solutions to

7/31/2019 Solutions To

1/17

Solutions to strategic supplychain mapping issues

M. Theodore Farris IIUniversity of North Texas, Oak Point, Texas, USA

Abstract

Purpose The development of strategic supply chain mapping techniques has been slowed by fourcritical issues. The purpose of this paper is to answer a call to address supply chain mappingtechniques and issues. It offers recommendations for more readable and useful strategic supply chainmaps.

Design/methodology/approach The paper utilized executive MBA, traditional MBA, andgraduating logistics undergraduates applied economic input/output data to refine mapping techniques.

Findings The paper addresses strategic supply chain mapping issues to serve as the next step in

advancing the evolution of strategic supply chain mapping techniques. It utilizes geovisualization toprovide useful guidance to individuals trying to map their current supply chain and seeking potentialimprovements.

Research limitations/implications The paper is limited in that strategic supply chain mappingis in its infancy. Future research may consider use of the technique comparing alternative approachesto a supply chain, as well as the application of Pareto analysis and other metrics to focus on criticalcomponents for mapping.

Practical implications The use of input/output analysis initiates mapping at the macro industrylevel as a key starting point. Geovisualization techniques allow those mapping to offer a great amountof detail in a simple, easy-to-read format to identify the critical components of the specific supply chain.

Originality/value This paper is the critical next step to help further advance the evolution ofstrategic supply chain mapping techniques by both practitioner and academic.

Keywords Knowledge mapping, Supply chain management, Strategic management

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionGardner and Coopers (2003) Journal of Business Logistics article Strategic supplychain mapping approaches offered ten compelling arguments supporting the benefitsof strategically mapping the supply chain:

(1) To link corporate strategy to supply chain strategy.

(2) To catalog and distribute key information for survival in a dynamicenvironment (in order) to direct the focus of the managers.

(3) To offer a basis for supply chain redesign or modification.

(4) Current channel dynamics can be displayed in a supply chain map.(5) The process of building the strategic supply chain map, in itself, will help define

the perspective of the supply chain integration effort.

(6) Both the process of developing the map and the process of disseminating themap should lead to a common understanding of the supply chain.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm

The author would like to thank the University of North Texas for financial support of thestrategic supply chain mapping development through their Research Initiation Grant program.

IJPDLM40,3

164

Received June 2009Revised October 2009Accepted November 2009

International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics ManagementVol. 40 No. 3, 2010pp. 164-180q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0960-0035DOI 10.1108/09600031011035074


2/17

(7) Provides a communication tool to reach across firms, functions, and corporateunits.

(8) Facilitates monitoring of supply chain integration progress.

(9) New individuals or firms can be oriented to their role in the supply chain.(10) Finally, a well-documented supply chain mapping approach can lead to an

improved supply chain management procedure.

They were adamant that strategic supply chain mapping reach across firms,functions, and corporate units (p. 40) instead of a highly detailed, internal focus. Theyreviewed mapping types and attributes offering a solid primer on cartography. Whileleaving the final decision of the proper mix of attributes to the reader, they identified thecharacteristics of a good map as:

. interpretable;

. recognizable; and

.

in an easy-to-disseminate format.

They also suggested a good map utilizes standardized icons but point to the absence ofanything of this nature in strategic supply chain mapping. They identified four issueswhich must be addressed to further the development of strategic supply chainmapping:

(1) proprietary information;

(2) inadvertently changing channel dynamics;

(3) getting lost in too many details; and

(4) providing an ineffective perspective for management use.

Gardner and Cooper concluded their paper calling for development of a managerialmapping procedure:

There needs to be research focused on the processes for building the map so that it is useful forstrategic planning purposes [. . .] it could be a conceptual map or a diagram. The map shouldcapture multiple levels of the supply chain, cover more than logistics and manufacturingfunctions, and should be information rich without reaching information overload.

Perhaps, because the four issues appear to be insurmountable obstacles, in the six yearssince this paper, no one has responded with potential solutions. This paper begins byaddressing the problem of finding actual data for use in the development of strategicsupply chain mapping procedures. Economic input-output data were utilized to developmacro industry supply chain maps in the classroom laboratory to refine mapping

techniques. The issue of mapping complexity, getting lost in too many details, is analyzedand recommendations are offered. The paper concludes with final recommendationsto help advance further evolution of strategic supply chain mapping techniques.

Creating a macro map as a foundation for developing mapping techniquesGardner and Cooper offer a hypothetical example strategic supply chain map.Uncertain if a real strategic supply chain map actually existed from which one coulddevelop a mapping procedure, the author tried to obtain actual strategic supply chain

Strategic supplychain mapping

issues

165


3/17

maps through various industry contacts as well as through interaction at logistics andtransportation related trade shows. Claims of the existence of actual strategic supplychain maps turned out to be sales promises or often the simplest one-tier up and one-tierdown value chain diagrams, such as the one shown in Figure 1, which offered no

meaningful information. (Note that throughout this paper the terms supply chain andvalue chain have been used interchangeably.) It became quickly evident that strategicsupply chain maps either have yet to evolve beyond anything other than representingdyadic relationships, or, if strategic maps exist, their release is limited, potentiallyguarding proprietary data. Without an available precedent to help guide the developmentof a mapping procedure, an alternative approach was required.

The mapping functions available from internet mapping engines such as Mapquest(www.Mapquest.com), MSN Maps Live (Bing Maps) (www.bing.com/maps), or GoogleMaps (maps.google.com/) offer a technique which helps further strategic supply chainmapping efforts. These mapping engines all follow the same heuristic; create an initialmap at a higher strategic mapping level, even if the user inputs a specific address. Then,as shown in Figure 2, it allows the user to zoom in for a closer view, or shift the map,redirecting the view to an area of higher interest.

The first obstacle in developing a strategic supply chain mapping procedure was theability to obtain actual data spanning the supply chain. The solution came from raisingthe mapping effort to a macro level. A macro map identifies the overall structure of thesupply chain at the industry level to serve as a basis for exploring more detailedmapping of concentrated areas. Using the same principle as the internet mappingheuristics, the macro map technique facilitated development of mapping techniques.

Using publicly available economic input-output dataA commodity-by-commodity economic input/output model is available from the USFederal Government which identifies financial flows through the value chain at

the industry level. The data may be accessed at the US Department of Commerce website (www.bea.gov/) and uses standard industrial classification codes to identify theeconomic exchange among 66 industries as shown in Table I. These data quantify theexchange of funds among industries and allows the user to determine the magnitudeof purchases and sales. The input-output make-use data identifies how mucheach industry made for, or used from, other industries. For example, the mining,except oil and gas industry purchased (used) $2.590 billion from the machineryindustry and $1.575 billion from the petroleum and coal products industry.

The development effort utilized 2002 make-use economic data. An analysis wasconducted comparing 1992 economic input-output data with 2002 input-output data

Figure 1.One-tier up/one-tierdown value chain

SFocal

companyC

CustomerSupplier

IJPDLM40,3

166


4/17

to see if relative industry trading relationships differed over time, for example, hadincreased use of electronic components by the automobile industry significantlychanged the mix of commodity flows for that industry. It was concluded that therewere no significant differences. Technological innovation is more likely to occur withinan industry and replace like commodities instead of significantly changing the tradingrelationships between industries. Therefore, industry-level macro maps should notchange dramatically.

Figure 2.Internet mapping process

50,000

perpective

Initial

starting

point

Desired

end

result

Note: Reproduced from the only available original


issues

167


5/17

Farms

F

orestry,

fishingand

relatedactivities

Oilandgas

extraction

Mining,except

oilandgas

Supportactivities

formining

Utilities

PubComCodecomLabel

111CA

113FF

211

212

213

22

111CA

Farms

27,1

63.3

863.7

0.1

23.2

113FF

Forestry,fishingandrelated

activities

13,1

06.5

14,666.7

0.5

211

Oilandgasextraction

1.1

14,358.5

251.8

16.2

46,4

82.2

212

Mining,exceptoilandgas

384.1

1.2

4,595.6

26.8

14,0

25.0

213

Supportactivitiesformining

2,057.9

816.0

352.8

22

Utilities

5,873.6

84.3

1,172.9

1,234.7

166.5

358.9

23

Construction

800.8

94.5

2.1

0.8

29.9

5,4

45.6

311FT

Foodand

beverageandtobacco

products

17,069.0

99.9

313TT

Textilemillsandtextileproducts

mills

337.0

135.2

14.0

7.7

315AL

Apparela

ndleatherandallied

products

50.3

2.0

1.1

1.4

3.8

321

Woodpro

ducts

884.5

10.5

1.8

34.4

18.3

567.3

322

Paperproducts

713.6

6.3

90.1

52.0

31.4

243.1

323

Printinga

ndrelatedsupport

activities

60.2

0.7

1.5

1.6

1.3

80.3

324

Petroleum

andcoalproducts

6,692.6

195.8

646.7

1,575.7

975.1

3,5

96.0

325

Chemical

products

11,076.4

1,0

35.5

1,367.1

677.2

564.1

428.3

326

Plasticsandrubberproducts

1,219.5

54.0

435.3

550.5

128.6

916.1

327

Nonmetallicmineralproducts

523.6

3.7

249.8

126.9

412.6

1,3

11.9

331

Primarym

etals

576.8

0.0

855.2

392.9

475.6

749.2

332

Fabricatedmetalproducts

1,055.2

53.7

1,189.4

609.6

845.9

1,9

99.2

333

Machinery

3,400.9

65.6

1,068.8

2,590.3

843.4

823.3

334

Computer

andelectronicproducts

0.8

5.2

3.1

1.4

84.0

217.7

335

Electrical

equipment,appliances

andcomponents

476.4

5.4

11.1

31.8

51.0

2,5

94.1

3361MV

Motorveh

icles,bodiesand

trailers,andparts

634.1

56.3

309.1

232.7

119.5

147.5

Table I.Input-output make-useeconomic data

IJPDLM40,3

168


6/17

Developing mapping techniquesArmed with real data reflecting actual relationships among industries, it was possibleto begin developing mapping techniques by creating industry macro maps to reflect theexchange of business between industries. Over the last five years, the author utilized

undergraduate senior students, graduate MBA students, and executive MBA studentsfrom logistics and supply chain management courses to hone mapping techniques andapplications in the classroom laboratory. In developing mapping techniques, theclassroom laboratory was an ideal setting to try a variety of different approaches andtest potential solutions. There is no single way to create an effective map, but there aremany ways to create an ineffective map. The cost of failure in the classroom laboratorywas low and the degree of innovation high as the students offered a wide range ofsolutions and results.

Issue of complexityAs the mapping techniques were being developed, one of the first issues to arise wasthat of complexity. The complexity of mapping the value chain may make the taskoverwhelming and dilute the strategic usefulness of the map. The quantity of thenumber of relationships expands exponentially as the value chain is extendedbeyond the first tier. As shown in Table II and Figure 3, mapping two primaryrelationships two tiers forward in each direction (customers, customers-customers,suppliers, suppliers-suppliers) results in a map containing 13 total companies with12 relationships. Add just one backward tier (customers suppliers, customerscustomers suppliers, suppliers customers, and suppliers suppliers customers) toinclude the next two largest suppliers for each Tiers 1 and 2 customer and the next twolargest customers for each Tiers 1 and 2 supplier and the map will contain 37 totalcompanies with a minimum of 36 relationships as shown in Table III and Figure 4.Expand the map to three relationships per entity forward and three relationships per

entity backward for just two tiers and the number of companies jump to 97. Mappingcan very quickly get too complicated to be useful.Initial mapping efforts attempted to incorporate many trading exchanges simply

because data was available. Maps, such as the one shown in Figure 5, were toocomplicated to guide strategic management decisions, confirming Gardner andCoopers (p. 41) cautionary warning:

[. . .] there is no way to include enough information in a supply chain map to manage thesupply chain and still have the map useful for strategic purposes.

Eventually the classroom laboratory effort settled on mapping the three largestrelationships forward (customer, customers-customer, supplier, suppliers-supplier)

Number of forwardrelationships per entity Tier 2 Tier 1 Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2

Totalcompanies

1 1 1 1 1 1 52 4 2 1 2 4 133 9 3 1 3 9 254 16 4 1 4 16 415 25 5 1 5 25 61

Table II.Mapping complexity

primary entities forwardper tier


issues

169


7/17

and two relationships backward (customers other suppliers, customers customers

suppliers, suppliers other customers, and suppliers suppliers customers) for two tiersin each direction. The largest financial relationships were selected for mapping in orderto capture as much of the supply chain as possible.

Concept of geovisualizationThe concept of geovisualization is a key element in creating effective strategic supplychain maps. Minard (18441870) (Tableaux graphiques et cartes figuratives) has beencredited as one of the earliest geovisualists (MacEachren and Kraak, 1997). Minard was

Figure 3.Three primary entitiesforward

S

S

S

S C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

S

S

S

S

Focal

company

S

S

S

S

Number of backwardrelationshipsper entity

Number of forwardrelationships

per entity Tier 2 Tier 1 Tier 0 Tier 1 Tier 2Total

companies

2 4 2 1 2 4 372 ! 8 ! 4 4 8

3 9 3 1 3 9 732 ! 18 ! 6 6 18

3 9 3 1 3 9 97 3 ! 27 ! 9 9 27

Table III.Mapping complexityprimary entities forwardand backward per tier

IJPDLM40,3

170


8/17

renowned for including multiple variables within the same two-dimensional space on

his maps. His best known map was the 1861 thematic map of Napoleons march onMoscow (Tufte, 1983) shown in Figure 6.In this map, Minard combined data about the size of the French army, daily

temperature, and time of year, then overlaid it on a spatial map to identify distancestraveled and geographic obstacles. In doing so, Minard was able to depict the key factorsof Napoleons ill-fated campaign on a single map. Using Minards concept, strategicsupply chain maps should use geovisualization techniques to effectively create maps withmore, richer information.

Reflecting magnitude of financial flowsSupply chain management emphasizes managing flow. These flows may be inventory(finished goods and returned goods), cash (receivables and payables), or information

(research and design, quality assurance data, sales projections, on-hand inventorystatus, and supply status). Strategic supply chain maps, therefore, should reflect flow.

To reflect the magnitude of the flow, weighted arrows and lines were used. The mapshown in Figure 7 offers a different perspective when weighted arrows and lines areused to reflect the magnitude of financial flows. It becomes easier for the viewer toidentify where the largest transactions take place.

In the figure, the size of each arrow to the right of the target industry reflects theproportion of the target industry sales to the three largest customers and the

Figure 4.Three primary entities

forward and twobackward

CS

S

S

S

S

S S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

SS

S

S

S

S

SS

S

S

S

S

S

C

C

C

C

CC

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

CC

C

C

C

C

CC

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

Focal

company


issues

171


9/17

Figure 5.High complexity mappingattempt

IJPDLM40,3

172


10/17

Figure 6.Minards geovisual map


issues

173


11/17

Figure 7.Reflecting magnitudeof flow

111CA 18.0%

311FT

55

8.7%

7.8%

7.5% 5.3%

334

11.6%

10.3%

13.3%

12.6% 11.9%

12.7%

9.9%

7.4%

13.7%16.0%

10.0%

21.6%

18.0%

12.2%

7.8%

19.6%6.6%82.0%

12.9%

523521CIGSLC

33.8%

11.8%

622H0

14.9%9.8%

722

GFG

54120P 23

561

531

8.2%

44RT

42

111CA

18.0% 311FT

55

8.7%

7.8%

7.5%

5.3%

33411.6%

10.3%

13.3%

12.6%

11.9%

12.7%

9.9%

7.4%13.7%

16.0%

16.7%

10.0%

21.6%

18.0%

12.2%

7.8%

19.6%6.6%

82.0%

12.9% 523521CIGSLC

33.8%

11.8%

622H0

14.9% 9.8%

722

GFG

54120P 23

561

531

8.2%

44RT

42

Without weighted arrows and lines

With weighted arrows and lines

IJPDLM40,3

174


12/17

proportion of sales from each customer to their largest customers. Likewise, the size ofeach arrow to the left of the target industry reflects the proportion of the target industrypurchases from the three largest suppliers and the proportion of purchases from eachsupplier from their largest suppliers.

Reflecting trading relationshipsAs the mapping techniques continued to develop, it became evident that the flow shouldreflect both the magnitude of the buy-from of the customer from each supplier and themagnitude of the sell-to of each supplier to the customer. Combined with weightedarrows and lines, one could start to identify key relationships in the supply chain.For example, a small purchase by a large customer may represent a large percentage ofsales for a small supplier. To distinguish between buy-from and sell-to relationshipswe opted to use solid lines to represent sell-to transactions and dotted lines torepresent buy-from transactions.

Use of symbologyAs with any map the use of symbology is important to allow the user to easily identifythe elements and also understand the flows between each element. Also consider thatthe map likely will be copied in black and white and must be as readily understandablewith the absence of color. The use of solid and dashed weighted arrows and lines servedthis purpose well. For the same reason, we opted to use a triangle to represent the targetindustry, squares to represent customers, and circles to represent suppliers. In some ofthe mapping attempts there was a need to represent a key customer who was also a keysupplier. In these cases we utilized an octagon, a combination of the circle used for thesupplier and a square used for the customer. These geovisual techniques allow themanager to easily identify differences in relationships and where to investigate further.The end result of the classroom laboratory effort is shown in Figure 8.

Using the maps for strategic managementBeginning the strategic supply chain mapping process is no different than the startingpoint for an internet map. It should serve as a guide from which to drill down andexplore in greater detail. Macro industry maps should not be considered a finaldestination. They serve as a critical first step in guiding creation of a successful valuechain map. Once the initial map has been completed look for potential areas forstrategic improvements or relationships which may be managed differently. Supplychain opportunities exist not only by taking advantage of the strengths and capabilitiesof your trading partners but also may benefit from relationships with their othertrading partners.

To strategically manage the supply chain, firms must extend their interest beyondTier 1 customers and suppliers. Relationships of interest were classified as shown inFigure 9. Type I (suppliers suppliers) and Type III (customers customers) relationshipsrepresent the logical extension into Tier 2 relationships. The development of the valuechain map should also be expanded to include Type II (suppliers other customers) andTypeIV (customers othersuppliers) relationships as they alsooffer strategic opportunities.

Mapping Type I relationships (suppliers suppliers) to understand potentialshortages of supply would be incomplete without including consideration of Type IIrelationships (suppliers other customers). The competition for limited supply will play


issues

175


13/17

an important role in any shortage of supply. Strategic purchasing should not onlyconsider sources of supply but also competition for these resources by other customersof the supplier. Likewise, sales and marketing must not only look at the Type IIIrelationships (customers customers) but also the Type IV relationships (customersother suppliers) both for the competitive analysis but also to seek potential

complimentary opportunities.As a part of an Executive MBA course we required students to create strategic

supply chain maps with their own companies as the target (Tier 0) firm. While mostexecutives initially thought they had a solid concept of their value chain at the Tier 1level (and a few at the Tier 2 supplier level), virtually all could only identify Type I(customers customers) and Type III (suppliers suppliers) relationships at a cursorylevel of understanding. The mapping exercise by the executives, particularly in theType II (suppliers other customers) and Type IV (customers other suppliers) sectors

Figure 8.Recommended strategicsupply chain map

311FT

3361MV

42

325

331

622HO

GSLG

81

GSLE

722

324

55

113

GFG

34.7%

13.7%

7.7%

2.1%

5.3

%

4.1

%

4.0%

10.6%

3.3%

9.5%

7.3%

3.8%

484

9.2%

5.5%

561

311FT

334

111CA

2.6%

8.8%

6.3

%

6.3

%

5.4%

6.8%

4.0%

13

.3%

7.5%

7.5%

10.3

%

6.2

%

11

.6%6

.9%

7.8%8

.0%

8.7%

6.9%

531

23

5.6%19

.3%

5.0%

17.9%

11

.3%

8.3

%

18.6%

13.9%

44RT

10.9

%

50.9%

7.3%

14.0%

8.4%

6.0%

33.8%

31.7%

9.9%4

.4%

6.0%

11.8%

13.0%

7.8%

7.4%

7.1%

2.9%

5.4%

1

0.0

16.5

%

5412OP

8.8%

2.6

%

8.1%

14.0%

12.7%

13.5%

13.7%10

.6%

4.0%

12.3%

487

7.6%6.9%

481

16.7%

11.2%

5412

22

9.1%

8.2%

14.5%

1.6%

22.5

%

8.4

%

5412

15.8%

6.7%

9.4%

2.3%

7.7%

50.9%

326

Focal industry

Customer

Supplier

Both customer

and supplier

Sell to another industry

326 Plastics and rubber products industry

supply chain macro map

Buy from another industry

Width of line

reflectsmagnitude of

relationship

X% of total sales revenue

X% of total purchase spend

Data inside

symbol

identifies

industry usingBureau of

economic

analysis

identifier

codes

IJPDLM40,3

176


14/17

expanded into sound strategic and tactical questions offering potentially lucrativebusiness opportunities. For example, as a result of what was identified in the mappingexercise, one firm pursued joint marketing efforts, bundling their products with thoseof other non-competing suppliers to the same customer, to jointly seek higher market

share with new common customers.

RecommendationsGardner and Cooper left the final decision of the mapping attributes to the reader. Theclassroom laboratory effort, as described in this paper, allowed many different attemptsat mapping utilizing real economic data to test various attributes and help shape thefollowing mapping recommendations.

Utilize geovisualization techniquesThe mapping efforts utilized a geovisual technique combining weighted solid anddashed arrows and lines, defined symbology representing different tradingrelationships, and the representation of financial flow to develop maps rich in content.

Start at a higher levelIt is highly unlikely a company would be able to, or would desire to, expend theresources required to map 100 per cent of all of their customers and suppliers. Eachmapping effort must determine the economic trade-off between the level of detail oftheir map, the cost to gather the detail, and the benefit received. Future research mayhelp identify what level of detail offers the optimal return. Owing to the ready access toeconomic data, an industry macro map may offer the greatest mapping value for a

Figure 9.Strategic areas of interest

Tier 1 to Tier 2relationships

Cross-tier alliance opportunities

New product opportunities

First-mover for new technologies

Cost reduction opportunities

Technological knowledge

Custom

er

CustomerSupplier

Supplier

III

I II

IV Your customers

customer

Customer relationship

management

New product ideas

Better channel design

Alternative channels

Market orientation implementation

Innovation/new product uses

Your suppliers

supplier

Your customers

other suppliers

Potential competitors

Alliance opportunities

Pricing comparison


Identify solution selling opportunities

Dependence and power

Magnitude of profitability and sales

Your suppliers

other customers

Competition

Alliance opportunities

Pricing comparison


Magnitude of profitability and sales

Services or functions completed


issues

177


15/17

relatively minimal investment. It is recommended that the map designer begin at a highlevel and then drill down.

Strive to keep the maps strategic

Reiterating Gardner and Coopers cautionary warning that strategic supply chain mapsmust maintain a strategic emphasis, any users with a desire to drill down to anoperational level should utilize alternative process-related tools such as the SCORmodel (SCOR, 2008) for benchmarking, or flow modeling (Farris, 1996) for mappingfinancial value-added within the firm or with immediate trading partners. Keep thestrategic supply chain maps at a high, strategic level and avoid undue complexity.

Manage a synergistic networkAs value chain mapping continues to evolve, map designers may find that the termsupply chain is a misnomer. Strategic supply chain maps quickly reflect a supplynetwork as it is not unlikely that a customers customer may be a critical supplierssupplier. Recognition of these types of relationships may have far-reaching strategicimpact in terms of keiretsu-type relationships or jointly beneficial marketing efforts asdiscovered by one of the executive MBA mappers.

Embrace mapping creativityOne of the advantages of using the classroom laboratory was that it was determinedthere was no single approach to developing a strategic supply chain map. Creating astrategic supply chain map is as much an artistic endeavor as it is a defined process. Asshown in the Figure 10, multiple map designers armed with identical data may createmaps which reflect the same data in different ways. It is recommended that firmsattempting to strategically map their supply chain embrace this fact by asking multipleindividuals who create a map to use the same data set. Each variation may result in

components within the map which offer easier readability and should be incorporatedinto the final map.

ConclusionGardner and Cooper identified four critical issues which have hampered thedevelopment of strategic supply chain mapping techniques. The first issue of the lackof availability of proprietary data to help develop mapping techniques was addressedby raising the mapping level and using real economic industry exchange data. It issuggested that readers begin mapping efforts with high level maps in order to targetareas worthy of pursuing proprietary information from key trading partners. Detaileddata collection or estimation may be a costly time-consuming process. Starting with ahigher-level map may help alleviate part of the cost by identifying which areas deserve

more focus and then seeking to obtain the data. In the absence of available primarydata, consider using secondary sources of information to estimate these numbers.

The author offers an alternative perspective to Gardner and Coopers issue ofinadvertently changing channel dynamics with strategic supply chain maps. Theeffort involved and the ability to accumulate the data for a strategic supply chain mapmay serve as a competitive advantage. It is unlikely this will be readily shared withouta specific intent to influence the supply chain dynamics to benefit the goals of thetarget firm. With respect to Gardner and Cooper, the target firm should be cognizant of

IJPDLM40,3

178


16/17

the potential influence the release of this data may cause and is ethically obligated to

act accordingly.Finally, Gardner and Coopers remaining two issues of getting lost in too many

details and providing an ineffective perspective for management use, have beenaddressed through the classroom laboratory development of geovisual techniquesusing weighted arrows and lines to reflect the buy-from and sell-to flows, mappingsymbology to identify customers, suppliers, and the target firm, and limiting thecomplexity of the map to the top three suppliers or customers. These recommendationswill result in a strategic supply chain map which is rich in data and informative

Figure 10.Three different mapping

perspectives using thesame data

Note: Reproduced from the only available original


issues

179


17/17

without getting lost in the details. Maintaining a high level, the strategic supply chainmap should serve as a guide from which to drill down and explore in greater detail.

This paper reported the next step in the evolution of mapping techniques. By usingreal economic input-output data to develop macro industry supply chain maps,

mapping techniques were refined and recommendations offered to the reader to helpadvance further evolution of strategic supply chain mapping techniques. This mayresult in closer examination, increased visibility, and understanding of trading partnerrelationships extending throughout the supply chain. Truly managing andstrategically competing with supply chains must first start with this visibility.

References

Farris, M.T. II (1996), Utilizing inventory flow models with suppliers, Journal of BusinessLogistics, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 35-61.

Gardner, J.T. and Cooper, M.C. (2003), Strategic supply chain mapping approaches, Journal ofBusiness Logistics, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 37-64.

MacEachren, A.M. and Kraak, M.J. (1997), Exploratory cartographic visualization: advancingthe agenda, Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 335-43.

Minard, C.J. (1844-1870), Tableaux graphiques et cartes figuratives (Collection of Graphic Works),ENPC, Parris, Fol. 109775.

SCOR (2008), Supply-chain council, available at: www.supply-chain.org/

Tufte, E.R. (1983), The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT.

Further reading

Cooper, M.C. and Gardner, J.T. (2005), Map your supply chain, CSCMP Explorers, Vol. 2,pp. 1-15.

About the authorM. Theodore Farris II is presently an Associate Professor at the University of North Texas. Hereceived his PhD in Business Logistics from The Ohio State University and joined the Universityof North Texas in 1997 to develop the Professional Program in Logistics. He is a 2008Austrian-American Fulbright Scholar. In addition, he has recently been named a 2009-2010Charn Uswachoke International Scholar. M. Theodore Farris II can be contacted at:[email protected]

IJPDLM40,3

180

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

solutions to

Documents