際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

critical factors related to buyer supplier reationship in sustainable supply chain management

Download as PPTX, PDF
U
UPENDRA SINGH

The document provides details of a mid-semester thesis progress presentation on identifying critical factors related to buyer-supplier relationships in sustainable supply chain management. It includes the objectives, plan of work, introduction, literature review identifying key papers, identified critical factors, and the proposed use of Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to evaluate and prioritize the factors.

Convert to study materialsBETA

Transform any presentation into ready-made study materialselect from outputs like summaries, definitions, and practice questions.

1 of 30
Download to read offline
Mid Semester Thesis Progress Presentation On IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL FACTORS RELATED TO BUYER SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIP IN SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF Dr. MANISH GUPTA Associate Professor, MED DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MOTILAL NEHRU NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,ALLAHABAD-211004 PRSENTED BY:- UPENDRA SINGH Reg.No. - 2016PR20 M.Tech. - 2nd YEAR 1
CONTENTS : Objectives Plan of work Introduction Literature review Factor related to buyer-supplier relationship Implementation of ISM Implementation of AHP References 2
Objectives 3 Critical factors identification for effective buyer- supplier relationship in sustainable supply chain management. To Evaluate and prioritize the effect of factors on buyer- supplier relationship in SSCM using AHP and ISM model. To Improve the supply chain performance of buyer- supplier relationship in sustainable supply chain management.
4 MONTH WORK DEC JAN FEB MARC H APR MAY Study of mathematical modelling Techniques related to supply chain Implementation of modelling Technique Comparison of result Rank the preference order Plan of Work
Supply chain management Supply chain management is the managing flow of information through supply chain in order to attain the level of synchronization that will make it more responsive to customers needs while lowering costs. The main aim of supply chain management is to enhance sales of goods and services to the end customer while at the same time reducing both inventory and operating expenses. 5
Sustainable supply chain management 6 The management of material, information and capital flow as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain while taking the goal from three dimension of sustainable development, i.e. economic, environmental and social, into account which is derived from customer and stakeholder requirement. Three area of sustainable development-: Environmental Economic Social
Literature Review 7 SR. NO TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 1 Buyersupplier relationships: derived value over two decades Regis terpend Robert B. Handfield. 2005 2 Effect of Buyer-Seller Relationship Structure On Firm Performance. RenGe Fontenot Richard P. Vlosky et.al 1997 3 Activity-based costing: effects of long-term buyer-supplier relationships Henrik Agndal Ulf Nilsson, 2007 4 Sustainability adoption through buyer supplier relationship across supply chain: A literature review and conceptual framework Divesh Kumar, Zillur Rahman. 2015
8 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 5 Buyer-seller relationships in business markets. Cannon, J. and Perreault, W. 1999 6 Sustainability to support end-to-end value chain: the role of supply chain management David J.Closs , Nathan Meachan. 2010 7 Sustainable supply chain practices: an empirical investigation on Indian automobile industry. P.R.C. Gopal, and Jitesh Thakkar. 2015 8 Evaluation of supplier capability and performance: A method for supply base reduction. Ashutosh Sarkara,, Prata K.J. Mohapatra. 2006
9 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 9 Buyer-Seller Relationships in Business Markets Joseph P. Cannon and William D. Perreault Jr 1999 10 Supplier development and buyer- supplier relationship strategies - a literature review Ilkk Sillanpa, Khuram Shahzad, Elina Sillanpa. 2015 11 Core issues in sustainable supply chain management a Delphi study Stefan Seuring, martin Muller. 2017 12 The evolution of buyer-supplier relationships:An historical industry approach. Jared Hansen. 2009
10 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 13 Role of buyer-supplier relationship and trust in organizational performance Inayatullah, Rakesh narain, Amar singh. 2012 14 Performance Measurement in Strategic Buyer-Supplier Relationships Benn Lawson. 2008 15 Evaluating buyer-supplier relationshipperformance spirals: A longitudinal study Chad W. Autry , Susan L. Golicic . 2010 16 Buyer-supplier relationships in supply chain Management: relationship, trust, supplier Involvement, and performance Jacques Verville and Nazim Taskin. 2012
11 Serial no. Critical factors related to buyer- supplier relationship References 1 Trust [1],[2],(4),[7],[13],[16] 2 Performance [2],[3],[13],[15],[16] 3 Cooperation [1],[4],[5],[13] 4 Real time information sharing [6],[8],[10], (13] 5 Collaboration [1],[3],[4],[10] 6 Commitment [2],[4],[9],[13] 7 Communication [2],[13],[14] Critical factors related to buyer- supplier relationship
12 8 Risk sharing [6],[7],[13] 9 Satisfaction [2],[4],[12] 10 Knowledge sharing [10],[13] 11 Technology sharing [4],[5] 12 Mutual goal [5],[13] 13 Coordination [5],[13] 14 Supplier involvement [10],[16] 15 Risk& Rewards [10]
Interpretive Structural Modeling(ISM) 13 Interpretive Structural Modeling is used for identifying and summarizing relationship among specific variables, which define a problem or an issues. It is an interactive learning process. To identify rank and variables. To establish the interrelationship among the variables
14 Identified the factors Literature review Expert Opinion Establish contextual relationship between variable Develop the SSIM Develop the Reachability matrix Partition the Reachability Matrix into different level Develop the diagraph Remove the Transitivity from diagraph Construct the model Step of ISM methodology
Structural Self Interaction Matrix(SSIM) 15 ISM methodology suggests the use of the expert opinions based on various management techniques such as brain storming, nominal group technique, etc. in developing the contextual relationship among the variables, Four symbol are used to denote the direction of relationship between the variables. V : Criterion for i leads to criterion j A : Criterion for j leads to criterion i X : Criterion for i leads to criterion j and j leads to criterion i O : No relationship i and j
Reachability matrix 16 If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is V, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the (j, i) entry becomes 0; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is A, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the (j,i) entry becomes 1; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is X, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the (j, i) entry becomes 1; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is O, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the (j, i) entry becomes 0;
17 Structural Self Interaction Matrix (SSIM) Critical Factors Risk&reward Supplier involvement Coordination Mutualgoal Technologysharing Knowledgesharing Satisfaction Risksharing Communication Commitment Collaboration RealtimeInformation sharing Cooperation Performance Trust Trust O V O O O V V X A V O O X O Performance A V V X V X A A V A V A O Cooperation O V A V O O V V V O V O Real time Information sharing O V A O O X O X A X X Collaboration O X V V X V O V O X Commitment O X A O A X O V V Communication O X V V O V V A Risk sharing V O O V O O V Satisfaction O O O V O O Knowledge sharing O O X A A Technology sharing O V O O Mutual goal O V X Coordination O A Supplier involvement O Risk reward
Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledge sharing Technology sharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 Performance 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Cooperation 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Real time Information sharing 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Collaboration 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Commitment 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Communication 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 Risk sharing 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Satisfaction 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 Knowledge sharing 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Technology sharing 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Mutual goal 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 Coordination 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 Supplier involvement 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Risk & reward 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Initial Reachability Matrix 18
19 Final Reachability Matrix Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Realreal TimeIinformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledge sharing Technology sharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1 1* 1 1* 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1* 1 0 Performance 1* 1 1* 0 1 1* 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* Cooperation 1 1* 1 1* 1 0 1* 1 1 0 0 1 1* 1 1* Real time Information sharing 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1 0 0 1* 1 0 Collaboration 1* 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1* Commitment 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1* 0 1 0 Communication 1 1* 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1* Risk sharing 1 1 0 1 0 1* 1 1 1 0 1* 1 0 0 1 Satisfaction 0 1 0 0 1* 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1* 0 Knowledge sharing 0 1 1* 1 0 1 0 1* 0 1 0 0 1 0 1* Technology sharing o 1* 0 0 1 1 1* 0 0 1 1 1* 0 1 1* Mutual goal 0 1 0 1* 0 0 0 0 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 0 Coordination 0 1* 1 1 0 1 1* 0 1* 1 0 1 1 0 1* Supplier involvement 1* 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1* 0 0 1* 1 1 0 Risk& reward 1* 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1* 0 1
20 Factor s Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Level 1 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,13,14,15 1,2,3,5,7,8,14 1,2,3,8,14 V 2 1,2,3,5,6,7,9,10,11,12 ,13,14,15 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10 ,12,13,15 1,3,2,6,7,9,10,12 ,13,15 VI 3 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,12,14, 15 1,3,10,12,13,15 1,3,12,15 V 4 2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,13,14 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,1 2,13 4,8,10,13 IV 5 1,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,12,1 3,14,15 2,3,4,5,6,9,11,14 4,5,6,9,11,14 VI 6 2,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,14 1,2,4,5,6,8,10,11, 13,14 2,4,5,6,8,10,14 IV 7 1,2,4,7,9,10,12,13,14, 15 2,3,4,6,7,8,11,13, 14 2,4,7,13,14 IV Partition level for Reachability Matrix
21 Factor s Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Lev el 8 1,2,4,6,7,8,9,11,12 1,3,4,5,6,8,10 1,4,6,8 IV 9 2,5,9,12,14 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,12, 13,14 2,5,9,12,14 II 10 2,3,4,6,8,10,13,15 2,3,4,5,6,7,10,11,1 2,13 2,3,4,6,10,13 V 11 5,6,7,10,11,12,14,15 2,5,8,11,12 5,11,12 VI 12 2,4,10,11,12,13,14 2,3,5,6,7,8,9,11,12, 13,14 11,12,13,14 VI 13 2,3,4,6,7,9,10,12,13,1 5 1,2,3,4,5,7,10,12,1 3,14 3,4,7,10,12,13 V 14 1,5,6,7,9,12,13,14 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,11,1 2,14 1,5,6,7,12,14 III 15 1,2,13,15 1,2,3,5,7,8,10,11,1 3,15 1,2,13,15 I
22 Fig.1: Diagraph of initial reachability matrix
23 Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one of multi criteria decision making method that was originally developed by Prof Thomas L. Saaty. In short, it is a method to derive ratio scales from pair comparisons, Checking the consistency ratio of every pair- wise comparison to check the consistency of the subjective judgments. Analytical Hierarchy Process Scale Definition Judgments of preferences 1 Equal Importance Both activities have equal importance 3 Moderate importance Judgments slightly favour one activity over another 5 Strong importance Judgment strongly favour one activity over another 7 Very strong importance An activity is favoured very strongly over another 9 Extreme importance An activity is favoured Extremely over another Scale of relative preference to pair wise comparison
24 Check CR If CR<0.1 Define the objective and goal Identified the factors To make the pair wise comparison Formation of comparison matrix Calculate the priority vector Flowchart for Analytic hierarchy Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) yes No
Consistency ratio 25 The consistency ratio (CR) computation formula is: CR = Consistency Index (CI) / Random Consistency Index (RI). Ax = 了 max X, where A is denoted as the pair-wise comparison matrix and X as row averages, CI can be calculated by: CI= (了 max n)/ (n-1) (n represents the number of criteria) Then the corresponding value of RI is found in the Saatys table below: N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 RI 0 0 0.5 8 0.9 0 1.1 2 1.2 4 1.3 2 1.1 4 1.4 5 1.4 9 1.5 1 1.4 8 1.5 6 1.5 7 1.5 9 Using the responding RI found in the above table, we can receive the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI. If the CR value is less than 0.1, then we say the judgments are consistent and acceptable.
26 Pair-wise comparison of critical factors Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledgesharing Technologysharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 3.00 Performance 0.33 1.00 5.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 Cooperation 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 3.00 3.00 7.00 0.33 7.00 5.00 3.00 Real time Information sharing 0.20 0.33 3.00 1.00 5.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 5.00 3.00 7.00 0.33 7.00 7.00 3.00 Collaboration 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.20 3.00 0.20 0.33 0.33 5.00 0.20 3.00 3.00 0.33 Commitment 0.33 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 Communication 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.20 0.33 0.14 1.00 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.14 3.00 3.00 0.20 Risk sharing 0.33 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 0.33 5.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 9.00 0.33 7.00 7.00 3.00 Satisfaction 0.20 0.20 0.33 0.20 3.00 0.33 3.00 0.20 1.00 0.33 5.00 0.20 5.00 3.00 0.33 Knowledge sharing 0.10 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.20 3.00 0.33 3.00 1.00 5.00 0.20 5.00 5.00 0.33 Technology sharing 0.33 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.14 Mutual goal 0.11 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 0.33 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 Coordination 0.33 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.14 0.20 0.20 3.00 0.14 1.00 0.33 0.20 Supplier involvement 0.20 0.14 0.20 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.33 0.20 3.00 0.14 3.00 1.00 0.20 Risk reward 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.20 5.00 0.33 3.00 3.00 7.00 0.20 5.00 5.00 1.00 Total 4.30 6.78 24.89 18.03 50.20 9.77 59.00 15.33 41.40 38.60 85.00 18.34 78.33 65.67 29.74
27 Normalized matrix of critical factors Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledgesharing Technologysharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Total Average Trust 0.23 0.44 0.20 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.23 0.04 0.49 0.09 0.08 0.10 2.95 0.20 Performance 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.17 2.26 0.15 Cooperation 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.89 0.06 Real time Information sharing 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.10 1.11 0.07 Collaboration 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.36 0.02 Commitment 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.17 1.84 0.12 Communication 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.28 0.02 Risk sharing 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.08 0.11 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.10 1.32 0.09 Satisfaction 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.01 0.48 0.03 Knowledge sharing 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.01 0.56 0.04 Technology sharing 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.18 0.01 Mutual goal 0.03 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.03 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.06 0.09 0.11 0.17 1.59 0.11 Coordination 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.02 Supplier involvement 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.02 Risk reward 0.08 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.03 0.74 0.05 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Total
References 28 Asif, M., Bruijn, E. J. D., Fisscher. O. A. M., & Steenhuis, H.(2008). Achieving Sustainability Three Dimensionally. IEEE, conference publication for Management of Innovation and Technology. ICMIT 2008. 4th IEEE International Conference, pp. 6-8. Christopher, Martin L. (1992), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, London: Pitman Publishing. Cooper, Martha C. and Lisa M. Ellram (1993), Characteristics of Supply Chain Management and the Implication for Purchasing and Logistics Strategy, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 3-6. Anon., 2001. Europes steelmakers get lean and green. Business Week 3720 (February 19), 1992. Stefan Seuring. , A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management . Decision Support Systems 54 (2013) 1513-1520.
References 29 J. A. Awuni and J. Du, Sustainable Consumption in Chinese Cities: Green Purchasing Intentions of Young Adults Based on the Theory of Consumption Values, Sustain. Dev., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 124135, 2016. B. R. Bhardwaj, Role of green policy on sustainable supply chain management., Benchmarking An Int. J., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 456468, 2016. C. A. Brandi, Sustainability Standards and Sustainable Development - Synergies and Trade-Offs of Transnational Governance, Sustain. Dev., 2016. Jonathan D. Linton, Robert Klassen, Vaidyanathan Jayaraman Sustainable Supply Chain: An Introduction. J. Of Operation Management 25 (2007) 1075-1082. Divesh Kumar , and Zillur Rahman, Sustainablity Adoption Through buyer Supplier Relation Across Supply chain. International Strategic Management Review. Vol. 3,. pp.110-127 , 2015.
30

More Related Content

critical factors related to buyer supplier reationship in sustainable supply chain management

  • 1. Mid Semester Thesis Progress Presentation On IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL FACTORS RELATED TO BUYER SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIP IN SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF Dr. MANISH GUPTA Associate Professor, MED DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MOTILAL NEHRU NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,ALLAHABAD-211004 PRSENTED BY:- UPENDRA SINGH Reg.No. - 2016PR20 M.Tech. - 2nd YEAR 1
  • 2. CONTENTS : Objectives Plan of work Introduction Literature review Factor related to buyer-supplier relationship Implementation of ISM Implementation of AHP References 2
  • 3. Objectives 3 Critical factors identification for effective buyer- supplier relationship in sustainable supply chain management. To Evaluate and prioritize the effect of factors on buyer- supplier relationship in SSCM using AHP and ISM model. To Improve the supply chain performance of buyer- supplier relationship in sustainable supply chain management.
  • 4. 4 MONTH WORK DEC JAN FEB MARC H APR MAY Study of mathematical modelling Techniques related to supply chain Implementation of modelling Technique Comparison of result Rank the preference order Plan of Work
  • 5. Supply chain management Supply chain management is the managing flow of information through supply chain in order to attain the level of synchronization that will make it more responsive to customers needs while lowering costs. The main aim of supply chain management is to enhance sales of goods and services to the end customer while at the same time reducing both inventory and operating expenses. 5
  • 6. Sustainable supply chain management 6 The management of material, information and capital flow as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain while taking the goal from three dimension of sustainable development, i.e. economic, environmental and social, into account which is derived from customer and stakeholder requirement. Three area of sustainable development-: Environmental Economic Social
  • 7. Literature Review 7 SR. NO TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 1 Buyersupplier relationships: derived value over two decades Regis terpend Robert B. Handfield. 2005 2 Effect of Buyer-Seller Relationship Structure On Firm Performance. RenGe Fontenot Richard P. Vlosky et.al 1997 3 Activity-based costing: effects of long-term buyer-supplier relationships Henrik Agndal Ulf Nilsson, 2007 4 Sustainability adoption through buyer supplier relationship across supply chain: A literature review and conceptual framework Divesh Kumar, Zillur Rahman. 2015
  • 8. 8 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 5 Buyer-seller relationships in business markets. Cannon, J. and Perreault, W. 1999 6 Sustainability to support end-to-end value chain: the role of supply chain management David J.Closs , Nathan Meachan. 2010 7 Sustainable supply chain practices: an empirical investigation on Indian automobile industry. P.R.C. Gopal, and Jitesh Thakkar. 2015 8 Evaluation of supplier capability and performance: A method for supply base reduction. Ashutosh Sarkara,, Prata K.J. Mohapatra. 2006
  • 9. 9 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 9 Buyer-Seller Relationships in Business Markets Joseph P. Cannon and William D. Perreault Jr 1999 10 Supplier development and buyer- supplier relationship strategies - a literature review Ilkk Sillanpa, Khuram Shahzad, Elina Sillanpa. 2015 11 Core issues in sustainable supply chain management a Delphi study Stefan Seuring, martin Muller. 2017 12 The evolution of buyer-supplier relationships:An historical industry approach. Jared Hansen. 2009
  • 10. 10 SR. NO PAPER TITLE AUTHOR YEAR 13 Role of buyer-supplier relationship and trust in organizational performance Inayatullah, Rakesh narain, Amar singh. 2012 14 Performance Measurement in Strategic Buyer-Supplier Relationships Benn Lawson. 2008 15 Evaluating buyer-supplier relationshipperformance spirals: A longitudinal study Chad W. Autry , Susan L. Golicic . 2010 16 Buyer-supplier relationships in supply chain Management: relationship, trust, supplier Involvement, and performance Jacques Verville and Nazim Taskin. 2012
  • 11. 11 Serial no. Critical factors related to buyer- supplier relationship References 1 Trust [1],[2],(4),[7],[13],[16] 2 Performance [2],[3],[13],[15],[16] 3 Cooperation [1],[4],[5],[13] 4 Real time information sharing [6],[8],[10], (13] 5 Collaboration [1],[3],[4],[10] 6 Commitment [2],[4],[9],[13] 7 Communication [2],[13],[14] Critical factors related to buyer- supplier relationship
  • 12. 12 8 Risk sharing [6],[7],[13] 9 Satisfaction [2],[4],[12] 10 Knowledge sharing [10],[13] 11 Technology sharing [4],[5] 12 Mutual goal [5],[13] 13 Coordination [5],[13] 14 Supplier involvement [10],[16] 15 Risk& Rewards [10]
  • 13. Interpretive Structural Modeling(ISM) 13 Interpretive Structural Modeling is used for identifying and summarizing relationship among specific variables, which define a problem or an issues. It is an interactive learning process. To identify rank and variables. To establish the interrelationship among the variables
  • 14. 14 Identified the factors Literature review Expert Opinion Establish contextual relationship between variable Develop the SSIM Develop the Reachability matrix Partition the Reachability Matrix into different level Develop the diagraph Remove the Transitivity from diagraph Construct the model Step of ISM methodology
  • 15. Structural Self Interaction Matrix(SSIM) 15 ISM methodology suggests the use of the expert opinions based on various management techniques such as brain storming, nominal group technique, etc. in developing the contextual relationship among the variables, Four symbol are used to denote the direction of relationship between the variables. V : Criterion for i leads to criterion j A : Criterion for j leads to criterion i X : Criterion for i leads to criterion j and j leads to criterion i O : No relationship i and j
  • 16. Reachability matrix 16 If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is V, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the (j, i) entry becomes 0; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is A, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the (j,i) entry becomes 1; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is X, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 1 and the (j, i) entry becomes 1; If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is O, then the (i, j) entry in the reachability matrix becomes 0 and the (j, i) entry becomes 0;
  • 17. 17 Structural Self Interaction Matrix (SSIM) Critical Factors Risk&reward Supplier involvement Coordination Mutualgoal Technologysharing Knowledgesharing Satisfaction Risksharing Communication Commitment Collaboration RealtimeInformation sharing Cooperation Performance Trust Trust O V O O O V V X A V O O X O Performance A V V X V X A A V A V A O Cooperation O V A V O O V V V O V O Real time Information sharing O V A O O X O X A X X Collaboration O X V V X V O V O X Commitment O X A O A X O V V Communication O X V V O V V A Risk sharing V O O V O O V Satisfaction O O O V O O Knowledge sharing O O X A A Technology sharing O V O O Mutual goal O V X Coordination O A Supplier involvement O Risk reward
  • 18. Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledge sharing Technology sharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 Performance 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Cooperation 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Real time Information sharing 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Collaboration 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Commitment 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Communication 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 Risk sharing 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Satisfaction 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 Knowledge sharing 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Technology sharing 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Mutual goal 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 Coordination 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 Supplier involvement 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Risk & reward 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Initial Reachability Matrix 18
  • 19. 19 Final Reachability Matrix Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Realreal TimeIinformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledge sharing Technology sharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1 1* 1 1* 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1* 1 0 Performance 1* 1 1* 0 1 1* 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* Cooperation 1 1* 1 1* 1 0 1* 1 1 0 0 1 1* 1 1* Real time Information sharing 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1 0 0 1* 1 0 Collaboration 1* 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1* Commitment 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1* 0 1 0 Communication 1 1* 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1* Risk sharing 1 1 0 1 0 1* 1 1 1 0 1* 1 0 0 1 Satisfaction 0 1 0 0 1* 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1* 0 Knowledge sharing 0 1 1* 1 0 1 0 1* 0 1 0 0 1 0 1* Technology sharing o 1* 0 0 1 1 1* 0 0 1 1 1* 0 1 1* Mutual goal 0 1 0 1* 0 0 0 0 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 0 Coordination 0 1* 1 1 0 1 1* 0 1* 1 0 1 1 0 1* Supplier involvement 1* 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1* 0 0 1* 1 1 0 Risk& reward 1* 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1* 0 1
  • 20. 20 Factor s Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Level 1 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,13,14,15 1,2,3,5,7,8,14 1,2,3,8,14 V 2 1,2,3,5,6,7,9,10,11,12 ,13,14,15 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10 ,12,13,15 1,3,2,6,7,9,10,12 ,13,15 VI 3 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,12,14, 15 1,3,10,12,13,15 1,3,12,15 V 4 2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,13,14 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,1 2,13 4,8,10,13 IV 5 1,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,12,1 3,14,15 2,3,4,5,6,9,11,14 4,5,6,9,11,14 VI 6 2,4,5,6,7,8,10,12,14 1,2,4,5,6,8,10,11, 13,14 2,4,5,6,8,10,14 IV 7 1,2,4,7,9,10,12,13,14, 15 2,3,4,6,7,8,11,13, 14 2,4,7,13,14 IV Partition level for Reachability Matrix
  • 21. 21 Factor s Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Lev el 8 1,2,4,6,7,8,9,11,12 1,3,4,5,6,8,10 1,4,6,8 IV 9 2,5,9,12,14 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,12, 13,14 2,5,9,12,14 II 10 2,3,4,6,8,10,13,15 2,3,4,5,6,7,10,11,1 2,13 2,3,4,6,10,13 V 11 5,6,7,10,11,12,14,15 2,5,8,11,12 5,11,12 VI 12 2,4,10,11,12,13,14 2,3,5,6,7,8,9,11,12, 13,14 11,12,13,14 VI 13 2,3,4,6,7,9,10,12,13,1 5 1,2,3,4,5,7,10,12,1 3,14 3,4,7,10,12,13 V 14 1,5,6,7,9,12,13,14 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,11,1 2,14 1,5,6,7,12,14 III 15 1,2,13,15 1,2,3,5,7,8,10,11,1 3,15 1,2,13,15 I
  • 22. 22 Fig.1: Diagraph of initial reachability matrix
  • 23. 23 Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one of multi criteria decision making method that was originally developed by Prof Thomas L. Saaty. In short, it is a method to derive ratio scales from pair comparisons, Checking the consistency ratio of every pair- wise comparison to check the consistency of the subjective judgments. Analytical Hierarchy Process Scale Definition Judgments of preferences 1 Equal Importance Both activities have equal importance 3 Moderate importance Judgments slightly favour one activity over another 5 Strong importance Judgment strongly favour one activity over another 7 Very strong importance An activity is favoured very strongly over another 9 Extreme importance An activity is favoured Extremely over another Scale of relative preference to pair wise comparison
  • 24. 24 Check CR If CR<0.1 Define the objective and goal Identified the factors To make the pair wise comparison Formation of comparison matrix Calculate the priority vector Flowchart for Analytic hierarchy Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) yes No
  • 25. Consistency ratio 25 The consistency ratio (CR) computation formula is: CR = Consistency Index (CI) / Random Consistency Index (RI). Ax = 了 max X, where A is denoted as the pair-wise comparison matrix and X as row averages, CI can be calculated by: CI= (了 max n)/ (n-1) (n represents the number of criteria) Then the corresponding value of RI is found in the Saatys table below: N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 RI 0 0 0.5 8 0.9 0 1.1 2 1.2 4 1.3 2 1.1 4 1.4 5 1.4 9 1.5 1 1.4 8 1.5 6 1.5 7 1.5 9 Using the responding RI found in the above table, we can receive the consistency ratio CR = CI/RI. If the CR value is less than 0.1, then we say the judgments are consistent and acceptable.
  • 26. 26 Pair-wise comparison of critical factors Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledgesharing Technologysharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Trust 1.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 3.00 Performance 0.33 1.00 5.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 Cooperation 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 3.00 3.00 7.00 0.33 7.00 5.00 3.00 Real time Information sharing 0.20 0.33 3.00 1.00 5.00 0.33 5.00 0.33 5.00 3.00 7.00 0.33 7.00 7.00 3.00 Collaboration 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.20 3.00 0.20 0.33 0.33 5.00 0.20 3.00 3.00 0.33 Commitment 0.33 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 3.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 Communication 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.20 0.33 0.14 1.00 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.14 3.00 3.00 0.20 Risk sharing 0.33 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 0.33 5.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 9.00 0.33 7.00 7.00 3.00 Satisfaction 0.20 0.20 0.33 0.20 3.00 0.33 3.00 0.20 1.00 0.33 5.00 0.20 5.00 3.00 0.33 Knowledge sharing 0.10 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.20 3.00 0.33 3.00 1.00 5.00 0.20 5.00 5.00 0.33 Technology sharing 0.33 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.14 Mutual goal 0.11 0.33 3.00 3.00 5.00 0.33 7.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 9.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 Coordination 0.33 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.14 0.20 0.20 3.00 0.14 1.00 0.33 0.20 Supplier involvement 0.20 0.14 0.20 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.33 0.20 3.00 0.14 3.00 1.00 0.20 Risk reward 0.33 0.20 0.33 0.33 3.00 0.20 5.00 0.33 3.00 3.00 7.00 0.20 5.00 5.00 1.00 Total 4.30 6.78 24.89 18.03 50.20 9.77 59.00 15.33 41.40 38.60 85.00 18.34 78.33 65.67 29.74
  • 27. 27 Normalized matrix of critical factors Critical Factors Trust Performance Cooperation Real TimeInformation sharing Collaboration Commitment Communication Risksharing Satisfaction Knowledgesharing Technologysharing Mutualgoal Coordination Supplier involvement Risk&Reward Total Average Trust 0.23 0.44 0.20 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.23 0.04 0.49 0.09 0.08 0.10 2.95 0.20 Performance 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.17 2.26 0.15 Cooperation 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.89 0.06 Real time Information sharing 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.02 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.10 1.11 0.07 Collaboration 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.36 0.02 Commitment 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.17 1.84 0.12 Communication 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.28 0.02 Risk sharing 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.08 0.11 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.10 1.32 0.09 Satisfaction 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.01 0.48 0.03 Knowledge sharing 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.01 0.56 0.04 Technology sharing 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.18 0.01 Mutual goal 0.03 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.03 0.12 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.06 0.09 0.11 0.17 1.59 0.11 Coordination 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.02 Supplier involvement 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.02 Risk reward 0.08 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.03 0.74 0.05 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Total
  • 28. References 28 Asif, M., Bruijn, E. J. D., Fisscher. O. A. M., & Steenhuis, H.(2008). Achieving Sustainability Three Dimensionally. IEEE, conference publication for Management of Innovation and Technology. ICMIT 2008. 4th IEEE International Conference, pp. 6-8. Christopher, Martin L. (1992), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, London: Pitman Publishing. Cooper, Martha C. and Lisa M. Ellram (1993), Characteristics of Supply Chain Management and the Implication for Purchasing and Logistics Strategy, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 3-6. Anon., 2001. Europes steelmakers get lean and green. Business Week 3720 (February 19), 1992. Stefan Seuring. , A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management . Decision Support Systems 54 (2013) 1513-1520.
  • 29. References 29 J. A. Awuni and J. Du, Sustainable Consumption in Chinese Cities: Green Purchasing Intentions of Young Adults Based on the Theory of Consumption Values, Sustain. Dev., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 124135, 2016. B. R. Bhardwaj, Role of green policy on sustainable supply chain management., Benchmarking An Int. J., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 456468, 2016. C. A. Brandi, Sustainability Standards and Sustainable Development - Synergies and Trade-Offs of Transnational Governance, Sustain. Dev., 2016. Jonathan D. Linton, Robert Klassen, Vaidyanathan Jayaraman Sustainable Supply Chain: An Introduction. J. Of Operation Management 25 (2007) 1075-1082. Divesh Kumar , and Zillur Rahman, Sustainablity Adoption Through buyer Supplier Relation Across Supply chain. International Strategic Management Review. Vol. 3,. pp.110-127 , 2015.
  • 30. 30