Evaluating alternative supply chain structures for perishable products

Abstract

PurposeThis paper sets out to investigate the impact of various supply chain advancements within a perishable goods environment.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses discrete event simulation to evaluate diverse adjustments within the distribution framework of a food manufacturer and their major customers. Analysed aspects include level of safety inventory held, inventory issuing, replenishment and through‐put policies and increased demand transparency due to collaboration between manufacturer and various retailers. The importance and the impact of these factors are investigated using a wide variety of performance measures.FindingsSeveral promising practice designs are generated and recommended for implementation to improve the experienced shortcomings. Engaging in collaborative replenishment is emphasized in particular even in cases of limited scope. The analysis further reveals the importance of advanced inventory dispatch policies.Research limitations/implicationsThe research focused on the delivery framework of a particular manufacturer and the chosen products. Hence, research findings may differ and need to be modified before drawing conclusions for different products, companies or industries.Originality/valueEvaluating the impact of various stages of collaboration within a perishable product supply chain environment has not been addressed much within prior SCM research. The analysis tackles a variety of issues that specifically arise within a perishable goods framework and aims to support practitioners by identifying possible pitfalls and areas of improvement.

Modeling disruption in a fresh produce supply chain

“…Mathematical models for FPSCs incorporate the value of preserving perishable commodities (Ahumada and Villalobos, 2011a), different demand functions (Balkhi andBenkherouf, 2004, Deng et al, 2007), the impact of time-varying demand on lost sales and purchase costs (Dye et al, 2006), and inventory, replenishment, and through-put policies (Thron et al, 2007). A case study for melons and sweet corn discusses strategies to design a FPSC such as the responsiveness and efficiency of the SC (Blackburn and Scudder, 2009).…”

Capturing food logistics: a literature review and research agenda

“…The importance of maintaining the quality of perishable products is also shown in the papers that research food quality and traceability (Leat, Marr, and Roth et al 2008). It can also be seen that cost is of less importance to perishable products than to non-perishable products (Thron, Nagy, and Wassan 2007).…”

“…Five of these papers analyse solely distribution, whereof three relate distribution to product characteristics. Thron, Nagy, and Wassan (2007) evaluate the distribution structures of perishable products, Theodoras (2006) compares customer service for chilled and ambient products, and Boronico and Bland (1996) look at the distribution of a seasonal food product in terms of customer service and uncertainty. The other two papers include identifying the causes of promotional on-shelfavailability shortfalls in retailing from the perspective of both retailers and producers (Ettouzani, Yates, and Mena 2012) and establishing how to improve transportation by reducing the number of empty running trucks (McKinnon and Ge 2006).…”

A Systematic Literature Review of Collaborative Planning Forecasting and Replenishment

“…When trading partners trust each other they tend to communicate openly and it increases information transparency and decrease gaming (Büyüközkan et al, 2009). Furthermore, several authors have mentioned that a lack of trust serves as a barrier to the implementation of CPFR (Barratt and Oliveira, 2001, Fliedner, 2003, Attaran, 2004, Thron et al, 2006, Attaran and Attaran, 2007, Chen et al, 2007, Småros, 2007, Thron et al, 2007. According to Barratt and Oliveira (2001), as trust is developed from a long-term perspective, a possible approach is to (i) define a single point of contact for each trading partner,…”

“…Other barriers to CPFR mentioned in the literature include investments in technology (Fliedner, 2003, Småros, 2007, a lack of internal integration/collaboration (Fliedner, 2003, Småros, 2007, Ramanathan and Gunasekaran, 2014, a lack of a clear understanding of collaborations and SCC's impact from long-term partnerships on profit earnings (Ramanathan and Gunasekaran, 2014), information security and confidentiality (Büyüközkan et al, 2009, Audy et al, 2012, Büyüközkan and Vardaloğlu, 2012, system incompatibility (Audy et al, 2012), over-dependence on technology when implementing CPFR, lack of ability to differentiate between with whom to collaborate and in what order (Thron et al, 2006(Thron et al, , 2007 and security protocols (Hvolby and Trienekens, 2010). Larsen et al (2003) propose the only maturity model for CPFR encountered in this review.…”