Benchmarking performance of governance quality in Indian states using MCDM techniques

Influence of governance instruments on supply chain quality: a qualitative investigation in the dairy industry

Purpose

This paper aims to explore the formal (i.e. contracts, standards, processes, and structure) and informal (i.e. social structure, norms, information sharing, and value system and culture) governance instruments used in supply networks and their influence on quality.

Design/methodology/approach

This research is qualitative-exploratory in nature, involving semi-structured interviews with 20 managers from three essential layers in the dairy industry's supply chain: companies that supply essential inputs to milk producers; milk producers; and milk cooperatives.

Findings

Analysis of the generated data show that formal governance instruments have a strong and/or weak influence on products' and operations' quality in the dairy industry context; informal instruments have a strong and/or weak influence on quality, as a counterpart to formal instruments; and the integration of verified governance instruments positively influences the quality of products and operations.

Practical implications

This paper offers several managerial and practical implications. The first is to encourage suppliers of primary inputs and milk producers to invest in the formal structure, primarily in formal contracts with each other. The second implication suggests the relevance of creating different training and qualification courses with members from all organizational levels. Third, there is a need for cooperatives, encompassing all industries, to consider several informal instruments, complementary to contracts and standards currently used for processes.

Originality/value

Governance instruments can lead to desired supply chain outcomes, including those related to quality. Although previous supply chain studies have investigated the relationship between governance instruments and the supply chain, and quality management and the supply chain, studies on governance instruments' influence on supply chain quality are limited.

Multi-criteria decision-making toward supplier selection: exploration of PROMETHEE II method

Purpose

Supplier Selection (SS) is one of the vital decisions frequently executed by numerous industries. In recent times, the number of suppliers has increased enormously depending on a wide range of criteria. A selection of suppliers is a sensitive process that may impact various supply chain activities. The purpose of this research is to explore an underutilized technique called PROMETHEE II method for SS.

Design/methodology/approach

Various tools and techniques are available under multi-criteria decision-making tools, which sometimes creates confusion in researchers' minds regarding reliability. PROMETHEE II was the most prominent method for ranking all available alternatives that ultimately avoid decision-making errors. To execute this equal and unequal weights approach has been used with three case studies.

Findings

In this research, three case studies have been used and soved with the help of the PROMETHEE II approach. The study also provides fundamental insights into the supplier's ranking on different criteria using sensitivity analysis. Further, criteria were divided as per benefits and non-beneficial to get a robust result. The pros and cons of PROMETHEE II approaches are also highlighted compared to other MCDM tools in this study.

Originality/value

Most of the SS research uses either AHP or TOPSIS as per existing literature. There are very few attempts highlighted in the literature that use PROMETHEE II for the SS problem with sensitivity analysis. The proposed method is probable to motivate decision-makers to consider using a more sophisticated method like PROMETHEE II in supplier evaluation processes. This study opens a new direction for the ranking of suppliers in the field of the supply chain. The study also bears significant practical as well as managerial implications.

Performance evaluation: a comparative study between public and private sectors

Purpose

This study analysed international publications related to the performance evaluation (PE) theme to compare the public and private sectors with a focus on the metrics and a reflection on the consideration of each sector's characteristics.

Design/methodology/approach

In total, two bibliographic portfolios (BPs) were selected with the aid of the Knowledge Development Process-Constructivist (ProKnow-C) instrument, and the literature was systematically and critically reviewed to construct a theme literature map; the metrics analysed the performance evaluation systems (PESs) used in the studies and identified each sector's characteristics and PES behaviour based on these characteristics.

Findings

The two sectors stand out because of the low incidence of articles with cardinal scales, which enable the measurement and identification of the consequences of performance that are below or above the target. The behaviour of the sector characteristics was unusual, especially regarding the user and the organisational structure; it was found that the presence or absence of critical factors, such as communication, may prove to be a differential of success or failure. An absence of the organisation's particularities when designing and using a PES was noted.

Originality/value

The contributions relate to (1) identification of the public and private sector characteristics based on the selected literature, which helps in understanding the critical success and failure factors of an organisation's PES, especially with regard to metrics adequacy for each context; and (2) verification of the paths taken by the literature in both sectors.