Gosling, J; Naim, M; Towill, D and Moone, B (2014) The impact of supplier development initiatives on key performance indicators. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 30th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2014, Portsmouth, UK.
Abstract
It is frequently posited that supplier development and long term partnerships are an effective way of gaining a competitive edge. However, due to the lack of regularity in demand patterns in project based industries, some researchers have questioned the effectiveness of such initiatives. Exploiting a unique and interesting longitudinal dataset gathered from a global construction companyÕs archival records, the aim of this paper is to analyse the impact of supplier development initiatives on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Supplier KPIs, recorded on a database, are analysed for a range of suppliers from the 1990s to 2013. Suppliers are organised into relational categories for the analysis, including Ôlong term strategic partnersÕ, Ôsome partnerships arrangementsÕ and Ôlittle partnership arrangementsÕ. The highest performing group was the long term strategic partners, in both average performance scores and the consistency of those scores. We also conclude that suppliers with limitedÊpartneringÊarrangementsÊperformÊlessÊwellÊonÊthe project 'closeÊout'ÊKPI.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | supplier development; performance measure; relationship; supply chain management |
| Index terms: | dataset, partnership, key performance indicator, performance measure, effectiveness, database, global construction |
| Subjects: | partnership management, performance measurement, data management, performance management, strategic management, project delivery |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Digital Applications, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, International Construction |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here