptions of the relative importance of specific criteria (used in the selection of systems/software vendors) was conducted. The respondents identified vendor attributes (i.e., support, reliability) and product/service attributes (i.e., flexibility, ease of use) to be of the greatest importance and economic attributes (i.e., cost) to be significantly less important when selecting a vendor for systems/software.

Organizational structure significantly influences firm performance. A recent survey of logistics professionals revealed that centralized structures accommodated logistics system integration better than decentralized structures. Also, centralized firms spent a lower percentage of net sales on logistics costs and information system support costs than decentralized firms. On the other hand, no signficiant differences were identified between centralized and decentralized firms in terms of information system performance. Information system support needs were addressed comparably regardless of organizational structuring. However, while centralized and decentralized firms exhibited similar capabilities in terms of effectiveness (reaching goals), centralized firms appeared to be more efficient (resource utilization).