Table 4. Results from the Delphi study... | Emerald Publishing

Table 4.

Results from the Delphi study

Commercial SCD constructs	Acceptable and applicable?		Examples of panellists’
Commercial SCD constructs	Delphi round 3	Workshops	Comments in Delphi rounds 1 and 2
CODP	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“New, unnecessary, civilian, complicated concept, but, it is clearly useful”
Competitive priorities (Quality, Lead-time, Service-level, Cost)	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Service-level is a suitable dimension, but cost is subordinate to other parameters when it comes to assessing our operational capability”. “Focus should be on the customer’s requirements”. “The service-level is important and must be allowed to cost”. “Yes, because there is an inherent trade-off between these factors, which should be made visible”. “These dimensions are closely related to the SwAF ability to deliver operational effect. If quality, lead-time and service-level are substandard, the ability to deliver operational effect decreases. Cost is the means to regulate the other three to the right balance”. “These are important terms that deserve to be introduced in defence in earnest”
Efficiency, Responsiveness	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Options such as these are essential in defence SCD”. “Can be difficult to realise the flexibility that is required to be efficient in peace and responsive in war. If we can define differentiated SCs for different supply segments, which are suitable for both states and usable in operational planning and for peace-time storage, these strategies could be appropriate for defence SCs”. “Efficiency may be prevailing for routine supplies, but responsiveness should apply for our more important supplies”
ETO, BTO, MTO, ATO, PTO, STO, MTS	Yes (Majority)	Yes (Consensus)	“It could be advantageous to postpone certain manufacturing activities for some supplies”. ”Military SCs must be dynamic, flexible and adaptable. A combination of different strategies is appropriate”
Functional, Innovative products	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Provides a rationale for which choices that can, and must, be made”. “Not in a military SC”. ”Difficult to sort out which supply that belongs to which category, since this may change in different phases”
Lean, Agile	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Yes, but not puritanically implement one strategy for the entire SC. For resupplying at the strategic and operational levels, lean may be appropriate, but closer to the military units, agile is probably more suitable”. “Depends on where you are in the SC”. “Modern terminology in a traditional context, but, yes”
Manufacturing postponement, Full postponement, Full speculation, Logistics postponement	No (Majority)	Yes (Consensus)	”They are all required to handle different products”. “I am sceptic regarding the terminology, but I think that the strategies as such are useful”. “New terminology for already existing military activities. It should be ‘militarised’ so that personnel in the SwAF understand”
Postponement, Speculation	Yes = No (Bipolarity)	Yes (Consensus)	“I guess the strategy as such is OK, but I am a bit sceptic regarding the term ‘speculation’”
Predictability, Lead-time	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Essential for a well-functioning military logistics”. “Enhances logistics planning activities”. “I find it difficult to associate the presented concepts with the requirements of a defence SC”. “The significance of these words in themselves points towards the conclusion that these are obvious dimensions to take into consideration”
Push, Pull	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“They are both required, since consumption of some supplies can be calculated, whereas the demand for other supplies simply occurs”. “Classical terms in the military”. “Can be applied to different levels in the SC”
Risk-hedging, Agile, Efficient, Responsive	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Efficiency is subordinate in crises and war, but extremely important in peace for functional products”. “The complexity of military logistics require many different SCSs that can work together”. “My concern is that efficiency is allowed to supersede operational requirements on preparedness”

Commercial SCD constructs	Acceptable and applicable?		Examples of panellists’
Commercial SCD constructs	Delphi round 3	Workshops	Comments in Delphi rounds 1 and 2
CODP	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“New, unnecessary, civilian, complicated concept, but, it is clearly useful”
Competitive priorities (Quality, Lead-time, Service-level, Cost)	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Service-level is a suitable dimension, but cost is subordinate to other parameters when it comes to assessing our operational capability”. “Focus should be on the customer’s requirements”. “The service-level is important and must be allowed to cost”. “Yes, because there is an inherent trade-off between these factors, which should be made visible”. “These dimensions are closely related to the SwAF ability to deliver operational effect. If quality, lead-time and service-level are substandard, the ability to deliver operational effect decreases. Cost is the means to regulate the other three to the right balance”. “These are important terms that deserve to be introduced in defence in earnest”
Efficiency, Responsiveness	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Options such as these are essential in defence SCD”. “Can be difficult to realise the flexibility that is required to be efficient in peace and responsive in war. If we can define differentiated SCs for different supply segments, which are suitable for both states and usable in operational planning and for peace-time storage, these strategies could be appropriate for defence SCs”. “Efficiency may be prevailing for routine supplies, but responsiveness should apply for our more important supplies”
ETO, BTO, MTO, ATO, PTO, STO, MTS	Yes (Majority)	Yes (Consensus)	“It could be advantageous to postpone certain manufacturing activities for some supplies”. ”Military SCs must be dynamic, flexible and adaptable. A combination of different strategies is appropriate”
Functional, Innovative products	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Provides a rationale for which choices that can, and must, be made”. “Not in a military SC”. ”Difficult to sort out which supply that belongs to which category, since this may change in different phases”
Lean, Agile	Yes (Qualified majority, >2/3)	Yes (Consensus)	“Yes, but not puritanically implement one strategy for the entire SC. For resupplying at the strategic and operational levels, lean may be appropriate, but closer to the military units, agile is probably more suitable”. “Depends on where you are in the SC”. “Modern terminology in a traditional context, but, yes”
Manufacturing postponement, Full postponement, Full speculation, Logistics postponement	No (Majority)	Yes (Consensus)	”They are all required to handle different products”. “I am sceptic regarding the terminology, but I think that the strategies as such are useful”. “New terminology for already existing military activities. It should be ‘militarised’ so that personnel in the SwAF understand”
Postponement, Speculation	Yes = No (Bipolarity)	Yes (Consensus)	“I guess the strategy as such is OK, but I am a bit sceptic regarding the term ‘speculation’”
Predictability, Lead-time	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Essential for a well-functioning military logistics”. “Enhances logistics planning activities”. “I find it difficult to associate the presented concepts with the requirements of a defence SC”. “The significance of these words in themselves points towards the conclusion that these are obvious dimensions to take into consideration”
Push, Pull	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“They are both required, since consumption of some supplies can be calculated, whereas the demand for other supplies simply occurs”. “Classical terms in the military”. “Can be applied to different levels in the SC”
Risk-hedging, Agile, Efficient, Responsive	Yes (Consensus)	Yes (Consensus)	“Efficiency is subordinate in crises and war, but extremely important in peace for functional products”. “The complexity of military logistics require many different SCSs that can work together”. “My concern is that efficiency is allowed to supersede operational requirements on preparedness”