Linking strategic objectives to operations: towards a more effective supply chain decision making
Pages 1422 - 1430
Abstract
Supply chain managers today face an unremitting challenge to their capabilities in both the volume and complexity of factors to be reconciled. In order to achieve more effective decision making, it is very necessary to link strategic objectives to operational actions. However, little is available to guide managers in translating a set of objectives into operations so far. This paper presents a comprehensive methodology to address this gap. In this methodology, strategic objectives are translated into performance metrics by qualitative strategy map and metric network firstly, and then quantitative techniques such as system dynamics simulation and optimization are adopted to take managers through the stages of strategy mapping, action evaluation and decision making. A case study, supported by a software tool, is carried out throughout the paper to illustrate how the method works.
References
[1]
Akkermans, H. and Kim van Oorschot. 2002. Developing a balanced scorecard with system dynamics. Proceeding of 2002 International System Dynamics Conference.
[2]
Banker, R. D., H. Chang, S. N. Janakiraman, and C. Konstans. 2004. A balanced scorecard analysis of performance metrics. European Journal of Operational Research 154(2): 423--436.
[3]
Dong, Jin, Hongwei Ding, Changrui Ren, and Wei Wang. 2006. IBM SmartSCOR - a SCOR based supply chain transformation platform through simulation and optimization techniques. Proceedings of the 2006 Winter Simulation Conference, accepted.
[4]
Forrester, J. W. 1961. Industrial dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
[5]
Garvin, D. A. 1993. Manufacturing strategic planning. California Management Review 35(4): 85--106.
[6]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 1992. The balanced score-card: measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review January-February: 71--79.
[7]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 1993. Putting the balanced scorecard to work. Harvard Business Review September-October: 134--142.
[8]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 1996. Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review January-February: 75--85.
[9]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 2000. Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it. Harvard Business Review September-October: 167--176.
[10]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 2001a. Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I. Accounting Horizons 15(1): 87--104.
[11]
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton. 2001b. Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part II. Accounting Horizons 15(2): 147--160.
[12]
Malina, M. A. and F. H. Selto. 2006. Causality in performance measurement models {online}. Available via <http://www-us.colorado.edu/faculty/selto/home.html> {accessed March 17, 2006}.
[13]
Mayo, D. D. and K. E. Wichmann. 2003. Tutorial on business and market modeling to aid strategic decision making: system dynamics in perspective and selecting appropriate analysis approaches. Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference, eds. S. Chick, P. J. Sanchez, D. Ferrin, and D. J. Morrice. 1569--1577.
[14]
Rabelo, L., M. Helal, and C. Lertpattarapong. 2004. Analysis of supply chains using system dynamics, neural nets, and eigenvalues. Proceedings of the 2004 Winter Simulation Conference, eds. R. G. Ingalls, M. D. Rossetti, J. S. Smith, and B. A. Peters. 1136--1144.
[15]
Saaty, T. L. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York.
[16]
Santos, S. P., Valerie Belton, and Susan Howick. 2002. Adding value to performance measurement by using system dynamics and multicriteria analysis. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22(11): 1246--1272.
[17]
Schoeneborn, F. 2003. Linking balanced scorecard to system dynamics. Proceeding of 2003 International System Dynamics Conference.
[18]
Supply-Chain Council. 2006. SCOR version 7.0 overview {online}. Available via <http://www.supply-chain.org> {accessed March 21, 2006}.
[19]
Suwignjo, P., U. S. Bititci, and A. S. Carrie. 2000. Quantitative models for performance measurement system. International Journal of Production Economics 63(1--3): 231--241.
[20]
Tan, K. H. and K. Platts. 2003. Linking objectives to actions: a decision support approach based on cause-effect linkages. Decision Sciences 34(3):569--593.
[21]
Wolstenholme, E. 1998. Balanced strategies for balanced scorecards: the role of system dynamics in supporting balanced scorecard and value based management. Proceeding of 1998 International System Dynamics Conference.
[22]
Young, S. H. and C. K. Tu. 2004. Exploring some dynamically aligned principles of developing a balanced scorecard. Proceeding of 2004 International System Dynamics Conference.
- Linking strategic objectives to operations: towards a more effective supply chain decision making
Recommendations
Generating Objectives: Can Decision Makers Articulate What They Want?
Objectives have long been considered a basis for sound decision making. This research examines the ability of decision makers to generate self-relevant objectives for consequential decisions. In three empirical studies, participants consistently omitted ...
Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives
Important to decision making is recognition of what today's decisions have on future options, and an oft-used tool to aid in this problem is the decision tree. This paper addresses situations in which uncertainty arises in the objectives associated with ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
December 2006
2429 pages
ISBN:1424405017
- Editors:
- L. Felipe Perrone,
- Barry G. Lawson,
- Jason Liu,
- Frederick P. Wieland,
- General Chair:
- David Nicol,
- Program Chair:
- Richard Fujimoto
Sponsors
- IIE: Institute of Industrial Engineers
- ASA: American Statistical Association
- IEICE ESS: Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, Engineering Sciences Society
- IEEE-CS\DATC: The IEEE Computer Society
- SIGSIM: ACM Special Interest Group on Simulation and Modeling
- NIST: National Institute of Standards and Technology
- (SCS): The Society for Modeling and Simulation International
- INFORMS-CS: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences-College on Simulation
Publisher
Winter Simulation Conference
Publication History
Published: 03 December 2006
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Article
Conference
WSC06
Sponsor:
- IIE
- ASA
- IEICE ESS
- IEEE-CS\DATC
- SIGSIM
- NIST
- (SCS)
- INFORMS-CS
Acceptance Rates
WSC '06 Paper Acceptance Rate 177 of 252 submissions, 70%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 3,413 of 5,075 submissions, 67%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 606Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 14 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in