Supply chain performance measurementin Latin America

Prepared for the Roundtable on
Logistics Development Strategies and their Performance Measurements(9-10-March 2015, Queretaro)

Gaston CEDILLONational Council of Science and Technology, Mexico

February 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................5
SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT .............................................................................6
Measurement techniques and attributes: a global perspective ...................................................................7
A Latin American perspective: the logistics cost.......................................................................................9AN INTEGRAL APPROACH FOR LATIN AMERICA ...........................................................................10
Definition of the scope of the study and selection of the logistics chains ...............................................11
Costs, over costs and processes analysis..................................................................................................12
Recommendations and proposals for public policies ...............................................................................13
SUPPLY CHAIN CLUSTERING: THE NEXT LOGISTICS PARADIGM? ............................................13
Implications of a supply chain clustering approach .................................................................................16
Data availability and coverage .................................................................................................................21
CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................................................22
AKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................................23
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................................23

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTINTRODUCTION

According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), the real salaries in Asia between
2000 and 2008 increased almost 1% per year, whereas in China, they increased 10% per year
between 2000 and 2005 and 19% between 2005 and 2010. These figures, added to the increasingenergy and logistical costs, have damaged the competitive advantages of the Asian Giant as themain manufacturing platform to the West, and initiated a new step to the global hypercompetitiveness, a “regionalization of the global economy”
For any industrial organization, controlling operational costs has been a main issue for
decades. The transfer of the Lean Manufacturing concepts to the logistics and supply chain area
has enabled developing concepts based on efficient operations (Lean Logistics, Lean Supply
Chain, etc.). However, nowadays, the increasing volatility of the markets, as well as thevariability in demand and the increasing risk of disruptions in the supply flow (either caused bynatural disasters or intentionally by men) are driving the design of more agile, cheaper, andabove all, more resilient supply chains (Gaonkar and Viswanadham, 2004; Giunipero andEltantawy, 2004; The White House, 2012; Bueno and Cedillo-Campos, 2014; Cedillo-Campos
et al., 2012; Cedillo-Campos et al., 2014a; Cedillo-Campos et al., 2014b). In fact, uncertainty ismaking companies go from a “lean” approach (efficient) to integrated effective solutions inwhich efficiency is only important when it guarantees a proper level of resilience in the supply
chain to face operational unexpected events (Waters, 2007; Wilson, 2007; Wu et al., 2007;
Stecke and Kumar, 2009; Thun and Hoening, 2011; Vilko and Hallikas, 2011).
Nowadays, both companies and regions are facing a complex set of ever changing factorsthat constantly transform their business environment. This situation requires major analyticalabilities, a comprehensive perspective when designing a competitive model, and a substantial
improvement of their decision-making abilities to respond to the demand. With the increasing
globalization, manufacturing companies have standardized, and replicated process with somesuccess almost everywhere companies have decided to settle. However, only a few countries
have achieved distinctive capabilities to reach an economical development more based on
supply chain, engineering, and continuous innovation than on low-cost labor. With an increasing
amount of regions with high manufacturing capabilities, we see today a major global interaction,
where supply flows are the key element of the global trade (Notteboom and Rodrigue, 2012;Rodrigue, 2012).
Today, the region is considered as the physical context that facilitates the development ofrelational strengths and drives the success, innovation, and competitiveness of the industrial
operations and services (Marshall, 1961; Storper, 1997; Porter, 1998; Theo and Roelandt, 2000;
Li and Cai, 2004). Consequently, the most competitive companies at a global level acknowledge
that success is mainly because they are located in regions able to go along with them in their

5

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

own competitive challenges (Cedillo-Campos et al., 2006; Cedillo-Campos and Perez-Araos,
2010).
This is why an “efficient” (low-cost) answer is no longer considered enough to compete in
the current global market. In fact, companies in areas such as hi-tech, automotive industry or
aerospace will not only require major logistical innovation within organization, but also a major
dexterity and accuracy in decision making from the public agencies. The future of bothcompanies and of the region will always be more interrelated in dynamic interactions that havenot until now been properly analyzed (Cedillo-Campos, 2012; Cedillo-Campos and Sanchez,2013).
Since “supply chain consists of all parties involved, directly or indirectly, in fulfilling acustomer request” (Chopra and Meindl, 2013), to improve supply chain performancemeasurement in emerging regions as Latin American one is increasingly complex. Since in the
Latin American region there are operational risks due to factors like market and financial
volatility, quality fade, supply chain disruptions, security issues, infrastructural challenges, andlack of transparency; a systems approach in logistics is needed (Bertalanffy, 1968).
Accordingly, based on literature review, this paper proposes a threefold discussion forimproving supply chain performance measurement in the region. First, this paper offers an
overview of supply chain performance measurement approaches currently applied in theacademic world identifying the most common metrics and methods. Second, it provides a
critical analysis and proposes a Latin American perspective when measuring supply chain
performance based on logistics costs. Third, it exposes information about an emergent supply
chain approach that could be important to integrate as part of a future supply chain performancemeasurement framework.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 exposes a statistical analysis based on a large
literature review related to supply chain measurement techniques and attributes, and at the sametime, discusses about logistics cost as a Latin American concern when measuring supply chain
competitiveness in the region. Section 3 exposes a methodology based on an integral approach
to measure logistics cost, that is not correlated to a specific transport mode or supply chain
stage, and considers both public and private stakeholders. Section 4 develops a discussion
regarding a potential novel supply chain approach that could be part of a renovate supply chain
performance measurement framework as well as issues in data availability and coverage withemphasis in the Mexican circumstance. Finally, Section 5 exposes relevant conclusions.

SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

In 2001, Perchet was already expressing that “the world economy is now structured
according to a double competition: a) the competition between companies that are increasingly
globalizing; and b) the competition between the regions that try to attract the best investments.

6

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTThe competition between companies keeps on looking for major parts of the world market, so
the competition between regions must take into account not only perseveration, but also
maximization of the attraction of productive investments, generating major incomes for theregion, and must at the same time, develop at least some significant competitive advantages”.
From this perspective, based on Chopra and Meindl (2013), the modern concept of supply
chain also involves now the region (the local geographic space) where supply chains operate. A
territory where local and global supply chains interact building the global value chains. For
decades, international trade was based on three main flows: i) exchange flows of manufactured
products between industrialized nations; ii) export flows of products from industrialized nations
to developing nations; and iii) export flows of raw material and primary goods from developing
nations to industrialized ones. However, since offshoring strategies became a critical part ofmost of the manufacturing business models, nowadays this context is fundamentally different.
The geographical dispersion around the globe of different value components of the same value
chain, allowed emerging countries to be part of the manufacturing and trading fragments ofgoods where they did not participate before (Blyde, 2014). Today, according to Accenture(2014), between the success factors achieved by leader companies when operating their supply
chains in emerging markets as Latin American, four count with a strong local component:i)

Investments in assets located in the region (plants, supplier basis, etc,);ii)

Service providing from local sites;iii)

Hiring local talent;iv)

Set up a joint venture or partnership with a local organization.

Considering the current Latin American context where companies and regions are in front of
the competitive challenge for integrating global supply chains with more local content, local
governments are in a fierce battle to attract industrial investments. Still, the question about how
local regions can effectively support in the long term the supply chain competitiveness of thedifferent industries remains (beyond the initial fiscal incentives, development of dedicatedinfrastructures and resources, among others).
Today it is clear that monitoring supply chain performance is critical to transform strategicplanning into concrete competitive actions across different entities (companies, public agencies,
universities, non-profit organizations, etc.). Nevertheless, to identify the right measurement
techniques and attributes when measuring supply chain performance remains a significant
challenge.
Measurement techniques and attributes: a global perspective

A measurement technique is here understood as a procedure or set of rules, standards orprotocols, which aim to achieve a particular result, whether in the field of science, education or
any other activity (Avelar-Sosa et al., 2014). On the other hand, an attribute is understood as aset of metrics used to express a value, which is related to company’s competitive strategy. The
measurement and control of these attributes must provide direct or indirect feedback informationthat support a better control of business processes (Chan, 2003; Abu-Suleiman et al., 2004).
Thus, since supply chain is a concept emerged in the business context, currently, most of themeasurement techniques take into account industrial attributes leaving aside the territorial
component. Thus, Elgazzar et al. (2012) and Chen and Gong (2013) argue that because one of7

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

the main companies’ objectives is to compare their own performance with others in the same
industry when measuring supply chain performance, measurement should be extended to all
supply chain members from a global perspective.
Currently, there two main types of measurements to evaluate the overall performance ofcompanies, which are: i) financial; and ii) operational. The first considers strategic indicators
derived from economic and financial outcomes, while the second considers indicators regarding
tactical attributes critical for short or mid-term activities. However, authors as Gunasekaran etal. (2001) note that companies do not achieve a balance when measuring these two groups of
attributes. It is because, when designing measurement frameworks, managers mainly focused
their analytics efforts on financial attributes, and researchers on operational ones. In fact,
Bhatnagar and Sohal (2005) highlight that academic literature has tended to emphasize on
quantitative factors, and consequently, operational attributes have gained more importance. As aresult, it seems that modern approaches to diagnose supply chains should not only include
quantitative attributes, but also qualitative ones. Actually, Jiménez and Hernández (2002) havementioned that to improve measure attributes oriented to planning, material procurement,
production and distribution as well as customer service an integrated qualitative and quantitative
approach is a need.
More operationally, modern supply chain literature highlights the importance ofcomplementary attributes of cost (Otto and Kotzab, 2003; Guiffrida and Nagi, 2006), as
collaboration among partners (Ramanathan, 2014), globalization (Caniato et al., 2013), risk of
disruptions (Cedillo-Campos and Bueno, 2014) carbon food-print (Velázquez-Martínez et al.,2014), corporate social responsibility (Cruz, 2013), among others. Some other authors include
local advantages when analyzing supply chain performance (Veltz, 1993; Veltz, 2000; Dzever etal, 2001; Saives, 2002; Bhatnagar et al., 2005; Cedillo-Campos et a., 2006; Cedillo-Campos andPerez-Araos, 2010; Cedillo-Campos and Sanchez, 2013).
Other authors analyzing supply chain performance measurement highlight important
attributes as collaboration (Ramanathan and Gunasekaran 2014), environmental management(De Giovanni and Esposito 2012; Perotti et al. 2012), dynamism in the supply chain(Wiengarten et al. 2012), responsibility and partnership (Gallear et al. 2012).
In that sense, based in a large literature review and laborious statistical analysis, that involved
95 scientific articles published from 2000 to 2012, Avelar-Sosa et al. (2014) identified the maintechniques used when measuring supply chain performance. The study found that multivariate
analysis was the most widely technique used by 30 references during the last 13 years. Casestudy was the second most used technique by 29 research works in different industrial sectors.
Other quantitative techniques based on mathematical models, multi-criteria approaches,
intelligent systems as neuronal networks or genetic algorithms, and six sigma were identified.
Concerning multivariate techniques, structural equation modeling (SEM) was the most used(see Figure 1). This technique allows researchers to find causal relationships among latentvariables. In fact, SEM is used by researchers because of its capacity to isolate observational
error from measurement of latent variables. On the other hand, regarding the case study
technique based on empirical analysis of different sectors, the main advantage argued byresearchers who used this technique was its flexibility to perform comparisons among
companies, as well as an in deep analysis of the real operational context.

8

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Figure 1. Multivariate techniques Avelar-Sosa et al. (2014)

Even if there is a number of analysis in supply chain measurement where only one technique
is used, the number of studies using hybrid techniques to better understand the topic isincreasing. Currently, academic documents as well as practitioner reports agree that cost still themain attribute when measuring supply chain performance, however, quality, service, reliability
and lead-time are now critical elements to be considered (Accenture, 2014; Hausman et al.,2013).
Other commonly used attributes are, delivery time, fulfillment rate, perfect order, informationtransparency, but other attributes as risk or reliability are starting to be considered as key
elements for measuring global supply chains. Furthermore, there are other attributes related to
how green the supply chain activities are, as well as agility and innovation involved in theoperations management.
A Latin American perspective: the logistics cost

As mentioned above, logistics costs are an important part of supply chains. However, they
are not the unique component. It is probably because Latin American countries face important
challenges in terms of lack of logistics infrastructure, trade facilitation agility including customs
procedures, transparent market regulations, supply chain security as well as efficiency andquality of logistics services, measurement perspective, still based on logistics costs. In fact,
challenges exposed above are causing not only important costs to regular operations, but also
over costs by creating a lack of coordination, inefficiencies in the export and import processes,
and inappropriate public policies. In that sense, the supply chain concept as an opportunity for
improving economic competitiveness is taking time to arrive to the region. Furthermore, as
mentioned before, since supply chain is a concept emerged from the business world, a delay isforeseen in its adoption in less industrialized countries (since a less dynamic governmentindustry interaction), as an integral part of the public policies for improving national
competitiveness.
Actually, as Pérez-Salas et al. (2014a) argue, in the region logistics costs represent a highpercentage of the total value of products. For example, for tomato exports in Central America,
logistics costs represent 49% of their total value while its price at the farm accounts only for9

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

31% of the total cost. Thus, González et al. (2008) provide evidence concerning the critical
impacts of logistics cost on competitiveness, regional development, and poverty levels in the
Latin American region.
Since logistics costs are defined as resources required for moving goods from an origin to apoint of consumption, they involve a spatial dimension as well as a temporal dimension. The
first is associated to transport and warehouse activities. The second is associated to process as
inventory, dead times for loading and unloading operations, stock-out costs, and the variabilityof lead-times.
According to Pérez-Salas et al. (2014a), there are two main approaches in the literature tomeasure logistics costs: i) a macro-economic perspective, and ii) a micro-economic perspective.
The macroeconomic methodologies aim to determine the logistics performance of a country
based on the global estimation of its logistics systems and its relative importance with respect tothe country’s productivity and its competitiveness. In most of the Latin American countries,
those studies are currently been part of the basis to design and operate their public policies andinvestment decisions. At the same time, due to a lack of reliable national entities measuring
logistics cost, strategic decision-making in private sector are also based on this approach.
Macro-economic methodologies are mainly based on descriptive tools (qualitative approach)and econometric methods (quantitative approach), where the variables do not necessarily
include all of those involved in the total logistics cost, but represent general estimations ofnational logistics performance. For doing this, primary and secondary information sources are
employed.
One of the main advantages offered by current macro-economic approaches is the availabilityof indicators that are critical in decision-making. However, since this type of analysis deal withaggregated data, and there is, for instance, a lack in product differentiation (bulk products,
perishable items, dangerous cargo, etc.), then, specific logistics requirements of products are notproperly considered. Furthermore, the specific operational characteristics related to every
industry are not sufficiently taken into account. As a result, distortions related to the real costs ofoperations and times involved are part of those studies. On the other hand, micro-economic
studies involving total cost of ownership are the most common analysis supporting enterprises
decision making in Latin America. Those studies are mostly used when selecting suppliers or
identifying opportunities for collaboration in design, planning and fulfillment. Since they are
performed from a business perspective, most of them do not take into account induced costderived of all public services inefficiencies. Consequently, an integral vision of logistics cost isneededAN INTEGRAL APPROACH FOR LATIN AMERICA

Based on Pérez-Salas et al. (2014a), this section presents an integral approach to measurelogistics cost. This methodology was already used in countries as Bolivia and Paraguay (PérezSalas et al. (2014b). In fact, United Nations - Economic Commission for Latin America and the10

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Caribbean (UN-ECLAC) is promoting an integral framework when analyzing every trade
processes, identifying the potential inefficiencies, in terms of time and costs involved. This
analysis is not correlated to a specific transport mode or supply chain stage, and considers bothpublic and private stakeholders. The proposed framework is structured in three steps that are
further described.
Definition of the scope of the study and selection of the logistics chains
Identification of the most relevant logistics chains

This activity consists in the analysis of the export and import transactions of the country underanalysis, with the aim to determine a set of representative logistics chains to be include in the
study. This considers the identification of logistics chains and modeling the main process andstakeholders involved, as well as the main transport corridors used to transport cargo. Historical
data of trade volumes and the coverage of the transport modes that are more frequently used foreach logistics chain are an important basis for this analysis.
Regarding export transactions, the analysis should consider those logistics costs from theorigin of the product (i.e. at the farm) to the point of consumption. Related to importtransactions, the analysis should consider since the product arrives to the point of origin until it
arrives to the warehouse of the importer.
Selection of logistics chains

It consists in the identification and selection of the main logistics chains based on a multicriteria
analysis. For this and as a first step, a pre-selection of the most relevant logistics chains is
performed. Then, criteria to select a set of logistics chains are defined. Criteria to be considered
could be the relative importance of each productive sector with respect to trade volumes, valueof the cargo, innovation opportunities, among other criterion that may be important to consider.
Finally, based on the relative importance of each criterion, the pre-selected logistics chains areevaluated and those with a higher score are selected.
Definition of costs categories

Costs have to be categorized in order to be measured. Table 1 presents a general categorizationof costs that may be used and should be adapted to the specific considerations of each casestudy.

11

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Table 1. Cost categories by transport mode and trade (Pérez-Salas et al., 2014a).
Cost CategoryPre-shipment

Description
Costs related to the activities performed for cargo handling prior to its shipment to its final destination such
as: i) packing; ii) labeling; iii) consolidation of cargo and storage of products; and finally, iv) transport of cargoamong facilities. It also includes the cost of the activities related to cargo inspection and certifications
required by any public agencies.

Shipment to the port oforiginCosts of the land transport from the warehouse of the exporter to the port terminal where it will betransferred.

Port/ Airport/ Border entry

Costs for cargo handling at the port/airport terminal where the cargo will be loaded to a ship. It also includes
all the related costs for delays at the gate and within the terminal.

Customs and control
agencies

Costs incurred for Customs and other control agencies for the inspection, control and clearance procedures.
It also includes those costs incurred for certifications and inspections required by the customer or the countryof destination. For the case of road transport, it also includes those costs incurred at the borders.

Shipmet to destination

Costs related to the freight shipment that could be either by road, air or sea. It also considers any otherhandling costs as well as insurances.

Inventory and Finance

Costs such as in-transit inventory costs as well including those incurred due to waiting times. In addition,
supplementary costs that resulted because of delays or lead times variability are considered in this category.

Identification of information sources

It consists in the identification of main information sources both primary and secondary for data
gathering. Primary sources of information consider those relevant stakeholders involved in theprocess either of export or import of each logistics chain. An agenda should be planned, with thedates for interviews and focus group.
Costs, over costs and processes analysis
Development of a logistics processes mappingThis activity consists in the analysis of the export and import processes of each logistics chain
under study, with the aim of determining potential impacts that these factors and its regulation
have respected to the efficiency of the logistic chains. For this, in-deep interviews should be
performed with those stakeholders previously selected of each logistics chain. With theinformation gathered during the interviews and the secondary information also obtained, alogistics processes map should be designed, such that the main physical and information flows
are identified with their corresponding costs. Other techniques such as Business Process
Analysis (BPA) to model the process could be also employed.
Costs and over costs analysis

A diagnostic of the current situation of each logistics chain may be elaborated, based on thelogistics process mapping. The costs and over costs incurred at each stage of each logistics chain
must be identified. For this, a base scenario is determined first, where the costs of the logistics
chain are identified under a “normal” operation.
Then, the over costs are determined considering other scenarios that can occur (based on infield observations and interviews), such as inefficient operations that resulted in additional costs

12

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT(i.e. a late arrival of export cargo for the stacking period at a port that resulted in an additional
fees for the exporter). Furthermore, costs associated to waiting times or delays in each of thestages of the logistics chain (i.e. waiting times at the gate of the port or at an empty containerpark). This estimation may be computed according to average observations or probabilities ofoccurrence.
Logistics inefficiencies analysis

This activity aims to provide a general analysis of the most relevant inefficiencies observed forthe logistics chains under study, and current gaps with respect to other economies and bestpractices. Impacts on the competitiveness of foreign trade at a macro level of those gaps andpotential benefits obtained by the reduction or elimination of those over costs observed shouldbe estimated.
Recommendations identified to reduce those gaps should be provided and analyzed with thestakeholders involved in the processes in order to prioritize them and generate a roadmap of thespecific actions required to significantly reduce those over costs per product and transport
corridor. This process is not proportional to the scale economies of the potential solutions
recommended, and is actually a complex process in which political and social variables may bealso considered.
Recommendations and proposals for public policies

A summary of the recommendations to improve current export and import processes as wellas public policies recommendations should be reported. It is based on the results obtained withthe logistics costs analysis, as well as the priorities defined for the specific projects to be
implemented and its impacts on national productivity and competitiveness.
Today it is clear that for the average of the Latin American region, to measure and reduce
logistics cost is an important first step to be achieved in order to improve their competitiveness.
However, in emerging industrialized countries as Brazil and Mexico, even if logistics costs arestill a challenge, in order to remain competitive these countries should pass to the next logistics
step and should adopt a supply chain paradigm in their public policies.

SUPPLY CHAIN CLUSTERING: THE NEXT LOGISTICS PARADIGM?

The global-local structure of key industries, as well as the economic losses because of the
fierce competition between bordering regions, is providing the incentives to propose morecollaborative, efficient, and innovative solutions.
In fact, since the concept of supply chain strongly emerged, the industrial companies try todevelop new capabilities to coordinate internally and externally their technical, commercial, andrelational dimensions. These dimensions enable them first, to adapte to the current changes andthen, to improve their capabilities to react more swiftly to the changing requirements imposed
13

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

by the technological change and the final customer. However, these issues are not always
identified or not considered as critical by the government agencies focusing on the regional
development. As such, a key component of the industrial competitiveness is that the region
remains outdated, generating competitive “losses” to the company-region system (or interaction
between global-local supply chains and the local industrial cluster). In a global economy thatmoves to increasing complexity, improving the “synchrony” of flows will become a key element
for both global supply chains as well as for industrial clusters interacting with the local
environment to optimize their common competitive opportunities.
On the other hand, mainly because of the risk mitigation strategies in global supply chains,
manufacturing is expected to increase, as well as the business interchanges within the limits ofthe free-trade zone, that is to say, a regionalization of the global economy. This phenomenon is
confirmed by the Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index [30], which highlights the trendof the companies to make regional supply decisions (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Percentage of answers regarding supply decision (Deloitte and U.S. Council on Competitiviness,2013).

The strategies of “nearsourcing” try to reduce costs between 5 to 20% according toestimations done by different consulting companies (GCI, 2008; Deloitte and U.S. Council on
Competitiviness, 2013; EIU, 2013). However, although the increasing labor and energy costs
represent a critical part, they remain a small part of the total landed costs. The greater added
value a product has, the more expensive its components are. As such, regarding products withhigh added value, the most important costs are not the ones related to labor and energy, but the
total costs within the supply chain and the ones related to intellectual property rights. The
location of the production plants near their target market and in countries with greater
intellectual property rights enables at the same time reducing supply chains and guaranteeing
respect of the transactions deriving from patenting innovations.
In this sense, because of current industrial changes, it is foreseen that the next logistics
frontier would be defined by a competition between industrial clusters and their supply chainsoperating along the freight transport corridors, more than between the supply chains ofindividual companies.

14

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTThis approach is spreading to collaborations every time more related to the region where thecompany (industrial cluster) is located. This is due to the fact that the company clearly remains
in a geographical space in which it is constantly in interaction. Under the influence of theinterchanges or transfers of flows between the company and its extern environment (throughout
its supply chain), the “company” system evolves and its variables (performance indicators) areconstantly changing. In fact, while operating in environment of dynamic change, the company
develops its operations with a stated “imbalance”. However, thanks to its capability to keep
through time its competitive advantage lined up with its company business model, it could
remain a winner in the market.
These interactions between the “original business model” of the company and the reality of
its economical, industrial and regional environment shape is what Boyer, Freyssenet (2000)
define as “hybridization”. These authors argue that a business model, because of its dynamic
interactions with its external environment, evolves up to the point of taking its own personality
depending of its local operational environment. This way, the local environment of operation(industrial cluster) influences the competitiveness of the company-region system throughout theflow of processes (global supply chain).
As such, the emergence of new manufacturing regions makes the current manufacturing
regions wonder constantly about their abilities to attract and keep investments with high added
value. As a result, observing, and understanding the behaviors and evolutions of cutting-edge
industrial sector, as well as what other regions are developing to be more attractive is every day
more critical. The existence of transversal “meta-systems” (global supply chains) enables thecollaboration-cooperation, but also the competitiveness between the different industrial clusters
where some of the links develop operations (see Figure 3). Therefore, since these industrial“meta-systems” called global supply chains ease the comparison of performance between
different regions of location through their industrial clusters, a dynamic and transversal analysis
approach have become a key element to improve the competitiveness of both the industries aswell as of the regions that receive them (Mélèse, 1979, 1990).
Figure 3 Integrated structure industrial cluster and supply chain (Cedillo-Campos, 2012).

15

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Implications of a supply chain clustering approach

Every day, the industrial manufacture becomes a more global sector. Competition moved
from between countries to between companies and their supply chains, and nowadays, between
global supply networks and their local components operating inside the regional industrial
clusters.
The SCC can be identified when they show three fundamental features: i) physical proximity;ii) common processes, activities, products and/or services to different supply chains operating
within a same cluster; and iii) collaboration relations between providers. The supply chain
cluster provides opportunities for organizations that try to ease and shorten their supply chain
making it more resilient, and as a consequence, more reliable. This implies interacting withpartners and resources on a specific region. Companies operating in a supply chain cluster
scheme can take advantage of the economies of scale, without being compelled to deal with theinflexibilities of a vertical integration.
In this sense, a supply chain cluster (SCC) is defined as a geographical concentration ofprocesses, activities and/or services that can be put together to add value to one or more supply
chains. It mainly focuses on three aspects (see Figure 4):16Global-Local integration of flows. Designing and operating local hubs enabling the
global-local integration products, services, and information flows is one of the key
factors to the effective development of a SCC. Thanks to a local logistics hub, themembers of a SCC become more efficient regarding operation and coordination costs of
their global supply chain. At the same time, they boost the cluster’s competitiveness,trust, and innovation.

Global-Local collaboration network. In a SCC, most organizations are directly or
indirectly related to one or various industrial systems that are close (for example: theautomotive industry, the electronic and the aerospace ones are industrial systems highly
based on technological innovation as well as on logistical competitiveness for theassembly activities). There is then a relation between companies inside one supply chain,but also a relation of competition-collaboration inside similar companies that collaborate
with other supply chains. As such, each member of a SCC can take advantage of
economies of scale for buying, financial support, and technological development (withother similar organizations), as well as economies of scope when identifying andsatisfying specific niches based on their size and flexibility.



Focus on the differentiated competitive advantages. By introducing a cluster model,
Porter (1998) suggested that in the future, the competitive advantages would not be
determined by a major efficiency in providing products, but rather by the companies’
ability to explore the resources available in the environment they are operating in. By
doing so, he suggested that a main competitive advantage could derive through assessing
the immediate environment outside the company instead of focusing only on what
happens inside the supply chain the company participates. The support service system a
SCC can provide enables collaborating more productively in the local development of
the inputs which are required by the global supply chain when going through local
clusters, as well as access to information and coordination between related companies.

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Figure 4 Potential supply chain clusters in Mexico, (IDB, 2013).

Logistics Regions
Main Cities
Second Rang Logistics Hub

Main Logistics Hubs
Strong Logistics Links

Since a diversity of the companies can be located in an industrial cluster (see Figure 5),gathering processes, activities and/or services in common to different supply chains, reducecomplexity of operations in the cluster and enables mitigating the variability in competitiveness(see Figure 6).
Hence, the regions go through different tensions, derived from the different competitive
cycles of each industrial sector located in them. This implies two main challenges for them: a) toease the productive linking within the cluster, looking for common processes or services thatwould link the companies without worrying about the industrial system they are in; b) to design
a local flow system that would interact with the global flow system.
Considering the integrative role logistics platforms play in the Global-Local flows, they could
potentially become the ideal location around which supply chain clusters could be operate (seeFigure 7). As such, not only common processes would be integrated to different supply chains,
but logistics platforms would also support a reduction in logistics by taking advantage of theeconomies of scale that intermodal corridors can offer to companies.

17

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Figure 5 Global supply chains interacting in a local industrial cluster.

Figure 6 Competitive variability in the local industrial clusters, induced by the variability of the global
supply chains.

18

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Figure 7 Logistic platforms as Supply Chain Clustering Hubs.
rs

li

rd

B

A
Intermediate
logistics platforms
Logistics Hub “A”

Logistics Hub “B”

Nowadays it is a fact that when a company is looking for an effective global integration of
the supply chain, the capabilities of the local environment in which the plant is located canbecome crucial. In successful SCC such as Silicon Valley, although the companies’ supply chain
must respond to global requirements, the local capabilities have enabled them not only facing
the challenges, but also innovating to propose better responses.
In this sense, and based on the analysis of different cases studied by several authors (DeBanville and Chanaron, 1991; Chanaron, and De Banville, 1996; Storper, 1997; Carrie, 2000;
Cedillo-Campos, 2001; Theo and Roelandt, 2000; Li and Cai, 2004; Sturgeon et al., 2007;
Sanchez et al., 2008; Sturgeon and Biesebroeck, 2010), we could verify that when the industrial
cluster and the supply chain approach are integrated in the analysis to build a “supply chain
cluster”, then positive interactions appear:i. The resources are organized on one specific geographical area, creating opportunities forachieving agility to ease and shorten the supply chains;
ii. The geographical proximity enormously reduces the complexity of the supply chain;iii. The mutual interdependence and trust are intensified between the companies that are
member of the same supply chain. In that sense, regional elements, such as long-term
perspective inside the cluster’s company improve directly the performance of the supply
relationships. An improve interdependence also increases the mutual trust, strengthening thelevels of commitment and reducing conflicts;
iv. Motivate and accurately measuring performance of supply chain cluster partners becomeachievable;
v. Visibility of the processes is improved, thanks to the advantages of the technological,
relational, organizational and cultural proximity;
vi. Flexibility increases when supply chain partners are located in the same industrial cluster;vii. Disruption risk in the supply chain flows is reduced thanks to the gathering and line up of
the efforts;
viii. The information is shared faster and more efficiently. The partners of a same cluster
promote faster some information about new opportunities;
ix. The feedback cycles are shorter, enabling a faster transformation of the supply chain,creating substantial savings.

19

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Actually, in an integrating process of highly effective providers, the local businessenvironment in which the location is settled becomes crucial to get a sustainable competitive
advantage. This is especially true in cases in which the company faces complexity due todynamic interactions between the local environment and the global pressures from the market.
In fact, a clear example of a supply chain clustering configuration in progress is theautomotive supply chains in North America. Over the past two decades, automotive supply
chains have been organizing their processes all along the north-south corridor that links different
automotive clusters in the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) zone (Klier andRubenstein, 2010). Actually, by 2011 Mexico accounted for 31 percent of U.S. motor vehicle
parts imports. At the same time, Mexico was the third exporter (it is today the second one) of
light vehicles to de U.S. market. This suggest a unique co-production relationship based on
supply chain clustering corridors between the two economies (see Figure 8).
Figure 8 NAFTA supply chain clustering corridors. Based on Parrilla and Berube (2014).

AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCTION
US $ 10 billion
US $ 2 billion
US $ 1 billion

US $ 200 million
US $ 1 billion
US$ 3 billion

Thus, accumulations of flows in certain geographic zones along NAFTA’s transport corridors
are emerging. Those transport corridors are structured along supply chain clusters (SCC) that
regulate the flows at the local and regional level. In that sense, NAFTA supply chains clusteringcorridors could be structured around three main elements:i) Logistics platforms located along the main transport corridors allowing the use ofintermodal technology;ii) Supply chain clusters organized around logistics platforms, which as control towers
regulate freight, and information flows inside their hinterland;

20

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTii) Transport corridors as a “pipeline” that not only links supply chain clusters between them,
but as platform of services, provide value added logistics services (high technology
security services based on tracking and tracing of vehicles, etc).
Thus, given the increasing economic globalization structuring the global network economy,in the future it is very likely that logistics platforms will not only play an important part as
modal interchange points by increasing the efficiency of logistical flows or as tools of theterritorial development, but also favored points to drive innovation in logistics and supply chain
processes. On the other hand, from an information technologies approach, there is an
opportunity to pass from enterprise applications software (ERP – Enterprise Resources
Planning) to supply chain clusters applications software. Accordingly, technologies responding
to a “real time” demand will move from an operations management (OM) perspective based on
individual companies to a “4D approach” that considers at the same time:i)

Optimization of the internal company’s operations;ii)

Design and operation of the company’s global supply chain;iii)

Coordination of the company's interactions with the local industrial cluster;iv)

Tracking the freight flows and measuring “supply chain fluidity” (Eisele et al, 2011)

Data availability and coverage

As Chopra and Meindl (2013) argue, supply chain performance measurement depends on thecompetitive strategy related to it. Supply chain is not an end in itself. Countries andorganizations should define its competitive strategy and then decide what their supply chain
strategy ought to be. Thus, the supply chain strategy determines how the supply chain should
perform.
Currently, in most of the Latin American countries, there is not a clearly stated national
competitive strategy, and consequently, a national supply chain strategy neither. For somepublic decisions makers, since supply chain is currently an umbrella term for different
understanding of the concept, it “allows” the application of any performance measurement
approach regardless a wide range of methodological considerations. However, if at an academic
level, the risks of a wrong measurement are mitigated, since the analyzed problems could bebordered, at the national level, the risk is higher. Based on the Lord Kelvin’s paradigm, if weonly improve what we can measure, incorrect measurement could be transformed in fact in an
attack on competitiveness.
In Mexico, a wide variety of supply chain performance measurement studies exists. Most ofthem are performed by consulting companies with strong supply chain background from thebusiness perspective of the topic. They perform survey studies trying to cover an important
information lack on this matter. Thus, important efforts to enlarge data collection in order toachieve reliable studies have been done by them. Nevertheless, even if the growth of digitaltechnologies has enabled companies to collect increasingly massive amounts of data, theyrequire powerful capabilities in statistics and “Big Data” technologies to make sense of thatdata.
Currently, most of the studies performed in Mexico do not clarify a national supply chain
strategy or paradigm on what they are based, and no information about the statistical robustnessof the studies are exposed and neither discussed. Thus, results do not have a real link with the21

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

national supply chain landscape. Thus, to provide an update to all supply chain actors, reliable
and nationally exposed study is becoming challenging.
Hence, it is today clear that this kind of efforts could be performed by/or under supervision ofrecognized research centers with strong methodological capabilities. For doing this, a clear
identification of a national supply chain strategy is needed. Subsequently, under a high-qualified
supervision, to define metrics and the method to measure it could be more reliable.
However, regardless of the strategy or strategies adopted for performing those studies,organization performing these types of studies need to provide a rationale for their choices byarticulating the expected benefits and weaknesses of any strategy, method, or sample size theychoose.

CONCLUSIONS

Through our review of the literature on supply chain performance measurement, a statisticalcomparison of supply chain techniques and attributes was exposed. The most used methodology
is multivariate analysis and the most used technique approach is structural equation. However, it
was also notice that hybrid methodologies and combined techniques are widely used to achievea better understanding when measuring supply chain performance.
At the same time, it was possible to understand that – although there is a number of importantstudies related to supply chain performance measurement – in many cases only a few attributes
are taken into account. The importance of the local factors in building the dynamic competitive
advantage of global supply chains is still not fully appreciated.
Thus, implementation of systemic approaches for an efficient supply chain performancemeasurement has become one of the main challenges to take advantage of business opportunities
of globalization. In this regard, logistics costs represent the main challenge and play a key role
especially in emerging markets as the Latin American one. In the region, logistics costs
currently account for a bigger percentage of the total cost of a product with respect to duties andtariffs.
Furthermore, this document exposed a framework for logistics costs assessment based on an
integral vision that differs to the traditional approaches found in the current literature. The
proposed framework considers a sequential analysis of the foreign trade processes to identify
inefficiencies and over costs. Furthermore, a temporal dimension is also incorporated to theanalysis. A systematization of the framework proposed on a long run term can be the base for
econometric studies that may be further implemented to validate results.
Finally, this work presented a potential new paradigm called “Supply Chain Clustering” that
could serve as a tool to identify factors that allow the articulation of dynamic competitiveness.
The tendency towards flexible organization in production obliges companies as well as
governments to adopt a systemic approach in which supply chain competencies are a strong
differentiation factor.
22

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Thus, logistics platforms must be seen as logistical elements that enable mitigating the global
variability transmitted by different supply chains to the regions, and then, improve supply chain
performance. They should also be considered as a coordination, and innovation element since
they enable identifying the “best logistics practices” developed by the industrial cluster, which
are susceptible of being standardized and propagated as “local” standard.

AKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author thanks Flora Hammer for several useful comments that improved this paper.

References

Accenture (2014). Supply Chain Success Factors in Emerging Markets. Washington, USA.
Abu-Suleiman, A., Boardman, B. and Priest, J. (2004). A framework for an integrated Supply Chain
Performance Management System. Industrial Engineering research Conference. University ofTexas Arlington, Arlington, TX., USA.
Avelar-Sosa, L., García-Alcaraz, J. and Cedillo-Campos, M. (2014). Techniques and attributes used in
the supply chain performance measurement. Springer, Germany.
Bhatnagar, R. and Sohal, A. S. (2005). Supply chain competitiveness: Measuring the impact of location
factors, uncertainty and manufacturing practices. Technovation, No. 25, Vol. 5, pp. 443–456.
Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General Systems Theory. Development and Applications. George Braziller, NewYork.
Blyde, J. (2014). Synchronized Factories: Latin America and the Caribbean in the Era of Global Value
Chains. Springer, IDB. Washington , DC , USA.
Boyer, R., Freyssenet, M. (2000). Les modèles productifs. La Découverte, Paris.
Bueno, A., Cedillo-Campos, M. (2014). Dynamic impact on global supply chains performance ofdisruptions propagation produced by terrorist acts. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics andTransportation, Vol. 61, pp. 1-12.
Caniato, F., Golini, R. and Kalchschmidt, M. (2013). The effect of global supply chain configuration on
the relationship between supply chain improvement programs and performance. International
Journal of Production Economics, No. 143, Vol. 2, 285–293.
23

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Carrie, A. (2000). From integrated enterprises to regional clusters: the changing basis of competition.
Computers in Industry, Vol. 42, pp. 289–298.
Cedillo, M. (2001). Reconfiguration de l'espace stratégique des firmes automobiles: Quelles nouvelles
implications pour la logistique?. Mémoire de D.E.A. Logistique et Organisations. Centre deRecherche sur le Transport et la Logistique (C.R.E.T.-LOG), Université de la Méditerranée AixMarseille II, Aix-en-Provence.
Cedillo-Campos, M., Sanchez, J., Sanchez. C. (2006). The new relational schemas of inter-firms
cooperation: the case of the Coahuila automobile cluster in Mexico. International Journal ofAutomotive Technology and Management (IJATM), Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 406-418.
Cedillo-Campos, M. and Perez-Araos, A. (2010). Hybrid supply chains in emerging markets: the case of
the Mexican auto industry. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, May, Vol. 21, No.1,
pp. 193-206.
Cedillo-Campos, M. (2012). Supply Chain Clustering: the next step of industrial competitiveness.
Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals Conference, CSCMP-Roundtable Mexico.
Mexico City, Mexico.
Cedillo-Campos, M., Gonzalez, R., Jimenez, E., Bueno, A. (2012). Designing supply chains under
security threat: the first national exploratory survey in Mexico. Technical Report to the Secretariatof Commerce and National Council of Science and Technology, México (in Spanish).
<http://www.elogistica.economia.gob.mx/swb/work/models/elogistica/Resource/3/1/images/2011_
Evaluacion_del_Riesgo_en_las_Cadenas_de_Suministro.pdf> (Consulted: 10.05.2014).
Cedillo-Campos, M. and Sanchez, C. (2013). Dynamic Self-Assessment of Supply Chains Performance:
an Emerging Market Approach. Journal of Applied Research & Technology, JART, Vol. 11, No.
3, pp. 338-347.
Cedillo-Campos, M., Sanchez, C., Vadali, S., Villa, J. and Menezes, M. (2014a). Supply chain dynamics
and the “cross-border effect”: The U.S.–Mexican border’s case. Computers and Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 72, June, pp. 261–273.
Cedillo-Campos, M., Bueno, A., Gonzalez, R., Jimenez, E., Perez, G. (2014b). Dynamic impact on
global supply chains performance caused by criminal disruptions. Journal of Applied Research &Technology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pages 684-694.
Chan, F. T. S. (2003). Performance measurement in a Supply Chain. International Journal Advanced
Manufacturing of Technology, Vol. 21, pp. 534–548.
Chanaron, J., De Banville, E. (1996). Inter-Firm Relations in Alternative Industrial Models In : Copingwith variety. Chanaron, J.,Fujimoto, T., Lung, Y., Raff, D., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Chen, T. and Gong, X. (2013). Performance evaluation of a supply chain network. Procedia Computer
Science, No. 17, pp. 1003–1009.
Chopra, S. and Meindl, P. (2013). Supply chain management: Strategy, planning, and operations. 5thedition, Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Cruz, J. M. (2013). Modeling the relationship of globalized supply chains and corporate social
responsibility. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 56, October, pp. 73–85.
24

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTDe Banville E., Chanaron, J. (1991). Vers un système automobile européen. Economica, Paris.
De Giovanni, P. and Esposito Vinzi, V. (2012). Covariance versus component-based estimations of
performance in green supply chain management. International Journal of Production Economics,
No. 135, Vo. 2, pp. 907–916.
Deloitte, U.S. Council on Competitiveness (2013). Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index.
Deloitte Global Services Limited.
Dzever, S., Merdji, M., and Saives, A.L. (2001). Purchase decision making and buyer-seller relationshipdevelopment in the French food processing industry, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 216-229.
EIU - Economist Intelligence Unit (2013). Global Manufacturing Outlook, KPMG International.
Eisele, W., Tardif, L.-P., Villa, J., Schrank, D., and Lomax, T. (2011). Developing and Applying Fluidity
Performance Indicators in Canada to Evaluate International and Multimodal Freight System
Efficiency. Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Washington, U.S.A.
Elgazzar, S. H., Tipi, N. S., Hubbard, N. J., and Leach, D. Z. (2012). Linking supply chain processes’
performance to a company’s financial strategic objectives. European Journal of Operational
Research, No. 223, Vol. 1, pp. 276–289.
Gallear, D., Ghobadian, A. and Chen, W. (2012). Corporate responsibility, supply chain partnership andperformance: An empirical examination. International Journal of Production Economics, No. 140,
Vol. 1, pp. 83–91.
Gaonkar, R. and Viswanadham, N. (2004). A conceptual and analytical framework for the managementof risk in supply chains. Proceedings, ICRA, IEEE, International Conference on Robotics andAutomation, Vol. 3, pp. 2699–2704.
Giunipero, L.C. and Eltantawy, R.A. (2004). Securing the upstream supply chain: a risk management
approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 9, No. 34,
pp. 698–713.
GCI - Global Commerce Initiative (2008). 2016 Future supply chain. Capgemini.
González, J. A., Guash, J, L. and Srebrisky, T. (200(9. Improving Logistics Costs for Transportation andTrade Facilitation. Policy and Research Working Paper 4558, The World Bank, Washington D.C.,
USA.
Guiffrida, A. L. and Nagi, R. (2006). Cost characterizations of supply chain delivery performance.
International Journal of Production Economics, No. 102, Vol. 1, pp. 22–36.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E. (2001). Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain
environment. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, No. 21, Vol. 1-2,
pp. 71–87.
Hausman, W., Lee, H., and Subramanian, U. (2013). Impact of logistics performance on trade.
Production and Operations Management, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp. 236–252.

25

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORTIDB – Inter American Development Bank (2013). National System of Logistics Platforms in Mexico. In
Spanish. Secretariat of Transportation and Communications and Secretariat of Economy, Mexico.
Jiménez J. E. and Hernández, S. (2002). Conceptual framework of the supply chain: A new logistics
focus (Technique Publication No. 215). Mexican Institute of Transport, Sanfandila, Querétaro,
Mexico.
Klier, T. and Rubenstein, J. (2010). The changing geography of North American motor vehicle
production. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 335-347.
Li J. and Cai G. (2004). Study on the frame of supply chain system based on cluster. Science Research
Management, Vol. 3, pp.77–82.
Marshall, A. (1961). Principles of economics. Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press.
Mélèse, J. (1990). Approches systémiques des organisations. Les Editions d'Organisation, Paris.
Mélèse, J. (1979). L'analyse modulaire des systèmes de gestion. Editions Hommes et Techniques, Paris.
Notteboom, T. and J-P Rodrigue (2012). The Corporate Geography of Global Container Terminal
Operators, Maritime Policy and Management, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 249-279.
Otto, A. and Kotzab, H. (2003). Does supply chain management really pay? Six perspectives to measure
the performance of managing a supply chain. European Journal of Operational Research, No. 144,
Vol. 2, pp. 306–320.
Parilla, J. and Berube, A. (2014). Metro North America. The Brookings Institution, U.S.A.
Perchet, D. (2001). Sept interrogations autour des systèmes productifs locaux. In : DATAR (Coord.).
Réseaux d'entreprises et territoires. Regards sur les systèmes productifs locaux. La Documentation
Française, Paris.
Pérez-Salas, G., Cedillo-Campos, M., and González-Ramírez, R. (2014a). A holistic approach formeasuring the international logistics costs. International Congress on Logistics and Supply Chain[CiLOG], Mexican Logistics and Supply Chain Association [AML], Huixquilucan, Mexico.
Pérez-Salas, G., Sánches, R.J. and Wilsmeier, G. (2014b). Status of Implementation of the Almaty
Programme of Action in South America, ECLAC, Natural Resources and Infrastructure, [Online],
SeriesNo.
167,[12Novemberof2014].
Availableat:
http://www.cepal.org/publicaciones/xml/0/53920/StatusofImplementation.pdf
Perotti, S., Zorzini, M., Cagno, E., & Micheli, G. J. L. (2012). Green supply chain practices and company
performance: the case of 3PLs in Italy. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics
Management, No. 42, Vol. 7, pp. 640–672.
Porter M E. (1998). Clusters and new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76, No.
6, pp. 77–90.
Ramanathan, U. and Gunasekaran, A. (2014). Supply chain collaboration: Impact of success in long-term
partnerships. International Journal of Production Economics, No. 147 (Part B), pp. 252–259.

26

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Ramanathan, U. (2014). Performance of supply chain collaboration—a simulation study. Expert Systems
with Applications, No. 41, Vol. 1, pp. 210–220.
Rodrigue, J-P (2012). The Geography of Global Supply Chains: Evidence from Third Party Logistics.
Journal of Supply Chain Management, Special Issue on “Global Sourcing: Other Voices”, Vol. 48,
No. 3, pp. 15-23.
Saives, A.L. (2002). Territoire et compétitivité de l'entreprise. Editions L'Harmattan.
Sánchez, C., Cedillo-Campos, M., Perez, P., and Martinez, J. (2011). Global economic crisis and
Mexican automotive suppliers: Impacts on labor capital. Simulation, 87, 711–725. Transactions of
the Society for Modeling and Simulation International, August.
Stecke, K.E. and Kumar, S. (2009). Sources of supply chain disruptions, factors that breed Vulnerability,
and mitigating strategies. Journal of Marketing Channels, Vol. 3, No. 16, pp.193–226.
Storper, M. (1997). The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy, Guliford Press,
New York, NY.
Sturgeon, T., Biesebroeck, V. and Gereffi, G. (2007). Prospect for Canada in the NAFTA Automotive
Industry: A Global Value Chain Analysis. Industry Canada, Research Report.
Sturgeon, T. and Biesebroeck, V. (2010). Effects of the crisis on the automotive industry in developing
countries: a global value chain perspective. Report Number: WPS5330, The World Bank.
The White House (2012). National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security. Washington, U.S.A.
Theo J. and Roelandt A. (2000). Cluster analysis and cluster-based policy making in OECD countries:
An introduction to the theme. Boosting Innovation : the Cluster Approach. OECD Proceeding,Paris.
Thun, J.H. and Hoening, D. (2011). An empirical analysis of supply chain risk management in theGerman automotive industry. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 131, pp. 242–
249.
Velázquez-Martínez, J., Fransoo, J., Blanco, E., and Mora-Vargas, J. (2014). The impact of carbón
footprinting aggregation on realizing emissions reduction targets. Flexible Services andManufacturing Journal, June, Volume 26, Issue 1-2, pp 196-220.
Veltz, P. (1993). Logiques d’entreprise et territoires: Les nouvelles règles du jeu, in: Savy, Michel and
Veltz, Pierre (eds), Les nouveaux espaces de l’entreprise, DATAR-Editions de l’aube.
Veltz, P. (2000). Le nouveau monde industriel. Gallimart, Paris, France.
Vilko, J. and Hallikas, J. (2011). Risk assessment in multimodal supply chains. International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 140, No. 2, December, pp. 586–595.
Waters, D. (2007). Supply Chain Risk Management: Vulnerability and Resilience in Logistics. Kogan
Page Limited, Philadelphia, ISBN-13:978-0-7494-4854-7.

27

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT

Wiengarten, F., Pagell, M. and Fynes, B. (2012). Supply chain environmental investments in dynamic
industries: Comparing investment and performance differences with static industries. International
Journal of Production Economics, No. 135, Vol. 2, pp. 541–551.
Wilson, M.C. (2007). The impact of transportation disruptions on supply chain performance.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation, Vol. 43, pp. 295–320.
Wu, T., Blackhurst, J., and O’Grady, P. (2007). Methodology for supply chain disruption analysis.
International Journal of Production Research, 45 (7), pp. 1665–1682.

28