International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

Case Study

A business process re-design methodology to support supply chain

integration: Application in an Airline MRO supply chain
Jaime A. Palma-Mendoza a,∗ , Kevin Neailey b,1
a
Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations, Instituto Tecnologico Autonomo de Mexico, 01080, Mexico, Rio Hondo No.1 Col. Progreso Tizapan,
Mexico City, Mexico
b
WMG, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: One of the challenges faced by organizations in the construction of Supply Chain Integration (SCI) is
Available online 24 March 2015 the re-design of business processes. Accordingly a detailed methodology was constructed based on
the integration of a number of different methodological strands from the literature. The proposed BPR
Keywords: methodology was validated by applying it to an Airline Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) supply
Supply Chain Integration chain. This application lead to a re-design of the aircraft component repair services offered by an inde-
Business process re-design
pendent Airline MRO provider. Results from this application shows that the proposed methodology can
Service supply chains
clearly guide the re-design of business processes to support SCI.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction integrate process information in enterprise networks (Roder &

In recent years companies across different sectors have been fac-
ing a new competitive environment, characterized by an increase
in the number of competitors, shorter product cycles, and chang-
ing customer demand. In order to cope with these challenges and to
achieve competitive advantage, companies are engaged in alliances
and partnerships with other organizations and closer collaboration
with suppliers and customers. Accordingly, companies have turned
their attention towards improving the management of their supply
chains to achieve competitive advantage (Simchi-Levi, Kaminsky,
& Simchi-Levi, 2007; Prajogo & Olhager, 2012).
At the core of gaining competitive advantage through Sup-
ply Chain Management (SCM) is Supply Chain Integration (SCI);
when integration is achieved, the supply chain operates as a
single entity driven directly by customer demand (Farhoomad,
2005). However evidence found in the supply chain literature
shows a number of challenges faced by organizations regarding
the construction of SCI (Awad & Nassar, 2010; Sweeney, 2011).
One of the challenges is the necessity to change business pro-
cesses to support SCI. However redesigning business processes is
difficult; the increase of complexity in business processes in sup-
ply chains results in the need for new methodologies on how to
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 525556284000x3683.
E-mail addresses: Jaime.palma@itam.mx (J.A. Palma-Mendoza),
K.Neailey@warwick.ac.uk (K. Neailey).
1
Tel.: +44 0 24 765 24762.
Tibken, 2006).
2. Research methodology
Based on the identification of a research problem consisting
of the need to re-design business processes, a research question
was elaborated; how to re-design business processes to support
supply chain integration (Palma-Mendoza, Neailey, & Roy, 2014).
To answer this question, a literature search and review was con-
ducted to find a methodology to conduct business process redesign
(BPR) to support SCI (Palma-Mendoza et al., 2014). The review
found that none of the methodologies provides a comprehensive
solution. However, a number of methodologies tend to be more
useful in relation to some phases than others. Thus the idea of
combining different methodologies for a better result is attractive.
When linking different methodologies it is necessary to decom-
pose them into detachable elements (Mingers & Brocklesby, 1997).
Thus the methodologies identified were decomposed at their stage
level, then through an inductive approach of pattern recognition
similar to the one used by Kettinger, Teng, and Guha (1997), com-
monalities and differences between the reviewed methodologies
were analysed. This analysis resulted in the identification of generic
stages for the construction of a BPR methodology structure. The
methodologies reviewed were decomposed a second time in terms
of the techniques and methods employed in order to select the
most suitable for each stage. Additional methods and techniques
were adopted from the wider SCM and e-business literature. The
resulting methodology is as shown in Fig. 1.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.03.002
0268-4012/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631 621

Fig. 1. Business process re-design methodology to support supply chain integration.Source: Palma-Mendoza et al. (2014).
622 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
Fig. 2. Elements of research.
Once the BPR methodology was constructed (Palma-Mendoza
et al., 2014), the following hypothesis was elaborated:
H1. The BPR methodology can clearly guide business process re-
design to support supply chain integration.
To test this hypothesis and the BPR methodology it will be
necessary to take action and interact with a running operation.
Thus the Action Research (AR) approach was selected to con-
duct the research effort in applying and validating the proposed
BPR methodology. Coughlan and Coghlan (2002) define AR as an
approach that studies the resolution of important social or orga-
nisational issues involving those individuals who experience the
issues directly. AR involves the participation of members from the
system under study and it takes action on a situation at the same
time that it builds up a body of knowledge. According to Coughlan
and Coghlan (2002) AR is about change and is applicable to the
understanding, planning and implementation of change in organi-
zations. The proposed BPR methodology aims to solve a practical
problem (re-design of business processes) present in organizations
across different sectors by providing a set of steps to guide and
implement change in business processes (Palma-Mendoza et al.,
2014). Thus, the action research approach is embedded within the
proposed BPR methodology, whose purpose is to take action in
a real world situation to improve it. Action research is a holistic
research strategy, rather than a single method for collecting and
analysing data. Thus, it allows the incorporation of several differ-
ent research tools, techniques, and methods. The authors made use
of a range of tools including keeping research notes, participant
observation recordings, unstructured interviews, and gathering
documents that are routinely produced by the company on which
the proposed BPR methodology was applied.
According to Checkland and Holwell (1998), any research should
include a framework of ideas, which are used in a methodology to
investigate an area of interest (Fig. 2).
In Action Research (AR) it is possible to test and/or change the
adequacy of the framework of ideas; for this it is essential that
there is an explicit declaration of the framework of ideas before the
researcher enters into the area of interest (Checkland & Holwell,
1998). In this research the framework of ideas is represented by
the proposed BPR methodology (Palma-Mendoza et al., 2014). With
this framework of ideas, the researcher entered a real world prob-
lem situation to take action (Fig. 3). This real world situation is
represented by a problematic situation present in the repair ser-
vices offered by an airline MRO provider.
Source: Checkland and Holwell (1998).
3. BPR methodology application in an airline MRO supply
chain
3.1. Introduction
In recent years, the United Kingdom (UK) Airline MRO sec-
tor has been experiencing considerable growth. The main drivers
affecting the positive growth are the appearance of low cost car-
riers and new aircraft technology, which brings an increase in
the number of aircraft systems to be maintained/repaired. This
growth has been affected by the current world economic situa-
tion causing a drop in demand, making it difficult to achieve high
margins (Adams, 2009; Jackman, 2009). Thus, in order to remain
competitive MRO providers are aiming to improve their supply
chain processes (Adams, 2009). Potential benefits from e-business
applications for SCI in the Airline MRO business are considered
to be in the area of inter-organizational transactions, the ability
to track components status, increased visibility, speed of commu-
nication, and reduction in inventory levels (MacDonnell & Clegg,
2007). Within this context contact was established with an Airline
MRO provider in order to discuss a BPR project within their com-
ponent repair services operations in the UK. This BPR project was
conducted using the proposed BPR methodology as shown in Fig. 1
(Palma-Mendoza et al., 2014).
3.2. Stage 1: top management commitment and vision
A project plan was created and an agreement was reached on
the conduct of a BPR effort centred on aircraft component repair
services to generate, evaluate, and propose alternatives for supply
chain integration.
3.3. Stage 2: business understanding
The objective of this stage is to develop an overall understand-
ing of the business in which the BPR project will be conducted.
This understanding can be divided into two parts: understanding
the business context, followed by understanding the business logic.
Understanding the business context involves gaining knowledge
about the sector in which the company competes, the market char-
acteristics and company history. Next it is necessary to understand
the business logic, meaning how the company operates to satisfy its
customers with emphasis on identifying the current roles of supply
chain management and e-business technologies, if present.
 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
Fig. 3. Action research cycle to test and validate the BPR methodology.
Using company annual reports, industry reports, information
from the company website, and unstructured interviews with
company executives, a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and
Threats (SWOT) analysis (Bolstorff & Rosenbaum, 2012) was per-
formed. This revealed that in recent years the Airline MRO provider
had focused on consolidating as a global leading independent
provider of technical solutions for airline industry worldwide,
whilst maintaining a reputation for technical quality and safety.
The Airline MRO provider also conducted an expansion of opera-
tions through partnerships, acquisitions and joint ventures and a
unique component repair services model. Nevertheless, the eco-
nomic situation, added to the already intensive competition, has
had a negative effect on worldwide MRO services demand. Addi-
tionally, a situation of high costs and tight margins suggested the
need for efforts to lower costs and increase operational efficien-
cies. In this context, the need to generate, evaluate, and propose
alternatives for supply chain performance improvement is justified.
A business logic map centred on the value proposition rep-
resented by component repair services was created using the
business model ontology proposed by Osterwalder and Pigneur
(2004) as shown in Fig. 4.
This business logic map shows how the company operates to
satisfy its customers with emphasis on identifying the current roles
of supply chain management activities and supporting technolo-
gies. It shows that component repair services can be obtained by
customers either as a single component service or as part of an
Integrated Component Solution (ICS), designed to help customers
to lower maintenance costs and reduce risk. Target customers are
623
Source: based on Checkland and Holwell (1998).
worldwide airlines equipped with Airbus and Boeing aircraft. Dif-
ferent channels act to promote the portfolio of component repair
services and obtain new airline customers. Continuous customer
support is provided by a dedicated customer team. The component
solutions offered by the main supply chain activities involved are:
• Procurement of new components from Original Equipment Man-
ufacturers (OEM)
• Procurement of serviceable components1 from other component
suppliers.
• Reverse logistics flow of unserviceable2 components
• Repair and maintenance of unserviceable components
• Delivery of serviceable components to airline customers.
A number of these activities are currently supported by an Enter-
prise Resource Planning (ERP) system to share and store component
related information; however its main use is to support internal
transactions whereas, for intra-organizational transactions, data
exchange with external supply chain partners is done through fax
and email.
1
Serviceable components are those, which are ready to be used by an airline
customer.
2
Unserviceable components are those, which have been withdrawn from an air-
craft and have been sent to the Airline MRO provider for repair/maintenance.
624 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
Fig. 4. Business logic map of the Airline MRO provider.
3.4. Stage 3: identification of relevant processes and selection of a
target for re-design
A supply chain consists of different processes and, when
conducting supply chain re-design, is necessary to identify the
relevant supply chain processes present and select a target for
re-design. Relevant supply chain processes were identified first
by using the business model (Fig. 4). Next a supply chain pro-
cess map (Fig. 5) was created using the SCOR model process
types and process categories as explained by Palma-Mendoza
(2014a). The SCOR model was developed by the Supply Chain Coun-
cil (SCC) in 1996, to understand, describe, and evaluate supply
chains (SCC, 2012). The SCOR model provides a common sup-
ply chain framework, standard terminology, common metrics,
and best practices. One of the applications of the SCOR model is
to aid the understanding of a particular supply chain by means
of mapping it in business process terms using SCOR model ter-
minology. Thus, mapping with the SCOR model will show the
relevant SC processes present in a particular supply chain under
study. According to Fig. 5, three main supply chain partners deal-
ing with repair and maintenance of aircraft components were
identified:
• Airline customers: represented mainly by European Airlines,
from low cost carriers to large carriers.
• Airline MRO provider: the service provider located in the UK
• External component repair vendors: a number of components are
sent to be repaired by external repair vendors, in total around 23
external repair vendors are used.
Next, in conjunction with Airline MRO provider executives, the
relevant supply chain processes were identified using SCOR model
level I process types. These processes are:
• Return of unserviceable components: airline customers, send
components in need of repair – unserviceable components – to
the Airline MRO provider.
• Delivery of serviceable components: the airline MRO provider
sends on request, components in working condition – serviceable
components – to airline customers.
• Repair and maintenance of unserviceable components: repair of
components is conducted in facilities owned by the airline MRO
provider and in facilities owned by external component repair
vendors.
Next the process categories from SCOR model level II process
were identified; these better describe the supply chain processes
present, and include:
• DR2: delivery of MRO product is the process that better fits the
return of unserviceable components
• D1: delivery of stocked product is the process that better
describes the delivery of serviceable components, because com-
ponents are stocked in the Airline MRO provider facilities and are
send on request to an airline customer.
• M1: repair of stocked product is the process that better describes
the repair operations conducted within the facilities of the airline
MRO provider and by the external component repair vendors.
Unserviceable components are repaired/maintained and then
stocked in the Airline MRO storage locations.
 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
Fig. 5. SCOR model map.
Table 1
Metrics for objective definition.
Performance attribute Metric
Asset Return of investment on components
management Component inventory turnover
Supply chain cost Transaction costs
Reliability Delivery performance
In summary the resulting SCOR process map (Fig. 5) shows
that when a customer demands a component, this requirement is
satisfied, when possible, through components stocked in the com-
pany storage locations. The airline customer returns components
to be repaired or maintained; this is performed within the repair
facilities of the company and also with the aid of external repair
vendors.
For the selection of a target for redesign, the AHP technique
(Saaty & Vargas, 2012) was used with two level criteria consisting
of SCOR model performance attributes and level 1 metrics (Fig. 6) as
explained by Palma-Mendoza (2014a). AHP assumes that decision
problems can be structured by translating goals into measurable
criteria, which in turn, can be related to alternative decisions. As a
result, AHP provides a priority number at each level of the hierar-
chy; then priorities of the alternatives are weighted against those
of the criteria so that the eventual importance of the alternatives
related to the goal are quantified (Saaty & Vargas, 2012).
From a workshop session organized with company executives,
a number of tables for pair-wise comparison were completed. This
information was then entered into the free licensed software Super
Decisions 1.6.0 to be processed giving the results shown in Fig. 7
with a consistency ratio of 8%.
From the AHP analysis it was concluded that the target for re-
design is the repair and maintenance of unserviceable components
conducted within facilities of the Airline MRO provider and in facil-
ities of external repair vendors.
3.5. Stage 4: definition of objectives for improvement
From AHP analysis it was possible to identify by priority rank of
the most important performance attributes and metrics associated
with the target for redesign as shown in Fig. 5 (items shaded). Per-
formance was measured and compared with industry benchmarks
as recommended by Bolstorff and Rosenbaum (2012) to identify
gaps, leading to definition of objectives for improvement. These
objectives were specified with the following performance metrics
adapted from SCOR model (SCC, 2012) as shown in Table 1, (details
are not shown due to the confidentiality agreement signed with the
company).
3.6. Stage 5: analysis of process
Once a process has been selected and objectives for improve-
ment defined, it is necessary to understand the targeted process.
625
The understanding of a supply chain process should be quite
exhaustive to comprehend the diverse elements, interactions and
flows. Trkman, Indihar, Stemberger, Jaklic, and Groznik (2007) rec-
ommend business process mapping to understand, visualize, and
document a process as it is. Business process maps are useful in
analysing flows, clarifying the relationships and sequence of oper-
ations.
Through investigative methods as defined by Towill (1996), a
business process map was constructed to understand the sequence
and main activities present in the component repair process
(Trkman et al., 2007). The business map (Fig. 8) is sectioned ver-
tically according to areas of responsibility and horizontally into
unserviceable and serviceable component related activities. The
process starts at the upper left corner with the airline customer
replacing a component and returning it to the MRO provider. It fin-
ishes when components are repaired, stocked, and replenished to
the airline customer.
According to Fig. 8, the airline customer sends unservice-
able components to the Airline MRO provider – those that
need to be repaired – and receives components ready to use,
also called serviceable components. The airline MRO provider
repairs unserviceable components and dispatches a number of
components to an external repair vendor to be repaired, when
there is a lack of repair capacity. Overall, there are 23 exter-
nal repair vendors. The repaired components are returned to
the Airline MRO provider as serviceable components, placed in
stock, and are available to be sent to Airline Customers when
necessary.
The BPR methodology recommends use of a hybrid SD/DES com-
puter simulation to analyze the system AS IS (Palma-Mendoza
et al., 2014). Simulation models can describe how all parts of the
supply chain will operate over time in respect to a set of param-
eters and policies defined by managers/analysts. Understanding
the dynamics of the supply chain in a safe computer environ-
ment is the main value of computer simulation models. Two main
distinct approaches to computer simulation for supply chain anal-
ysis exist: Discrete Event Simulation (DES) and System Dynamics
(SD) (Akkermans & Dellaert, 2005). Simulation models in both
DES and SD are built to understand how systems behave over
time. However, given the fact that pure DES and SD simulation
have a number of drawbacks preventing a thorough and exhaus-
tive supply chain analysis, hybrid SD/DES simulation approaches
have been suggested (Lee, Cho, Kim, & Kim, 2002; Palma-Mendoza,
2014b, Pereira, 2009; Rabelo, Helal, Jones, & Hyeunk-Sik, 2005;
Reiner, 2005; Venkateswaran & Son, 2005). A hybrid SD/DES sim-
ulation approach analyses both discrete and continuous aspects
of a supply chain simultaneously (Pereira, 2009). Although before
adopting a hybrid SD/DES computer simulation approach, it is
necessary to determine if a stand-alone SD or DES approach is
enough.
At this point in the BPR project, it was decided to model com-
ponent and information flows. Information transactions follow
626 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631

Fig. 6. AHP structure to select the target for re-design.

a well-defined sequence and detailed historic time series were component inventories/backlogs was limited, particularly in
available for most of the transactions which are characterized respect to component flows from Airline customers and to and from
by stochastic behaviour; thus making Discrete Event Simulation external repair vendors; thus, it was decided to model component
(DES) the most adequate modelling approach. However data about flows at an aggregate level to facilitate the modelling. Moreover

Fig. 7. AHP results.

 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631 627

Fig. 8. Business process map.

component flows occur continuously every day; thus, making Sys-
tem Dynamics (SD) the most adequate modelling approach to
represent component flows. Due to all these considerations, it was
decided to use a hybrid SD/DES simulation model to understand
the system as it is.
A causal loop diagram was constructed (Sterman, 2000) as
shown in Fig. 9, to understand the variables affecting the differ-
ent componentsb́acklogs/inventories and as a basis for modelling
component flows.
Next, it was necessary to identify the points of interaction
between the SD and DES model for the construction of the hybrid
SD/DES model (Chahal, Eldabi, & Young, 2013). The points of inter-
action are: unserviceable component information arrival (Input
from SD to DES), reception of unserviceable components in Air-
line MRO ERP system (Input from DES to SD), repair orders (Input
from DES to SD), reception of serviceable components in Airline
MRO ERP system (Input from DES to SD). Following the identifica-
tion of points of interaction, information was gathered to quantify
the main variables of the computer model (Table 2).
The hybrid simulation model was constructed using Goldsim
software. Goldsim has capabilities to model discrete events com-
bined with continuously varying systems.
3.6.1. Model verification and validation
According to Balci (1994) model validation implies substanti-
ating that the model behaves with satisfactory accuracy within its
domain of applicability. It is recommended to that the model be run
under the same input conditions that drive the system to compare
the model behaviour with real system behaviour. Thus, constant
communication took place with the Airline MRO company to verify
the assumptions and logic of the simulation model. The current con-
ditions observed in the real system were entered into the computer
simulation model. To run the model 100 replications were speci-
fied, which means that the system was simulated for a period of 365
days, 100 times. Then it was compared to the real system current
information backlogs and component inventory levels with those
obtained by the simulation model. This comparison leads to a num-
ber of corrections into the computer simulation model. This process

Table 2
Computer model main variables.

Variables Average Distribution type Standard Deviation Maximum–Minimum

Unserviceable component information rate of 32.00 component Triangular 0–79

arrival information/day
Number of unserviceable components receipted in 54.80 components/day Log normal 28 6–146
ERP system
Number of repair notifications sent 53.70 notifications/day Log normal 27.8 6–141
Number of repair orders issued 57.30 orders/day Log normal 20.6 2–121
Number of unserviceable components dispatched 26.42 components/day Normal 15 0–86
Number of components repaired and dispatched by 27 components/day Normal 3 20–34
external repair vendors
Number of components repaired by internal repair 26 components/day Normal 17 0–62
workshop
Number of serviceable components receipted into 58.7 components/day Log normal 29.9 6–150
the ERP System
Customer demand (number of components) 22 components/day Triangular 0–35
628 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631

Fig. 9. Casual loop diagram.

continued until there was minimal difference between the real
system behaviour and that of the simulation model (Balci, 1994;
Robinson, Brooks, Kotiadis, & Van Der Zee, 2010) was achieved. For
this model the minimal difference achieved after numerous cor-
rections is 12% on average. The Airline MRO company agreed that
the computer simulation model was accurate enough in terms of
replicating the real system behaviour.
3.6.2. Findings
From an analysis of the target for re-design under normal
conditions using the performance measures defined in stage 4,
it was found that the poorest performances were for the back-
log of components waiting for repair (Table 3) and the time
Table 3
Backlog.
necessary to receive repaired components from external repair
vendors (Table 4).
3.7. Stage 6: design of process AS TO BE
After achieving a good understanding of the process as it is,
what follows is the generation and evaluation of alternatives
for the construction of supply chain integration. A number of
alternatives for supply chain integration were generated using the
SCOR model (SCC, 2012) and e-business schematics (Weill & Vitale,
2001) as proposed by Palma-Mendoza et al. (2014). One of the
alternatives generated was to link the Airline MRO provider ERP
system with external repair vendors via their web portals; the pro-
posed relationships are shown in Fig. 10.

Backlogs From model Table 4

(daily average) Delivery performance.
Number of unserviceable components waiting to be 48
Delivery performance From computer
receipted
simulation model
Number of repair orders waiting to be generated 64.2
(average time in days)
Number of components waiting to be dispatched for 39.2
repair Time to generate repair orders 5.3
Work in Progress (WIP) with external repair vendors 173.9 Time to repair components by internal workshop 15.1
Work in Progress (WIP) with internal repair workshop 196 Time to repair components by external vendors 24.4
Number of serviceable components to be receipted 47 including dispatch and shipment

Table 5
Alternatives for improvement selection.

Performance attribute Metric Best alternative

Asset Return on components Alternative 2: automation of notifications for repair

management Inventory turnover Alternative 2: automation of notifications for repair

Supply chain cost Unserviceable component inventory cost Alternative 1: integration with external repair vendors
Reliability Delivery performance Alternative 2: automation of notifications for repair
 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631 629

Fig. 10. e-Business schematics representation of integration with external repair

vendors.

Fig. 11. Business schematics representation AS TO BE notification for repair.

Another alternative considered was to automate the genera-
tion of repair orders immediately after receipt of an unserviceable
component by the logistics area (Fig. 11).
These alternatives were evaluated using the computer simu-
lation model, simply by incorporating and quantifying the new
relationships. Table 5 summarizes the results from the computer
model.
Even with a reduction in component inventory cost, the
improvement from alternative 1 was found to be localized.
Whereas, alternative 2 produces benefits across other parts of the
process; this suggests that a main bottleneck is caused by delays
in processing the notifications for repair. When alternative 1 is

Fig. 12. New process design.

630 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
combined with alternative 2, it gains the benefit of improvement
on inventory cost, as well as in most of the metrics monitored.
3.8. Stage 7: implementation of changes
Based on the previous analysis, it was decided to proceed
to the specification of the two alternatives in one single new
process. First from reviewing Rosetta Net Partner Interface Pro-
cesses (PIP) standards (Rosettanet, 2012), it was possible to
understand the necessary electronic interactions between the Air-
line MRO provider and external repair vendors. Next ERP reference
models were reviewed (Knolmayer, Mertens, Zeier, & Dickersbach,
2009; Dickersbach, 2006) to provide detail about transactions and
platforms necessary to design the new process. It was found that
through an Inventory Collaboration Hub (ICH), it will be possi-
ble to support integration between the airline MRO provider and
its external repair vendors. ICH is a low-price collaboration plat-
form available via the internet accessible through a web-based user
interface, which accommodates different ERP systems (Knolmayer,
Mertens, Zeier, & Dickersbach, 2009). Through ICH the Airline
MRO provider can exchange component information with external
repair vendors.
To automate the creation of repair orders triggered by compo-
nent receipts, it is necessary to modify ERP master data information
for each component type per costumer, then to associate this
information with the receipt transaction. If component receipt is
successful a notification is sent for a repair order. By using the Archi-
tecture of Integrated Information Systems (ARIS), the new process
is as shown in Fig. 12.
With this the BPR project was concluded, leaving the detailed
technical design to the Airline MRO provider and external repair
vendors.
4. Conclusions
Despite the potential benefits of supply chain integration, the
literature suggests a number of challenges preventing its success-
ful adoption, in particular the need to re-design business processes.
A number of methodologies were found that address business
process re-design, supply chain re-design and e-business process
design. However, none of these methodologies addressed, in par-
ticular, how to redesign business processes to support construction
of supply chain integration. Through a literature review conducted
in different domains, a methodology has been developed and pro-
posed to tackle this particular problem (Palma-Mendoza et al.,
2014). Accordingly the BPR methodology was tested and validated
in this paper through a practical application. This application was in
support of creating a SCI between an MRO Company and its external
repair vendors (23 main repair vendors). Although it will require
further validation, experience from this application suggests that
it can clearly guide a business process re-design to support sup-
ply chain integration. According to Checkland and Holwell (1998),
Action Research (AR) cannot produce law like generalizations from
an involvement in a single situation (such as the BPR methodol-
ogy application in an Airline MRO provider). However, AR can yield
defensible generalizations which can be transferred to other situa-
tions.
Accordingly this application has proved the adequacy of the
framework of ideas embedded in the proposed BPR methodol-
ogy to support supply chain integration. According to Coughlan
and Coghlan (2002) AR may have implications beyond taking
action or the knowledge gained within a particular situation. The
results of AR may be applicable to similar situations in other
organizations. This means that even if AR takes place within the
realm of a particular company situation and the application of the
BPR methodology in the Airline MRO and its results are company
specific, it has the potential to have implications for other industries
and companies.
The main implication here is that the proposed BPR methodol-
ogy could be adapted to any company on any sector to undertake
a BPR effort to support supply chain integration. This is possible
because the techniques and methods employed in the BPR method-
ology can be generally applied to any company or sector:
• The business model ontology (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2004) can
be used to describe any business logic map.
• The SCOR model (SCC, 2012) can be used to map and describe any
supply chain regardless of the type of company and/or sector.
• The AHP structure, used to select a target for re-design, can be
adapted to any relevant supply chain processes to be considered.
• The SCOR model performance attributes and metrics cover all the
possible metric combination to measure the performance of any
supply chain.
• The modelling and simulation approaches used have been applied
to different supply chain cases as reported in the literature.
• The SCOR model recommended best practices are applicable and
adaptable to any supply chain configuration.
• The Rosettanet PIP standards, provide generic descriptions of col-
laboration processes among supply chain partners.
• Reference models such as those from SAP describe specifications
for different transactions which can be adopted by any company.
• The ARIS framework can be used to describe any business process
in combinations with any information system.
Acknowledgement
The author Jaime A. Palma-Mendoza gratefully expresses its
gratitude to Asociacion Mexicana de Cultura A.C for its support
during the elaboration of this article.
References
Adams, C. Supply chain: Problems and solutions. Aviation maintenance June 2009.
(2009). http://www.aviationtoday.com. Accessed 01.06.09.
Akkermans, H., & Dellaert, N. (2005). The rediscovery of industrial dynamics: The
contribution of system dynamics to supply chain management in a dynamic and
fragmented world. System Dynamics Review, 21(3), 173–186.
Awad, H.A. H. & Nassar, M.O. (2010). Supply chain integration: Definition and
challenges. Proceedings of the international MultiConference of engineers and
computer scientists. IMECS 2010, March 17–19, Hong Kong.
Balci, O. (1994). Validation, verification, and testing techniques throughout the life
cycle of a simulation study. Annals of Operations Research, 53(1), 121–173.
Bolstorff, P., & Rosenbaum, R. (2012). Supply chain excellence ((third ed.)). New York:
AMACOM.
Chahal, K., Eldabi, T., & Young, T. (2013). A conceptual framework for hybrid sys-
tem dynamics and discrete event simulation for healthcare. Journal of Enterprise
Information Management, 26(1/2), 50–74.
Checkland, P., & Holwell, S. (1998). Action research: Its nature and validity. In N.
Kock (Ed.), Information systems action research. Laredo TX: Springer.
Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22(2), 220–240.
Dickersbach, J. T. (2006). Supply chain management with APO. Structures, mod-
elling approaches and implementation of mySAP SCM 4.1 ((2nd ed.)). Heidelberg:
Springer.
Farhoomad, A. (2005). Managing e-business transformation, a global perspective. New
York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jackman, F. MRO market now, overhaul & maintenance. Aviation week, April 2009.
(2009). http://www.aviationweek.com. Accessed 01.07.09.
Kettinger, J. W., Teng, J. T. C., & Guha, S. (1997). Business process change: A study of
methodologies techniques and tools. MIS Quarterly, 21(1), 55–80.
Knolmayer, G. F., Mertens, P., Zeier, A., & Dickersbach, J. T. (2009). Supply chain man-
agement based on SAP systems. Architecture and planning processes. Heidelberg:
Springer.
Lee, Y. H., Cho, M. K., Kim, S. J., & Kim, Y. B. (2002). Supply chain simulation with
discrete–continous combined modelling. Computers & Industrial Engineering,
43(1–2), 375–392.
MacDonnell, M., & Clegg, B. (2007). Designing a support system for aerospace main-
tenance supply chains. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 18(2),
139–152.
 J.A. Palma-Mendoza, K. Neailey / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 620–631
Mingers, J., & Brocklesby, J. (1997). Multimethodology: Towards a framework
for mixing methodologies. International Journal of Management Science, 25(5),
489–509.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2004). An ontology for e-business models. In W. Currie
(Ed.), Value creation from e-business models (pp. 65–97). Oxford: Elsevier.
Palma-Mendoza, J. A., Neailey, K., & Roy, R. (2014). Business process re-design
methodology to support supply chain integration. International Journal of Infor-
mation Management, 34(2), 167–176.
Palma-Mendoza, J. A. (2014a). Analytical hierarchy process and SCOR model to sup-
port supply chain re-design. International Journal of Information Management,
34(5), 634–638.
Palma-Mendoza, J. A. (2014b). Hybrid SD/DES simulation for supply chain anal-
ysis. In J. Wang (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business analytics and optimization (pp.
1139–1144). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Pereira, J. V. (2009). SD-DES model: A new approach for implementing an e-supply
chain. Journal of Modelling in Management, 4(2), 134–148.
Prajogo, D., & Olhager, J. (2012). Supply chain integration and performance:
The effects of long-term relationships, information technology and sharing,
and logistics integration. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(1),
514–522.
Rabelo, L., Helal, M., Jones, J., & Hyeunk-Sik, M. (2005). Enterprise simulation: A
hybrid system approach. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufac-
turing, 18(6), 498–508.
Reiner, G. (2005). Customer-oriented improvement and evaluation of supply chain
processes supported by simulation models. International Journal of Production
Economics, 96(3), 381–395.
Robinson, S., Brooks, R., Kotiadis, K., & Van Der Zee, D.-J. (2010). Conceptual modeling
for discrete event simulation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Inc.
Roder, A., & Tibken, B. (2006). A methodology for modelling inter-company supply
chains and for evaluating a method of integrated product and process documen-
tation. European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 1010–1029.
Rosettanet. Overview: Clusters, segments, and PIPS. (2012). http://www.rosettanet.
org. Accessed 01.07.12.
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2012). Models, methods, concepts & applications of the
analytic hierarchy process ((2nd ed.)). New York: Springer.
SCC, (2012). Supply chain operations reference model version 11, Supply Chain
Council Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.
631
Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P., & Simchi-Levi, E. (2007). Designing and managing the
supply chain: concepts, strategies and case studies ((third ed.)). New York: McGraw
Hill.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics, systems thinking and modeling for a complex
world. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sweeney E. (2011). Supply chain integration: Challenges and solutions. In Supply
chain Innovation for competing in highly dynamic markets: challenges and solu-
tions. In: Evangelista P., McKinnon A., Sweeney E., & Esposito E. (Eds.), Hershey,
PA. Business Science Reference.
Towill, D. R. (1996). Industrial dynamics modelling of supply chains. Logistics Infor-
mation Management, 9(4), 43–56.
Trkman, P., Indihar, M., Stemberger, I., Jaklic, J., & Groznik, A. (2007). Process
approach to supply chain integration. Supply chain management: An International
Journal, 12(2), 116–128.
Venkateswaran, J., & Son, Y. J. (2005). Hybrid system dynamic—discrete event
simulation-based architecture for hierarchical production planning. Interna-
tional Journal of Production Research, 43(20), 4397–4429.
Weill, P., & Vitale, M. R. (2001). Place to space, migrating to e-business models. Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
Jaime Palma joined Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) at the University
of Warwick 6 years ago as a research engineer on the Engineering Doctorate
programme. His doctoral research consisted in the creation, development and
application of a Business Process Redesign Methodology to support e-business
implementation for Supply Chain Integration. Jaime was awarded the Doctor of
Engineering degree in 2011 and since July 2012 is an Associate professor at Instituto
Tecnologico Autonomo de Mexico (ITAM).
Kevin Neailey has been in Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) at the University
of Warwick for almost 20 years. His main responsibilities are for over 140 research
students, half of whom are on the prestigious Engineering Doctorate programme.
Kevin has been Director of Warwick’s Eng.D since 1994 and has led its development
within the UK and in South Africa and Hong Kong. It is now believed to be the largest
programme of its type in the UK and has been used as a model for other centres in the
UK, the Far East and Australia. Since 2004 he has also been Director of the Warwick
Collaborative Training Account, currently worth over £5m. In this role, he helped to
develop a similar programme to the Eng.D but within Chemistry—the ChemDoc.