“…This structure captures the main elements of S&OP (Kjellsdotter Ivert et al, 2015a) and is considered generic, as it offers a complete overview of the process (Noroozi and Wikner, 2017). This study was later referred to by several authors, such as Danese et al (2017), who evaluated the managing evolutionary paths in S&OP, Goh and Eldridge (2015), who analyzed new product introduction and supplier integration in the S&OP of two companies in Asia, Kristensen and Jonsson (2018), who did a systematic literature review on context-based S&OP, Pedroso et al (2016), who developed a multiple case study, Pedroso et al (2017), who offers a model for S&OP maturity, Seeling et al (2019) and Seeling et al (2020), who presents a case studies in Latin America, and Vereecke et al (2018), who assesses maturity in demand planning. There was also the influence of the different frameworks developed, such as those by Tuomikangas and Kaipia (2014), which assesses the coordination of S&OP, by Hulthén et al (2016) looking at the effectiveness and efficiency of S&OP, by Thomé et al (2012) and Hollmann et al (2015) with a focus on collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment, by Kjellsdotter Ivert et al (2015a) who analyzes the complexity of the planning environment, by Noroozi and Wikner (2017) with a focus on supply chain integration, and Kristensen and Jonsson (2018) analyzing context-based S&OP.…”