Purpose -This paper seeks to identify competitive priorities, based on the opinions of top executives of manufacturing firms belonging to the Federation of Thai Industry (FTI). It is also to evaluate the implications and applicability of these findings for Thai manufacturers. Design/methodology/approach -A survey is used as a data-collection tool to gather the opinions of top executives. Its main contents are based on Takala (2002). Ten manufacturers from four industries have participated in the study. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is selected to analyze the survey responses. In addition, the comparison of competitive priorities among Thailand, China, and Taiwan is made. The follow-up interviews and discussion are also conducted. Findings -There are six criteria selected to reflect competitive priorities: quality, customer-focus, delivery, flexibility, know-how, and costs. The study reveals that the quality, customer-focus and delivery criteria are recognized as important priorities in order to enhance manufacturing firms' competitiveness. The Taiwanese experiences possibly suggest more attention on innovation in order to sustain quality improvement. Practical implications -The findings illustrate the shift in competitive priorities from cost into quality and customer-focus. This shift reflects intense campaigns by relevant public agencies as well as the FTI. The awareness on these priorities is critical so that companies in the value chain can properly establish coherent manufacturing strategies and objectives. Originality/value -The knowledge on competitive priorities leads to better understanding of manufacturing strategies in the future. This knowledge can serve as a reference during an assessment of the desirable impacts from programs and initiatives conducted by public agencies and the FTI.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine and describe competitive priorities for service providers in Thailand. This research responds to the need expressed by the Federation of Thai Industries (FTI) for understanding these priorities. This study is part of a planning session on future enhancement of its members' competitiveness.Design/methodology/approachThe survey, developed by Takala, was modified to gather feedback and opinions from top executives of ten service providers. These companies mainly provided technical services to customers. This survey consisted of six criteria or competitive priorities with a total of 31 dimensions. The analysis and computations were on both relative and global weights of the responses, derived from the analytical hierarchy process.FindingsQuality represented the most important competitive priority. Quality was given the highest weight of 36.4 percent, while service provision, customer‐focus, and know‐how were at 20.4, 12.9 and 12.5 percent, respectively. The remaining weights were 9.8 percent for costs, and 8.0 percent for flexibility.Practical implicationsThe awareness on competitive priorities was beneficial to the future organizational development of service providers in Thailand. These findings also helped reassure the FTI's current efforts on promoting quality among its members.Originality/valueThe knowledge on competitive priorities potentially helps companies formulate future strategies and action plans. It serves as feedback and a milestone for the FTI's effectiveness on promoting quality among the members in its service‐related clusters.

Purpose -This paper aims to compare and evaluate competitive priorities between manufacturers and service providers. A concern over the trends of moving manufacturing/production units overseas, while maintaining essential service operations at the companies' headquarters, encouraged senior administrators of the Federation of Thai Industries (FTI) to suggest the study. This study was part of an effort to support FTI members facing separate locations between manufacturing and services operations, and to help evaluate its initiatives' usefulness towards these members. Design/methodology/approach -The survey, developed by Takala, was modified to gather the opinions from top executives of 75 manufacturers and service providers. This survey consisted of six criteria or competitive priorities with a total of 31 dimensions. The basic statistical techniques such as Cronbach's a were applied. Findings -The paper finds that in general, top executives from manufacturing and service operations shared and agreed that delivery/service provision and quality represented their future competitive priorities. Practical implications -The selection of these two competitive priorities was generally consistent with several previous studies. These findings supported past and current initiatives by the FTI as well as its policy on working together with key public agencies/organizations towards an achievement of excellent quality. Top executives, facing a challenge on separate operations -manufacturing plant in one location while maintaining service operations at another location, could synchronize and coordinate their future efforts such as strategies and plans around delivery/service provision, and quality. Originality/value -The knowledge on competitive priorities could potentially help companies, regardless of operational types, to further formulate operational strategies, and later develop action plans. This knowledge could also serve as feedback (e.g. usefulness and effectiveness) and a milestone for the FTI's support and initiatives for its members.

The study illustrates the historical development of the criteria used for supplier management, and suggests a possible future trend as a result of this development. This study stems from globalisation in the private sector, and many policy initiatives of Thai public agencies to assist specific industries, such as electronic and automotive sectors. The awareness of these past and current developments, coupled with anticipation of a possible future trend, should help large companies and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) become better prepared. This study initially relies on literature reviews for identifying the criteria's historical development, and later confirms the result with separate surveys to companies belonging to the Federation of Thai Industries (FTI). A future trend on accreditation practices is suggested and discussed. This is potentially useful for value chain management, especially for SMEs when dealing with large companies. The follow-up discussion seems to agree with this suggestion.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to identify critical factors for effective business value chains in the electrical and electronic industries. This knowledge can benefit private firms as well as their supplier management and customer fulfillment, and public agencies for relevant policy initiatives. Design/methodology/approach -The research methodology includes the survey development and the statistical analyses, especially the use of the Pearson correlation. Altogether, a total of 129 firms participated in this study, 97 companies from Hong Kong and 32 firms from Thailand. Included in this methodology are a pre-test of a survey and follow-up discussions with participating executives. Findings -An effective business value chain essentially depends on good operational systems and management, and information and communication technology (ICT) linkages with both suppliers and customers. There are a total of five critical factors for effective business value chains. For example, an effective business value chain is influenced by how well production and delivery systems are managed. In addition, how well a manufacturer can manage its operation is influenced by customers with effective information and communication infrastructures. Practical implications -The five identified factors can be used as a checklist for planning and/or monitoring the effectiveness of a business value chain. The findings also helps develop a new initiative to be undertaken by Thailand's Department of Industrial Work when attempting to strengthen business value chains within various industrial clusters. Originality/value -The findings underline the need to focus on data harmonization and to adapt ICT standards, such as Control Objectives for Information and related Technology COBIT and Projects in Controlled Environments PRINCE for data sharing and software development, to promote supplier audits when sustaining a business value chain.