بازار های الکترونیکی B2B و شرکت های کوچک و متوسط
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|21142||2002||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Computers in Industry, Volume 49, Issue 1, September 2002, Pages 47–58
Since February 2000, we have seen numerous announcements from large companies such as General Motors, Boeing, Ford and British Airways saying they are creating or participating in Business-to-Business (B2B) eMarketplaces. Clearly, these companies believe they are going to derive benefits in supply chains from these trading exchanges. In analyzing the situation, the potential benefits to large organizations are obvious. However, the benefits to suppliers, who are usually SMEs, are less obvious. This paper draws on the author’s experience in working with Boeing to build an aerospace hub in Asia, and addresses the problems that face SMEs when they are asked to participate in exchanges. The paper includes an outline for a realistic business case that includes supplier considerations, and ends with a proposal for creating an exchange environment that makes it easier for SMEs to participate.
The exchange advocate (usually a large supply chain prime) stresses the joint benefits of participation. That is, benefits are promised for suppliers as well as the prime. These benefits are usually presented as greater access, more opportunities, and a “leveling of the competitive playing field.” However, is this the case? Is it possible that rather than leveling the playing field, eMarketplaces could reinforce the advantages of big companies? Supply chain cost reduction for the prime is a direct threat to those suppliers who are delivering less added value, since they most likely will be replaced by a competitor in the eMarketplace. This paper analyzes eMarketplace incentives from the point of view of the SME, focusing on two related factors: • the profit squeeze, and • the technology squeeze. The first concept, the profit squeeze, is related directly to the economic incentives for participating in trading exchanges. How do suppliers maintain profit margins while supply chain costs are being reduced? The second concept, the technology squeeze, relates to the pressures faced by suppliers as they receive multiple exchange participation mandates from many large supply chain leads. The presentation argues that exchanges cannot be successful unless there are benefits for large companies and SMEs, which is different from the prevailing approach to exchange implementation. SMEs will always participate at some level, especially if an important business relationship must be preserved. However, if larger profit margins are available by exercising traditional distribution channels, suppliers will focus on traditional channels; hence, diminishing projected exchange transaction volumes. This paper identifies areas of common benefit for large companies and SMEs, and provides some insight into the future of public and private eMarketplaces, including a proposal for locating an exchange at a first-tier supplier, where the business model is more favorable to SMEs.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This paper has discussed the supplier reaction to the recent proliferation of eMarketplaces. Since many suppliers are SMEs, the impact on this segment of the business base is dramatic. To date, the reaction of suppliers has been less than enthusiastic. Suppliers have been “squeezed” in at least two ways. First, there are economic disincentives for supplier participation. If the exchange objective is supply chain cost reduction, suppliers will use traditional distribution channels if they can maintain profit margins by avoiding exchanges. Second, suppliers are faced with a plethora of standards and technologies, so from a technology point of view, participation is difficult. With a new emphasis on SRM, service providers are finally producing solutions that are sensitive to the needs of suppliers. Many of these solutions are hosted, relieving suppliers from significant investments in complex and constantly changing solutions. The future exchange landscape is unclear, but it is clear that SRM will be a significant component after market consolidation. The primary lesson-learned in the last two years is clear: exchange success requires solutions that provide joint benefits to buyers and sellers. Third, this paper reviews the business case for building marketplaces. This discussion requires an understanding of the different types of marketplaces and the incentives for their operation. A profit formula is provided as a guide for a private exchange business case, which is used as a baseline for discussing public and consortia exchange models. The analysis suggests that the private exchange model, in most cases, is easier to justify. Finally a proposal for a new exchange model is described. This model, which is located at a first-tier supplier, is more sensitive to the needs of SMEs. The argument is made that a first-tier supplier has incentives to broker transactions, while large companies have incentives for mandating requirements. The general requirements for a first-tier supplier to own a hub are also outlined.