The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.

htm

IJPDLM 39,8

Developing a consensus denition of supply chain management: a qualitative study

James R. Stock
Department of Marketing, College of Business, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA, and

690
Received 4 March 2009 Revised 7 July 2009 Accepted 19 July 2009

Stefanie L. Boyer
Department of Marketing, Bryant University, Smitheld, Rhode Island, USA
Abstract
Purpose Without the adoption of a uniform agreed upon denition of supply chain management (SCM), researchers and practitioners will not be able to advance the theory and practice of the discipline. An integrated denition of SCM would greatly benet researchers efforts to study the phenomenon of SCM and those practitioners attempting to implement SCM. This paper aims to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach Using the qualitative analysis software NVivo, this study examines 166 denitions of SCM that have appeared in the literature to determine important components of an integrated denition of SCM. Findings Three broad themes of SCM are identied, including: activities; benets; and constituents/components. An encompassing denition of SCM is developed from the qualitative analysis of these denitions. Research limitations/implications While a large number of SCM denitions have been included in the research design, there may be additional denitions that are excluded given the very large number of SCM publications. Practical implications A consensus denition of SCM will allow researchers to more precisely develop theory and practitioners to identify the scope and boundaries of SCM. Originality/value This paper is the rst attempt to include a large number of SCM denitions for the purpose of developing a consensus denition of the concept. Previous literature has included only a subset of published SCM denitions. Keywords Qualitative research, Supply chain management, Research work Paper type Conceptual paper

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management Vol. 39 No. 8, 2009 pp. 690-711 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0960-0035 DOI 10.1108/09600030910996323

1. Introduction Much confusion has occurred amongst supply chain researchers during the past two decades by the many supply chain management (SCM) denitions that have been proposed in the literature. While most scholars have agreed that SCM includes coordination and integration, cooperation among chain members, and the movement of materials to the nal customer; there are still varying conceptualizations of how SCM should be dened (Mentzer et al., 2001b). This confusion exists both in the academic as well as practitioner communities (New, 1997; Tan, 2001). The lack of a comprehensive and encompassing SCM denition is signicant for several important reasons. Without an inclusive or encompassing denition, it will be

difcult for researchers to develop supply chain theory, dene and test relationships between components of SCM, and develop a consistent stream of research that builds on what has gone before (at least in a comprehensive way). Without the adoption of a uniform denition accepted by researchers, confusion will continue to hinder the study and further development of SCM; and research will extend in various directions, rather than build upon itself (i.e. creating synergy in research). For practitioners, the absence of a comprehensive SCM denition makes it more difcult for supply chain executives to claim authority and responsibility for the right combination of functions and processes. It also makes it more difcult to benchmark against other companies and industries on supply chain metrics, job responsibilities, and other human resource issues, because of the differences that exist from one company to the next. From a theoretical perspective, it is impossible to develop sound SCM theory until valid constructs and generally accepted denitions of terms are developed. Since theory development is paramount to scientic pursuit, the absence of a consensus SCM denition will lead to theoretical ambiguity. The problem becomes amplied as the discipline searches for the bridge laws that will bridge the gap between potential SCM theories and the specic areas of SCM phenomena researchers choose to investigate. The end result will be the development and testing of research hypotheses that are not ultimately predictive. Consequently, a consensus denition of SCM is of signicant importance in the advancement of SCM theory and practice. In this paper, we argue that there are too many denitions of SCM and that there is a need for a single consensus denition. To address this shortcoming, we explore the multiple denitions of SCM that have been put forth in the literature, by reviewing 173 denitions of SCM across a multiplicity of journals and books. Primarily, we focus on common key concepts within each denition, which are then combined to form a consensus denition of SCM. Next, we examine why SCM has been so difcult to dene. Denitions of SCM are then reviewed, content analyzed and coded. A consensus denition of SCM is offered that addresses the encompassing nature of SCM. This denition is accompanied with implications for both researchers and practitioners. 2. The difculties in dening SCM A rapid surge in SCM publications occurred in the middle of the 1990s and the numbers continue to grow, as illustrated in Table I. Larson and Rogers (1998) rst tabulated the number of SCM articles published from the early 1980s through 1997 and we extend their calculations through 2008. We also contribute by calculating the number of academic articles published on SCM in refereed journals during the same time period. The number of publications was computed by compiling the number of citations that where contained in the ABI/INFORM database with the subject identied as supply chain management, supply chain, or SCM. Additionally, the number of academic dissertations dealing with SCM-related topics has increased since the 1980s. During the period 1970-1991, no academic dissertations were cited in Dissertation Abstracts searching on the keywords of supply chain management, supply chain or SCM. From 1992 to 1998, 14 supply chain dissertations were listed, and in the latest period from 1999 to 2004, 65 dissertations relating to SCM were identied (Stock, 2001; Stock and Broadus, 2005). With the growth of SCM, a staggering number of denitions have surfaced in both the practitioner and the academic literatures, yet a clear understanding of SCM remains

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 691

IJPDLM 39,8

Year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Refereed journal articles 49 74 143 122 194 310 403 443 515 586 743 796 922 902 1,105

Total of all publicationsa 232 361 593 908 1,411 1,684 2,074 2,421 2,147 3,378 2,113 2,435 2,495 2,293 2,892

692

Table I. SCM publications (1994-2008)

Note: aTotal of both practitioner trade publications and refereed journal articles Source: ABI/INFORM

shrouded in considerable confusion and misconception. This is due in large part to SCM denitions that vary widely in their scope and description (New, 1997; Tan, 2001). Some denitions concentrate on supply chain participants and activities while others place emphasis on material ows and inter-organizational collaboration. Some authors include nal consumers in their denitions while others exclude them. In early denitions, the term SCM was used, or perhaps misused, synonymously with traditional denitions of logistics management. However, the consensus today seems to be that SCM is somewhat more than logistics (Johnson and Wood, 1996; Lambert et al., 1998a, b). Several articles have taken on the challenge of bringing clarity to the multiplicity of denitions of SCM. Although Lummus and Vokurka (1999) did not propose a unied denition of SCM, they did provide a historical perspective of its development and clearly described the processes that should constitute its denition. Skjoett-Larsen (1994) proposed that the SCM concept was comprised of many different denitions. He identied denitions that equated SCM with the traditional logistics concept, some that dened it in general terms of management and control, and others that focused on the management of interdependent relationships. Mentzer et al. (2000) reviewed varying denitions of SCM in an effort to categorize and synthesize them, although only a handful of denitions were examined. In a subsequent study, Mentzer et al. (2001b) presented a more comprehensive denition of SCM developed from a search of the literature and interviews with executives in 20 companies. The authors indicated that SCM denitions could be classied into three categories: management philosophy; implementation of a management philosophy; and a set of management processes (Mentzer et al., 2001b, p. 9). Mentzer et al. (2001b, p. 22) dened SCM as:
[. . .] the systematic, strategic coordination of the traditional business functions within a particular company and across businesses within the supply chain, for the purposes of improving the long-term performance of the individual companies and the supply chain as a whole.

Larson and Rogers (1998), in a special issue of the Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice dedicated to SCM development, also proposed a unifying denition of SCM, blending ideas gleaned from a number of published denitions. However, much like Mentzer et al. (2000), Larson and Rogers denition was based on the examination of fewer than ten denitions out of the hundreds of denitions proposed in the literature. Larson and Rogers (1998, p. 2) denition described SCM as: the coordination of activities, within and between vertically linked rms, for the purpose of serving end customers at a prot. There is nothing inherently incorrect about analyzing a limited number of SCM denitions. However, such analyses are incomplete in that there is the potential that key denitions or concepts may be omitted. Thus, in this research, a census of SCM denitions published in the literature was conducted. 3. A logistics perspective of SCM Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) realized the need to better distinguish logistics from SCM in their 1998 denition:
Logistics is that part of the supply chain process that plans, implements, and controls the efcient ow and storage of goods, services, and related information from the point of origin to point of consumption in order to meet consumers requirements (emphasis added).

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 693

Thus, the CSCMP in 1998 differentiated logistics as only one function or component contained underneath the umbrella of SCM. More recently, CSCMP proposed separate denitions for SCM and logistics management that again reiterated the distinct differences between the two. CSCMP currently denes logistics management as:
[. . .] that part of Supply Chain Management that plans, implements, and controls the efcient, effective forward and reverse ow and storage of goods, services and related information between the point-of-origin and the point-of-consumption in order to meet customers requirements (www.cscmp.org).

CSCMP has also proposed a denition for SCM, stating that it:
[. . .] encompasses the planning and management of all activities involved in sourcing and procurement, conversion, and all Logistics Management activities. Importantly, it also includes coordination and collaboration with channel partners, which can be suppliers, intermediaries, third-party service providers, and customers. In essence, Supply Chain Management integrates supply and demand management within and across companies (www.cscmp.org).

CSCMP (2005) also provides a brief description of the boundaries of SCM:

Supply Chain Management is an integrating function with primary responsibility for linking major business functions and business processes within and across companies into a cohesive and high-performing business model. It includes all of the Logistics Management activities noted above, as well as manufacturing operations, and it drives coordination of processes and activities with and across marketing, sales, product design, nance and information technology.

Because of the recognition of CSCMP as the preeminent supply chain professional organization, many persons have adopted their denition of SCM.

IJPDLM 39,8

694

Mentzer et al. (2008) have highlighted the confusion that exists within the SCM literature regarding its denition and boundaries and have asked the question: Is the CSCMP denition of SCM sufcient, both for academicians and practitioners in the eld? The premise of their paper was that the CSCMP denition, as well as those that had been published in recent years, were not completely adequate to optimally describe it and to develop supply chain theory and practice. This view has been taken by a number of researchers, such as by Larson et al. (2007), who surveyed supply chain executives regarding their perspectives of SCM and its implementation. Larson et al. (2007, p. 18) found that the lack of a common SCM perspective across members of any given supply chain is [a] barrier to moving forward with SCM. They called for more research into the denition and implementation of SCM. Other articles appearing in the last few years that have dealt with dening SCM (Trent, 2004; Larson et al., 2007) seem to indicate anecdotally that a denition of SCM is not a settled issue. Also, when examining the denitions proposed by authors researching this issue, there are consistencies in several components of a SCM denition. However, because SCM is rightly viewed as a broad, encompassing set of activities, functions and processes, there is still disagreement regarding which activities, functions, and processes belong within the purview of SCM. With the previous discussion in mind, this present research was conducted in an attempt to provide a consensus denition of SCM in order to provide researchers and practitioners with a common ground for pursuing theory and practice. Since its inception as a formal area of investigation in the early-1980s, SCM has evolved from a more narrow focus to one that today is broad and encompassing. Thus, as a rst step in this research, a census of SCM denitions was conducted so that the scope and breadth of the area could be determined for the purpose of identifying how the concept had evolved over the years and to identify the major themes of those denitions. 4. Methodology The purpose of this study was to develop a consensus denition of SCM through content analysis of previously published SCM denitions. Following this approach, key concepts within each SCM denition were identied and clustered into broader themes relevant to SCM. These themes were then quantied with the ultimate objective of bringing greater clarity to the concept of SCM by developing a consensus denition that included the most commonly occurring themes appearing in these published denitions of SCM. The ABI/INFORM database was searched for the terms supply chain management, supply chain, and SCM. The results of that search yielded more than 1,000 articles and other references containing a SCM denition. All sources containing the terms being searched were individually examined to determine the denition of SCM being used. If a denition of SCM was provided which the author(s) obtained from another source, that original source was recognized as the basis of the denition. In a few instances, those sources were journals not included in the ABI/INFORM database. No attempt was made to tabulate how many times a specic SCM denition was repeated in the literature, although anecdotally, the CSCMP denition was likely the most widely used. Table II shows the refereed journals that contained unique denitions of SCM.

Journal Benchmarking: An International Journal British Food Journal Business Process Management Journal Decision Sciences Emerging Issues in Purchasing and Supply Chain Management European Journal of Operational Research Industrial & Commercial Training Industrial Management & Data Systems

Total from journal 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 7

Year 2002 1996 2000 2000 2001 1998 2005 1997 1997 2001 1999 2000 2001 2002 2000 2001 1995 2000 2001 2002 1999 2006 1990 1998 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 1994 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2008 2001 2000 2001 2001 2002 2003 1998 2000

Total year 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 5 1 5 1 1 2 1 8 5 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 (continued)

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 695

Industrial Marketing Management Integrated Manufacturing Systems

3 5

International Journal of Agile Management Systems International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology International Journal of Logistics Management International Journal of Operations & Production Management

1 1 2 15

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

21

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management International Journal of Service Industry Management International Marketing Review Journal of Business Logistics Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice Journal of Retailing

1 2 1 4 1 1

Table II. List of journals used in analysis of SCM denitions

IJPDLM 39,8

Journal Journal of Services Marketing Journal of Supply Chain Management Logistics Focus Logistics Information Management

Total from journal 1 2 1 10

Year 2000 2002 2005 1999 1995 1996 1999 2000 2001 1990 2000 2001 2003 1996 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998 2000 2002

Total year 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 2 2 5 6 2 1 2 1

696

Management Decision Management Research News Management Science Marketing Intelligence & Planning Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

3 1 1 1 20

Work Study

Table II.

Note: Total does not equal 173 since books and reports are not included in this listing which only includes journals

Two researchers independently assessed the denitions to determine if they were unique and that no other denitions were verbatim replicates. If a denition contained at least one new element, it was considered unique and was included in the analysis. Each unique denition became a single entry into the database. Duplicates were not counted as unique denitions. The research methodology only examined unique denitions. The inclusion of duplicates would have awed and biased the research. When duplicates occurred, the citation containing the earliest SCM denition was used. There were 173 unique denitions of SCM identied from published sources through 2008. NVivo7, a commonly used qualitative software package, was employed to analyze these SCM denitions (QSR International, 2006). Analysis of qualitative data (i.e. unstructured data that are not appropriately reduced to numbers) requires sensitivity to both detail and context. NVivo facilitates and simplies this analysis by providing tools for the rigorous exploration of qualitative datasets and discovery of the underlying, reoccurring themes. Using NVivo for analysis results in a node tree xed hierarchical structure, which may be inconsistent with the actual ndings and be subjected to the researchers subjective interpretations. This hierarchical representation may lead less independent-minded researches to reect it unquestioningly in their analysis and related conceptualizations. This disadvantage was not relevant to this analysis as NVivo was not solely used for textual counting, but

rather structured reoccurring concepts that provided a framework for a coherent denition of SCM. To this end, each of the compiled SCM denitions were analyzed using a word-for-word content analysis and the key concepts (or terms) of each denition were identied. It is important to note here that content analysis is a form of conceptual analysis, whereby key concepts or terms are evaluated. In our analysis, these concepts were placed into free-standing nodes and subsequently used to build broader themes or sets. The researchers initially identied some key themes of the SCM denitions and had NVivo assign cases into these groups. Additionally, the software suggested other potential groupings that did not t into the initial categories or themes. NVivo was then directed to code each of these key concepts into a specic free node, or sub-theme, which was then identied by the researchers. Once all of the key aspects of the denitions were coded into the appropriate free nodes, the researchers combined similar free nodes into themes (i.e. categories of free nodes). When a key concept was uncovered that did not t into one of the previously identied free nodes, a new free node was created and descriptively labeled. The derived free nodes or major themes are presented in the following paragraphs after a brief example of how the denitions were coded. The researchers utilized the Graneheim and Lundman (2004) methodology for conducting the content analysis of SCM denitions and developing the themes and sub-themes. The unit of analysis in this research was each of the published studies that included denitions of SCM. Two researchers involved in conducting this study independently read through the denitions several times to get a sense of the totality of SCM. The denitions were then placed into a single data base for analysis using NVivo. The researchers examined each denition and discussed each one with respect to whether or not they felt that the denition was different or similar to other denitions. They discussed how each denition was congured (i.e. the components included in the denition) and developed a comprehensive list of those elements that were included. This procedure was used to develop the overall themes and then the nodes within each theme. In order to ensure that the research ndings would be trustworthy, the Graneheim and Lundman (2004) methodology was employed to examine the trustworthiness of the research results based on credibility, dependability and transferability. Relating to credibility, the data were all based on published manuscripts dealing with the topic of SCM where a denition was included. Since a large number of source materials were evaluated, a variety of aspects relating to the topic were examined, representing thoughts of more than 100 authors. The components or elements of SCM have been generally well recognized in terms of what they encompassed and how they were dened. For example, there is not much difference in how activity or functional terms such as transportation, warehousing, inventory control are dened by researchers and practitioners. The dependability of the ndings examines the degree to which data change over time and how the researchers interpret that data. In this study, the researchers were examining the various published denitions during one time interval, even though the actual manuscripts were published over a signicant time span. The transferability or extent that the ndings can be transferred to other settings or groups is facilitated by the fact that the researchers used a common approach to collecting and evaluating the

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 697

IJPDLM 39,8

data, that is, the denitions of SCM. In other words, it can be reasonably assumed that utilizing the same methodology in another context or situation would produce results that would be reliable. 5. Identication of SCM themes As a result of the qualitative analysis of the 173 denitions, three major themes were identied: (1) activities; (2) benets; and (3) constituents/components (Figure 1). Within each theme, some sub-themes were identied. For example, activities included both ows of materials, services, nances, and information, and networks of internal and external relationships. Benets included adding value, creating efciencies, and customer satisfaction. Utilizing these three themes, the denitions of SCM were examined to determine what elements or components of the denitions pertained to one or more of the three major themes. The development of SCM has been rapid during the previous three decades. In this section of the paper, this development will be traced with respect to the three major themes identied from the qualitative analysis, namely, the: (1) activities; (2) benets; and (3) constituents/components. Utilizing the themes and nodes identied from the qualitative analysis of the 173 denitions, the researchers attempted to discover if there were any trends evident from the denitions offered by authors over the years that could result in the creation of a consensus denition of SCM. 6. Results A detailed analysis of the denitions and descriptions resulted in the identication of several themes and sub-themes that occurred repeatedly throughout the dataset. The sub-themes were labeled as:

698

Activities

Benefits

Constituents or components

Themes

Figure 1. Material/physical, Major themes and sub-themes of a consensus finances, services, and information SCM denition
flows

Networks of relationships (internal and external)

Value Creates creation efficiencies

Customer satisfaction

Constituents or components

Sub-themes

. . . . . .

material/physical, services, nances and information ows; networks of relationships (both internal and external); value creation; creates efciencies; customer satisfaction; and constituents or component parts.

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 699

Each was determined to fall into one of the three broad themes constituting the key activities, the benets, or the constituents associated with SCM. In tracing the development of SCM denitions over time, the number of themes and sub-themes included in SCM denitions generally increased. Typical in the evolution of a eld of study, as an area is examined by more researchers, a greater understanding of it emerges, resulting in a broader and more encompassing view of the eld. In examining SCM denitions over time, the majority included activities such as ows of materials and networks of external relationships with other supply chain rms. The earliest denitions averaged about two themes or sub-themes (out of a total of six possible) and gradually increased to 3-4. Initially, early SCM denitions only included materials ows, but over the years expanded to include services, nancial and information ows as well. Similarly, the denitions included networks of relationships, but early denitions typically only considered external networks. Later, both internal and external networks were incorporated into SCM denitions. Additionally, as denitions of SCM developed, they began to include various benets such as adding value (47 percent), creating efciencies (35 percent), and customer satisfaction (28 percent), although these benets were included less than one-half of the time. Finally, throughout the evolution of SCM denitions, constituents/component parts were included in more than three-quarters of all denitions published. Overall, when examining the SCM denitions published through 2008, it was unusual to nd denitions that included all six sub-themes. Of the 173 unique denitions identied, only a relatively few (eight in total) possessed all sub-themes, and these appeared in sources published in 1990, 1995, 2000 (three times), and 2001 (three times) (Table III). Stevens (1990, p. 25) was the rst author to include all six components in a denition of SCM:

Number of sub-themes contained in denitiona Six Five Four Three Two or less Total

Number of SCM denitions 8 23 34 58 50 173

Notes: aTo be considered a complete denition, which includes six sub-themes, each sub-theme must contain nodes for network of relationships (internal and external) and ows (information and materials)

Table III. Published SCM denitions containing sub-themes of a consensus denition

IJPDLM 39,8

700

The supply chain is the ow of both information and material through a manufacturing company, from the supplier to the customer. Traditionally the ow of material has been considered only at an operational level, but this approach is no longer adequate. It is now essential for business to manage the supply chain in order to improve customer service, achieve a balance between costs and services, and thereby give a company a competitive advantage. Managers must work to integrate the supply chain;, i.e. to ensure that all the functions and activities involved in the chain are working harmoniously together. To develop an integrated supply chain means managing material ow from three perspectives: strategic, tactical and operational. At each of these levels, the use of facilities, people, nance and systems must be coordinated and harmonized as a whole.

Stewart (1995) included all six themes in his discussion of SCM:

The supply chain consists of those logistical and informational elements which are bounded by the aggregate demands of the marketplace at one end, and by specic product/service delivery at the customer site, at the other end. Integrating the supply chain requires philosophical, operational and systems changes. Four categories of operational change must be considered:
.

Policies, practices and procedures including: management approaches/methodologies which dene how to perform activities (task, sequence, timing, etc.); balanced performance metrics which reect process performance; knowledge of industry best practices that enable best performance. Organization including: organizational structure and degree of cross-functional integration; roles and responsibilities for each policy, practice or procedure; skills/training available as well as required to perform activities. Structure including: assembly value add or distribution centre rationalization; ow of material from source of supply to end customer; ow of data from customer to manufacturer/distributor and back. Systems including: the use of systems to enable best practice performance; the effective management of data and analysis across the supply chain (speed of ow, one touch quality, appropriate access).

The integrated supply chain structure seeks to minimize non-value-add activities and their associated structure, because this drives investment cost, operating cost, and time out of the supply chain process. This serves to inject greater customer responsiveness and exibility into the supply chain, driving costs down and thereby enhancing bottom-line performance and cost competitiveness (p. 38).

During 2000, three examples of SCM denitions were identied that included all major themes and sub-themes. Interestingly, all three denitions were published in books, rather than journal articles. Groosse (2000, pp. 173-4) included a denition of SCM in a discussion of global business strategies as follows:
Supply chain management is designing and controlling the entire system of procurement, logistics, and supplier relationships. [It is] an integrative end-to-end approach to dealing with the planning and control of materials and information from suppliers to end customers. The manufacturer and its suppliers, and customers that is, all links in the extended enterprise working together to provide a common product and service to the marketplace that the customer desires and is willing to pay for throughout the life cycle of the product and service. This multi-company group, functioning as one extended enterprise, makes optimum use of shared resources (people, process, technology, and performance

measurements) to achieve operating synergy. The result is a product or service that is high-quality, low-cost, delivered quickly to the marketplace, and achieves customer satisfaction.

In a book examining the electronic supply chain, Poirier and Bauer (2000, pp. 3-4) dened SCM as follows:
Supply chain management (SCM) refers to the methods, systems, and leadership that continuously improve an organizations integrated processes for product and service design, sales forecasting, purchasing, inventory management, manufacturing or production, order management, logistics, distribution, and customer satisfaction. SCM involves optimizing the creation and delivery of goods, services, and information from suppliers to business customers and consumers. It is a means to improve the enterprises competitive position within the market served by itself and the constituent members of its supply chain network. Typically, early SCM efforts are internally focused and dedicated to cutting cost and improving prots only for the company.

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 701

In another book, Schonsleben (2000, p. 2) dened SCM using all six components as:
Supply chain management enables the coordinated management of material and information ows through the chain from your sources to your customers. The objective of SCM is to reduce or minimize total cost, improve total quality, maximize customer service, and increase prot.

The following year, Lummus et al. (2001), Towers and Ashford (2001) and Elmuti (2002) offered their own denitions of SCM that included all six components. Lummus et al. (2001) examined the relationship of logistics to SCM in an attempt to develop a common denition of SCM. Lummus et al. (2001, p. 428) dened SCM as:
[. . .] all the activities involved in delivering a product from raw material through to the customer, including sourcing raw materials and parts, manufacturing and assembly, warehousing and inventory tracking, order entry and order management, distribution across all channels, delivery to the customer, and the information systems necessary to monitor all of these activities.

Towers and Ashford (2001, p. 1) took a marketing approach in dening SCM, giving emphasis to the sustainable customer relationships that SCM could develop:
SCM has sought to create streams of activities linked between producer, customer and supplier that demanded longer-term partnership links to be developed. The process of strategically managing the procurement, movement and storage of materials, parts and nished inventory (and their related information ows) through the organization and its marketing channels in such a way that current and future protability are maximized through the cost effective fulllment of orders. It has a focus on the external environment of the enterprise with the boundaries dened by the legal entity of the enterprise.

Finally, Elmuti (2002, p. 49) presented a denition of SCM in one of the journals specically focused on the topic of SCM and examined its impact on organizational effectiveness. The author offered the following denition:
Supply chain management works to bring the supplier, the distributor, and the customer into one cohesive process. The manufacturers, suppliers, transporters, warehouses, retailers, and customers are involved in a dynamic but constant ow of information, products, and funds. SCM has also become know as the supply network or the supply web because they show how each unit interacts with the others. The suppliers and distributors that were once adversaries

IJPDLM 39,8

are now becoming partners for the betterment of both corporations. Managing the chain of events in this process is called SCM. Effective management must take into account coordinating all the different pieces of this chain as quickly as possible without losing any of the quality or customer satisfaction, while still keeping costs down.

702

The three major themes and sub-themes are briey discussed in the following sections so as to provide readers with an understanding of the development of SCM and its present breadth and scope. 6.1 Activities Given that denitions and detailed descriptions were analyzed in this study, it is not surprising that the activities associated with SCM occur most often. SCM activities are composed of two sub-themes, the material/physical, nances, services and information ows sub-theme and the networks of relationships (which includes both internal and external relationships) sub-theme which occurred in 68 and 70 percent of the denitions, respectively. Material/physical, nances, services and information ows. The effective management of product and information ows is clearly a key aspect of SCM. Illustrative examples of SCM denitions containing this sub-theme include the following:
[. . .] The supply chain encompasses all activities associated with the ow and transformation of the goods from the raw materials stage (extraction), through to the end-user, as well as associated information ows. Materials and information ow both up and down the supply chain (Handeld and Nichols, 1999). [. . .] a set of three of more entities (organizations or individuals) directly involved in the upstream and downstream ows of product, services, nances, and/or information from a source to a customer (Mentzer et al., 2001a). The processes concerned with moving products from the extraction of natural resources and processing all the way to the end consumer (Paulson, 2001).

Most of the SCM denitions cited material/physical, nances, services and/or information ow as key concepts of activities. For example, Zsidisin et al. (2000, p. 312) describe the primary goal of SCM as effectively managing the ow of materials and information from supply sources to the nal point of sale. Likewise, SCM has also been described as the management of raw materials, in-process materials, and nished-goods inventories from the point of origin to the point of consumption and the planning and control of materials and information from suppliers to end customers (Arthur D. Little, 1991). Interestingly, the vast majority of denitions identied ow only as a one-way process. Either material ows one-way from the supplier to consumer or information ows one-way from consumer to supplier. Stevens (1989) stated that SCM involved establishing a system for linking together (constituent parts) via the feed forward ow of materials and the feedback ow of information. Similarly, Towill et al. (2000, p. 160) proposed that information concerning demand ows upstream from the marketplace and ultimately to the raw material supplier and material ows downstream, ending up as a particular physical product.

However, a few authors have recognized that material and information travels in two-way ows both up and down the supply chain. Handeld and Nichols (1999) stated that SCM encompasses all activities associated with the ow and transformation of goods . . . as well as all information ows, not only ows traveling in a one-way direction. Svensson (2002, p. 749) recognized a dilemma in the uni-directionality proposed by some previous denitions arguing that they ignore the overall bi-directional dependencies of activities, actors, and resources between the points-of-consumption and origin. The CSCMP (2005) denition of SCM implies the two-way ow of various elements in the supply chain. If materials and information only ow uni-directionally downstream and upstream, how would one account for the upstream ow of materials resulting from reverse logistic activities and the downstream ow of information that undoubtedly occurs from raw material suppliers, to manufacturers, and then to retailers? Networks of relationships. Establishing networks of relationships between interrelated and interdependent organizations, as well as across business units internal to an organization, is another sub-theme of the activities theme identied in SCM denitions. Illustrative examples include the following:
Supply chain management as the management of the interface relationships among key stakeholders and enterprise functions that occur in the maximization of value creation which is driven by customer needs satisfaction and facilitated by efcient logistics management (Walters and Lancaster, 2000). SCM works to bring the supplier, the distributor, and the customer into one cohesive process (Elmuti, 2002). Supply chain management has recently concentrated on closer relationships between parties involved in the ow of goods from the supplier to the end-user (Dainty et al., 2001).

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 703

Occurring in 123 (70 percent) of the 173 denitions examined, the idea of SCM as a method of managing a system of interrelationships was the most frequently occurring sub-theme. Denitions citing the networks of relationships as a key aspect of SCM refer to these relationships as either external to the organization, internal across business units, or both. Morgan and Hunt (1994) identify the need to manage relationships between internal customers and suppliers simultaneously with the management of relationships between the organization and its customers and suppliers. SCM has also been described as the management of the interface relationships among key stakeholders and enterprise functions (Walters and Lancaster, 2000, p. 160) and the coordination within and between various supply chain members (Chandra and Kumar, 2000). 6.2 Benets The benets resulting from effective implementation of SCM strategies are comprised of three sub-themes that appear repeatedly throughout the dataset. These sub-themes relate to various aspects of SCM benets: (1) value creation; (2) creates efciencies; or (3) customer satisfaction. Ultimately, the goal of SCM is to achieve greater protability by adding value and creating efciencies, thereby increasing customer satisfaction (Groosse, 2000).

IJPDLM 39,8

Value creation. Illustrative examples of SCM denitions that include value creation as a sub-theme include the following:
[. . .] integration of business processes from end use through original suppliers that provides products, services, and information that add value for customers (Cooper et al., 1997).

704

[. . .] processes and activities that produce value in the form of products and services in the hands of the ultimate consumer (Christopher, 1992).

SCM has traditionally been identied closely with logistics because of similarities associated with the ow of materials and services between suppliers and consumers. However, the concept of SCM adding value for consumers and stakeholders highlights that the value-added components of SCM, such as technical support and training services, clearly separates it from traditional logistics management ( Jones, 1989). Further, this concept of adding value in the supply chain is becoming even more important. In some industries, additional support features such as 24-hour technical support may carry more weight than price when making the purchase decision (OBrien and Deans, 1996). Each supply chain member performs a specic added value function in relation to the product/service as it progresses towards the nal consumer (Ritchie and Brindley, 2002, p. 110). Although SCM adds value to the process, it is important to note that a basic premise of SCM is that value must increase faster than the costs associated with managing the supply chain (Lamming, 1996; Lockamy and Smith, 1997). Despite the obvious importance of value added concepts in SCM, they were cited in less than half (47 percent) of the denitions. Creates efciencies. Illustrative examples of SCM denitions that include the sub-theme of creating efciencies include the following:
The [supply chain], functioning as one extended enterprise, makes optimum use of shared resources (Groosse, 2000). Utilized to efciently integrate suppliers, manufacturers, warehouses and stores (Simchi-Levi et al., 2000). Supply chain management is the management of the interface relationships among key stakeholders and enterprise functions that occur in the maximization of value creation which is driven by customer needs satisfaction and facilitated by efcient logistics management (Walters and Lancaster, 2000). Enhanced SCM capabilities can create efciencies and cost savings across a wide range of business processes (Horvath, 2001).

Linking the manufacturer, suppliers and customers, SCM makes optimum use of shared resources, both internal and external to the organization, to achieve operating synergy by creating greater efciencies (Groosse, 2000). Cox (1997, p. 167) describes SCM being dedicated to:
[. . .] discovering tools and techniques that provide for increased operational effectiveness and efciency throughout the delivery channels that must be created internally and externally to support and supply existing corporate product and service offerings to customers.

SCM has developed as a means of improving an organizations competitive advantage in the marketplace and the competitiveness of its constituent members by creating

mutually benecial supply chain networks. These networks create greater synergy and efciencies by allowing organizations to cut costs and improve prots (Poirier and Bauer, 2000). Creating efciencies was included in only a little over one-third (35 percent) of the denitions. Customer satisfaction. Illustrative examples of SCM denitions that include customer satisfaction as a sub-theme are:
[. . .] the integration of business processes from end-users through original suppliers that provide products, services and information that add value for customers (Cooper et al., 1997). [. . .] manage inventory throughout the channel, from source of supply to end-user aiming at improved customer service (Verwijmeren et al., 1996). [. . .] reducing investment without sacricing customer satisfaction (Spekman et al., 1998).

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 705

Understanding and meeting consumer needs is of paramount importance in SCM as a way of optimizing value to customers and improving return to all stakeholders in the supply chain (Mowat and Collins, 2000). According to Kuei et al. (2001, p. 864), SCM practitioners must maintain and sustain a customer-driven culture. Others argue that the most basic purpose of SCM is conforming to customer requirements and one of the two most important aspects of SCM is that it focuses on customers at the end of the chain (Taylor, 1997). Given the fundamental nature of customer satisfaction in the effective utilization of SCM, it is surprising that this sub-theme of SCM was only addressed in about one-fourth (28 percent) of the denitions examined. 6.3 Constituents or components of SCM More than three-fourths (76 percent) of the SCM denitions addressed the components or the constituent parts of SCM. However, they consist of a plethora of constituencies, systems and functions ranging from material suppliers, production facilities, distribution services and customers (Gunasekaran et al., 2001, p. 71) to purchasing, transportation, inventory control, materials handling, manufacturing, distribution, and related systems (Arthur D. Little, 1991). In the case of identifying the components and constituent parts, it may sufce to say that SCM is composed of all operations, systems, business functions and organizations involved in the management of a particular supply chain. The majority of denitions included mention of constituents or component parts, which could have included functional areas or processes within an organization, or external entities such as manufacturers, retailers, wholesalers, distributors, and transportation companies. 7. An encompassing denition of SCM In conducting this study, we chose to develop a consensus SCM denition based on the denitions of a large number of our predecessors rather than relying on a small number of individuals or the review of only a few, select denitions. By considering a large sample of denitions from both the academic and practitioner literature we attempted to remove as much of our own SCM biases from the development of a consensus denition. The denition that has been developed is based solely on our research and analysis of the 173 denitions rather than imposing our own opinions on the denition we propose. From this analysis, we compiled the most commonly cited

IJPDLM 39,8

components (themes and sub-themes) in our dataset of denitions. Each of these themes and sub-themes are included in our denition to insure that it includes the most salient aspects of each previously published denition. By integrating these disparate, yet encompassing aspects, we propose the following encompassing denition of SCM:
The management of a network of relationships within a rm and between interdependent organizations and business units consisting of material suppliers, purchasing, production facilities, logistics, marketing, and related systems that facilitate the forward and reverse ow of materials, services, nances and information from the original producer to nal customer with the benets of adding value, maximizing protability through efciencies, and achieving customer satisfaction.

706

Is the above denition better? The answer, of course, depends on ones perspective. This denition is inclusive of a large number of previous denitions that have appeared in print. In that regard, it combines the collective thinking and wisdom of numerous individuals with varying perspectives and viewpoints. Thus, the denition developed is much like taking a census of the population since it includes the SCM denitions published. The proposed denition is more encompassing because many of the previously published denitions have only included a portion of what is currently viewed as SCM by SCOR, Version 9.0 (Supply Chain Council, 2009) and Lambert et al. (1998a, b) models of SCM. This is an important nding as many denitions of SCM have been previously set forth, but they have failed to encompass the various components or the widely accepted models of SCM. To that end, this proposed denition is simply not another addition to the SCM literature, but rather it serves to synthesize SCM thought by taking into account the most agree upon aspects of SCM while yielding a consensus denition of SCM generated from previously published research. A review of the 173 denitions revealed that many of the conceptualizations of SCM failed to capture the most commonly identied themes and sub-themes from our analysis. Sufce it to say that our denition captures the scope of many researchers and it is broad enough to accurately portray the accepted models within the SCM discipline. So, is this consensus denition the optimal denition of SCM? Likely, no optimal denition may ever be determined because SCM is still developing and evolving continuously. However, we believe the proposed denition is better than those previously published because it is representative of the conceptualizations of both academicians and practitioners and relates to earlier denitions of SCM. More importantly, the proposed denition has three themes that have been widely agreed upon in the SCM literature: activities, benets, and SCM constituents or components. Thus, although the eld is still developing these core SCM themes, they will remain a vital part of SCM as the area continues to grow and develop. Based on the newly proposed consensus denition of SCM, there are a number of implications for academicians and practitioners. 8. Implications and conclusion By recognizing that enterprises can no longer effectively compete unilaterally or autonomously in todays business environment, the development of SCM represents one of the most signicant paradigm shifts in modern business management practice (Lambert and Cooper, 2000). Hence, the adoption of a consensus denition of SCM is of paramount importance in the development of a coherent SCM discipline. A consensus

denition can provide opportunities to academicians in terms of guiding future research and to practitioners as they develop and implement more effective SCM practices. In order to scientically study a phenomenon such as SCM, it is necessary to have a clear conceptualization of the phenomenon itself and its associated components and boundaries. Based on our ndings, there were three commonly used themes across the various SCM denitions identied in the literature. As evidenced from our proposed denition, a consensus denition would include all six sub-themes. These concepts can be employed to spur future research. The adoption of the proposed consensus denition would provide an agreed upon starting point and accepted structural framework for additional development and empirical testing of SCM theory, concepts, principles and methods and could aid in the identication and resolution of SCM-related problems and issues. Research synergy is difcult when multiple approaches are being taken as is the case without a common framework for SCM. Examples of some of the issues in SCM that could be examined include the following conceptual and practical issues: . Is there a theory or theories of SCM? . What are the factors that impact the formation and continuation of inter-rm relationships in the supply chain? . What are the best ways of obtaining coordination between supply chain members? . What are the outputs of a supply chain and how should they be measured? With specic regard to the development of supply chain theories, the process proposed by Hunt (2002) could be employed. This theory testing process consists of ve interdependent stages, the results of which will either tend to corroborate or undermine SCM theory. The absence of a consensus denition has greatest impact on the theory, bridge laws, and research hypotheses stages of empirical testing. Theory development must be the backbone and at the heart of scientic research endeavors. However, the lack of a denitive conceptualization of the components and activities encompassing SCM phenomenon will lead to theory that is ambiguous and incompletely conceived. A consensus denition will also assist practitioners in developing a more structured understanding of the activities and processes within and between supply chain members that are vital for creating and sustaining superior competitiveness and protability in todays business environment. Given that many resource allocation decisions within a rm are based on an understanding and interpretation of SCM, an increased conceptualization also has implications in supply chain strategy, organization and planning, performance measurement, and human resource management. Concerning the outputs of a supply chain and how they should they be measured, researchers and practitioners might ask: Are the outputs the same, irrespective of whether an integrated supply chain exists or not? Or, are the outputs different in a supply chain versus a traditional channel of distribution? Presently, there is debate on this issue and a consensus denition of SCM would be helpful in framing a response to that debate. Additionally, practitioners will be able to benchmark other companies and

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 707

IJPDLM 39,8

708

industries when they can be more certain that others are visioning SCM in the same way. At the moment, it is like comparing apples to oranges rather than apples to apples or oranges to oranges. In sum, there exists too much disagreement as to what SCM is and what functions and/or processes it includes. A consensus denition of SCM would be helpful in eliminating much of the disagreement. As a result of the qualitative analysis of a large number of SCM denitions heretofore published in the academic and trade/professional press, a consensus denition has been offered which can assist in advancing the art and science of SCM. Agreement on a denition will allow SCM research and practice to move forward from both theoretical and practical perspectives.
References Arthur D. Little (1991), Logistics in Service Industries, Prepared by Arthur D. Little and The Pennsylvania State University for the Council of Logistics Management, Oak Brook, IL, pp. 10-31. Chandra, C. and Kumar, S. (2000), Supply chain management in theory and practice: a passing fad or a fundamental change?, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 100-14. Christopher, M.L. (1992), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Pitman Publishing, London. Cooper, M.C., Lambert, D.M. and Pagh, J.D. (1997), Supply chain management: more than a new name for logistics, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-13. Cox, A. (1997), Business Success, Earlsgate Press, Boston, MA. CSCMP (2005), Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, available at: www. cscmporg/AboutCSCMP/Denitions/Denitions asp (accessed March 2005). Dainty, A.R.J., Millett, S.J. and Briscoe, G.H. (2001), New perspectives on construction supply chain integration, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 163-73. Elmuti, D. (2002), The perceived impact of supply chain management on organizational effectiveness, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 49-57. Graneheim, U. and Lundman, B. (2004), Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness, Nurse Education Today, Vol. 24, pp. 105-12. Groosse, R. (2000), Thunderbird on Global Business Strategy, Wiley, New York, NY. Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtiroglu, E. (2001), Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 Nos 1/2, pp. 71-87. Handeld, R. and Nichols, E. (1999), Introduction to Supply Chain Management, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Horvath, L. (2001), Collaboration: the key to value creation in supply chain management, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 205-7. Hunt, S. (2002), Foundations of Marketing Theory: Toward a General Theory of Marketing, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, pp. 212-5. Johnson, J. and Wood, D. (1996), Contemporary Logistics, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Jones, C. (1989), Supply chain management the key issues, BPICS Control, October/November, pp. 23-7. Kuei, C., Christian, N. and Lin, C. (2001), The relationship between supply chain quality management practices and organizational performance, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 18 No. 8, pp. 864-72. Lambert, D. and Cooper, M. (2000), Issues in supply chain management, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 65-83. Lambert, D., Cooper, M. and Pagh, M. (1998a), Supply chain management: implementation issues and research opportunities, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1-19. Lambert, D., Stock, J. and Ellram, L. (1998b), Fundamentals of Logistics Management, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA. Lamming, R. (1996), Squaring the lean supply with supply chain management, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 183-91. Larson, P. and Rogers, D. (1998), Supply chain management: denition growth and approaches, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 1-5. Larson, P., Poist, R. and Halldorsson, A. (2007), Perspectives on logistics vs. SCM: a survey of SCM professionals, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 1-24. Lockamy, A. and Smith, W. (1997), Managing the supply chain: a value-based approach, The 40th International Conference Proceedings: Target Breakthrough Ideas, October 26-29, APICS, Washington, DC. Lummus, R. and Vokurka, R. (1999), Dening supply chain management: a historical perspective and practical guidelines, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 99 No. 1, pp. 11-17. Lummus, R., Krumwiede, D. and Vokurka, R. (2001), The relationship of logistics to supply chain management: developing a common industry denition, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 101 No. 8, pp. 426-32. Mentzer, J.T., Min, S. and Zacharia, Z. (2000), The nature of interrm partnering in supply chain management, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 549-68. Mentzer, J.T., Stank, T.P. and Esper, T.L. (2008), Supply chain management and its relationship to logistics, marketing, production, and operations management, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 31-46. Mentzer, J.T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Min, S., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D. and Zacharia, Z.G. (2001a), Dening supply chain management, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 1-25. Mentzer, J.T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Min, S., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D. and Zacharia, Z.G. (2001b), What is supply chain management, in Mentzer, J.T. (Ed.), Supply Chain Management, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 1-25. Morgan, R. and Hunt, S. (1994), The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38. Mowat, A. and Collins, R. (2000), Consumer behaviour and fruit quality: supply chain management in an emerging industry, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 45-54. New, S. (1997), The scope of supply chain management research, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 15-22. OBrien, E. and Deans, K. (1996), Educational supply chain: a tool for strategic planning in tertiary education?, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 33-40.

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 709

IJPDLM 39,8

710

Paulson, L.D. (2001), Understanding supply chain management, IT Professional Magazine, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 10-13. Poirier, C. and Bauer, M. (2000), E-Supply Chain, Berrett-Koehker, San Francisco, CA. QSR International (2006), NVivo7: An Overview, QSR International, available at: www. qsrinternational.com Ritchie, B. and Brindley, C. (2002), Reassessing the management of the global supply chain, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 110-6. Schonsleben, P. (2000), Integral Logistics Management, St Lucie Press and APICS, Alexandria, VA. Simchi-Levi, D., Daminski, P. and Simchi-Levi, E. (2000), Designing and Managing the Supply Chain: Concepts, Strategies and Case Studies, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead. Skjoett-Larsen, T. (1994), Third-party logistics from an interorganizational point of view, paper presented at the 6th Nordic Logistics Conference, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, June. Spekman, R.E., Kamauff, J.W. Jr and Myhr, N. (1998), An empirical investigation into supply chain management, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 630-50. Stevens, G. (1989), Integrating the supply chain, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Materials Management, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 3-8. Stevens, G. (1990), Successful supply-chain management, Management Decision, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 25-30. Stewart, G. (1995), Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply chain excellence, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 38-44. Stock, J. (2001), Doctoral research in logistics and logistics-related areas: 1992-1998, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 125-256. Stock, J. and Broadus, C. (2005), Doctoral research in supply chain management and/or logistics-related areas: 1999-2004, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 139-496. Supply Chain Council (2009), SCOR Version 9.0, Supply Chain Council, available at: www. supply-chain org (accessed 17 February 2009). Svensson, G. (2002), The theoretical foundation of supply chain management: a functionalist theory of marketing, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 734-54. Tan, K. (2001), A framework of supply chain management literature, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 7, pp. 39-48. Taylor, D. (1997), Global Cases in Logistics and Supply Chain Management, International Thompson Business Press, London. Towers, N. and Ashford, R. (2001), The supply chain management of production planning and sustainable customer relationships, Management Research News, Vol. 24 No. 12, pp. 1-6. Towill, D., Childerhouse, P. and Disney, S. (2000), Speeding up the progress curve towards effective supply chain management, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 122-30. Trent, R. (2004), What everyone needs to know about SCM, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 52-60. Verwijmeren, M., van der Vlist, P. and van Donselaar, K. (1996), Networked inventory management information systems: materializing supply chain management, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 16-31.

Walters, D. and Lancaster, G. (2000), Implementing value strategy through the value chain, Management Decision, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 160-78. Zsidisin, G., Jun, M. and Adams, L. (2000), The relationship between information technology and service quality in the dual-direction supply chain, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 312-28. Further reading Gibson, B., Mentzer, J. and Cook, R. (2005), Supply chain management: pursuit of a consensus denition, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 17-25. About the authors James R. Stock, PhD, The Ohio State University, is the Frank Harvey Endowed Professor of Marketing at the University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. His research interests include reverse logistics, product returns, supply chain management, and the marketing/logistics interface. He is the author or co-author of more than 150 publications including books, articles and conference proceedings. He presently serves as Editor of the Journal of Business Logistics. James R. Stock is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: jstock@coba.usf.edu Stefanie L. Boyer, PhD, University of South Florida, is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at Bryant University. Her research seeks to improve organizational performance by enhancing supply chain management, and organizational training and learning. She has published in the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science and the Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management.

Developing a consensus denition of SCM 711

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints