Influencing factors on the logistics strategy process outcomes
| Identified logistics strategy components | Expected outcomes | Realized outcome | Identified constraints towards strategy implementation (data source within parentheses: D = documentation, LM = logistics manager, PM = project manager, LD = logistics Developer) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Structure components | |||
| Centralized logistics | Centralized development of logistics operations platform | Existed between 2016 and 2019 | New purchasing manager left (started in 2016) (LM), Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM, LD) |
| Regional planning units | Aggregation of materials and distribution planning (MTS materials) | Not realized | Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Regional managers were not committed to change current way of working (LM) |
| ERP-system | Connecting central/regional and project planning levels | Not realized | Central organization was reluctant to carry initial investment costs (LM, PM), Top management did not understand the strategy (PM) |
| Distribution terminals | Inventory buffers of MTS materials in each region to increase flexibility, minimize number of deliveries, achieve economies of scale | Not realized | Site managers only experienced the incurred cost of distribution terminals (PM), Central organization was reluctant to carry initial investment costs (LM, PM) |
| Process components | |||
| Design and engineering | Routines to improve planning, supplier selection and accuracy of information | Not realized | Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Low degree of standardization in design and engineering solutions (D, LM) |
| Site logistics | Site disposition plan, roles and responsibilities, delivery planning, goods reception | Not realized | Material handling on site was not considered logistics (PM), Purchasers were not aware of material flow problems on site (LM, PM) |
| Marking and labelling of goods | Ensure correct and informative packaging labels | Not realized | Site managers only experienced the purchasing cost but not the savings of labelling goods (PM), Lack of scale perceived by suppliers (PM) |
| Delivery planning and transports | Increased control of delivery times and reduce disturbances on production activities | Not realized | Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM), transport costs were not visible to project purchasers (included in purchasing costs) (D, LM) |
| Supplier development policies | Continuous improvements to supply logistics | Not realized | Insufficient logistics capabilities within purchasing organization (D, LM, PM), Long-term supply agreements were not used by project purchasers (PM), Purchasing organization's incentives drove focus on purchasing costs over total costs (D, LM, PM), Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM) |
| Identified logistics strategy components | Expected outcomes | Realized outcome | Identified constraints towards strategy implementation (data source within parentheses: D = documentation, LM = logistics manager, PM = project manager, LD = logistics Developer) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centralized logistics | Centralized development of logistics operations platform | Existed between 2016 and 2019 | New purchasing manager left (started in 2016) (LM), Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM, LD) |
| Regional planning units | Aggregation of materials and distribution planning (MTS materials) | Not realized | Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Regional managers were not committed to change current way of working (LM) |
| ERP-system | Connecting central/regional and project planning levels | Not realized | Central organization was reluctant to carry initial investment costs (LM, PM), Top management did not understand the strategy (PM) |
| Distribution terminals | Inventory buffers of MTS materials in each region to increase flexibility, minimize number of deliveries, achieve economies of scale | Not realized | Site managers only experienced the incurred cost of distribution terminals (PM), Central organization was reluctant to carry initial investment costs (LM, PM) |
| Design and engineering | Routines to improve planning, supplier selection and accuracy of information | Not realized | Top management did not understand the strategy (PM), Low degree of standardization in design and engineering solutions (D, LM) |
| Site logistics | Site disposition plan, roles and responsibilities, delivery planning, goods reception | Not realized | Material handling on site was not considered logistics (PM), Purchasers were not aware of material flow problems on site (LM, PM) |
| Marking and labelling of goods | Ensure correct and informative packaging labels | Not realized | Site managers only experienced the purchasing cost but not the savings of labelling goods (PM), Lack of scale perceived by suppliers (PM) |
| Delivery planning and transports | Increased control of delivery times and reduce disturbances on production activities | Not realized | Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM), transport costs were not visible to project purchasers (included in purchasing costs) (D, LM) |
| Supplier development policies | Continuous improvements to supply logistics | Not realized | Insufficient logistics capabilities within purchasing organization (D, LM, PM), Long-term supply agreements were not used by project purchasers (PM), Purchasing organization's incentives drove focus on purchasing costs over total costs (D, LM, PM), Logistics was part of the purchasing organization (D, LM, PM) |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.