مدیریت عرضه : ایجاد ارزش، هماهنگی و تعیین موقعیت در روابط عرضه

Value creation in the supply literature commonly builds on the value chain model. This results in a focus on sequential interdependencies, an emphasis on coordination by planning and a restricted view of possible positioning options. This article contributes an original approach to the supply management debate, based on value configuration analysis. Value configuration analysis acknowledges the value chain logic, but finds it constraining in certain business systems, and also includes recognition of the value network model as representing the layered supply relationships typically associated with a mediating presence. Central issues in this article's view of supply management are value logic interaction, coordination of multiple interdependencies and the simultaneous presence of both over-and undercurrent relationships as well as traditionally-recognized up-and down stream dependencies. The complexity thus revealed identifies novel positioning options for firms in supply relationships. These arguments are illustrated with help of a case study and related to previous work on supply chains and networks.

Managing supply relationships is a strategic task that can contribute to the competitiveness and profitability of both individual firms and entire chains.1 But despite the acknowledged importance of supply relationships, little is known about the determinants of success and failure.2 Reports that the U.S. food industry alone is estimated to waste $30 billion annually through poor supply coordination illustrate a significant potential for improvement.3 Porter's well-known value chain model and the corresponding notion of value systems have profoundly influenced the perception of how supply relationships work.4 These models have shaped managerial thinking about such strategic issues as value creation, coordination and positioning. However, while the value chain logic is seen as representing a strong and valid analytical tool for such areas as corporate strategy, it is also believed to limit fuller understanding of how knowledge- and service-based business systems function.5 Value configuration analysis is a recent contribution to strategic management theory by Stabell and Fjeldstad, which both incorporates the well-known value chain model and also introduces an interesting alternative in the value network model.6 It deals with firm level differences in terms of value creation, and offers an alternative understanding of the knowledge- and service-based activities which are central to well functioning supply relationships. Value configuration analysis has never been systematically applied to understand either supply chains or supply networks, two important representations of supply relationships, although its basic arguments suggests that the value chain/value systems line of reasoning alone can provide only partial understandings of supply relationships. The research question is therefore to investigate the consequences of a value configuration approach to the management of supply relationships, focusing on value creation, supply structures, interdependencies, coordination and positioning. This study is thus part of a recent stream of research on value creation and business development in interorganizational relationships and network settings.7 In particular it relates to previous work on supply chain management (SCM), industrial networks and strategic supplier networks.8 It shares the concern expressed in the supply literature (and noted above) that the simple linearity of the traditional supply logic may conceal levels of complexity that have to be addressed in managing supply relationships.9 value creation occurs between, as well as within, firms in supply relationships. In general terms, this article contributes in two ways: by revealing some of this complexity, and by looking at how supply relationships function in the face of this complexity. In particular, it offers an alternative view of how value creation occurs between, as well as within, firms in supply relationships. It reveals how more complex sets of interdependencies exist in supply relationships than in ‘simple’ chains, and that these require managing by a variety of coordination mechanisms to achieve efficient working. Finally, it proposes a novel approach to defining a firm's position beyond that covered by the traditional up-stream/down-stream terminology. The following section presents the concept of value configuration analysis and relates it to previous work on supply chains and networks. The study's research methodology and case follows. Theoretical and managerial implications are then discussed, with central supply management issues presented in a number of propositions. The article ends with conclusions and suggestions for future research.

As in other areas of strategic management, the supply literature is ‘chained to the value chain’, to borrow Normann's phrase. This article articulates reservations as to the usefulness of the value chain model and the notion of value systems as general representations of value creation, coordination and positioning in supply relationships. It suggests that value configuration analysis including the value network logic provides a fruitful alternative, and can reveal a number of complexities in supply relationships, including differences in value creating logic, sets of interdependencies and more compound supply structures. The models offered in value configuration analysis provide different analytical insights. These insights will be of interest in varying degrees to different managers, depending on their firm's particular activities, but an understanding of value logic models can be beneficial across a more generalized area than is specifically illustrated here. Manufacturing and product oriented firms operating their own distribution chains or networks can benefit from an alternative view of mediation and understanding of how different value logics co-exist. Likewise, the notions of over- and under-current activities and the positioning options they reveal should interest both ‘pure’ logistics operators and product managers operating their own supply chains. … [the concept] of over- and under-current activities reveal interesting positioning options for both ‘pure’ logistics operators and product managers operating their own supply chains. Future research may continue this article's line of inquiry in different ways. A limitation of this study is that it does not present cross-case comparisons, something future studies should consider. Our understanding of the strategic work conducted by supply managers would also benefit from more empirical studies, including in-depth analyses of other types of LSPs and their different network relationships. Value configuration analysis applied to large manufacturing firms that mix both value chain and value network reasoning internally would likewise be interesting, and provide illustrations of other value logic interactions. Studies on how a third value configuration analysis model – the value shop, focusing on problem-solving activities – interacts with both value chain and value network logics would be illuminating in terms of product and service development. Another specific area of interest for further study is the linkages between different forms of coordination and how they affect relationship development in supply networks – how are new standards developed and what role does mutual adjustment play in that process? Porter's basic value chain analysis of sequential business collaboration has much to commend it, especially when applied to industrial and manufacturing systems. But more recent business activities require more subtle developments in thinking and in analysis tools. As the business environment becomes ever more interlinked, and as services and knowledge-based activities overtake manufacturing as business growth areas, advantages will accrue to those who can think and see in more sophisticated terms. Such developed insight will enable them to conceive, design and then manage more complex networks, and to assess both the value creation strengths of their current network position and the potential of alternative options.