13

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Literature review helps to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research

evidence relevant to supply chain management. Ever since 1982, when Keith Oliver used the

term ‘Supply Chain Management’ for the first time, researchers and practitioners have

contributed and developed the concept to great significance. The present literature review

categorized research articles on supply chain optimization, integration, restructuring,

performance, efficiency, environment and social parameters. It also provided evidence that the

growing importance to environment and social issues are incorporated in supply chain

research leading to the concept of Green Supply chain Management and Sustainable Supply

Chain management.

2.2 REVIEW OF SCM LITERATURE

The SCM emerged in the early 1980s due to the fast changing and challenging environment in

industries [32]. The logic of synchronization and integration of players involved in business

activities can be traced back to the ancient times [33]. Mentzer, et al., 2001 [7] distinguished

between supply chains as phenomena that exist in business and the management of those

supply chains. The phenomenon of supply chain exists even if none of the organizations

14

actively implements any of the concepts of SCM to manage the supply chain to realize exists

[7].

SCM has basically evolved from physical distribution management and logistics management.

Forrester [4] recognized the integrated nature of organizational relationships and introduced a

theory of distribution management which proposed that “there will come general recognition

of the advantage enjoyed by the pioneering management who have been the first to improve

their understanding of the interrelationships between separate company functions and between

the company and its markets, its industry, and the national economy.” He also highlighted the

importance of materials flow and the reduction of the total inventory. In the 1960s and 1970s,

physical distribution and logistics were recognized as important links in a firm’s ability to

serve its customers. Physical distribution was first to emerge, since it represents about two

thirds of logistics costs and was considered a component of the marketing mix of essential

elements [3]. Though physical distribution was usually associated with outbound logistics,

Smykay et al., (1961) [34] included both inbound and outbound movements as part of

business logistics. Heskett et al., (1964) [35] extended the concept of physical supply and

physical distribution and integrated it with coordination of the material flows throughout the

entire chain. These concepts of integration and synchronization were subsequently built upon

to develop what is currently described as SCM.

With the onset of 1980s, there was a significant increase in professionalism within

distribution. Measures like centralized distribution, severe reduction in stock holding and

usage of computer for information processing were dominant [33]. Inventory management

and warehousing became part of corporate decisions [36]. Third party distribution services

started ushering, which further brought methods of improving information transmission and

processing to the front [37]. At some point in the mid-1980s, emerged the all-encompassing

term: supply chain management. It included the concepts of transportation, distribution and

material management. The term first appeared in print in 1982, and is attributed to Keith

Oliver, a consultant with Booz Allen Hamilton [38]. It was then used by Houlihan (1984,

1985 and 1988) [39] [40] [41] to depict material flows across organizational boundaries. Mid-

1980s saw the emergence of an era of SCM. The paradigm of integration began to shift

gradually from internal to external integration [33].

15

Subsequent to Houlihan (1985), numerous other researchers introduced new concepts and

suggested frameworks for managing the supply chains. Ganeshan et al. (1999) stated that

SCM goes beyond the boundaries of a company and linked operating decisions to strategic

considerations [42]. Stevens (1989) observed that more successful companies will be the one

who developed an integrated supply chain strategy [43]. Development of SCM can be traced

from the definitions given during the various periods since the 1980s. Oliver and Webber

(1982) [38] simply defined SCM “as management of flow of goods from supplier to end

consumer”, while in 1990, Ellram and Cooper [44] described SCM as a function integrating

philosophy in a supply chain. Berry et al. (1994) [45] focused more on maintaining long-term

relationships among members in supply chain, which clearly reflects the state of environment

prevailing in supply chains in 1990s [33]. La Londe and Masters (1994) [46] proposed that “a

supply chain is a set of firms that pass materials forward”. Normally, several independent

firms are involved in manufacturing a product and delivering it to the consumer in a supply

chain—raw material and component suppliers, product assemblers, channel partners, dealers,

retailers and logistics companies are all members of a supply chain [46]. A simple Supply

Chain Model (Figure 2-1) proposed by Beamon in 1998 [13] identifies two basic, integrated

processes: ‘production planning and inventory control process’, and the ‘distribution and

logistics process’.

Figure 2-1 : The Supply Chain Process (Source: Beamon, 1998)

Another definition by Mentzer et al. (2001) notes “a supply chain is the network of

organizations that are involved, through upstream and downstream linkages, in the different

processes and activities that produce value in the form of products and services delivered to

the ultimate consumer” [7]. In other words, “a supply chain consists of multiple firms, both

16

upstream (i.e., supply) and downstream (i.e., distribution), and the ultimate consumer” [7].

Mentzer et al. (2001) identified three degrees of supply chain complexity: a “direct supply

chain,” an “extended supply chain,” and an “ultimate supply chain” [7]. The increasing

complexity of direct, extended and ultimate supply chains is illustrated in Figure 2-2. A third

party financial provider may be providing financing, assuming some of the risk, and offering

financial advice; a third party logistics (3PL) provider is performing the logistics activities;

and a market research firm may provide information about the market demand and needs of

consumers.

Figure 2-2 : Degrees of supply chain complexity (Source: Mentzer et al., 2001)

Lambert et al. (1998) [47] and Simchi et al. (2003) [48] emphasized on holistic view i.e.,

importance of overall optimization in supply chain rather than functional optimization, thus

adding one more aspect to SCM. Reviewing the literature, Mentzer et al. (2001) [7]

synthesized the definitions of supply chain management and defined it as “the systemic,

strategic coordination of the traditional business functions and the tactics across these

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 [7].”

17

Based directional supply chain flows, Mentzer et al. (2001) [7] proposed a new model for

supply chain management. Figure 2-3 shows the flow of products, services, financial

resources, and the information associated with these flows. It also shows the critical role of

inter-corporate coordination in the global environment as well as inter-functional coordination

among different functions leading to customer satisfaction, added value to achieve

competitive advantage and profitability for the individual companies in the supply chain, and

the supply chain as a whole. Fleischmann et al. (2002) [49] categorized the supply chain into

four main stages or processes and described their purpose. Procurement involves the

operations for sourcing of the raw material and resources necessary for production. Next

process is production which converts the raw materials into semi-finished and/or finished

products. Distribution includes movement of the products either to companies for further

processing or to distribution centers and subsequently to retailers. Thereafter, the sales process

includes customer selection, market segmentation; pricing policy, demand forecasting and

delivery policies.

Figure 2-3: A Model of Supply Chain Management (Source: Mentzer et al., 2001)

Fox, et al., 1993 [50] defined supply chain “as a set of activities which span enterprise

functions from the ordering and receipt of raw materials through the manufacturing of

products through the distribution and delivery to the customer. In order to operate efficiently,

these functions must operate in an integrated manner”.

18

Figure 2-4: Supply chain management functions (Source: Fox et al., 1993)

In an enterprise, providing rapid and quality responses to supply chain events requires the

coordination of multiple functions. Supply chain management functions operate on three

levels: strategic level, tactical level, and operational level [50]. Each level is distinguished by

the time horizon over which decisions are made, and the granularity of decisions during that

period. Fleischmann and Meyr (2003) [51] provided the matrix (Figure 2-5) that encompasses

the operational, tactical and strategic analysis for decision making at short-term, mid-term and

long-term levels respectively. The degree of detail increases and the planning horizon

decreases while shifting from the long-term to the short-term.

Figure 2-5 : Supply Chain Planning Matrix (Source: Fleischmann and Meyr, 2003)

‘Strategic decisions’ are concerned with the design and structure of a supply chain and have

long-term effects, noticeable over several years. Mid-term planning, also referred as tactical

planning, is included within the strategic decisions and outlines the regular flow of resources

19

in supply chain operations. The planning horizon ranges from 6 months and up to 2 years.

Short-term planning is the lowest planning level and delineates the detailed activities and

instructions at the operational level. The planning horizon is between a few days and three

months. Strategic decisions in supply chains are made for the long term and are expensive to

alter. Strategic decisions outline the approach for management of supply chain operations for

tactical decisions, which have a horizon of about three months to a year; and operations

decisions, which have a horizon ranging from a day to a month [52].

2.2.1 SCM PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

Sink and Tuttle (1989) stated that ‘‘you cannot manage what you cannot measure’’ [12].

Measurement of supply chain processes and their benchmarking is essential for improving the

efficiency and effectiveness of supply chain management. Beamon (1998) [13] provided a

definition as “a performance measure, or a set of performance measures, is used to determine

the efficiency and/or effectiveness of an existing system, or to compare competing alternative

systems”. Performance measurement system is an important feedback mechanism for

monitoring performance, identifying progress, fix responsibility and rewards, enhance inter

personal communication, and diagnose problems [14]. The performance metrics need to be

integrated and aligned with the organization’s business goals; otherwise they will not be able

to respond effectively to market changes and opportunities. Effective decisions making is not

possible if performance is measured differently in every department in the organization [15].

Thus for any business organization, measurement of its performance becomes critical and

necessitate a robust performance measurement system.

The concept of performance of supply chains is even more relevant in developing economies

where the designing and modeling of supply chains is at a nascent stage as compared to the

state-of-the-art techniques employed by the developing countries. With the advent of

globalization and opening up of world economies, industries in the developing countries have

become a part of the global supply chains. The manufacturing industry in developing

countries, therefore, needs to produce world class products and services by improving their

performance. This entails optimizing their processes within the supply chain and improving

their performance by implementing performance measurement systems. Thus, performance

measurement methods are gaining importance as feedback mechanism for monitoring

20

performance, identifying progress, and diagnosing problems. These shall be considered as a

critical element in implementing supply chain strategy into operational actions [53].

Literature on performance measurements in SCM can be categorized into two distinctive

phases [54], first phase until 1980’s in which performance was measured exclusively on

financial measures, and the second phase, after late-1980s which corresponds to the

emergence of new performance measures in the evaluation of supply chain effectiveness and

efficiency. These new measures were categorized as ‘qualitative’ or ‘quantitative’. Qualitative

performance measures are defined as “measures for which there is no single direct numerical

measurement, although some aspects of them may be quantified, viz. Customer Satisfaction,

Flexibility, Information and Material Flow Integration etc”. Quantitative performance

measures are those measures that may be directly described numerically. Quantitative supply

chain performance measures may further be categorized by cost or profit measures and

measures of customer responsiveness [13]. Beamon (1999a) [55] elaborated on his

classification and identified three types of performance measures: resources (efficient

utilization), output (customer service) and flexibility (responsiveness).

Traditional cost-based measures, however, place a greater emphasis upon productivity

measures. They take a uni-dimensional perspective, lack flexibility and do not consider

customer requirements. Kaplan and Norton [56, 57] proposed the ‘balanced scorecard’

method which uses a set of measures reflecting the holistic approach of SCM performance

[58]. The balanced scorecard (BSC) provides good guidance for designing the core measures

in supply chain performance measurement systems. However, it was not specifically designed

for the supply chain; therefore it is quite difficult to couple Kaplan logic in a supply chain

because this methodology is done for a single organization. Moreover, along a supply

chain, many organizations are working together. Therefore because of the number of entities,

and because of its nature, it is not obvious to use this methodology on a supply chain. [59]

The BSC is criticized as it proved to be a very useful tool at the top management level, but it’s

applicability at shop floor level needs to be further investigated. Moreover, the BSC was

developed outside SCM, so the challenge is to develop a BSC for the companies in a specific

supply chain, given its ‘environment’ [60].

21

Table 2-1 Supply chains performance measures (Source: Gunasekaran et al., 2001)

Gunasekaran, et al., (2001) [61] developed a framework for measuring the performances from

strategic, tactical, and operational levels in supply chains. Strategic level performance

measures are the measures related to the business and competitive strategy. Tactical

performance measures are the measures involving mostly in-house tactics to achieve the

targeted goals. Operational performance measures are mostly related to production,

22

manufacturing, quality etc. Some of the measures such as innovations are hard to categorize

as they can be put in more than one level.

Based on SCOR processes of supply chain, viz. plan, source, make or assemble and delivery,

Gunasekaran, et al., 2001 [61] classified their metrics and proposed a framework which

includes both financial and non-financial measures (Figure 2-6).

Figure 2-6 Metrics at four basic links in a supply chain (Source: Gunasekaran et al., 2001)

Gunasekaran and Kobu (2007) identified traditional performance measures can be used for

measuring the performance in a new enterprise environment, and also prioritized them on

basis of applicability. They focused on intangibles and non-financial performance measures

which are critical for the running the business successfully in a given environment [62].

23

2.2.2 SCOR

The first widely accepted performance measures for supply chain performance measurement

were generated by Supply Chain Council (SCC) and were named as supply chain operations

reference (SCOR) model. The SCOR were based on the idea of integrated SCM and were

accepted as cross-industry framework for evaluating and improving enterprise-wide supply

chain performance and management [63]. SCOR defines supply chain as “the integrated

process of plan, source, make, deliver and return spanning suppliers’ supplier to customers’

customer, aligned with operational strategy, material, work and information flows”. The

model integrates the concepts of business process re-engineering, benchmarking and process

measurement into a cross-functional framework that describes processes rather than functions.

SCOR does not attempt to describe every business process or activity. The SCOR model is a

process reference model that serves as a diagnostic tool for supply chain management. The

SCOR model (version 10.0) consists of four major components: Performance, Processes, Best

Practices and People.

SCOR model contains three levels of process details. Level 1 process are used to describe the

scope of a supply chain (Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return); level 2 process (26 in number)

are the configuration level differentiating the strategies of level 1 processes; and 185 level 3

element level processes describing the steps to execute the level 2 processes. [15]. Based on

these three process levels, the SCOR model recognizes three levels of predefined metrics.

Bolstroff (2002) divided the level 1 metrics in two broad categories: Customer facing, i.e.

measuring supply chain delivery reliability, responsiveness and agility with respect to

customers and suppliers; and internal facing, i.e. metrics measuring supply chain cost and

asset management efficiency [64]. Huan et al. (2004) [65] stated that SCOR endorses twelve

‘level 1’ performance metrics, which fall under 4 ‘performance attributes’: Reliability,

flexibility and Responsiveness, Costs, and Asset Management. The strength of SCOR model

is that it provides a standard format to facilitate communication. Tong (2008) developed a

balance scorecard based on SCOR model in a case study of a manufacturing company. He

reviewed the SCOR model and identified 6 customer facing and 7 internal facing performance

metrics. [66]. The SCOR performance section consists of two types of elements: Performance

Attributes and Metrics.

24

2.2.2.1 Performance attributes

A performance attribute is “a group of metrics used to express a strategy. An attribute itself

cannot be measured; it is used to set strategic direction”. SCOR identifies five core supply

chain performance attributes: Reliability, Responsiveness, Agility, Costs, and Asset

Management.

A. Customer-focused metrics measure supply chain delivery reliability, responsiveness

and agility with respect to customers and suppliers.

Reliability: The attribute focuses on the predictability of the outcome of a process

attribute and the ability to perform tasks as expected. Metrics based on the reliability

attribute include: on-time, the right quantity, the right quality. The SCOR key

performance indicator (KPI) is ‘Perfect Order Fulfillment’.

Responsiveness: This attribute describes the speed at which tasks are performed.

Examples include cycle-time metrics. The SCOR KPI is ‘Order Fulfillment Cycle

Time’.

Agility: Ability to respond to external influences and the ability to change describe the

agility attribute. The SCOR KPIs include ‘Flexibility’ and ‘Adaptability’.

Figure 2-7 SCOR Level 1 metrics (Source: Theeranuphattana and Tang, 2008)

25

B. Internal-focused metrics measure supply chain cost and asset management efficiency.

Costs: This attribute describes the costs of operating the process, including includes

labor costs, material costs, and transportation costs. The SCOR KPIs are ‘Cost of

Goods Sold’ and ‘Supply Chain Management Cost’.

Asset Management: The “assets” attribute describes the ability to efficiently utilize

assets. Strategies such as inventory reduction and in-sourcing vs. outsourcing are part

of asset management. Metrics include the ‘inventory days of supply’ and ‘capacity

utilization’. The SCOR KPIs include: ‘Return on Working Capital’ and ‘Return on

Fixed Assets’ [15].

Theeranuphattana and Tang (2008) developed a practical and efficient measurement model

(Figure 2-7) incorporating the strengths of two different measurement models, namely Chan

and Qi’s model and the supply chain operations reference (SCOR) model to create a

synergistic new model [67].

2.2.2.2 Performance metrics

A metric is a standard for measurement of the performance of a process. SCOR defines three

levels of diagnostic metrics. SCOR Level 1 metric, also named as strategic metrics or key

performance indicators, are strategic, high-level measures that cross multiple SCOR

processes, and measure the overall strength of the supply chain. Level 1 metrics helps

establish realistic targets that support strategic objectives, e.g. ‘Perfect Order Fulfillment’.

SCOR Level 2 metric define the diagnostics for the level 1 metric and help to identify causes

of a performance gap for a level 1 metric. Examples of level 2 metric are ‘% of Orders

Delivered in Full’, ‘Delivery Performance to Customer Commit Date’, ‘Documentation

Accuracy’and ‘Perfect Condition’. SCOR Level 3 metrics serve as diagnostics for level 2

metric, few of which are ‘Delivery Item Accuracy’, ‘Delivery Quantity Accuracy’,

‘Compliance’, ‘Payment Documentation Accuracy’, ‘Shipping Documentation Accuracy’, ‘%

of Faultless Installations’, ‘Warranty and Returns’.

The main objective of Supply Chain Council [SCC] is to get companies involved in the

supply chain and improve the performance of it [68]. It translates qualitative performance

in metrics and gives list of metrics for supply chain. However, it is criticized by various

26

researchers. SCOR is a reference model that does not consider mathematical models or

heuristics. It is based on the usage of indicators to analyze, compare and get the best

improvement strategy, guidelines or standards. The method to implement, and to choose

the right metrics is not really clear [59]. A weakness of the SCOR model is arguably that it

mainly focuses on processes and efficiency but not on strategy [67]. The SCOR model does

not specify the necessary collaboration with various stakeholders, including environmental

and societal aspects [69].

Framework Key features Relevance to SCM Limitation

Balance

scorecard by

Kaplan and

Norton

(1992)

Identifies financial

measures, customer

facing measures,

internal business, and

learning perspectives

measures.

Reflect non-financial

measures, soft issues and

continuous improvement.

1. Useful at the top management level,

but it’s applicability at shop floor level

needs to be further investigated.

2. It is quite difficult to couple BSC

logic in a supply chain because this

methodology is done for a single

organization. Does not provide a

holistic view which is core of supply

chain

Framework

by Beamon

(1999)

Identifies use of

resources, desired

output and flexibility

as measures. It

provides a detailed list

of performance

measures

Could be very effective for

supply chain performance

as it takes in to account

flexibility and provides a

quantitative approach for

its measurement.

1. Lacks soft issues of supply chain.

Ignores issues related to supplier

relations and supply performance. Not

useful to adopt in an integrated supply

chain performance measurement.

2. The model uses simple performance

measures, as simple measures are more

easily implemented.

Framework

by

Gunasekaran

et al. -2001

It identifies four

processes of supply

chain: plan, source,

make, and deliver.

Categorizes measures

into strategic,

operational and tactical

level

It includes issues such as

source performance and

customer satisfaction.

1. Distinction of various levels such as

strategic, tactical and operational

levels is not very clear.

2. The measures are identified from

literature and need to be empirically

tested.

SCOR

framework

SCOR is structured in

five levels, based on a

plan, source, make,

deliver and return

framework. Integrates

the concepts of

business process re-

engineering,

benchmarking and

process measurement

into a cross-functional

framework that

addresses management

issues at the enterprise

rather than at the

functional level.

SCOR focuses on three

process levels (Top level,

Configuration Level, and

Process Element level) and

does not attempt to

prescribe how a particular

company should conduct

its business or change its

systems and information

flows. SCOR model

describes processes rather

than functions.

1. A weakness is arguably that it mainly

focuses on processes and efficiency

but not on strategy.

2. In an integrated supply chain, levels of

chain become more complicated.

Herein, the method to implement, and

to choose the right metrics is not really

clear.

3. Does not specify the necessary

collaboration with various

stakeholders, including environmental

and societal aspects

Table 2-2 Summary of SCM performance metrics

27

A summary of performance measurements models and framework discussed above, along

with their key features, relevance to SCM and limitations is provided in Table 2-2.

2.3 REVIEW OF GREEN SCM LITERATURE

With an increased focus on environment issues, the component “green” got involved to

address the influence and relationships of supply chain management to the natural

environment. Srivastava (2007) defined green supply chain management as “initiatives to

integrate environmental thinking into SCM, right from product design, material sourcing and

selection, manufacturing process, delivery of the final product to the consumers as well as

end-of-life management of the product after its useful life” [70]. Penfield (2007) [17] defines

GrSCM as “the process of using environment-friendly inputs and transforming these inputs

into outputs that can be reclaimed and reused at the end of their lifecycle, thus creating a

sustainable supply chain”.

Hervani et al. (2005) [71] describe that the idea of GrSCM is to eliminate or minimize waste

(energy, emissions, chemical/hazardous, and solid wastes) along supply chain. They identified

a number of environmentally conscious practices throughout the supply chain ranging from

green design (marketing and engineering), green procurement practices (e.g. certifying

suppliers, purchasing environmentally sound materials/products), total quality environmental

management (internal performance measurement, pollution prevention), environmentally

friendly packaging and transportation, to the various product end-of-life practices such as

reduction, reuse, remanufacturing and recycling. In the area of supply chain management,

reverse logistics is used to manage the return flow of products. Reverse logistics is a process

whereby a manufacturer accepts products from consumers for possible remanufacturing,

recycling, reuse or disposal [72]. Reverse logistics includes not only the returns from the

customers, but also handling the product at ‘end-of-life’. The GrSCM can be expressed as

[71]

“Green Supply Chain Management (GrSCM) = Green Purchasing + Green

Manufacturing/Materials Management + Green Distribution/Marketing + Reverse Logistics.”

28

GrSCM has gained popularity with both academics and practitioners to aim in reducing waste

and preserving the quality of product-life and the natural resources [73]. All stages of a

product’s life cycle influence a supply chain’s environment burden, from resource extraction,

to manufacturing, use and reuse, final recycling, or disposal [74]; [75]. Environmental issues

have become an important concern for manufacturers under new legislations and directives

from customer [76]. The research in GrSCM shows that over last two decades, the concepts of

green procurement, green manufacturing, green distribution, reverse logistics, and waste

management have gained importance is academia and practice [77]; [70].

2.3.1 Green Purchasing/Procurement

Since the environmental issues have become an integral part of supply chain activities, all its

processes have adopted green initiatives. Green Procurement (GP) is defined as

“environmental purchasing consisting of involvement in activities that include the reduction,

reuse and recycling of materials in the process of purchasing”. It involves acquiring a raw

material, goods and services that minimize environmental impact. Thus, environmentally

preferable purchasing (EPP) is “a process of selection and acquisition of product and services

which minimize the negative impact over the lifecycle of manufacturing, transportation, use

and recycling” [78]. Procurement of eco-products is the need of the hour and many

governments as well as the civil society organizations are persuading the industries to

maximize their use.

2.3.2 Green Manufacturing

Green Manufacturing is an important aspect in manufacturing oriented companies to achieve

sustainability. GM is defined as “production processes which use inputs with relatively low

environmental impacts, are highly efficient, and generate little or no waste or pollution. GM

can lead to lower raw material costs, production efficiency gains, reduced environmental and

occupational safety expenses, and improved corporate image” [76]. As the concern for global

warming and environmental issues is becoming increasingly bigger, the governments have

introduced legislations and companies have started taking initiatives in manufacturing. GM

benefits include better products for the consumers, cost savings for the shareholders, and

increased goodwill of the company in the market [79].

29

2.3.3 Green Distribution

The logistics function of supply chain processes generates maximum amount of waste and

damages the environment. Green Distribution (GD) also includes green packaging as

packaging characteristics such as size, shape, and materials have an impact on distribution and

practices like better packaging and rearranged loading patterns can reduce material usage,

increase space utilization, and reduce the amount of handling required [76].

2.3.4 Reverse Logistics

The concept of Reverse Logistics (RL) includes the management of returns due to defects,

qualities issues, or sales returns; and the management of e-waste after end of useful life of the

product. RL is the “process where a manufacturer accepts previously shipped products from

the point of consumption for possible recycling and/or re-manufacturing” [80]; [72]. Carter

and Ellram (1998) identified three primary intra-organizational activities that impact reverse

logistics in an organization: a sincere commitment to environmental issues; high ethical

standards; and the existence of policies and practices enabling organization’s adoption of an

environment-friendly philosophy [80]. Kopicki et al. (1993) [81] proposed RL hierarchy

which suggests resource reduction as the first step, followed by next aim to reuse materials,

recycling of waste and finally disposal.

Figure 2-8 : Modified Reverse Logistics Hierarchy (Source: Dhanda and Peters, 2005)

Beamon (1999) [55] presents a flow chart showing the flow of materials towards

remanufacturing and recycling, with first stage of collection from the customer and then

30

sorting and transportation to facilities for recycling. The aim of the activity is to sort products

that can be reused to reduce costs of making new products. Dhanda and Peters (2005) [18]

applied the suggested hierarchy to the computer industry by modifying and adding an

important and unique step of ‘refurbishing’ between reuse and recycling, represented in

Figure 2-8. Refurbishing of computers and IT equipments for further use is quite prevalent in

IT industry. They also suggested removing ‘incineration’ process, as in case of computers it

proves more harmful to the environment.

Figure 2-9 : Reverse Logistics (Source: Thierry, et al., 1995)

Thierry et al. (1995) [82] presented a framework Figure 2-9 for reverse logistics which shows

how the steps of repair, refurbish, remanufacture, cannibalize and recycle fit in the supply

chain processes and fixes the prime responsibility of each supply chain actor.

2.3.5 E-waste management

Another peculiar characteristic of IT hardware industry is the concept of e-waste management.

E-waste comprises of wastes generated from used IT equipments and electronic devices which

are beyond their useful life. Such wastes encompasses wide range of electrical and electronic

devices such as computers, monitors, keyboards, networking equipments, cables, air

conditioners etc. E-wastes contain over 1000 different toxic substances potentially hazardous

to both to the environment and the society. These need to be handled in an environmentally

31

sound manner to reduce their harmful impact. E-waste is managed through reverse logistics

processes so that products can be reused, repaired, refurbished, cannibalized or recycled for

sustainable development.

Roy and Whelan (1992) [83] was first to propose a standardized model for reducing e-waste

with minimal harmful affect on the environment, and in subsequent studies by Sarkis and

Cordeiro (2001) [84], and Nagorney and Toyasaki (2005) [85], different waste management

issues around recycling and remanufacturing were emphasized. With an increased focus on e-

waste management, the concept of green supply chain becomes more important to the IT

products.

2.4 REVIEW OF INNOVATION IN SCM LITERATURE

Innovation drives the industry to achieve new finished products, ingredient technologies and

packaging [86]. But the task of generating ideas is not simple but becomes increasingly

complex as a company grows, and needs to be nurtured and managed. These ideas lead to

innovation, which are crucial for a high tech industry such as IT. In such industry, firms

compete on the grounds of new products with new features, new design, and new applications

of the product. For technical firms especially, innovation in product offerings is crucial to gain

a competitive advantage over competitors [87].

Shorter life cycles are the result of increased competition. In the 19th century it was not

unusual that a product existed for 100 years. After the WWII a typical product life cycle was

20 years. In the 1980’s it has been reduced to 7-8 years and today it is typically 3-5 years [88].

Due to unpredictable demand and short life cycle, companies are forced to introduce new

innovations continuously [29]. The innovations can be incremental in nature; viz making

processes more efficient or eliminating wastes, or they may be radical like redesigning the

entire supply chain. Innovation as a term has also been extended to marketing and

organization. Schumpeter (1934) [89] described different types of innovation: “new products,

new methods of production, new sources of supply, the exploitation of new markets, and new

ways to organize business”.

32

In his groundbreaking work, ‘The Sources of Innovation’, Eric von Hippel, (1988) [90],

discussed from where in the value-chain innovations came in different industries, the

customer, the manufacturer, the supplier or the third party innovator (universities, research

laboratories, etc.). He observed that the firm itself was of course the innovator in many cases.

However, he identified customer involvement as key issue in successful innovation.

Consumers often adapt or improve new innovations, or relay information on how to do so

back to the innovating firms [91]. In some industries, he identified third parties, such as

inventors, universities and independent research laboratories, as sources of innovation [88].

Suppliers may contribute to firm innovation by performing research and development (R&D)

of its own as they often have valuable knowledge of production and fulfillment processes that

influence a firm's performance [92].

The OECD Oslo Manual (2005) introduced four different innovation types, namely product

innovation, process innovation, marketing innovation and organizational innovation [93].

Product innovations involve significant changes in the capabilities of goods or services, either

by introducing entirely new goods and services or by significant improvements to existing

products. Gunday et al., (2011) defined product innovation as “the introduction of a good or

service that is new or significantly improved regarding its characteristics or intended uses;

including significant improvements in technical specifications, components and materials,

incorporated software, user friendliness or other functional characteristics” [93].

A process innovation is the implementation of a new or significantly improved production or

delivery method. This includes significant changes in techniques, equipment and/or software

[94]. Marketing innovations target at addressing customer needs better, opening up new

markets, or newly positioning a firm’s product on the market with the intention of increasing

firm’s sales. Marketing innovations are strongly related to pricing strategies, product package

design properties, product placement and promotion activities along the lines of four P’s of

marketing [95] [93]. Organizational innovations refer to the implementation of new

organizational methods. These can be changes in business practices, in workplace

organization or in the firm’s external relations [93].

33

2.4.1 Innovation in Supply Chains

Innovation is the key to future long term success [86]. In high-tech industries such as the IT

industry, there is a clear difference in terms of organizational performance between firms that

innovate and those that do not [87]. Innovation can occur within processes, products, services,

organizational structures, management strategies and so on. It can be represented by

continuous improvement or discontinuous and radical shifts in technology or ways of

approaching a problem [96]; [97]; [98].

The current international business environments require innovation, not only in products and

their features but also across the entire business processes. To maintain a competitive

advantage, companies must strategize with an effective supply chain in mind.The supply

chain environment is characterized by globalization, increased customer responsiveness,

channel integration and advances in IT [99]. Collaboration in supply chains leads to

innovations which are spread across the partners. Therefore, the various benefits of innovation

such as high quality, lower costs, more timely delivery, efficient operations and effective

coordination of activities are available to all the supply chain actors [99]

Storer and Hayland (2009) proposed that the supply chain, like the firm, uses innovation to

provide unique value adding solutions for the supply chain that provides a market competitive

advantage [100]. Supply chain innovation has a potential role in a firm’s effort to develop new

products or entry into new markets, in terms of innovative supply chain designs, innovative

supply chain management practices, and enabling technology [101]. The firms increasingly

rely on their supply chain partners for innovation. Firms with the ability to better manage their

supply chains should experience superior supply chain innovations. Key to successful supply

chain management is coordination within an organization and between its suppliers and

customers [102]. Employing a supply chain’s innovation capacity indicates the willingness of

groups of actors within the supply chain to take steps, or perform activities that ultimately

produce output that improves or changes current activities to meet a market need or new

trajectory [100]. Another way of introducing innovations is the organizational and social

processes that produce innovation, such as individual creativity, organizational structure,

environmental context, and social and economic factors. A social innovation “can be a

34

product, production process, or technology (much like innovation in general), but it can also

be a principle, an idea, a piece of legislation, a social movement, an intervention, or some

combination of them”. A few social innovations, such as microfinance, are combinations of a

number of these elements [103].

2.5 REVIEW OF SUSTAINABLE SCM LITERATURE

Research in SCM has examined issues such as environment safety, social welfare and their

interrelationship with organization’s economic responsibility [20]. Over a period of time, the

shift has become more and more evident towards the social and environmental aspect of doing

business. This concepts corresponds with the triple bottom line (TBL) perspective given by

Elkington (1998) [21] which states that “at the intersection of social, environmental, and

economic performance are activities that an organization can engage in which not only are

beneficial from a social and environmental standpoint, but that also make economic sense and

result in competitive advantage for the firm”. The triple bottom line has been identified as a

tool to measure the organization’s progress towards the end goal of being truly sustainable

[22]. The term sustainability, which increasingly refers to an integration of social,

environmental, and economic responsibilities, was subsequently introduced in the literature of

business disciplines such as management and operations [20].

Carter and Rogers [20] suggest that “organizational sustainability, at a broader level, consists

of three components: the natural environment, society, and economic performance”. In the

year 1981, Freer Spreckley suggested organizations to measure and report on social,

environmental and financial performance [19]. The idea of integrating social and

environmental factors to economic activity is termed as sustainability. The concept of

sustainability has been extended from the organization to the supply chain. Sustainable supply

chain management would include the economic responsibility as a base level of a supply

chain’s responsibility. The aim of supply chain management is to integrate the processes in a

supply chain for efficient utilization of resources and reduction in costs, leading to

shareholder’s profit maximization. However, the broader concept of stakeholder’s theory

[104] demands that a company's responsibility lies with stakeholders rather than shareholders.

In this case, "stakeholders" refers to anyone who is influenced, either directly or indirectly, by

the actions of the firm. Supply chain processes involve exploitation of natural resources as

35

well as the human capital. Thus the stakeholders in a supply chain would include the society

as well as the ecological environment.

Many forward thinking organizations have realized the importance of reverse logistics in

gaining competitive advantage in the industry. In the area of supply chain management,

reverse logistics is used to manage the return flow of products. Reverse logistics is defined as

“a process whereby a manufacturer accepts products from consumers for possible

remanufacturing, recycling, reuse or disposal” [72]. Reverse logistics includes not only the

returns from the customers, but also handling the product at ‘end-of-life’. E-waste comprises

of wastes generated from used IT equipments and electronic devices which are beyond their

useful life. Such wastes encompasses wide range of electrical and electronic devices such as

computers, monitors, keyboards, networking equipments, cables, air conditioners etc. E-

wastes contain over 1000 different toxic substances potentially hazardous to both to the

environment and the society. These need to be handled in an environmentally sound manner

to reduce their harmful impact. E-waste is managed through reverse logistics processes so that

products can be reused, repaired, refurbished, cannibalized or recycled for sustainable

development.

In India, green practices are being implemented by mobile manufactures (Nokia), electronic

goods companies (LG), and Information technology companies (HCL, TCS, DELL) to name a

few. These green initiatives by these companies have provided a distinction vis-à-vis their

competitors and helped them to improve their brand image.

Incorporating the environmental programs and operations has resulted as economic advantage

to the firms in form of carbon credits. Carbon credits are allocated to companies that reduce

carbon emissions (emissions from carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases) below

the cap fixed under emission trading scheme. The carbon credits are tradable and may be sold

to firms that exceed their cap. This economic incentive provides the supply chain managers a

choice to offset the cost of implementing green initiatives in their supply chains by trading

carbon credits. Rao and Holt (2005) [105] divided the environmental initiatives in a green

supply chain and analyzed that greening the different phases of the supply chain leads to an

integrated green supply chain, which ultimately leads to competitiveness and economic

36

performance. Zhu and Sarkis (2004) [106] took this idea further and argued that green SCM

practices lead to ‘win-win relationships on environmental and economic performance’.

All stages of a product’s life cycle influence a supply chain’s environment burden, from

resource extraction, to manufacturing, use and reuse, final recycling, or disposal [74]. The

findings by Rao and Holt (2005) [105] show that organizations as well as environment gain

with the implementation of green supply chain initiatives. Other studies also have shown that

profitability and cost reduction are some of the major achievements for businesses having

green supply chain practices. Therefore, GrSCM gained popularity with both academics and

practitioners to aim in reducing waste and preserving the quality of product-life and the

natural resources [107]; [70]; [108]; [73].

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, 1987) provided one of the

earlier definitions of sustainability as “development that meets the needs of the present

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.” In their report

“Our Common Future”, the Brundtland Commission (1987) defined sustainable development

as being about social equity as well as environmental protection, on the grounds that the latter

cannot be achieved without the former [109]. One of the early references to sustainability is

made by O’Connor (1994) [110] who points out the question of “sustainability” are not

primarily an ecological (or even economic) argument, but one of politics and ideology.

Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) [111] conceived corporate sustainability as the business case

(economic), the natural case (environmental), and the societal case (social). The triple bottom

line has been identified as a tool to measure the organization’s progress towards the end goal

of being truly sustainable [22]. The term sustainability, which increasingly refers to an

integration of social, environmental, and economic responsibilities, has begun to appear in the

literature of business disciplines such as management and operations. Carter and Rogers

(2008) [20] suggest that organizational sustainability, at a broader level, consists of three

components: the natural environment, society, and economic performance. The concept of

sustainability has been extended from the organization to the supply chain. SSCM must

include the sustainability dimension parameters in whole framework of SCM. The first paper

on sustainability in supply chain is attributed to New (1997) [112] who argued that supply

37

chain management in industrial society should explicitly consider ethical, political and

economic implications. A supply chain’s performance should be measured not just by profits,

but also by the impact of the chain on ecological and social systems [113]; [114]; [115].

More research in available on the environmental dimension as compared to social dimension

in past literature [116]. While environmental sustainability emphasizes the management of

natural resources, social sustainability is concerned with the management of social resources,

including people’s skills and abilities, institutions, relationships and social values [117]. A

vast amount of literature has recognized the centrality of social issues to sustainable

development. But there is a lack of consensus regarding the elements that fall under it. In a

review of the current state of the art on social sustainability of supply chains, Borrella, et al.,

(2012) [118] highlighted the variety of subjects in social dimension and concluded that the

topics that do not fit in the other categories of sustainability (economical or environmental)

end up being included in the “social hodgepodge’.

Based on practical experience, James (1997) [109] suggests a few key issues that cover most

aspects of social dimensions. He included equity as one of the major areas. As per him, this

not only includes equality of opportunity to all sections of the society but also the creation of a

situation where the poorer have greater opportunities of employment. Role of community and

local bodies as an external stakeholder to the business organization was identified to achieve

social parity. Social equity is a key component of social sustainability and requires that all

members of society have equal access to resources and opportunities [119], extending to the

fair and equitable treatment of employees [120]. It is concerned with poverty, injustice and

human rights, and from a supply chain perspective considers the welfare of all employees

globally [120].

Social sustainability is strongly linked to corporate social responsibility (CSR) which

comprises actions not required by law, but furthering social good, beyond the explicit,

transactional interests of a firm [117]. CSR requires firms to embrace economic, legal, ethical

and discretionary expectations of stakeholders [119]. Labuschagne (2005) proposed a

framework Table 2-3 of social sustainability and divided it into four main categories of

internal human resources, which includes practices related to employment stability and health

38

and safety; external population which encompasses human, productive and community

capital; stakeholder participation which includes information provision and stakeholder

influence issues; and macro social performance issues of socio-economic and socio-

environmental performance [121].

Table 2-3 Framework for Social Sustainability (Source: Labuschagne and Brent, 2005)

Through stakeholder management, firms respond to individuals, outside organizations, and

even the natural environment [122] that have a legitimate stake in the organization [104]. An

important aspect of stakeholder management is building strong stakeholder relationships

39

through transparent operations, engaging in ethical relationship with partners, representing

stakeholder interests in decision-making, and distributing the value created by firms equitably

among all relevant stakeholders [119].

Table 2-4 Sustainability checklist (Source: Silvius, 2010)

At the 2010 IPMA Expert Seminar ‘Survival and Sustainability as Challenges for Project” in

order to ‘translate’ the concepts of sustainability to practically applicable tools a

‘Sustainability Checklist’ was developed for managers. Table 2-4 provides this Sustainability

Checklist [123].

Hall and Matos (2010) emphasize that the social dimension of sustainable development is

emerging as the key challenge in sustainable supply chains. They suggest that the relationship

among government policies (regulations and incentives), secondary stakeholder pressures and

the profile and pressure placed on the focal firm plays an important role in sustainable supply

chains [124]. The recent ISO 26000:2010 guideline on social responsibility mentions

accountability, transparency, ethical behavior, respect for stakeholders interests, respect for

rule of law, respect for international norms of behavior and respect for human rights” as

principles of sustainability [125]. Silvius, et al., (2012) proposed six “principles of

sustainability” for integration across projects and organizations [126]. These principles state

40

that sustainability is about balancing or harmonizing social, environmental and economical

interests, it has both short term and long term orientation as well as local and global

orientation, it encourages consuming income, transparency and accountability and also

supports personal values and ethics. Companies are adopting sustainability practices for a host

of reasons depending on the industries and geographies in which they operate [127].

Sustainability and sustainable development are effectively ethical concepts, expressing

desirable outcomes from economic and social decisions.

Elaborating on the three perspectives of the Triple-P concept, several organizations developed

frameworks of indicators that would allow organizations to evaluate the sustainability aspects

of different policies and projects, as well as to monitor progress. In fact, the literature on these

models is a veritable jungle of different approaches and numerous case studies [128]. A

widely used framework in (external) sustainability reporting is the ‘Sustainability Reporting

Guidelines (SRG)’ by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). Companies can use the SRG to

indicate to shareholders and consumers their economic, social and environmental

performance. GRI’s objective is to facilitate sustainability reporting for companies and

thereby stimulate them to operate more sustainably. The SRG framework consists of an

extensive set of indicators, from which companies can select a set that is relevant to their

operations or industry [129].

Based on the literature review above, we realize that different authors have included different

elements in the dimension of social sustainability. However, a few of the elements have

appeared at a regular consistency. These have been identified as below:

1. Compliance and Governance

2. Transparency and Accountability

3. Ethics and Values

4. Human Rights and Welfare

41

2.6 SSCM PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

Performance measurement of sustainable supply chains requires a methodology which allows

managers to identify key elements in environmental and social aspects and to integrate them

into a system. However, there is a general lack of research on the subject of supply chain

metrics, and more so for performance measures of sustainability. Few researchers have

proposes measures green supply chain performance and suggested ISO 14000 guidelines as

basis for performance management system. But since the ISO guidelines are developed for

individual organizations, their effectiveness in measuring sustainability of supply chains is

doubtful. Hervani et al. (2005) [71] have provided measures for evaluating a green supply

chain performance measurement system.

Figure 2-10 Framework for analyzing supply chains (Source: Burgess and Prakash, 2005)

Burgess and Prakash (2005) [130] in an analysis of supply chains, proposed a framework that

shows the relationships between relevant variables from different disciplines (i.e. corporate

governance, infrastructure, operations knowledge, social climate and innovation), and how

they impact on performance. The suggested integrated framework is shown in Figure 2-10.

42

Figure 2-11 Framework for Sustainable Supply Chain Metrics (Source: Hassini et al., 2012)

Figure 2-11 shows the framework proposed by Hassini et al., (2012). Using Elkington’s

TBL’s principle, each supply chain partner (supplier, manufacturer, channel partner, dealer,

retailer or customer) collects measures on each of the three dimensions: economy,

environment and society. The choice of these measures as to align with each partners own

strategic goals.

2.7 REVIEW OF DEMAND CHAIN MANAGEMENT LITERATURE

From supply chain to demand driven value chain is one of the key areas that have attracted

increasing levels of attention in the SCM literature. SCM is changing focus from supply

issues to demand driven value. Design of a supply chain and its alignment with the objectives

of the organization plays a major role in the success of any product. According to Fischer

(1997) [29], the problems of supply chain are associated with mismatches between the type of

supply chain (demand-pull versus supply-push) and the type of product (innovative versus

functional). In the IT industry due to continuous up-gradation of technology and shortened

product life cycles, prices of items fall over time, often every week, and sometimes

drastically. This entails efforts to keep inventories as small as possible [26]. In such markets,

with shortening life cycles and falling prices, the balance of power shifts from suppliers to

43

customers, who dictate what they want, where and why. Visibility to demand signals is crucial

in today’s rapidly changing IT industry. Demand signals need to be captured at a very

granular level and communicated across the supply chain [30].

There is a growing realization that the activities of these two crucial disciplines should be

much more closely linked if organizations are to respond rapidly to the varying needs of

different customers. This leads us to the emerging idea of "demand chain

management"(DCM), where the strategies of marketing, supply chain, and operations, are

fully aligned. Blackwell and Blackwell (1999) defined DCM as “the essence of DCM is to

define and understand customer demand on real time basis, followed by rapid respond to it”

[131]. Driving the supply chain purely based on forecast is no longer reliable. Real time

demand sensing is required to drive the supply chain and adjust direction [30]. The approach

of DCM starts at the other end of the supply chain, i.e. with the needs of the customer, instead

of starting with the manufacturer and working forwards. The needs of the customer are

captured at the granular level and these form the basis of designing the demand chain

processes [31].

Figure 2-12 : Demand Chain Management (Source: Agarwal, 2007)

Globalization and information technology (especially the Internet) are the two major drivers

of emerging business environment. Due to global exposure consumers have become better

informed, and have increased expectations and aspirations. Market responsiveness capability

of supply chain management is largely reactive in nature as it is based on the philosophy of

‘make-and-sell’. Whereas, demand chain management is proactive in market responsiveness

44

and is based on “sense-and-respond” philosophy [132]. Demand chain management involves

real-time capture of demand-related information followed by various business decisions

related to the flow of finished goods from point of inception to the point of use throughout the

network of chain for fulfillment of sensed demand quickly in cost efficient manner.

Figure 2-13 : Demand Chain Processes (Source: Agarwal, 2007)

To respond dynamics of emerging market scenario, key demand chain management issues are

speed, flexibility, integration, innovation and coordination, time-to- market, and externally

oriented culture, distinctive capabilities and a configuration that enables the entire

organization to anticipate and respond to changing customer requirements and market

conditions [132].

The literature review on the related topics of SCM and sustainability helped to identify,

appraise, critique and synthesize all high quality research evidence, summarized in the Table

2-5. Existing literature on SCM reviewed above may broadly be categorized under

• Planning and Designing SCM

• Green Supply Chain management

45

• Sustainable SCM

• Performance Measurement in SCM

S.No Topic Author

1 SCM Beamon, 1998; Mentzer et al., 2001; Fleischmann et al., 2002:

Olhager, et al., 2002; Cousins & Speckman, 2003; Chow, et al., 2006;

Lambert, 2008; Naslund & Williamson, 2010; Stock & Boyer, 2009

2 Green SCM Guide & Srivastava, 1998; Hervani, et al., 2005; Srivastava, 2007;

Srivastava, 2007; Fortes, 2009; Ninlawan, et al., 2011; Gupta, et al.,

2013

Reverse logistics,

End of life’

management

Kopicki, et al., 1993; Thierry, et al., 1995; Carter and Ellram, 1998;

Beamon, 1999; Dowlatshahi, 2000; Dhanda & Peters, 2005; Zhu, et

al., 2007; Zhu, et al., 2010

E-waste

management

Roy & Whelan, 1992; Barve & Muduli, 2011; Dhanda & Peters, 2005;

Fortes, 2009

3 Supply Chain

Innovation

Schumpeter, 1934; Eric von Hippel,1988; OECD Oslo Manual, 2005;

Storer & Hayland, 2009; Pagell & Zhaohui, 2009; GRI, 2011

4 Sustainable

Supply Chain

Management

Spreckley, 1981; Brundtland Commission, 1987; Rio Summit, 1992;

O’Connor, 1994; New, 1997; Rao & Holt, 2005; Carter & Rogers,

2008; Seuring & Müller, 2008; Pagell & Zhaohui, 2009; Mann et al,

2010; Ramudhin, et al., 2010; ISO 26000: 2010; Silvius, 2010; GRI,

2011; Dey et al, 2011; Hassini et al., 2012; Gupta, et al., 2013

5 Performance

Measurement in

SCM

Kaplan & Norton, 1992; Beamon, 1998; Gunasekaran et al., 2001;

Singh & Shah, 2001; Saad & Patel, 2006; SCOR Model 10.0, 2010

6 DCM Fisher, 1997; Vollmann and Cordon (1998); Blackwell and Blackwell,

1999; Selen and Soliman (2002); Baker (2003); Treville et al. (2004);

Agarwal, 2007

Table 2-5 Summary of Literature Review

Apart from SCM, related topics such as DCM which is more relevant for technology products

having high rate of innovation, short shelf life, high obsolescence and fashion products also

gain relevance and reviewed in the study.

The above exhaustive literature review traces the origin of concept of SCM, its performance

measure, and different related disciplines researcher have explored during its evolution over

the years. The review reveals four distinct branches of SCM research, viz. planning and

designing of supply chains, Green Supply Chain Management, Sustainable SCM and the

46

performance Measurement of SCM and SSCM. Sustainability in supply chains includes the

environment and social aspects which have been extensively reviewed and various existing

frameworks have been critically evaluated. Green practices including green design,

manufacturing, E-waste management, reverse logistics, and end-of-life management have

been crucial in making supply chains environment friendly. Social aspects in SSCM include

compliance and governance, transparency and accountability, ethics, values and human rights

and welfare. Innovation has been identified as a major dimension for technology intensive

industry and its origins and applications have been documented. The available existing

frameworks on performance management in SSCM have also been reviewed to understand its

implication in measuring performance of SSCM. Other concept such as DCM relevant for

innovative products having shorter life cycles is also reviewed to be included in the study.

This review of literature has highlighted the inadequacy in existing frameworks and provided

foundation and insights for conceptualization of industry specific SSCM framework. The next

chapter describes the profile of Indian IT industry including its dynamic nature, growth

drivers, challenges, e-waste handling and supply chain configuration etc.