a case study on measuring performance of supply chain in a brasilian automaker

8/8/2019 A Case Study on Measuring Performance of Supply Chain in a Brasilian Automaker

1/12

PROCEEDINGS

A CASE STUDY ON MEASURING PERFORMANCE OF SUPPLY CHAIN IN A

BRAZILIAN AUTOMAKER

Giancarlo Pessoa de Jesus (GEPEQ/DEP/UFSCar) [email protected]

Roberto Antonio Martins (GEPEQ/DEP/UFSCar - IFM) [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This paper poses the findings from a case study on measuring performance of supply chain

carried out in a Brazilian automaker company. The interviewed were middle and top

managers who are involved in supply chain issues. The company measures the performance

of supply chain through the function as Logistics, Quality, Marketing but the performance

measures are barely integrated. The employees view of supply chain and the organizational

structure can act as levers of change in performance measurement practices to supply chain. Based on empirical findings, a first step towards a performance measurement system for

supply chain is the integration of functional performance measures.

Key-words: Supply chain management, performance measurement, coordination, integration

1. INTRODUCTIONSome managers have realized that the improvement of internal operations through the

application of Total Quality Management, Lean Manufacturing, and other managementphilosophies are not enough to achieve high levels of competitiveness. Many internalimprovement efforts depend on both suppliers and customers. Hence, it is important to

consider the company entire supply chain. Those are one of the reasons why the supply chainmanagement (SCM) has attracted the attention of many managers around the world in last

decade.When companies embark on SCM band wagon, many problems are faced: difficult of

sharing information with suppliers, management relationship, difficult of implementing a new

vision, alignment of strategies, and lack of performance measurement systems to support

appropriately the supply chain management.

On the other hand, performance measurement has faced a revolution since the last decade

after the realization of the lack of relevance of traditional performance measurement systems.The most evident result of such revolution is the Balanced Scorecard framework. However,

most of performance measurement researchers and practitioners are limited to the

performance measurement issues of the company.

The performance measurement system (PMS) design to entire supply chain is a challenging

task. It is important to take into account the amount of companies which belong to the supply

chain. This makes the choice of performance measures harder, as well as the integration of

information for all companies.

By searching for empirical evidences on measuring the performance of supply chain, a casestudy was carried out in a large Brazilian automaker. The focus was on how the studied

company measures the performance of dealers and first tier suppliers.

Following is a brief literature review on supply chain management and performancemeasurement of supply chain. Then the empirical findings of case study are posed. Finally,


2/12

PROCEEDINGS

the final remarks and the implications for both practitioners and researchers of this study are

presented.

2. SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENTThere are many definitions about supply chain in the literature. A supply chain consists of

many organizations operating together. This means each organization is dependent on theperformance of other organizations in the supply chain (Xu and Beamon, 2006). Supply chain

is also the network of organizations that are involved, through upstream and downstream

linkages, in the different processes and activities that produce value in the form of products

and services delivered to the ultimate consumer (Christopher, 1992). Finally, it is a number

of organizations at least three working cooperatively with some common objectives

(Holmberg, 2000).Recently, the Council of Supply Chain Management Professional (CSCMP, 2007), which is

the premier organization of supply chain practitioners, researchers, and academics, has

defined supply chain management as: encompasses the planning and management of all

activities involved in sourcing and procurement, conversion, and all Logistics Management

activities. Importantly, it also includes coordination and collaboration with channel partners,

which can be suppliers, intermediaries, third-party service providers, and customers. In

essence, Supply Chain Management integrates supply and demand management within and

across companies.

Figure 1 illustrates a supply chain from suppliers of suppliers to the final customers.

Information flows both upstream and downstream. The materials flow downstream. The

match of those flows adds value to the customers. The supply chain configuration depends on

several factors such as the type of product/service, the processes, information technology

infrastructure available, level of customer service required, and so on.

Customer relationship management

Customer service management

The order fulfillment

Demand management

Manufacturing flow management

Supplier relationship management

Product development and commercialization

Returns management




Demand management




Returns management

Figure 1Example of Supply Chain

Fonte: Croxton et al. (2001).


3/12

PROCEEDINGS

Furthermore, Lambert et al. (1998), based on collaboration with company leaders, defined

eight key sub processes for supply chain management. These are: (1) customer relationship

management, (2) customer service management, (3) the order fulfillment, (4) demand

management, (5) manufacturing flow management, (6) supplier relationship management, (7)product development and commercialization, and (8) return management.

The concept of supply chain management arises from the supposition that the cooperativerelationship among the companies of supply chain can minimize the individual risks and

improve the effectiveness of logistics process. It is significant to highlight that the concept ofSCM is more comprehensive than Logistics.

The change from individual functions to integrated activities in the processes is critical toSCM. Usually the upstream and downstream companies in the supply chain interact as non-

integrated systems which receive a sporadic and delayed information flow (Lambert and

Pohlen, 2001). In this context, the holistic view is a key element. This means to apprehend a

view of the process from raw material suppliers to final customers as a single system which

demands less resource to add value to shareholders and stakeholders (Lummus and Vokurka,

1999).

The possible gains are improvement on product, processes, customer/supplier relationships,

balance of high customer service level low cost and high profitability trade-off, and son

on. Generally, such benefits are hard to be achieved when the focus on improvement is inside

the operations of the company. The lack of holistic view of supply chain causes mistakes that

add costs, delayed reaction to changes in market, and lack of competitiveness (Stewart,

1995).The inaccurate information regarding customers demand are distorted along the supply chain

what causes loss of revenue due to the reduction of customer level service and the increase of

inventories in downstream companies. The main cause of such losses is the optimization ofindividual companies operations without a supply chain holistic view.SCM pursuits high levels of integration among the companies of supply chain in order to

make the coordination easier. The information sharing, mutual trust, standardization of bothintra and inter organizational procedures and measurement of performance are fundamental to

achieve integration.Ballou (2006), Xu and Beamon (2006) consider coordination and collaboration, along with

trust, are the most important elements to realizing boundary-spanning opportunities. When

the supply channel is composed of multiple and legally separate members, realizing

opportunities afforded by acting in concert requires a collaborative effort (Ballou, 2006,

p.384). Xu and Beamon (2006) state the coordination within a supply chain is a strategic

response to the challenges that arise from these dependencies. A coordination mechanism is aset of methods used to manage interdependence between organizations. By definition, there

are a number of different people, entities, and processes that interact in order to execute

supply chain objectives. Coordination mechanisms, then, provide tools for effectively

managing these interactions and to increase the degree of integration between the

organizations of supply chain.

If collaboration and coordination require information sharing, the mutual confidence is a key-

factor for success in SCM. Then improvements on quality, amount, dissemination, and use of

information through the supply chain can lead to better management of supply chain.Coordination is a multidimensional management approach which links the organizations in

search of better integrating and operational performance (Holmberg, 2000). However it is

difficult to accomplish such objective without measuring the performance in order to identifywhere we are and where we are going. Therefore a performance measurement system is a keyelement in supply chain management. Performance measurement system can support the


4/12

PROCEEDINGS

decision makers through the collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination of

appropriate information.

3. SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTA performance measurement system enables informed decisions to be made and actions to

be taken because it quantifies the efficiency and effectiveness of past actions through theacquisitions, collation, sorting, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of appropriate data

(Neely, 1998). Performance measurement is a central element of performance management (Bititci et al. 1997). It enables the understanding on how the processes are operating and

what are the levers and constraints (Kaydos, 1991).Besides the performance measurement revolution envisioned by Sink (1991), Eccles (1991),

and Neely (1998), few performance measurement researchers have dedicated to developmentof PMS for supply chain. Considering management and performance measurement as

complementary activities, it is fundamental to develop PMS frameworks to support SCM.

Nevertheless, researchers or practitioners from Logistics or SCM field have proposed most of

performance measurement frameworks for supply chain. A PMS crafted for SCM will enable

informed decisions regarding integration and cooperation considering the several actors

implied on it.The lack of appropriate and relevant performance measures does not help the efforts in

integrating the companies of supply chain (Handfield and Nichols, 1999; Gunasekaran et al.,2001). Moreover, the performance measures are essential to check if the strategies are right.

They are also important to compel the improvements efforts in order to reach the targets andobjectives (Gunasekaran et al., 2001). Therefore, it seems crucial to develop PMSs in order

to give a better support to the supply chain management, going beyond the traditional

Logistics performance measures. Table 1 shows some supply chain performance measurementframeworks from a literature review.

Reference Proposal

van Hoek (1998)

Performance measures must be chosen according to the possiblecontributions of players in the chain to overall chaincompetitiveness (from cost-effectiveness to integration) and thestage of development of logistics in an organization (from cost saver

to market creation)

Beamon (1999)Three types of interrelated performance measures arranged in:resources, output and flexibility at least one measure to each

dimension.

PTRM Consulting apudHandfield &Nichols (1999)

Leading and lagging performance measures to the followingdimensions: quality/customer satisfaction, time, cost, and resources.

Supply Chain Council (2005)SCOR model is a set of supply chain performance measuresincluding a combination of: cycle time metrics, cost metrics,service/quality metrics, and assets metrics.

Gunasekaran et al. (2001)

The metrics are classified into strategic, tactical and operationallevels of management, and they are also classified as financial andnon-financial. Then the metrics are aligned to the four basic links

that constitute the supply chain: plan; source; make; and deliver.

Table 1 Frameworks for measuring supply chain performance.

Table 2 illustrates Beamons framework. A performance measurement system for supplychain must have at least an individual performance measure for each type (resources, output,


5/12

PROCEEDINGS

and flexibility). The individual performance measures for each type should match to

organizations strategic objectives (Beamon, 1999).

Performance

Measure TypeGoal Purpose

Resources High level of EfficiencyEfficient resource management is critical toprofitability.

OutputHigh level of

Customer Service

Without acceptable output, customers will turn to

other supply chains.

FlexibilityAbility to Respond to a

Changing Environment

In an uncertain environment, supply chains must

be able to respond to change.

Table 2Goals of Performance Measure Types

Fonte: Beamon (1999).

Table 3 shows some performance measures proposed by Gunasekaran et al. (2001). The

framework sorts the metrics in levels (strategic, tactical, and operational). Some metrics as

level and degree of buyer-supplier partnership, product development cycle time, truthfulness

of demand predictability/forecasting methods, extent of co-operation to improve quality, for

instance, are typical performance measures for supply chain.

Level Performance metric Financial Non-financial

Strategic Total cash flow time Rate of investment return Flexibility to meet particular customer needs

Delivery lead time Total cycle time Level and degree of buyer-supplier partnership Customer query time

Tactical Extent of co-operation to improve quality Total transportation cost Truthfulness of demand predictability/forecasting methods Product development cycle time

Operational Manufacturing cost Capacity utilization Information carrying cost Inventory carrying cost

Table 3A list of supply chain metrics

Fonte: Gunasekaran et al. (2001)

Table 4 exhibits some examples of performance measures proposed by Supply Chain

Operations Reference Model (SCOR Model). The SCOR is the model developed by the

Supply-Chain Council (SCC) and is built around six major processes: plan, source, make,deliver, return and enable. The aim of the SCOR is to provide a standardized method of

measuring supply chain performance and to use a common set of metrics to benchmark


6/12

PROCEEDINGS

against other organizations. It is a balanced set of metrics which evaluate criteria such as

reliability, response time, flexibility, cost and resources.

Customer-Facing Internal-Facing

Supply chain Management MetricsSupply Chain

Reliability

Responsiveness Flexibility Cost Assets

Delivery performance Fill rate Perfect order fulfillment Order fulfillment lead time Supply chain response time Production flexibility Total SCM management cost Cost of goods sold Value-added productivity Warranty cost or returns

processing cost

Cash-to-cash cycle time Inventory days of supply Asset turns

Table 4Supply chain metrics SCOR ModelFonte: Supply Chain Council (2006).

Finally, The PRTM consulting proposes to each performance area of supply chain, a primary

and secondary measures as Table 4 illustrates. The primary measures are composed ofsecondary ones. For instance, the perfect order fulfillment is composed of information

regarding delivery-to-commit date and customer-inquiry response time.

Performance Area Primary Measures Secondary Measures

Customer Satisfaction /Quality

- perfect order fulfillment- customer satisfaction- product quality

- delivery-to-commit date- warranty costs, returns, allowances- customer-inquiry response time

Time - order fulfillment lead time - supply chain response time- source/make cycle time

- production plan achievement

Cost - total supply chain costs - value added productivity

Assets - cash-to-cash cycle time- inventory days of supply- asset performance

- forecast accuracy- inventory obsolescence- capacity utilization

Table 4Performance measures for integrated supply chain

Fonte: PTRM consulting in Handfield and Nichols (1999).

These frameworks are complementary, although there are gaps. Some performance metrics

are very common in Logistics, cycle time for instance. Others are very hard to measure as

flexibility. Moreover, all frameworks are suitable to measure a companys customer and

suppliers but a frame to entire supply chain was not found in the literature review. Thereplication of the framework is the only way of reaching the supply chain entirely. In this


7/12

PROCEEDINGS

way, the problem could be the integration of those local performance measurement systems

from each company of supply chain.

4. RESEARCH FIELDThe research question, which provided focus to research, is the following: how the

performance measurement practices support the supply chain management? By searching foran answer to such question, a single case study was carried out in a Brazilian subsidiary of

multinational automaker. The investigation focuses on a Sao Bernardo plant of this companylocated in State of Sao Paulo.

The case study was most suitable research method because a primarily concern was to capturethe perspectives of people involved in supply chain management issues. It is impossible to

apply, for example, a survey. An experiment does not provide an answer to research question.An action research would involve action and it could be a second step on this research.

The choice of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) from auto industry was made because

it assemblies a complex product and buys a lot of parts from different kinds of suppliers, it

plays a role in coordinator of supply chain, and its supply chain is very complex in terms of

product, processes, technology and players (size, capital, location and so on.). The dealers

were a limitation because they are exclusive to OEM brand.

Table 5 shows the positions and responsibilities of all people interviewed in studied company.

They were chosen because either they are clearly or not involved in supply chain issues. They

also use any kind of performance measures in their activities.

Person In charge of

Supply chain managerManaging of 1

sttier suppliers, inbound logistics, and custom

issuesQuality supplier manager Developing and auditing the suppliers

Manufacturing manager Managing the truck assembly line and internal logistics

Production planning supervisor Planning production

Dealer network plannerManaging outbound logistics, and developing and monitoring thedealers performance

Sales planning manager Planning sales and forecasting the demand

Table 5People interviewed in the studied company

The first two people are involved in upstream supply chain (suppliers). The following two are

involved in internal supply chain (operations). Finally, the last two people are involved indownstream supply chain (dealers). It is important to note that the truck assembly linemanager and production planning supervisor have contact with other people interviewed. The

same does not apply to the others. Hence, the people interviewed enabled to attain an entire

vision of supply chain from a point of view of OEM employees.

Main Empirical Findings

The people interviewed did not show the same understanding of the concept involving supply

chain management. The comprehension was partitioned. For instance, the Supply Chain

Manager has considered SCM synonymous of inbound logistics. On the other hand, the

Quality Supplier Manager has considered the supplier development. The Production Planning

Supervisor has stated the lack of holistic view when considering supply chain works againstthe integration and coordination efforts, for the people involved do not understand well their


8/12

PROCEEDINGS

role in SCM. In the studied company, the interviewed peoples visions of supply chain were

partial and related to peoples duty.

The fragmented view can make difficult the implementation of the concept so called supplier

chain management. The consequence is the difficult to share information. This is one ofpillars of supply chain integration. People interviewed do not share the information well

because they think it is not necessary. The information needed is generally related to his/herobjectives and duties. It makes difficult to understand how his/her decisions and actions

influence the performance in different levels of supply chain.The Dealer Network Planner and the Supply Chain Manager, for instance, were not concerned

with the performance of downstream and upstream supply chain. The former was concernedwith the dealers performance while the latter was concerned with the availability of materials

destined to assembly line. On the other hand, the Sales Planning Manager, the ManufacturingManager and the Production Planning Manager have expressed interest on sharing

information regarding performance of downstream and upstream supply chain in order to

improve cycle time and flexibility, avoiding this way the bullwhip effect.

The same happens to performance measures used by people interviewed. Everyone has posed

many performance measures used to support his/her decisions regarded to supply chain. The

use of performance measures does not provide an entire vision of supply chain because the

performance measures are limited to users of the same department or function. Hence, there is

an evidence of madness of performance measurement, according to Neely and Austin

(2000), because all people interviewed has showed many performance measures used mainly

to support their local decisions. According to Production Planning Supervisor, the amount of

information produces noise what makes difficult the dissemination and usage of performance

measures.

Certainly, the fragmented vision of supply chain and the misunderstanding of SCM concepthave contributed to the establishment of local or functional performance measurementpractices, but the organizational structure has also played an important role. The studied

company is organized in functions and departments. This traditional organizational chart isnot suitable to supply chain management as the literature review pointed out. As Figure 1

illustrates, the arrangement of processes are essential to supply chain.In the studied company, the performance measures related to supply chain can be arranged in

three sets: internal operations mostly related to shop floor; suppliers mostly related to

inbound logistics and quality supplier; and dealers mostly related to outbound logistics and

dealers performance. It is important to note that the three sets are not integrated, what makes

it almost impossible to Sales Planning Manager, who has expressed interest on the

performance of both internal operations and suppliers accessing such information. Theintegration of such sets of performance measures seems to be the first building block in

establishment of supply chain performance measurement system in the studied company.

Regarding the internal operations set, the company used the Balanced Scorecard framework

with six perspectivessafety, quality, delivery, cost, morale, and environment. These lagging

indicators are related to other leading indicators as schedule fulfillment and overall equipment

efficiency, for example. On the shop floor there are panels with charts of performance

arranged in perspectives. According to Manufacturing Manager, the improvement groups on

shop floor have their own performance measures linked to six perspectives of BalancedScorecard.

With relation to companys supplier performance measurement system, it is very well known

worldwide in the automotive industry. It evaluates the suppliers capability of providingquality, on-time delivery and improving the operations. The evaluation based on audits andperformance measures is applied to either demerit or merit the supplier.


9/12

PROCEEDINGS

Regarding the dealers, the company monitors the dealers performance in terms of sales (units

and aftermarket parts), profitability, dealer share, and service. The quality of dealer service is

measured through questionnaire sent to customers. All this information is used to either merit

or demerit the dealer network. The customer satisfaction information is not available to othercompany functions.

An information technology (IT) infrastructure provides the support needed in terms ofinformation system to local performance measurement systems. The Enterprise Resource

Planning (ERP) system is the backbone of data processing. There are specific modules tosupplier management, internal operations management, and dealer management. According

the Supply Chain Manager, IT plays a major role to integrate to suppliers, but it is challengingbecause the system integration to dealers is quite difficult. There are different platforms but

the major problem is the investment necessary. It is worthy to note there is IT infrastructure inthe studied company, but there is no immediate information sharing. Then IT is necessary but

not enough.

Summarizing, the main empirical findings are:

- fragmented view of supply chain;- the performance measures compels local optimization as increase of sales volume or

market share, reduction of unassembled vehicles, increase of productivity and so on;

- the use of performance measure do not attain the holistic view of supply chain;- focus on local performance measurement to support decision making;- some people interviewed have expressed interest on performance of supply chain

beyond their duties.

- the supply chain performance measures are operational as inbound and outboundlogistics, quality, production etc.;

-the customer satisfaction performance measures are only used to merit or demerit thedealer; and

- suppliers are merit or demerit based on companys supplier quality system whichperformance measures play an important role.

FINAL REMARKSThe case study carried out in a large automaker company sheds light on some important issues

to take into account when designing a performance measurement system for a supply chain.

Considering mostly literature on performance measurement of supply chain is normative,

according to Schmitz and Platts (2002), the paper contributes to the understanding of practice

on measuring supply chain performance due to the empirical findings. With relation to

Schmitz and Platts (2002) findings, this paper poses similar evidences from case studyregarding the use of performance measurement to merit or demerit the suppliers as well as

dealers.

The first important issue is the understanding of SCM concept by users of performance

measurement. The users vision of supply chain determines the type of information and the

boundaries of supply chain. If supply chain vision is limited to suppliers, then there is no

reason to use performance measurement about sales, even internal operations. The

understanding of the SCM concept, and the vision of supply chain, can act as levers of change

in performance measurement.The second issue is the organizational structure. It seems to influence both the vision of

supply chain and practices of performance measurement. In the studied company, the

performance measurement practices are mostly limited to functions. The use of performancemeasurement is mainly to achieve local optimization. It is important to highlight that Lambertand Cooper (2000) claim that a prerequisite for successful SCM is to coordinate the activities


10/12

PROCEEDINGS

within the firm. Hence, the change of organizational structure can also act as a lever of

change.

The first step towards the development of performance measurement systems for supply chain

can be the company actual performance measurement practices that coordinate the supplychain as Figure 2 illustrates. The studied company has mature performance measurement

practices focused on functional issues. The performance measures provide information todecision makers in order to support them in their duties. There is no information sharing

considering the internal supply chain. Thus, the first step should be to integrate the differentlocal performance measures from different functions. In the studied company, it would be

very important, firstly, to integrate the performance measures from suppliers, internaloperations, and dealers. Certainly, this will not provide strategic performance measures

because the actual performance measures are essentially operational ones.

Figure 2The first step towards a supply chain performance measurement system.

At this point, information technology plays a very important role. The ERP system can be the

backbone of integration different databases. It is important to note that is necessary to allowthe information access to different users from different functions or processes. Some of the

people interviewed at the company studied have expressed interest on information aboutperformance of supply chain. The development of an intranet among suppliers and dealers, or

customers, seems to be a very interesting approach to share information on line with

immediate supply chain.

The development of performance measurement systems for supply chain is a complex andchallenging task. The vast literature on this issue is normative and there is a lack of empirical

studies (Schmitz and Platts, 2002). This paper has contributed to fill the gap of empiricalstudies and made some progress in order to shed light on some levers and steps to the

development of performance measurement systems for supply chain.

INFORMATIONT

ECHNOLOGY

INFORMATIO

NTECHNOLOGY




Demand management




Returns management




Demand management




Returns management

Performance

MeasuresPerformance

Measures

Performance

MeasuresPerformance

Measures

Performance

Measures

INFORMATIONINFORMATION TECHNOLOGYTECHNOLOGY

INFORMATION SYSTEM

SCM Performance

Measures System


11/12

PROCEEDINGS

5. ReferencesBallou, R.H. (2006), The evolutionand future of logistics and supply chain management .

Revista Produo, v. 16, n.3, p.375-386, Set./Dez. 2006.

Beamon, B.M. (1999), Measuring supply chain performance, International Journal ofOperation & Production Management, Vol.19, No.3, pp. 275-292.

Bititci, U.S.; Carrie, A.S.; McDevitt, L. (1997), Integrated performance measurement

systems: a development guide, International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, Vol.17, No.5, pp. 522-534.Christopher, M. L. (1992), Logistics and supply chain management, Pitman Publishing,

London.Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (2007). URL .

Acess: Januray 25th

, 2007.Croxton, K.L.; Garca-Dastugue, S.J.; Lambert, D.M.; Rogers, D.S. (2001). The supply chain

management processes.International Journal of Logistics Management, v.12, n.2, p.13-35.Eccles, R.G. (1991), The performance measurement manifesto, Harvard Business Review,

Vol.69, No.1, pp.131-137.Gunasekaran, A.; PateL, C.; Tirtiroglu, E. (2001), Performance measures and metrics in a

supply chain environment,International Journal of Operations & Productions Management,

Vol.21, No.1/2, pp. 71-87.

Handfield, R.B.; Nichols, E.L. (1999), Introduction to supply chain management, Prentice

Hall, New Jersey, NY.

Holmberg, S. (2000), A system perspective on supply chain measurements, International

Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 30, No.10, pp. 847-868.

Kaydos, W. (1991),Measuring, managing, and maximizing performance, Productivity Press,

Portland, Oregon.Lambert, D.M.; Stock, J.R.; Ellram, L.M. (1998), Fundamentals of logistics management,Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, Massachusetts.

Lambert D.M.; Cooper M.C. (2000), Issues in supply chain management, Industrial

Marketing Management, Vol. 29, pp.65-83.

Lambert, D. M.; Pohlen, T.L. (2001), Supply chain metrics,The International Journal of

Logistics Management, v.12, n.1, p. 1-19.

Lummus, R.R. and Vokurka, R.J. (1999), Defining supply chain management: a historical

perspective and practical guidelines,Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 99, No.1,

pp. 11-17.Neely, A.; Austin, R. (2000), Measuring operations performance: past, present and future,

In: Neely, A. (Ed.), Performance measurementpast, present and future. Centre for BusinessPerformance, Cranfield, UK, pp. 419-426.

Neely, A. (1998),Measuring business performance, The Economist Books, London, England.

Schmitz, J.; Platts, K.W. (2002), Supplier performance measurement indications from a

studying the automotive industry, in Neely, A.; Walter, A.; Austin, R. (Eds.) (2002),

Performance measurement and management: research and action, Centre for Business

Performance, Cranfield, UK, pp. 517-524.Sink, D.S. (1991), The role of measurement in achieving world-class quality and

productivity management, Industrial Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 23-28.Stewart, G. (1995), Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply

chain excellence,Logistics Information Management, Vol.8, No.2, pp.38-44.

Supply Chain Council. (2005), The Scor model, Available at URL: , Acessed in: 28 March 2006.
http://www.supply-chain.org/public/home.asphttp://www.supply-chain.org/public/home.asphttp://www.supply-chain.org/public/home.asphttp://www.supply-chain.org/public/home.asp


12/12

PROCEEDINGS

Van Hoek, R.I. (1998), Measuring the unmeasurable measuring and improving

performance in the supply chain, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 187192.

Xu, Lei, Benita M. Beamon (2006), "Supply Chain Coordination and Cooperation

Mechanisms: An Attribute-Based Approach",Journal of Supply Chain Management, Winter,pp. 4-12

Acknowledgement: To Coordenao de Aperfeioamento de Pessoal de Ensino Superior

(CAPES) for schollarship.

a case study on measuring performance of supply chain in a brasilian automaker

Documents