Postponement Strategies in the Supply Chain
-
Upload
sebi-shiva -
Category
Documents
-
view
90 -
download
5
Transcript of Postponement Strategies in the Supply Chain
Postponement Strategies in the Supply Chain
– How do the reasons underlying demand uncertainty affect the
choice of an appropriate postponement strategy?
Final Master’s Thesis
Miriam Bartels
University of Maastricht Faculty of Economics and Business Master of Science in International Business Supply Chain Management Miriam Bartels Student ID: i342793 Final Thesis Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Martin Wetzels Maastricht, 20th of august 2010
I
Preface
In the first year of my Bachelor studies I read a case study on the postponement concept
implemented at the textile company called Benetton. Back then this concept already intrigued
me and it was in regard to my Master Thesis that I finally took the opportunity to explore this
concept in more detail. I feel privileged that my topic suggestion was supported by my
supervisor Prof. Dr. Martin Wetzels, whom I would like to thank for guiding me through the
complete journey of this Master Thesis.
Furthermore, I would like to thank everyone that supported my research and without whom
this research could not have taken place. In the first place, I would like to thank the three
interview partners who contributed to this thesis by providing me with valuable practical
insights and interesting discussions in reference to real life examples. In addition, I would like
to thank all survey participants for taking the time to fill in the questionnaire. Your
contribution enabled me to conclude my thesis by means of studying empirical data, which is
one of the first attempts in the history of postponement choice theory. Finally, I would like to
thank the Dutch Logistics Institute that supported me in spreading the invitation to answer my
survey. Many thanks! Without you all, this thesis could not have been accomplished!
Finally, I would also like to thank my family and friends whose encouragement, especially in
periods in which my thesis progress did not go smoothly, was a tremendous help. In particular,
I would like to thank my boyfriend Peter for his patience and support. Especially during the
last months, when I had already started with my first job 800 km away, it certainly was a
challenging situation.
Finally, I would like to conclude this preface and wish you a pleasant reading experience.
Hopefully this thesis gives you interesting and valuable insights and inspires you in your
future academic or business efforts!
Miriam Bartels
II
Abstract
Coping with demand uncertainties is one of the greatest challenges that companies are facing
in an ever-changing world. One instrument that supports flexibility in this unstable
environment is postponement. By postponing certain activities of the supply chain to a later
stage, flexibility can be achieved, deferring decision making until more knowledge has been
acquired. A variety of postponement strategies is defined in current literature, among which
the most widely used are price postponement, logistics postponement, production
postponement, purchasing postponement and product development postponement. With such
a broad range of postponement strategies available, the question arises of how to choose the
most adequate postponement strategy for a certain company facing industry specific demand
uncertainties. This is exactly what this thesis investigates. Presently, available literature points
out several postponement indicators, including the level of uncertainty. The research at hand
however takes it one step further by exploring how different reasons of uncertainty actually
influence postponement choice.
For this purpose, a research model connecting reasons of uncertainty and different
postponement strategies has been developed, adapted and verified by means of three
interviews with senior supply chain professionals. Subsequently, the adapted research model
has been tested by conducting an online survey among professionals in a variety of industries.
Finally, the survey data has been analysed by means of PLS Path Modelling and cross-
validated with the help of Canonical Correlation and PLS Regression.
This research concludes that different reasons for demand uncertainty require the application
of different situation-specific postponement strategies. Several hypotheses were confirmed
and additional significant factors identified. The findings are summarized by means of a
postponement decision matrix that combines demand uncertainty reasons with organizational
aims. This tool can lead managers through the analysis and decision making process for
postponement strategies.
III
Table of Content
Preface ........................................................................................................................................I
Abstract .................................................................................................................................... II
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Research Motivation .................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Research Question...................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Outline........................................................................................................................ 3
2. Literature Review............................................................................................................. 4
2.1. The Concept of Postponement.................................................................................... 4
2.2. Postponement Strategies ............................................................................................ 6 2.2.1. Price Postponement ....................................................................................................... 8 2.2.2. Logistics Postponement................................................................................................. 8 2.2.3. Production Postponement.............................................................................................. 9 2.2.4. Purchasing Postponement ........................................................................................... 11 2.2.5. Product Development Postponement .......................................................................... 12
2.3. Existing Strategy Selection Techniques.................................................................... 13
2.4. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 17
3. Conceptual Research Model.......................................................................................... 18
3.1. Demand Uncertainty ................................................................................................ 18 3.1.1. Factors influencing Demand Uncertainty.................................................................... 19
3.2. The Research Model................................................................................................. 25
3.3. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 27
4. Methodology ................................................................................................................... 28
4.1. Preliminary field interviews ..................................................................................... 28 4.1.1. Interview results .......................................................................................................... 29 4.1.2. Adapted research model .............................................................................................. 32
4.2. Online Survey ........................................................................................................... 34 4.2.1. Questionnaire Development ........................................................................................ 34 4.2.2. Execution of Survey .................................................................................................... 35
4.3. Analytical Tools........................................................................................................ 36
4.4. Construct Validation ................................................................................................ 39
4.5. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 40
5. Findings ........................................................................................................................... 41
5.1. General Sample Characteristics .............................................................................. 41
5.2. The Research Model................................................................................................. 44
IV
5.2.1. Link 1: Uncertainty – Postponement Strategies .......................................................... 47 5.2.2. Link 2 and 3: Postponement Aims and Performance Impact ...................................... 47
5.3. Cross-validation with other statistical approaches ................................................. 48
5.4. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 51
6. Discussion........................................................................................................................ 52
6.1. Postponement Strategies .......................................................................................... 52 6.1.1. Price Postponement ..................................................................................................... 52 6.1.2. Logistics Postponement............................................................................................... 54 6.1.3. Production Postponement............................................................................................ 55 6.1.4. Purchasing Postponement ........................................................................................... 57 6.1.5. Product Development Postponement .......................................................................... 59
6.2. The Decision Matrix................................................................................................. 61
6.3. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 64
7. Conclusion and Future Research.................................................................................. 65
7.1. Problem Statement ................................................................................................... 65
7.2. Theoretical contributions ......................................................................................... 66
7.3. Managerial contributions......................................................................................... 67
7.4. Limitations and future research ............................................................................... 67
Appendix ................................................................................................................................. 70
Appendix I: Unstructured questionnaire for interviews....................................................... 70
Appendix II: Online questionnaire ....................................................................................... 71
Appendix III: Variance Inflation Factors (VIF)................................................................... 78
Appendix IV: Sample Characteristics .................................................................................. 79
Appendix V: Canonical Correlation Analysis ...................................................................... 80
Appendix VI: PLS Regression .............................................................................................. 82
References ............................................................................................................................... 84
V
List of Figures
Figure 1: Postponement strategies and the positioning of the CODP (Yang et al. 2007).......... 6
Figure 2: Postponement-speculation strategy continua (Pagh and Cooper 1998) ................... 14
Figure 3: Postponement-speculation strategy profile analysis (Pagh and Cooper 1998)......... 14
Figure 4: Supply and demand uncertainty matrix (Lee 2002) ................................................. 15
Figure 5: The initial conceptual research model ...................................................................... 26
Figure 6: The CODP and reasons of demand uncertainty (adapted from Yang et al. 2007) ... 27
Figure 7: Research plan............................................................................................................ 28
Figure 8: Adapted overview of research construct................................................................... 33
Figure 9: Adapted research model ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 10: Number of respondents per postponement strategy................................................ 41
Figure 11: Importance/extent of application within respondents’ companies ......................... 42
Figure 12: Distribution of survey respondents across industries ............................................. 43
Figure 13: PLS PM Model for Price Postponement................................................................. 44
Figure 14: Research model adapted for the findings of this study........................................... 60
Figure 15: Postponement strategy decision matrix .................................................................. 61
Figure 16: Example of matrix evaluation................................................................................. 63
List of Tables Table 1: Demand uncertainty factors ....................................................................................... 20
Table 2: Overview of uncertainty factors mentioned in interviews ......................................... 31
Table 3: PLS PM results per postponement strategy ............................................................... 46
Table 4: Overview of cross-validation ..................................................................................... 50
1. Chapter: Introduction
1
1. Introduction
“When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also admit that some things are
much more nearly certain than others.”
Bertrand Russell, "Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?", 1947
British author, mathematician, & philosopher (1872 - 1970)
Uncertainties are amongst the biggest enemies of companies’ supply chains, gaining ever
more importance in the presence of an increasingly changing environment. Reacting to
uncertainties presents a great challenge and thus tools have to be found allowing companies to
become more flexible when reacting to these instabilities. Postponement strategies are one
option that companies can opt for to reduce the negative effects in light of demand uncertainty.
By postponing certain activities of the supply chain to a later stage, that is deferring decision
making until more knowledge has been acquired, flexibility can be achieved. A famous
example of a practically applied postponement strategy is the company Benetton that
postpones the dying of their garments to just prior to delivery, enabling a faster reaction to
changing customer demand (Dapiran 1992).
1.1. Research Motivation
The business economics motivation stems from companies’ continuous strive for cost
reduction, while improving or maintaining a satisfactory level of customer service. Especially
in the current economic situation, it is extremely important for companies to minimize costs
and maintain stable product prices viewed as reasonable by market demand. This can be
achieved by maintaining, for example, low inventories, high customer service and good
product quality. This thesis will explore what postponement strategies can achieve by
enabling more company-wide flexibility. The academic motivation departs from the fact that
not much research has been done yet on the topic of postponement strategies. It is only
recently that the postponement strategy phenomenon has gained more attention in literature.
Even though academic research mainly focuses on the operational effects of postponement
strategies, the decision making process for postponement itself is only slightly touched upon.
Furthermore, most studies with regard to postponement strategies are based on case studies
and only little empirical research has been conducted. This thesis focuses on providing
1. Chapter: Introduction
2
support for a company’s postponement decision making in light of demand uncertainties, by
concluding from empirical research results.
The postponement concept was already established by Alderson (1950). However, as Boone
et al. (2007) point out, only lately there is an increasing research interest in this field and still
many challenges remain unaddressed. Although postponement concepts can be very simple,
gaps in understanding lead to a slow rate of adoption. The following research question is
therefore developed to fill a gap in the literature and to foster implementation initiatives by
creating a deeper understanding of the applicability of postponement strategies.
1.2. Research Question
One major gap in research conducted thus far is to explain the linkage that exists between
postponement strategies and the reasons underlying demand uncertainty. More specifically its
meaning for the determination of appropriate postponement strategies is yet to be researched
(Boone, Craighead et al. 2007). This thesis tries to answer just this, whereby the following
problem statement has been developed:
“How do the reasons underlying demand uncertainty affect the choice of an appropriate
postponement strategy?”
The relationship between postponement strategies and uncertainty is that postponement is
used to create flexibility in order to better react to demand uncertainties that a company is
confronted with. Yang et al. (2004) classified postponement strategies according to the degree
of uncertainty and product modularity. In contrast to this, the problem statement in this thesis
does not focus on the degree of uncertainty but rather on the type of uncertainty that can be
linked to different types of postponement strategies. In order to answer the problem statement
mentioned above a series of sub-questions will need to be investigated being:
- How is postponement defined?
- Which postponement strategies do exist and what is their specific purpose?
- How is demand uncertainty defined?
- Which are the most important reasons of demand uncertainty?
- Which postponement strategy reacts to which demand uncertainty dimension?
1. Chapter: Introduction
3
- Which postponement strategy has what operational aim?
- What is the impact of postponement strategies on company performance?
Hence, the objective of this research is to analyze the interrelationship between the
dimensions of demand uncertainty and the different types of postponement strategies. This
aims to lead to three important contributions: (1) better understanding of postponement
strategies and their application, (2) a theoretical relationship construct that extends existing
literature and (3) a decision tool with guidelines that will support managers to select
appropriate postponement strategies.
1.3. Outline
To analyze the research question, a conceptual model will be developed and tested by means
of interviews and an online survey. As a foundation for this research, Chapter 2 presents the
literature review with respect to postponement strategies. Subsequently, Chapter 3 highlights
various reasons of demand uncertainty and provides a research construct by establishing links
between demand uncertainties and specific postponement strategies. Chapter 4 elaborates on
the underlying research methodology used. It includes the interview results, the consequential
adaptations to the research model, the questionnaire development process as well as data
analysis tools and the associated construct validation. Thereafter, Chapter 5 presents the
findings of the empirical study, followed by a detailed discussion in Chapter 6. Finally,
Chapter 7 offers a conclusion to this research including the answer to the research question,
contributions to theory and practise, limitations and future research topics.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
4
2. Literature Review
Prior to linking postponement strategies to sources of demand uncertainty, the concept of
postponement and its application needs to be understood. This chapter therefore explains the
evolution of the concept of postponement. Subsequently, the concept of postponement is
defined and various postponement strategies are discussed and illustrated. Finally, existing
postponement strategy selection techniques are explored.
2.1. The Concept of Postponement
The concept of postponement was first introduced by Alderson (1950), who focused on the
postponement of product differentiation “to the latest possible point in time” (Alderson 1950),
that is until an actual customer order is received. Bucklin (1965) further explains
postponement as a trade-off between the inventory cost of the seller and the opportunity cost
of the buyer. Thereby demand uncertainty, which results in additional inventory cost of the
seller due to required safety stocks, is related to the opportunity cost in terms of purchasing of
the buyer. In theory, storage of finished goods is replaced by storage of product components
and hence slightly increases lead time, due to the necessary finalization of production after a
customer order is received. Bucklin designates this idea as postponement-speculation,
meaning that “a speculative inventory will build up at each point in a distribution channel,
whenever its costs are less than the net savings to both buyer and seller from postponement”
(Bucklin 1965, p.28). Accordingly, postponement would only be favourable, if transportation
costs are less than inventory cost plus opportunity cost, taking the factor of time into account.
This is further supported in the article written by Matthews and Syed (2004). Concluding on
the result of the APICS Membership Survey (2003), they state that 60% of the companies
regard inventory cost reduction as well as increased customer satisfaction as top benefit from
postponement.
Even though it was Alderson that introduced the concept of postponement in 1950, it was
only in the late 80s that researchers devoted more attention to this theory (Yang, Burns et al.
2004). Yang et al. (2005, p.992) summarize the reasons for this growing importance of
postponement strategies that can be found in literature as follows:
• “Product life cycles are increasingly shortening
• Product proliferations continue to expand
2. Chapter: Literature Review
5
• Technological developments are continuing at an ever-increasing pace
• Customers are more and more sophisticated
• Success is increasingly driven not so much by cost or quality, but by speed
• Mass customization and agility have been receiving increasing interest from both
researchers and practitioners
• With the ever-expanding presence of information and communication systems the
potential afforded by e-commerce is wide reaching
• Companies are increasingly focused on improving overall supply chain
management”
Most of these factors are confirmed by Matthews and Syed (2004), who elaborate on the
results of the APICS Membership Survey 2003. In this survey, it is interesting to note that
73% of the respondents perceive the “increased difficulty in forecasting consumer demand” as
the most important catalyst driving postponement. This result shows that it may be especially
useful to search for postponement selection techniques when referring to customer demand
uncertainty and its reasons.
The market is constantly changing and innovations and technological advancements speed up
introductions of new products, leading to demand variability. Lee (2002) points out that in the
presence of high demand unpredictability, responsive supply chains should be created that
enable flexible reaction to this uncertainty. Organic organizational structures that are
characterised by responsiveness and flexibility are beneficial in uncertain environments (e.g.
(Duncan 1972). Postponement is therefore a means to support the creation of an organic
system to achieve, for instance, overall lead time reduction or product development
acceleration. This can “shorten the forecasting horizon and lower risk of error” (Bowersox,
Stank et al. 1999, p.562). In extreme cases of demand uncertainty, Lee (2002, p.116) even
proposes to “make use of the concept of postponement to pursue aggressive build-to-order
strategies”.
In summary, there is a consensus that postponement helps companies to respond effectively to
uncertainty by creating organisational flexibility. In order to reach this goal a number of
different postponement strategies can be employed. The following section first discusses
postponement strategies in general, followed by an overview of the most widely-used
strategies.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
6
2.2. Postponement Strategies
In recent literature postponement is generally defined as a concept, whereby activities in the
supply chain are delayed until demand is realized, that is until customer orders are received
(van Hoek 2001). This point, called the customer-order decoupling point (CODP),
distinguishes supply chain activities between forecast-driven activities located upstream of the
CODP and order-driven activities located downstream of the CODP (Yang, Burns et al. 2004).
Yang et al. (2007) show that the different postponement strategies determine the location of
the CODP. The dashed line in Figure 1 illustrates this change in the CODP location. The type
of postponement strategy determines how far upstream in the supply chain the decoupling
point is moved or corresponding supply chain activities delayed (Yang, Yang et al. 2007). In
case of product development postponement, the CODP is located prior to the design phase,
whereas in case of logistics postponement the CODP is located just prior to distribution.
Production postponement is naturally based on the make-to-order principle, whereas logistics
postponement is naturally based on the make-to-stock principle as distribution follows upon
customer order. In the latter case, stock is managed by means of forecast and delivered upon
customer order.
Figure 1: Postponement strategies and the positioning of the CODP (Yang et al. 2007)
The first column in Figure 1 could be explained by logistics or price postponement. As
logistics postponement, stock may be decentralized and thereby partly distributed, where
stock levels and therefore production are determined by forecasts. Price postponement on the
other hand would really focus on the moment after final distribution to customers, and
2. Chapter: Literature Review
7
accordingly set the price at this late moment. This would however not require make-to-
forecast, that is make-to-stock. More detailed explanations of the postponement strategies will
be provided in following subsections.
The aim of postponement and the relocation of the CODP can be viewed from two
perspectives: the information flow perspective and the material flow perspective (Yang and
Burns 2003). The information flow perspective emphasizes the importance of information
availability throughout supply chain processes. Postponement delays certain activities in order
to benefit from additionally acquired market insights, due to extra information on product
demand as time passes. Yang and Burns (2003) underline that not all information is required
at the same time, if the supply chain tasks are sequenced (postponed or prolonged)
accordingly. The material flow perspective on the other hand stresses that inventory has to be
managed, which can be done by adequately locating the CODP. Thereby, inventory levels and
costs can be reduced, taking into account that inventory cost of materials is lower than of
finished products. However, the trade-off between inventory and lead time is not to be
disregarded. This is due to the fact that, if not finished but semi-finished goods are stored,
lead time may increase as the finishing process still needs to be finalized. Summarizing,
shifting the CODP upstream, meaning postponing supply chain activities downstream,
increases the knowledge of customer specifications at the point of production (Olhager 2003),
whilst reducing inventory cost.
Following the discussion above, postponement can now be defined as the action of delaying
certain activities of the supply chain downstream of the customer-order decoupling point in
order to achieve more flexibility and responsiveness with regard to demand uncertainty. In the
following paragraphs five strategies will be elaborated upon in more detail, including price
postponement, logistics postponement, production postponement, purchasing postponement
and product development postponement. The latter four strategies are derived from the
research of Yang et al. (2007). Price postponement was added in order to cover an additional
factor that influences demand and is therewith of special value for this research. These
aforementioned five strategies cover the entire range of the supply chain and enable the
researcher to focus on a limited set. Other postponement strategies, such as the postponement
of hiring new people, are not considered in this research as they are too focused and would
render this study inexplicit.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
8
2.2.1. Price Postponement
Price Postponement means to “defer the pricing decision until demand uncertainty is
resolved” (Van Mieghem and Dada 1999, p.1632). The price is thus not set before but after
production, resulting in a “make-to-stock strategy with an ex-post price flexibility” (Van
Mieghem and Dada 1999, p.1632). The price can then be set according to acquire demand
information, which was not available before production. This strategy may have a great
influence on total revenue, due to the fact that products are likely to be sold at the highest
price the customer is willing to pay.
According to Granot and Yin (2008), price postponement always occurs, when the customer
still has the option to negotiate the price. Car manufacturers, for instance, postpone the pricing
decision by negotiating at the moment of sale with a customer (Van Mieghem and Dada 1999).
Moreover, as van Mieghem and Dada (1999) point out, a company can also postpone the
pricing decision to influence the market-clearing price, the price at which supply is equal to
demand. In the farming industry, capacity is set during harvest. The price can thus be
increased, by bringing only part of the harvest to market. One challenge is however, that even
though price postponement may be beneficial for the buyer, profit sharing may prove to be
complicated and not favourable for an ongoing business relationship due to extensive
negotiation (Granot and Yin 2008). A sophisticated form of price postponement is yield
management, which is a price setting technique originally introduced by airlines (Biller,
Muriel et al. 2006). Here, price is adjusted as soon as new demand information is available.
Nowadays, this technique is also employed in other businesses, such as car rentals, fashion
companies or hotels, in other words in the service sector. Price postponement however should
be applied carefully because price uncertainty may alienate customers (Biller, Muriel et al.
2006).
2.2.2. Logistics Postponement
The principle of logistics postponement is best described by the use of direct distribution of
finished products from a central location (Pagh and Cooper 1998). This strategy is clearly
based on place and time postponement. Place postponement in regard to logistics
postponement means maintaining finished inventory at a central location, before it is
delivered to the final customer. Time postponement generally delays the forward movement
of inventory (van Hoek 2001). As Bowersox et al. (1999, p.563) point out it “provides
inventory-positioning flexibility by alleviating the need for forward deployment of inventory”.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
9
Logistics postponement thus enables shipping of “exact product quantities from a central
location to satisfy specific customer requirements” (Bowersox et al. 1999, p.562). Pagh and
Cooper (1998) argue that this strategy increases on-time deliveries, shortens lead times,
improves reliability, reduces inventory cost, achieves constant transportation cost, and enables
a faster introduction of new products. However, van Hoek (2001, p.161) predicates that
logistics postponement may result in a significant increase in transportation cost and is
therefore only “relevant when products are more sensitive to inventory than to transport cost”.
The company Amazon.com, an online catalogue firm, benefits tremendously from applying
logistics postponement. Most products are stored at a central warehouse, from where
distribution to the end-customer is initiated. The customer order is the trigger for a delivery
release. Up-to-date information is thereby used to prompt and guide final shipments. In order
to increase the ability to handle varying volume and timing of orders, Amazon.com is
working closely together with logistics service providers and vendors (Yang, Yang et al.
2007). This close cooperation also minimizes transportation costs. Hewlett-Packard Company
also implemented logistics postponement, even though it is used in a slightly different way.
By using the concept of “merge-in-transit”, Hewlett-Packard Company avoids unnecessary
transportation of finalized products to a central location by merging components of a product
at the closest merge centres or consolidation points before delivery to the customer (Lee and
Whang 2001). Transportation distances are thereby reduced and costs avoided. Finally,
another option of logistics postponement is to implement a “rolling warehouse”. Companies
such as the Orient Overseas Container Line are using this concept, whereby product
destinations are only defined close to or at the customer location, taking the latest available
customer order information into account (Lee and Whang 2001). Thus, final delivery
specifications can be postponed to the point in time, when the order is close to the customer.
2.2.3. Production Postponement
Production postponement, also referred to as manufacturing postponement, form
postponement or delayed differentiation, focuses on postponing differentiation of the base
product. It involves production processes such as assembly, packaging, labelling and
manufacturing (Bowersox, Stank et al. 1999). This results in quicker responsiveness and
lower finished goods inventories. If it is crucial to be close to the customer, meaning that the
ability of quick average response throughout the product line is important, production
postponement is beneficial (Pagh and Cooper 1998). As Van Hoek et al. (2001) point out,
2. Chapter: Literature Review
10
production postponement is also based on time and place postponement. Inventory of
components is kept at a central production facility (place postponement), used for product
finalization upon customer order and then shipped to the customer or a distribution centre
(time postponement).
To optimally support this strategy, the product should consist of a base product or generic
modules that can be differentiated into a variety of derivatives at a later stage (Yang, Burns et
al. 2004). Derivatives are to be understood as product as well as packaging options. Product
variety can thus be achieved with a small amount of generic base products (Lee and Tang
1997). Since forecasts are more accurate at the component level than at the finished product
level, demand forecasts are less prone to error (Yang, Burns et al. 2004). Furthermore, as
Pagh & Cooper (1998) point out, this product structure will also achieve a substantial
inventory reduction, because different products are based on the same base component.
However, it should not be neglected that customer order processing may increase in
complexity thanks to a late initiation of the differentiation process, and that costs associated
with coordination may increase (Pagh and Cooper 1998). Similarly, postponement will only
be appropriate, if no specialized manufacturing capabilities or highly restrictive economies of
scale are required (Pagh and Cooper 1998). Yang et al. (2004, p.1058) therefore conclude that
a “balance between the potential sacrifice that customers make and the company’s ability to
produce individualized products within an acceptable time and cost frame” has to be found.
The most famous example of this oldest form of postponement is the Benetton Group, a
textile company. Especially in the textile industry short average lead times are crucial due to
short life-cycles. Fashion collections change every few months to accommodate for seasonal
clothing needs, new market trends and changing customer preferences. Particularly, when
stores are reordering certain garments of one collection, it poses a great challenge for a textile
company to deliver these garments before the collection is replaced by a new one. It was at
this point that Benetton realized the benefit that production postponement could offer. They
decided to produce their garments in the base colour to stock and to delay the dying process of
garments to the point in time, when a customer order is received. Lead times were thereby
reduced from four to two weeks, which enables Benetton to satisfy reorders of retailers before
the new collection was introduced (Heskett and Signorelli 1984). Additionally a reduction in
inventory was achieved, because garments only had to be stocked in the base colour and not
in all different derivatives (Dapiran 1992). Dell Computers is another example of a company
using production postponement. With a clear implementation of a make-to-order strategy,
2. Chapter: Literature Review
11
products are assembled according to customer specifications. The customer-order decoupling
point is thereby moved to prior to assembly. This enables Dell to maintain a vast scale of
mass customization with an estimated 100 million computer configurations (Kumar and Craig
2007).
2.2.4. Purchasing Postponement
The purchasing postponement strategy suspends the purchase of certain inputs for as long as
possible. Yang et al. (2004) mention that the aim of purchasing postponement is to delay
costly ownership of inventory especially in situations of quick obsolescence, such as
“expensive and fragile materials that come in many sizes and shapes” (Yang, Burns et al.
2004, p.1055). This is achieved by time and/or place postponement. Materials are stored at the
supplier’s facility until an order is placed (time postponement) or until the agreed upon
delivery date (place postponement).
Furthermore, base components that are usually characterized by relatively stable demand can
be ordered in response to a longer forecasting horizon. However, surge components such as
referred to above, that feature a higher degree of demand uncertainty, can be delayed to the
moment in time, when more precise demand information is available (Yang, Burns et al.
2004). Benetton, for example, operates with 90% standard components that are purchased in
advance and 10% surge components that are purchased shortly before usage (Dapiran 1992).
Another reason for engaging in this type of postponement is to benefit from declining
component prices and therewith reduced material costs. On the other hand, however, the shift
of inventory ownership has to be taken into account (Yang, Burns et al. 2004). Thus, it is
crucial to be engaged in a high level of cooperation with suppliers, as for example strategic
partnerships, in order to assure timely deliveries (Yang, Yang et al. 2007). Yang et al. (2004)
underline, that B2B e-markets that are increasingly utilized throughout the last decade foster
the implementation of purchasing postponing by improved information sharing and
forecasting capabilities between involved parties. Vendor managed inventory (VMI) is the
extreme variant of purchasing postponement. By means of real time information sharing,
inventory is replenished by the vendor as needed.
Purchasing postponement in form of VMI can be illustrated by revisiting the example of Dell
Computers. Dell Computers established close relationships with its suppliers in order to
arrange an automatic replenishment of its inventory. By taking ownership of component parts
as late as possible, inventories can be radically reduced and risk of obsolescence decreased. In
2. Chapter: Literature Review
12
order to support the stability of this system, Dell is working closely together with its suppliers
and supports them in various situations. In this way, Dell reduces inventory costs and at the
same time assures availability of components; a crucial aspect when engaging in a make-to-
order strategy (Kumar and Craig 2007). Other examples of purchasing postponement include
supermarkets that also frequently engage in VMI or companies in the food industry that are
subject to strongly fluctuating component prices.
2.2.5. Product Development Postponement
“In the early phases of a product development project, detailed information on the product
attributes may not be available” (Yang, Burns et al. 2005, p.993), for example due to
uncertainty of customer preferences and new technology. Therefore product development
postponement delays the design of critical components to a moment, when better information
is obtainable (Yang, Burns et al. 2004), enabling product design improvements or production
costs reductions. Information is the driver of this strategy (Yang, Burns et al. 2004). In
quickly changing markets it can even be extended to: make a little – sell a little – adapt a little
– make a little – sell a little and so forth, in order to adapt to quickly changing market
information and needs (Mullins and Sutherland 1998). Product development postponement
can entail delaying the internal development processes or the external development process in
cooperation with suppliers. In both cases close cooperation with suppliers is essential in order
to assure the supply of appropriate parts or materials.
Toyota is engaged in product development postponement, frequently in cooperation with their
suppliers. Being a Japanese automaker, Toyota is characterised by very close relationships,
called Keiretsus, which are based on close cooperation and characterised by joint learning and
prospering (Liker and Choi 2004). Information on market and technological developments is
continually compiled and in turn enters the product development process. This permits the
postponement of product specifications and development to points in time, when better
information is available regarding customer preferences or new technologies (Yang, Yang et
al. 2007). Equally, cooperative product development together with suppliers is executed.
Thereby, product development postponement results in an incremental development process,
where specifying and structuring design tasks is essential (Yang, Burns et al. 2004).
After exploring these five types of postponement strategies, the question arises of how to
select the appropriate strategy for a company. The following section will investigate existing
2. Chapter: Literature Review
13
strategy selection techniques and will show that the link between postponement strategies and
the source of demand uncertainty is not considered yet, in currently published literature, as a
means for postponement strategy choice.
2.3. Existing Strategy Selection Techniques
When implementing postponement, meaning when repositioning the decoupling point further
upstream, it is important to take the nature of demand into account. There are ‘base’ and
‘surge’ elements in a company’s supply chain. Base elements are characterized by low
demand uncertainty where production can be based on long-term forecasts. On the other hand,
however, as Yang et al. (2004) point out, surge elements are subject to postponement.
Because of their high demand uncertainty, they “have to be delayed until further information
on market demand is available” (Yang, Burns et al. 2004, p.1056). When the presence of
surge elements is observed, an adequate postponement strategy will have to be selected.
Existing literature offers first anchor points for postponement strategy selection, which will be
discussed throughout the following paragraphs.
Pagh et al. (1998) suggest that companies have to define a speculation-postponement strategy
along the manufacturing and logistics continuum, illustrated by figure 2. Their idea is based
on the concept of the two extremes: ‘speculation’ and ‘postponement’. Speculation indicates
that all actions are based on forecasts by means of make-to-inventory and/or decentralization
of inventory. Postponement, on the other hand, bases actions on gathered information by
means of make-to-order and/or centralized inventory with direct shipments. Logistics
postponement and manufacturing postponement are hybrid strategies. In case of logistics
postponement it is assumed that decisions with regard to logistics are based on market
information (direct shipment), whereas decisions with regard to manufacturing are managed
purely on forecasts (make-to-inventory). On the other hand, manufacturing postponement is
assumed to manage logistics according to forecasts (decentralized inventories), whereas
manufacturing is organized according to market information (make-to-order). Therefore both
postponement strategies include a speculative as well as postponement dimension. This seems
contradictory to the idea of Yang et al. (2004), mentioned earlier in this chapter, who state
that downstream of the customer-order-decoupling point, activities are based on customer-
order information, whereas upstream activities are driven by forecasts. However, Pagh et al.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
14
(1998) argue that in the case of manufacturing postponement, full anticipatory logistics is
applied, and thereby planned prior to manufacturing activities according to forecast.
Figure 2: Postponement-speculation strategy continua (Pagh and Cooper 1998)
Each of the four strategies determined by Pagh et al. (1998) exhibits different characteristics
or determinants. The characteristics determined by Pagh et al. (1998) can be observed in their
example of a profile analysis shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Postponement-speculation strategy profile analysis (Pagh and Cooper 1998)
2. Chapter: Literature Review
15
By specifying the level of these determinants, as indicated by the dots in Figure 3, a
postponement/speculation strategy profile is created for the company in question that will
indicate which of the four strategies appears most adequate. Note that the level of demand
uncertainty is one of the determinants. Other characteristics possibly indicate a reason
underlying this uncertainty, for instance a mature life-cycle stage. However, the profile
analysis does not give a clear view on the source of demand uncertainty.
In contrast to Pagh et al. (1998), Lee (2002) does not regard such a wide spectrum including
product, organizational and market characteristics for strategy classifications. He focuses on
the level of demand and supply uncertainty as frameworks to classify four supply chain types,
which in turn link to postponement opportunities. Low demand uncertainty is associated with
functional products and high demand uncertainty with innovative products; whereas low
supply uncertainty is associated with stable processes and high supply uncertainty with
evolving processes. Figure 4 shows the classification of supply chain types along these
dimensions.
Figure 4: Supply and demand uncertainty matrix (Lee 2002)
For the purpose of this research, especially responsive supply chains are of interest. In the
presence of innovative products with high demand uncertainty and the existence of stable
processes resulting in low supply uncertainty, responsiveness can be achieved by means of
postponement strategies. This is in line with the examples given in previous sections. Agile
supply chains may also apply postponement strategies, as they focus on responsiveness
downstream of the decoupling point to deal with demand uncertainty; however, additionally
risk-hedging is applied upstream of the decoupling point to cope with supply uncertainty. This
illustrates the concept of positioning the decoupling point explained earlier, however in
2. Chapter: Literature Review
16
combination with actions taken to oppose supply uncertainty. Since this paper only focuses on
demand uncertainty, only responsive supply chains are subject to this research. Whereas Lee
(2002) only classifies supply chain types and creates a link to postponement, Boone et al.
(2007) make a first attempt to classify different postponement strategies according to the
types of supply chains. However, this attempt shows that almost all postponement types were
appropriate for responsive and agile supply chains. Thus, additional differentiating parameters
for postponement classification are needed.
Yang et al. (2004) takes in addition to the degree of demand uncertainty, the degree of
modularity as an additional factor into account. According to their framework, purchasing
postponement and product development postponement are applied in situations of high
uncertainty, whereas logistics postponement and production postponement are used in case of
low uncertainty. Additionally, product development postponement and production
postponement are more applicable for products with a high level of modularity. This
framework proves to be a simple generalization which may indicate a starting point for the
strategy selection process. However, in the opinion of the author of this thesis, production
postponement may even result to be valuable in case of low product modularity, that is, if the
final product is bulky or expensive. Additionally, production postponement can also be
especially effective in the presence of high demand uncertainty, alleviating the company from
the extremely high amount of safety stock needed. Thus, this framework gives a general
initial indication, but not a complete insight into the selection of postponement strategies.
It becomes obvious that all classification attempts published in current literature take demand
uncertainty into account, as this is the main driver for implementing postponement. Demand
uncertainty is an important issue throughout the supply chain, not only within processes close
to the customer. Yang et al. (2007) pointed out that postponement strategies are useful
throughout the whole network or modular organizational firm. Furthermore the authors
illustrate the locations of postponement applications within the supply chain. Product
development postponement and purchasing postponement is thus applied upstream of the
manufacturer and production and logistics postponement downstream. Identifying the location
of the supply chain, which is affected the most by an identified source of demand uncertainty,
will hence give a first indication of an appropriate postponement strategy.
2. Chapter: Literature Review
17
2.4. Conclusion
Summarizing, this second chapter provided an overview of current postponement theories that
can be found in currently published literature. Firstly, postponement was defined as the action
of delaying certain activities of the supply chain downstream of the customer-order-
decoupling point in order to achieve more flexibility and responsiveness in light of demand
uncertainty. Secondly, five widely applied postponement strategies that cover the whole range
of the supply chain were discussed in more detail, including price postponement, logistics
postponement, production postponement, purchasing postponement and product development
postponement. Finally, existing postponement strategy selection techniques were explored. In
conclusion, various selection techniques can be identified in literature. Although almost all
techniques take the level of demand uncertainty into account, none considers the source of
demand uncertainty as a determinant. The following chapter will therefore develop a
conceptual research model that will analyze the implication of sources of demand uncertainty
within the postponement strategy selection process.
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
18
3. Conceptual Research Model
The literature review revealed that demand uncertainty is an important aspect regarding
postponement strategy selection. This thesis argues that not only the level but also the source
of demand uncertainty is a very influential determinant of postponement strategies. In order to
analyse this proposition a conceptual research model will be developed throughout this
chapter. First, the concept of demand uncertainty will be explained. Subsequently, various
sources of demand uncertainty will be identified and logically linked to postponement
strategies. Finally, an overview of the established construct links is presented.
3.1. Demand Uncertainty
As pointed out by Yang et al. (2005), the greatest challenge of postponement implementation
consists of how to manage the external network of the company, including the supply as well
as the demand side. Especially managing the customer side however brings difficulties,
particularly, if demand is uncertain and thus characterised by a lot of unforeseeable volume
variability. “Uncertainty is best understood as an information defect” (Spender 1993, p.16).
When incomplete demand information is available, demand cannot be predicted with certainty.
Demand is especially uncertain when high demand variability is present.
In order to adapt to demand variability Bernhardt (1977) suggests two actions:
(a) Adjust terms of sale or
(b) Adjust operations
Both suggestions aim at increasing flexibility, when facing demand uncertainty. Adjusting
terms of sale refers to creating more flexibility in contractual agreements to maintain freedom
of action to a certain extent. This is dealt with by the sales and the legal department. On the
other hand, adjusting operations refers to operational means for creating flexibility, including
postponement strategies. This relates to the purpose of this paper, namely the investigation of
the relation between demand uncertainty and postponement strategies.
Demand uncertainty is caused by a series of factors. The following section will identify and
categorize potentially significant uncertainty reasons for the postponement decision.
Subsequently, these factors will be explained successively and relations between
postponement strategies will be established. Finally, an overview of the resulting relationship
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
19
construct will be presented which will be subject for verification throughout the remainder of
this research.
3.1.1. Factors influencing Demand Uncertainty
Demand uncertainty can be due to short- or long-run fluctuations in demand. Short-run
fluctuations may require large amounts of safety stocks, costly production techniques or an
adaptation of terms of sales in order to prevent costly stock outs. Long-run fluctuations
require scalability of facilities or an adaptation of terms of sale. In both cases, flexibility is
desirable to alleviate the burden of demand variability (Bernhardt 1977). Flexibility refers to
operational means that accommodate greater output variability (Stigler 1939). Postponement
is a mean that focuses on short-run flexibility. Spontaneous demand variations shall be
handled by postponing the customer-order-decoupling point further upstream in the supply
chain, thereby increasing responsiveness as discussed above.
Factors influencing demand uncertainty can be either controllable or non-controllable.
Controllable factors are factors that can be controlled by the organization (Cooper and
Kleinschmidt 1987). They can be influenced by the organization with the effect that uncertain
demand variability is reduced or effectively managed. Demand uncertainty reduction could be
achieved, for instance, by adjusting the forecasting techniques. Another option is to create
more flexible organizational processes like postponement strategies. Non-controllable factors
on the other hand are mainly environmental or market-related factors that are dependent on
external factors (Cooper and Kleinschmidt 1987). They cannot be controlled by a company,
because the power over these factors lies with another external party or nature. Examples are
new regulations, available market/product information, or income changes. Non-controllable
factors will be excluded from this study, because postponement aims at gaining control over
short-run demand uncertainty.
Summarizing, controllable factors that have an effect on demand uncertainty in the short-run
can be managed by postponement strategies. Table 1 provides a preliminary overview factors
that will be included in the research model. This list will still be subject to adaptation
according to findings resulting from the field interviews that will be conducted for this
research. The factors are grouped into four broad categories, namely operative, customers,
product characteristics and market. It is a condensed list of factors taken from a variety of
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
20
sources as well as logical derivation. The following paragraphs will briefly elaborate on these
factors.
1. Operational
1. Price of competitive products (substitutes +
complements)
2. Price of materials/components
2. Customers
1. Changing customer preferences/tastes across product
lines
2. Changing customer preferences/tastes in regard to new
or differentiated products
3. Irregularity of purchases, fluctuations in market
demand (due to bullwhip effect, advertising, changes is
amount and product mix of competitor)
3. Product
Characteristics
1. Innovation/short life-cycles/insufficient market
information
4. Market 1. Variety of customer groups with different
characteristics
Table 1: Demand uncertainty factors
1. Operational factors
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
The price of a substitute products influences demand variability. In situations, in which the
price of substitutes or complements experiences a sudden or incremental increase or decrease,
demand of the own product will vary, even if its price is stable. This is due to the fact that
customers tend to start switching to competitive products, which become more attractive or
vice versa. Whereas a positive relationship exists between the price of substitutes and demand,
there is a negative relationship between the price of complements and demand. For example,
if the price of filters of a water filter increases, the demand of water filters will decrease.
Frequent price changes of substitutes and complements therefore lead to demand uncertainty.
As pricing behaviour of competitors is usually unknown, it creates demand uncertainty.
One option is to adapt the pricing strategy by keeping price determination flexible as long as
possible, in other words postponing the pricing decision. This is only possible in a few
industries, namely where price determination is either decentralized or flexible enough to be
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
21
postponed centrally. When price determination is decentralized, price negotiation can occur at
the point of sale. When price determination is centralized, price displays should be controlled
centrally.
H1.1: In the presence of price fluctuations of substitutes or complements, price postponement
is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
1.2 Price of materials/components
Similarly, demand can be influenced by the price of materials and components that are being
used within the manufacturing process of the final product. If the price fluctuation is passed
on to the customer by changing the price of the end-product, demand variability is very high.
The challenge remains in keeping prices of end-products stable in order to reduce demand
uncertainty. If the end-product price is stable, but material and component prices are
fluctuating to a great extent, which is often the case in the food industry, a negative effect on
the product margin is reported. According to the DuPont method, only a small increase of
material costs can deflate return on net assets to a great extent (Weele 2005). Therefore it is
important to stabilize material costs.
One option is to hedge against the risk of declining margins by engaging in forward auctions.
Materials are thereby purchased to be delivered at some future moment, usually about 6-8
month later. However, also the opposite namely purchasing postponement may be practised.
Hereby, as explained above, materials are purchased as late as possible, in order to benefit
form declining material prices, thereby keeping material costs as well as associated storage
costs low.
H1.2: In the presence of price fluctuations of materials and component, purchasing
postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
2. Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes
Customers may have frequently changing tastes and preferences, especially in the fast moving
consumer goods or information technology industry. Customer preferences can vary in two
ways. Either preferences change across an existing product line, meaning that demand
variability exists across the own product line. On the other hand, preferences change in regard
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
22
to desired new products or product differentiations. Demand uncertainty results because these
changes in preferences are difficult to predict. Additionally, AMR Research points out that
resulting frequent product launches may further spur demand uncertainty (AMR Research
2009).
In both cases of changing customer preferences, organizational responsiveness is essential to
meet customer needs. In the first case, production postponement can alleviate demand
uncertainty, by differentiating the base product shortly before delivery. For example, if red
shirts experience a high demand within one period and blue shirts in the next but this is
difficult to predict, this situation can be approached by delayed differentiation of the basic
shirt to customer-order decoupling point. In the second case, when new products are
demanded, product development has to accelerate. Product development postponement
reaches this goal, by delaying final product differentiations in order to be able to take newly
gained customer or market information into account.
H2.1a: In the presence of changing customer preferences and tastes across product lines,
production postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
H2.1b: In the presence of changing customer preferences and tastes in regard to new or
differentiated product, product development postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent
risk.
2.2 Irregularity of purchases
Irregularity of purchases results in great fluctuations of market demand. In the first place this
irregularity can be due to the bullwhip effect. “The bullwhip effect […] refers to the
phenomenon, where orders to the supplier tend to have larger variance than sales to the buyer
(i.e., demand distortion), and the distortion propagates upstream in an amplified form (i.e.,
variance amplification)” (Lee and Padmanabhan 1997, p.145). Furthermore, advertising can
influence the irregularity of purchases. Sudden sales promotions by competitors may create a
sudden decline in sales followed by an uncertain period of sales level recovery. Imagine that
customer X uses Nivea Shampoo, then sees a promotion from Pantene Pro V, and therefore
tries Pantene Pro V Shampoo instead of Nivea. However, he does not like it and therefore
buys the Nivea Shampoo again next time. This uncertainty of product choice and their triggers
influence the variability of demand. Thus, replenishment levels at retailers may result in
irregular orders at the production side. Moreover, changes in amount and variety of the
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
23
product mix of competitors, influences the purchasing decision of customers (Prockl, Bauer et
al. 2004). If a new substitute is introduced into the market, customers may switch either in the
short- or long-run to this substitute. High irregularity of purchases as just described can result
in high levels of costly inventory. Finally, irregularity of purchases can be influenced by
changing availability of product information. Frequent new information about new
technologies, product tests, health insights, etc. may change the attitude of customers towards
certain products. Probiotic foods are, for instance, subject to this changing awareness. Many
tests are conducted, some approving effectiveness others doubting it, leading to changing
customer attitudes towards these products.
Thus, high finished product inventory levels should be avoided despite high demand
uncertainty in order to circumvent storage costs and costs related to the risk of obsolescence,
which is higher for finished goods than for materials. It follows that production postponement
appears to be appropriate. By delaying postponing or product differentiating, the number of
stock keeping units as well as the storage time of finished goods can be reduced, while being
able to respond to impulsive demand patterns. However, in situations of irregular purchases
where lead time is very important logistics postponement seems more adequate. The final
products would be fully assembled and then stored at a central location. From there customer
orders will be fulfilled individually achieving the shortest lead time possible as well as
inventory reduction through central storage.
H2.2a: In the presence of irregular purchases per customer, production postponement is
applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
H2.2b: In the presence of irregular purchases per customer and high importance of short lead
times, logistics postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
3. Product Characteristics
3.1 Innovation/short life-cycles/insufficient market information
Innovation is a sudden trigger for unexpected demand (Prockl, Bauer et al. 2004). The trouble
with innovation is the fact that a true innovative product is something that customers could
not imagine before. Thus, demand is difficult to predict, since it cannot be drawn from
experience data. Demand for innovative products is therefore uncertain. Post-its from 3M can
be put forward as an example. Nobody, not even their inventors could imagine these sticky
pieces of paper, but they turned out to be a great success once customers got confronted with
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
24
them. For new product development and introduction, especially for innovative products, it is
of utmost importance to gather as much market information as possible in order to assure that
only potentially very successful products will be introduced. Otherwise the risk of a product
flop and the associated financial loss is too substantial.
One possibility of assuring that products are developed in accordance with the latest market
information is product development postponement. Market knowledge may not be available,
when the product development process begins. It follows that, if information regarding certain
product modules is lacking at the initiation of the development process, their development
should be postponed to a later stage, when sufficient information is available.
H3.1: In the presence of insufficient information for product development, product
development postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
4. Market
4.1 Variety of customer groups with different characteristics
Some products are targeted at a variety of customer groups, each with differing demand
patterns. Paint, for instance, is used on a regular basis by professional painters, however only
occasionally by do-it-yourselfers. Paint for kids is also sold, however in different
compositions and for different purposes. It follows that the demand across the product line of
a paint producer is influenced by a variety of customer groups. Similarly, aggregated demand
from a variety of geographic markets leads to demand variability across the product line, due
to geographic differences in demand characteristics (AMR Research, 2009). The wider the
potential group of customers, the more uncertain demand behaves.
In such situations, it is important to adapt the supply chain and product offering to clear
market segmentation. Market segments may however be difficult to determine in an
unambiguous way. If this is the case, production postponement is expected to be adequate. By
differentiating base products, for example by mixing colour derivatives as late as possible,
responsiveness can be maintained and inventory levels be reduced. Regarding geographic
differences, postponement of packaging or assembly according to country characteristics will
reduce lead time because the assembly location may be located closer to the market than the
production plant. Additionally inventory reduction can be achieved, because only base
products will have to be stocked and not all derivatives.
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
25
H4.1: In the presence of a variety of customer groups with different characteristics,
production postponement is applied to mitigate the inherent risk.
Additional factors that are influencing demand can be found in currently published literature.
These will however be neglected for the purpose of this research, because they are rather
long-term in nature or create structured and not unstructured demand uncertainty. One of
these factors is the type of market, which has an influence on the level of demand uncertainty.
As van Weele (2005) points out, industrial markets are characterized by derived demand that
may fluctuate strongly, whereas consumer markets are characterized by autonomous demand
that is rather stable. Furthermore van Weele (2005) underlines that nowadays products create
customer value in various ways and not only by utility of the object. For instance
customization in form of special features or corresponding services may add additional value,
of which each influences demand variability.
Additionally, in case of an industrial customer, his market share may change and therefore
influence demand. Market share however is generally gained or lost over the long-term,
meaning that it is not a driver for postponement which shall achieve short term flexibility.
Last but not least, the influence of the length of the forecast horizon was considered. If
demand is forecasted a long time in advance, the forecast is more prone to uncertainty (Prockl,
Bauer et al. 2004). Contrarily, if forecasts are made based on too little historical data,
forecasts tend to be inaccurate. However, this source of uncertainty is a controllable factor
meaning that it should rather be managed by adjusting the forecasting method instead of
accepting the uncertainty and adapting operations.
3.2. The Research Model
Figure 5 summarizes the factors and relationships established in the previous section. Eight
sources of demand uncertainty are expected to influence the postponement strategy decision.
Between the demand factors and the postponement strategy one additional layer was
positioned. This layer is meant to explain shortly, why a specific postponement strategy is
appropriate in the presence of a certain demand uncertainty source. For example in hypothesis
1.1, the fluctuating price of a competitive product may cause demand fluctuations which can
be alleviated by price optimization through price postponement. In proposition 1b fluctuating
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
26
material prices may cause demand fluctuations which can be alleviated by taking advantage of
decreasing materials prices by means of purchasing postponement.
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies
1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H1.1
H1.2
H2.1a
H2.1b
H2.2b
H2.3a
H3.1
H4.1
Benefiting from decreasing prices
New product responsiveness
(long-term)
Customer responsiveness
(short-term)
Inventory –transportation cost
trade-off
Price optimization
Characteristic
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies
1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H1.1
H1.2
H2.1a
H2.1b
H2.2b
H2.3a
H3.1
H4.1
Benefiting from decreasing prices
New product responsiveness
(long-term)
Customer responsiveness
(short-term)
Inventory –transportation cost
trade-off
Price optimization
Characteristic
Figure 5: The initial conceptual research model
These relationships can be visualized by means of the effect of demand uncertainty sources on
the customer-order decoupling point (CODP). As introduced in chapter two, Yang et al.
(2007) established a clear relationship between postponement strategies and the location of
the CODP. In Figure 6, this framework is extended by indicating the influences of demand
uncertainty reasons on the various positions of the CODP, linking them thereby to different
postponement strategies. Four examples are shown in Figure 6 illustrating hypothesised
effects. ‘Variation in product price’ influences the CODP at the point of sale and thus
demands for price postponement to alleviate uncertainty risk. ‘Changing customer preferences
and behaviour’ pushes the CODP to positions around the production process and may be
countered by logistics and production postponement. ‘Price sensitivity of materials’ is
influencing the purchasing process and thus purchasing postponement can push the CODP to
the latest moment of purchase. ‘Innovation and quick life-cycles’ requires fast responsiveness
in product development by companies and thus product development postponement pushes
3. Chapter: Conceptual Research Model
27
the CODP to a later stage of product development. Hence, each reason underlying demand
uncertainty influences the supply chain at a specific point. By moving the CODP to this point
in the supply chain, that is applying a certain postponement strategy, the negative effect of
demand uncertainty may be mitigated.
Price sensitivity of
materials
Changing customer preferences and
behavior
Variation of Product price
Innovations/ quick life-cycles
Price Postponement
Dashed line = Customer order decoupling point
Price sensitivity of
materials
Changing customer preferences and
behavior
Variation of Product price
Innovations/ quick life-cycles
Price Postponement
Dashed line = Customer order decoupling point
Figure 6: The CODP and reasons of demand uncertainty (adapted from Yang et al. 2007)
3.3. Conclusion
In conclusion, this chapter developed a conceptual research model by identifying various
sources of demand uncertainty and linking them to the postponement strategies discussed in
the previous chapter. Eight potentially influential demand uncertainty sources were thereby
linked to five different postponement strategies. Thus, some sources may demand for the
same postponement strategies, namely logistics and production postponement. In essence the
proposed strategy choice model illustrates the impact of the sources of demand uncertainty on
the positioning of the CODP. The following chapter will explain the methodology for testing
the established research model.
4. Chapter: Methodology
28
4. Methodology
Subsequent to the establishment of the above research model, the methodology for model
verification needs to be determined. The research was accomplished in two phases. In the first
phase the completeness of the model was verified my conducting field interviews. The
interviews as well as the resulting model adaptations are described in the following section. In
the second phase, the adapted model was examined by means of a structured online
questionnaire. The questionnaire composition, the pre-test as well as the procedure of data
collection is discussed in section 4.2. In the third phase the tools used for the subsequent data
analysis as well as the data validation will be gathered, which is explained in section 4.3.
Figure 7 summarizes this research process.
Figure 7: Research plan
4.1. Preliminary field interviews
Before starting data collection by means of a survey, three interviews were conducted with
senior supply chain managers of multinational organisations. The aim was to verify the
completeness of the factors included in the previously established model and deepen the
researchers understanding of postponement practices. The first interview was conducted with
a Senior Director of Global Logistics of a specific business unit focusing on consumer
products of a multinational technology company. Throughout this chapter, this company will
be referred to as Company 1. The second interview was conducted with a Supply Chain
Planning Manager EMEA of a multi-technology company, focusing on consumer as well as
industrial products. In the following, this company will be referred to as Company 2. The
Planning and Design
Literature Review
Field Interviews
Online Survey
Data Analysis
6 m
on
ths
Write-up
4. Chapter: Methodology
29
third interview was conducted with an ex supply chain professional of a chemicals company,
focusing on industrial products. This company will be referred to as Company 3. In this way,
B2B as well as B2C operations in the technology as well as chemicals industry could be
covered. Furthermore, all three interview partners had more than 15 years of work
experiences in the field of supply chain management at multinational companies as well as at
least 10 years of experience in their respective industries. They were therefore able to judge, if
the postponement applications at their companies are best practise or a very specific “outlier”
applications, which was taken into account when evaluating the interview results.
An unstructured questionnaire, which is provided in Appendix I, formed the guideline for
these interviews, allowing for and fostering any related additional information. The guidelines
included questions concerning the following aspects: company specific information,
application of postponement strategies, level of and reason for demand uncertainty. The
findings of this phase and the resulting adaptation of the original research model will be
described in the following subsections.
4.1.1. Interview results
Overall, the research model could be confirmed and complemented by means of the field
interviews. All three contact persons expressed a general familiarity with the concept of
postponement and reported a medium to wide-spread application within their companies. One
company even predicated that postponement would be the direction of the future.
Postponement would mainly be realized throughout the final stages of the product life cycle,
where efficiency gains have to substitute demand increases. The interviews were covering two
main areas of interest, namely postponement application and demand uncertainty, which will
be discussed in the following paragraphs. Note that only interview findings that contribute to
the model verification and adaptation will be presented. Further aspects and in-depth
examples were discussed during the interviews. These will not be reported explicitly, because
they did not directly but indirectly contribute to the research goal by deepening the
researchers understanding of the postponement concepts, and thereby supporting the
interpretation and judgement of the results.
Postponement Application
All five postponement strategies could be discovered in at least one of the interviewed
companies. Price postponement was mentioned in relation to promotions that led to later
adaptation of the product price. It should however be kept in mind that the theoretical idea of
4. Chapter: Methodology
30
postponement delays activities to the moment after a customer order is received. In that sense
only promotions that are put into place while or after communicating with the customer
should be considered as postponement. Promotions that trigger demand relocates price
postponement until after the completion of production but prior to purchase and can thus not
be considered as true postponement.
Logistics postponement is applied in all three companies. Specific products are stored at a
central location, from where customer orders are fulfilled by means of direct deliveries. This
concept seems more popular in the chemicals industry than in the technology industry.
Production postponement on the other hand seems more popular in the technology industry.
Concepts such as make-to-order, pack-to-order, and assemble-to-order are expressed to be
used extensively by Company 1 and Company 2. Interesting is that both companies stated that
close supplier cooperation is essential for the success of these strategies, as lead time
reliability is essential for assuring the desired customer service level.
Purchasing Postponement is applied in all three companies for certain materials. These
materials are usually characterized by fluctuating prices, where the purchase on the spot
market is postponement to a moment of low prices. On the other hand, purchasing
postponement is practiced in the form of just-in-time mentality, which aims at keeping a
minimal inventory.
Product development postponement was applied in two of the interviewed companies, more
precisely in the two technology companies. Company 1 reported that Research &
Development (R&D) first focuses on the innovative product functions development and
postpones the development of the product in which the new function will be used. Company 2
expressed that the primary focus is on innovative products that assure the continuity of their
trend setter history and postpones more general product development phases.
One postponement example was mentioned by Company 2 that could not be classified clearly
into one of the five postponement strategies. It was stated that delaying the hiring of
temporary labour to the latest possible moment is postponement. This example could be
classified as purchasing postponement, because temporary labour is purchased. However, as
labour is not directly but indirectly adding value to the customer, the hiring process will not
be taken into account throughout this research. Future research should analyse postponement
in the area of HR in more detail.
4. Chapter: Methodology
31
Demand Uncertainty
All three companies reported a medium to high level of demand uncertainty. The major
reason especially in the chemicals industry was indicated to be the bullwhip effect. Lack of
information about timing and amount of upcoming orders causes demand uncertainty and
thereby costs due to, for instance, longer lead times or higher safety stocks. Company 3 stated
that the lack of trust between companies is clearly the reason of the bullwhip effect.
Information sharing, which would reduce the bullwhip effect, will only occur if both parties
trust each other.
Furthermore, various other reasons of demand uncertainty were stated. For instance, Price
changes of materials as well as competitive products achieve a partially temporary and
partially continuous shift in demand. Unforeseen weather conditions can drastically increase
or decrease demand of a product, leading to the risk of stock-outs or high inventories. The
shop around mentality of end-customers leads to irregular and spontaneous purchases that are
difficult to forecast. Changes in market share were reported to be an important factor for
demand uncertainty especially in the fast moving technology industries. Tenders that usually
lead to extensive orders may or may not create sudden production requirements.
Moreover, environmental factors such as competition, governmental regulations and
macroeconomic trends were mentioned. These however, are not relevant for this research
because postponement strategies in relation to continuous short-term demand fluctuations are
being analyzed and not abrupt extensive or long-term demand variations.
Table 2 summarizes all factors that were mentioned during the interviews.
Reasons for Demand Uncertaintymarket uncertaintiescompetitionchange in market sharemacroeconomic trendsemerging marketstax changesprice changestenderschanging regulationsshop arount mentalitybullwhip effectsupply uncertaintysupplier lead timesseasonalitylack of trust
Table 2: Overview of uncertainty factors mentioned in interviews
4. Chapter: Methodology
32
Ways of coping with demand uncertainty
Postponement strategies aim at increasing flexibility to mitigate the negative effects of
demand uncertainty. The interviewed companies were asked how they cope with the indicated
demand uncertainty. Interestingly all interviewees mentioned different business concepts
before postponement was brought up. Predominantly, the importance of precise forecasting
and honest information sharing was stated to reduce the demand uncertainty created by the
bullwhip effect. At Company 3 collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR)
with suppliers in combination with long-term contracts is perceived to be the solution.
Furthermore, VMI is conducted at Company 1 and Company 3. By sharing substantive sales
information, the inventory of the customer is managed by its supplier.
Still these procedures only increase the visibility of demand variability and can add to more
precise forecasts. But what are tools that foster the efficient and effective reaction of
production process to demand uncertainty? Close cooperation with suppliers was mentioned
that shortens delivery lead times. Furthermore, multi-scale production sites offer the
opportunity to produce different products in the same production site and thus increase and
decrease capacity for SKU production. A wide product mix with similar ingredients can
compensate for different uncertainties. Last but not least, postponement was mentioned as a
tool to create flexibility as explained above. This shows that postponement is not yet clearly
seen as a concept for reacting to demand uncertainty and more awareness and understanding
may foster application of postponement variants.
4.1.2. Adapted research model
The interview findings did not only deepen the understanding of postponement strategies in
practice, but also led to an adaptation of the original research model. Three reasons for
demand uncertainty that were considered to be important by the interviewees and agreed to be
missing in the model were added, namely change in market share, seasonality and weather.
Therefore, three more hypotheses are established:
Market
H4.2 In the presence of an instable market share, purchasing postponement has a positive
effect on the firm’s ability to react to demand uncertainty. (…by assuring flexibility in case
of a sudden market share decrease.)
4. Chapter: Methodology
33
H4.3 In the presence of seasonality, purchasing postponement has a positive effect on the
firm’s ability to react to demand uncertainty. (…by optimizing product availability and
reduces stock levels in case of uncertain high and low season timing.)
Other H5.1 In the presence of unforeseeable weather conditions, production postponement has a
positive effect on the firm’s ability to react to demand uncertainty. (…by reducing the
necessary amount of safety stock.)
Furthermore, it is perceived that the questionnaire should also cover the aims of the
implemented postponement strategies, as well as their impact on company performance in
order to receive a greater picture of the benefit of a postponement strategy in certain
circumstances. Figure 8 presents an overview of the adapted research construct.
DemandUncertainty
Postponement Strategies
PostponementAims
Impact on Performance
DemandUncertainty
Postponement Strategies
PostponementAims
Impact on Performance
Figure 8: Adapted overview of research construct
Figure 9 below shows the different construct linkages in more detail. At the beginning of the
chain the hypothesized linkages between the identified reasons underlying demand
uncertainty and the five postponement strategies are indicated by the arrows. Subsequently,
the aims or expected achievements of each postponement strategy are shown, followed by the
impact on company performance.
4. Chapter: Methodology
34
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
4.2 Change in Market share
4.3 High seasonality
5.) Other
5.1 Weather
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H1.1
H1.2
H2.1a
H2.1b
H2.2bH2.2a
H3.1
H4.1
H4.2
H4.3
H5.1
•Product price optimization
•Lead time reduction
•Increased customer responsiveness (short-term, operational)
•Inventory reduction
•Overall cost reduction
•Benefit from decreasing material prices
•Increased customer orientation (long-term, e.g. regarding new product development)•Increased innovativeness
Postponement Aims
Performance Impact
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
4.2 Change in Market share
4.3 High seasonality
5.) Other
5.1 Weather
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H1.1
H1.2
H2.1a
H2.1b
H2.2bH2.2a
H3.1
H4.1
H4.2
H4.3
H5.1
•Product price optimization
•Lead time reduction
•Increased customer responsiveness (short-term, operational)
•Inventory reduction
•Overall cost reduction
•Benefit from decreasing material prices
•Increased customer orientation (long-term, e.g. regarding new product development)•Increased innovativeness
Postponement Aims
Performance Impact
Figure 9: Adapted research model
In order to test this construct, data is collected by means of an online survey, which will be
discussed in the following subsection. Subsequently, the analytical tools for testing the
construct as well as the construct validation process will be explained.
4.2. Online Survey
The next step in the research process is the empirical validation of the research model. For
this purpose an online survey was carried out among supply chain practitioners. The
following section will outline the questionnaire development as well as the execution process.
4.2.1. Questionnaire Development
The questionnaire was designed with the intention of collecting information from companies
about their application of different postponement strategies, their aims and the reasons for
demand uncertainty that the company is facing. Prior to asking the respondent to answer a
question regarding postponement strategies, he is offered a general explanation of
postponement and its variants to ensure a common understanding. Subsequently, three
question blocks follow, covering the aspects just mentioned. Additionally, some general
4. Chapter: Methodology
35
questions about company characteristics were included. The complete questionnaire can be
found in Appendix II.
The measurement scales could not be adopted from earlier research, because very little
empirical research on postponement strategies has been conducted. Therefore, similar to
previous research, a 7-point Likert scale was initially used for most questions, however with
the aim of testing its effectiveness throughout the pilot study. A 5-point Likert scaled turned
out to be the preferred measurement scale. About ten supply chain professionals and
professionals from other business professions were asked to fill in the questionnaire and
provide feedback on wording, question difficulty, layout, length of questionnaire, sequence,
spelling, mood upon completion of the questionnaire and its reasons. Seven of the ten
participants indicated a preference for a 5-point Likert scale, without being confronted with
this idea.
4.2.2. Execution of Survey
A web-based version of a survey was chosen for data collection. In this way, also respondents
that were located out of the physical reach of the researcher could be contacted. Furthermore,
the online version is convenient for respondents, because time and location for participation
can be chosen individually, and answer transmission is not time consuming. The
disadvantages of this approach are the lack of personal contact and potential technical
problems, leading to lower response rates due to incomplete questionnaires. For the
construction of the questionnaire the software program NetQuestionnaire was used. The
questionnaire was administered in English as well as in German, depending on the
respondent’s preference.
The survey was directed to supply chain professionals that have a general understanding of
the supply chain structure of their companies. Optimally, these contact persons were Supply
Chain Managers, but also other professionals that are for example working in the field of
materials management proved to be able to give very valuable input. Potential participants
were contacted by a variety of methods, including direct e-mail, forwarding through personal
contacts, forum discussions on Xing.com and LinkedIn.com, direct contacting through
xing.com, and through cooperation with the Dutch Logistics Association “Vereniging
Logistiek Management”. In total 57 professionals completed the online survey and 53
responses remained valuable after data cleansing. The majority is active in the industry
4. Chapter: Methodology
36
sectors technology, consumer goods, fashion and chemicals. An overview of the sample
characteristics will be provided in section 5.1.
The following subsection will describe the statistical tools, as well as validation of the
research construct that is conducted by means of the questionnaire data.
4.3. Analytical Tools
Partial Least Squares Path Modelling (PLS PM) is used to analyze the research model. The
findings are then cross-validated by means of Canonical Correlation and PLS Regression.
These three statistical approaches and their relationship will be explained briefly in the
following paragraphs followed by a short elaboration on the reasoning of the final choice of
methods.
Canonical Correlation
Horst’s Generalized Canonical Correlation Analysis can investigate the relationship between
two sets of variables (Thompson 1984). Thereby, the first link of the research model, as it was
depicted in Figure 9, can be analysed, that is the relationship between the set of reasons for
demand uncertainty and the set of different postponement strategies. Canonical roots can be
identified that explain an underlying latent variable. Horst’s Generalized Canonical
Correlation Analysis is based on several assumptions. In the first place the distribution of the
data is assumed to be multivariate normal. For larger sample sizes canonical correlation
however proved to be robust against other distributions. For small sample sizes, it is important
to note, that canonical correlations may only be detected, if they are very strong (> 0.7). That
means that in case of a small sample size a low significance may be detected although the link
may actually be significant (Guinot C., Latreille et al. 2001). Furthermore, outliers should be
detected in the data set because they can seriously influence canonical correlations. Finally,
the data set should not contain any redundant variables. Due to these limitations, canonical
correlations will only be used for cross-validation purposes. Instead PLS Path Modelling can
be used to emulate canonical correlation and to avoid these hard assumptions.
PLS Path Modelling
PLS Path Modelling is a specific type of Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), which is less
subject to constraints than Horst’s generalized canonical correlation analysis. In fact,
4. Chapter: Methodology
37
canonical correlation is a special case of PLS PM, as the stationary equations of Horst’s
generalized canonical correlation can also be found in the estimation of the path model
(Tenenhaus, Vinzi et al. 2005). Recently this statistical analysis became more popular among
operations management researchers. It is used for this research, because it can be employed as
a diagnostic tool that allows the simultaneous analysis of several causal relationships of
manifest (MVs) and latent variables (LVs) (Chin 1998). PLS PM is a component-based SEM
method, in contrast to a standard covariance-based SEM approach (Wetzels, Odekerken-
Schröder et al. 2009). The aim of this method is to minimize the residual variance of
dependent variables. PLS Path Modelling is adequate for the research at hand due to its
limited assumptions. It does not assume normal distribution, requires only a small data sample
and has minimal demands on measurement scale. However, according to Hsu, Chen et al.
(2006) it should be kept in mind that a small sample size leads to a downward bias in form of
underestimation of path coefficients. Furthermore, this method can not only be used for theory
verification, but also for theory development and can easily handle formative constructs
(Wetzels, Odekerken-Schröder et al. 2009).
The model specifications can be split into an outer and an inner model. The outer model, also
called the measurement model, describes the relationship between the MVs to their LVs
(Tenenhaus, Vinzi et al. 2005). Within this research it relates for instance the reasons of
uncertainty to a certain postponement strategy, which is a link that was illustrated in Figure 9.
The inner model, also called the structural model, describes the relationship among the LVs
(Tenenhaus, Vinzi et al. 2005). Furthermore, formative indicators are chosen, in contrast to
reflective indicators, because they reveal a causal link from the indicators to the latent
variable (Tenenhaus, Vinzi et al. 2005). This is in line with the research aim of this paper,
which strives to investigate, if potential reasons for demand uncertainty trigger the use of a
specific postponement strategy. To estimate the inner and outer parameters of the model, the
software SmartPLS is used, that can conduct PLS path modelling with a centroid weighting
scheme. Estimating LVs with formative indicators and a centroid weighting scheme actually
copies the stationary conditions of Horst’s generalized canonical correlation (Guinot C.,
Latreille et al. 2001). Finally, the bootstrapping procedure is used to estimate the significance
of the PLS estimates (Chin 1998).
4. Chapter: Methodology
38
PLS Regression
PLS Regression focuses on the estimation of the outer weights of formative models. In PLS
Path Modelling the outer weights are computed by a system of multiple and simple
regressions. The problem here is that formative blocks often violate the independence
hypothesis of the classical multiple and simple regressions, which leads to increased variance
of estimation, insignificant regression coefficients and not interpretable weights. Therefore
PLS Regression was developed as a new multivariate method of linear multiple regression for
formative models and is thus also applicable for the research model of this study (Esposito
Vinzi, Russolillo et al. 2009). PLS regression can handle multicollinearity which occurs when
components are not independent. It proved to be a powerful diagnostic tool detecting those
latent dimensions underlying a block that are useful for explaining LV (Tenenhaus 2005).
Finally, PLS regression preserves the asymmetry of the model opposed to canonical
correlation. As the aim of this research is to analyse the causal relationship between
predetermined variables, PLS Path Modelling is the preferred approach. PLS Regression will
however be valuable in cross-validating the PLS PM findings for a specific model link.
Thus, there are several arguments for using PLS PM as main statistical tool for the research at
hand. In the first place, PLS PM provides the researcher with greater flexibility for the
interaction between theory and data (Chin 1998). Hypothesized theoretical relationships,
including unobservable latent variables, can be modelled and then tested for significance,
whereas canonical correlation and PLS Regression do not allow for pre-specification of
relations. Canonical correlation cannot determine statistical significance of weights and
loadings resulting in a subjective and thus arbitrary cut-off value (Bagozzi, Fornell et al.
1981). However, estimating the LVs by employing mode B and the centroid scheme in PLS
PM, recovers the stationary condition of Horst’s generalized canonical correlation (Tenenhaus,
Vinzi et al. 2005). Furthermore, chains of causal relations instead of pairs of variable groups
can be analyzed taking causal effects into account. Last but not least, due to a small sample
size and hard assumptions, canonical correlations may prove to be insignificant although in
fact a significant relation exists, thereby not unrevealing all significant links of the model
(Guinot C., Latreille et al. 2001). In conclusion, PLS PM should be used as the primary
statistical tool, and canonical correlation and PLS regression will be employed for cross-
validation purposes.
4. Chapter: Methodology
39
4.4. Construct Validation
In this section construct validation will be performed. Since the model at hand includes
formative indicators, the guidelines for formative model assessment by Petter et al. (2007)
will be followed. It follows that construct validity and reliability will be examined. It is not
necessary to check for unidimensionality, as this only needs to be examined in case of
reflective models, because formative models are by definition multidimensional.
4.4.1.1.Validity
As we are analysing a formative model, the general validity tests, such as Average Variance
Extracted (AVE) and Goodness-of-Fit (GoF) that are applied on reflective models cannot be
applied. This is due to the fact that the indicators do not have to be correlated, because they
are giving rise instead of influencing the LVs (Hulland 1999). As an alternative a Principal
Component Analysis (PCA) could be conducted (Petter, Straub et al. 2007). However, in
order to preserve content validity a PCA is not conducted. This is due to the fact that all items
will be kept in the model to assure not to omit a part of the construct. A model with causal
indicators requires a “census of indicators, not a sample” (Bollen and Lennox 1991, p.308).
Additionally, clear theoretically backed judgement lead to a list of indicators that is assumed
to be complete. This was achieved by means of literature review, interviews and forum
discussions. Hence, it is assumed that all indicators contribute significantly to scale reliability
and content validity.
4.4.1.2. Reliability
The uncertainty and aims are examined for multicollinearity by means of the variance
inflation factor (VIF). The corresponding tables are provided in Appendix III. Severe
multicollinearity is said to exist, when VIF > 10 (Kutner, Nachtsheim et al. 2004). None of
the uncertainty factors and aims proved to suffer significantly from multicollinearity (VIF <
10) and therefore none was omitted from the subsequent analysis. Note, however, that
uncertainty factors C1 and D 2 , aims B 3 and C 4 and aims A 5 and D 6 indicate moderate
collinearity.
1 Uncertainty factor C = Changing customer preferences (product line) 2 Uncertainty factor D = Changing customer preferences (new product) 3 Achievement factor B = Lead time reduction 4 Achievement factor C = Inventory reduction
4. Chapter: Methodology
40
4.5. Conclusion
The initial research model has been verified as well as rounded up by means of expert
interviews. To test the resulting adapted model, an online questionnaire was developed and
executed. Finally, 53 responses resulted to be valuable for the subsequent statistical analysis.
PLS Path Modelling is used for the main analysis and Canonical Correlation as well as PLS
Regression as cross-validation. For the latter two approaches it is important to keep their
constraints and limitations in mind, while interpreting the results. The following chapter will
present the findings of the statistical analysis.
5 Achievement factor A = Overall cost reduction 6 Achievement factor D = Product price optimization
5. Chapter: Findings
41
5. Findings
This chapter will analyse the data collected by means of the online survey. In the first place,
general findings regarding postponement strategies and sample characteristics will be
presented. Thereafter, the findings of the PLS PM analysis of the research model as well as
the cross-validation by means of Canonical Correlation as well as PLS Regression will be
presented. Finally, a conclusion to this chapter is provided.
5.1. General Sample Characteristics
The data collected by means of the online questionnaire indicates a frequent application of all
five postponement strategies among the 53 respondents. Logistics, production and purchasing
postponement proved to be applied most frequently, namely by 47, 45, and 46 respondents
respectively as can be observed in Figure 10 below.
05
101520253035404550
pric
epo
stpo
nem
ent
logi
stic
spo
stpo
nem
ent
prod
uctio
npo
stpo
nem
ent
purc
hasi
ngpo
stpo
nem
ent
prod
uct
deve
lopm
ent
post
pone
mnt
number of respondents
Figure 10: Number of respondents per postponement strategy
Furthermore, logistics, production and purchasing postponement are not only most frequently
applied but also receive higher importance and are more extensively applied (Figure 11).
Price and product development postponement show rather little or moderate importance for
the respondents.
5. Chapter: Findings
42
0
5
10
15
20
25
not applied littleimportance
moderatelyimportant
important veryimportant
importance of postponement strategy / extent of application
number of indications
price
logistics
production
puchasing
prod.dev.
Figure 11: Importance/extent of application within respondents’ companies
Referring to the length of the history of postponement strategy application, it can be stated
that price and logistics postponement have been frequently applied for more than ten years in
various companies, whereas production and purchasing postponement are on average used for
about 5 years. Product development postponement, on the other hand, indicates to be a rather
recent phenomenon as the majority of respondents indicates an application of less than 3 years.
The corresponding Figure is provided in appendix IV.
The impact of postponement on company performance was generally rated as positive to very
positive as can be observed in appendix IV. Only in very few instances, for product
development postponement and purchasing postponement, a negative influence was indicated
by two to three respondents. In case of product development postponement this can be due to
a negative impact on financial performance, even though a positive effect on innovation may
have been achieved. In case of purchasing postponement a negative impact may be due to the
risk of price variations.
The respondents are originating from different industries as shown in Figure 12. 22.2% of the
respondents are working in the technology industry, followed by 18.5 % in consumer goods
and 16.7 % in fashion as well as chemicals. There are eight respondents that fall into the
category “other”. Among these are four companies that could be classified as technology
companies and one as fashion company. In addition, two other companies indicate to produce
furniture and agricultural products, respectively.
5. Chapter: Findings
43
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
cons
umer
good
s
techn
ology
fashio
n
chem
icals
autom
otive
pharm
aceu
ticals
other
# of respondents
Figure 12: Distribution of survey respondents across industries
Moreover, 33% of the respondents indicated to operate internationally, whereas 61% operate
globally. The head quarter of 80% of the companies is located in Europe, 16% in America,
and 2 % in Asia. Only slight difference in postponement application could be detected among
European and North American companies. The p-values of the independent t-tests between
origin and logistics postponement, as shown in appendix IV, indicated that the means are
significantly different, namely significantly more important in the US compared to Europe.
This may be due to the longer distances in North America that require more frequent direct
deliveries compared to, for instance, milk runs, which are round trips by truck. However, the
findings should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size of American firms. A
comparison to Asian companies could not be established, because the sample size was too
small. Logistics postponement also varies in importance between internationally and globally
active firms. At a 10% significant level international firms indicated a significantly lower
average importance of logistics postponement.
The relation between postponement strategies and level of uncertainty does not show stronger
postponement application in the presence of high uncertainty. The following PLS path
modelling analysis will therefore investigate, if the reason of demand uncertainty has a
decisive influence on the choice of postponement application.
5. Chapter: Findings
44
5.2. The Research Model
The following subsections will report the findings in the sequence of links established above:
(1) PLS PM for Link 1: Uncertainty – Postponement Strategies, (2) PLS PM for Link 2 and 3
Aims/Impact, (3) Cross-validation by means of Canonical Correlation and PLS Regression.
The main focus will be on the results of PLS PM, because it proved to be the most robust
measure. For each postponement strategy, one PLS PM model was created in the software
program SmartPLS. Figure 13 shows the PLS PM model for price postponement as an
example. Each model includes four LVs, being demand uncertainty, the postponement
strategy, aim as well as the performance impact, that are in turn influenced by various
formative indicators (MVs).
Figure 13: PLS PM Model for Price Postponement
In order to understand the data structure behind the model, the construction of each latent
variable will now be explained.
The latent variable uncertainty is influenced by ten formative indicators (MVs). These are the
reasons underlying demand uncertainty. Data regarding these indicators was collected by
asking the respondents to specify the importance of each of the ten indicators in influencing
the demand uncertainty their company is facing.
The latent variable demand uncertainty is hypothesized to influence a certain postponement
strategy; in the example above this is price postponement (Figure 13). Price postponement
has one formative MV that is determined by asking the survey respondents to specify the
importance/extent of application of price postponement at their company.
Subsequently, price postponement leads to a certain aim of price postponement, which is
illustrated by the third LV. Eight formative postponement strategy specific indicators
5. Chapter: Findings
45
influence the aim of price postponement. Each indicator represents a possible aim of
postponement strategies. Data for these indicators was collected by asking the survey
respondents to determine the importance of each of the eight possible aims, when applying
price postponement.
Finally, the aim of price postponement is modelled to have an impact on company
performance, which is represented by the fourth LV. The impact on company performance is
influenced by one formative indicator. Data regarding this indicator was collected by asking
the survey respondents to rate the impact of price postponement on company performance.
In summary, data for the indicators of the first LV (demand uncertainty) is collected by means
of general questions, whereas the data for the indicators of the other three LVs is collected by
means of postponement strategy specific questions. Finally, the PLS algorithm is run in
SmartPLS for each of the five postponement strategy models, employing the centroid
weighting scheme, as every factor should be given the same weight (Vinzi, Chin et al. 2010).
The bootstrapping procedure subsequently provides an insight into the significance of outer
weights and path coefficients by calculating t-statistics. A summary of the findings of the PLS
PM analyses are provided in table 3, including the weights, path coefficients between LVs, t-
statistics as well as p-values. The findings will briefly be explained throughout the following
subsections. A more detailed discussion is provided in chapter 6.
5. Chapter: Findings
46
Price PostponementUncertainty weight T statistic p-value Aim weight T statistic p-value Path coefficients coefficient T statistic p-value reasuncA -0.0286 0.209 0.836 achPriceA 0.5801 1.8384 0.078 achiev. --> impact -0.1956 2.3283 0.028 reasuncB 0.2027 1.4714 0.154 achPriceB 0.3941 0.8395 0.409 price P. --> achiev. 0.3451 4.0431 0.000 reasuncC 0.2216 0.9502 0.351 achPriceC -0.6584 1.4738 0.153 uncert. --> price P. 0.5006 7.1917 0.000 reasuncD 0.2453 0.9699 0.341 achPriceD 0.8096 2.9882 0.006 reasuncE 0.0349 0.3183 0.753 achPriceE 0.5252 1.9476 0.063 reasuncF 0.9304 4.3106 0.000 achPriceF -0.098 0.5222 0.606 reasuncG -0.0366 0.3677 0.716 achPriceG -0.4612 1.8661 0.074 reasuncH -0.5791 2.5547 0.017 achPriceH 0.6008 1.8093 0.082 reasuncI -0.4026 2.0458 0.051 reasuncJ 0.1074 0.8275 0.416Logistics PostponementUncertainty weight T statistic p-value Aim weight T statistic p-value Path coefficients coefficient T statistic p-value reasuncA -0.0884 0.6799 0.503 achLogA 0.1796 0.6161 0.543 achiev. --> impact 0.3186 2.7275 0.012 reasuncB 0.4543 2.4935 0.020 achLogB 0.7529 2.8715 0.008 log. P. --> achiev. 0.368 3.4463 0.002 reasuncC 0.5875 1.9506 0.062 achLogC 0.3585 1.2531 0.222 uncert. --> log. P. 0.4979 6.2093 0.000 reasuncD -0.1043 0.4997 0.622 achLogD -0.0492 0.2152 0.831 reasuncE 0.4677 2.9732 0.006 achLogE 0.0573 0.4026 0.691 reasuncF -0.2025 1.3903 0.177 achLogF 0.298 1.2982 0.206 reasuncG 0.4373 2.7834 0.010 achLogG -0.5698 2.3398 0.028 reasuncH -0.1167 0.9133 0.370 achLogH -0.1606 1.0269 0.314 reasuncI -0.0635 0.5585 0.581 reasuncJ -0.4856 2.5177 0.019Production PostponementUncertainty weight T statistic p-value Aim weight T statistic p-value Path coefficients coefficient T statistic p-value reasuncA 0.2934 1.3947 0.175 achProdA 0.142 0.7561 0.457 achiev. --> impact 0.4383 5.9622 0.000 reasuncB -0.3168 1.9386 0.064 achProdB -0.0232 0.1269 0.900 prod P. --> achiev. 0.303 3.2706 0.003 reasuncC 0.5799 2.4229 0.023 achProdC 0.3682 1.7665 0.090 uncert. --> prod P. 0.5449 7.5044 0.000 reasuncD -0.0724 0.3611 0.721 achProdD 0.5233 2.2564 0.033 reasuncE 0.0953 0.7349 0.469 achProdE -0.5901 2.339 0.028 reasuncF -0.3339 1.8269 0.080 achProdF 0.4393 2.5593 0.017 reasuncG 0.1286 1.1134 0.276 achProdG 0.337 1.7123 0.099 reasuncH 0.4377 2.8093 0.010 achProdH -0.2446 1.489 0.149 reasuncI 0.1241 0.805 0.428 reasuncJ -0.9303 6.5523 0.000Purchasing PostponementUncertainty weight T statistic p-value Aim weight T statistic p-value Path coefficients coefficient T statistic p-value reasuncA 0.1006 0.6593 0.516 achPurchA -0.1563 0.9147 0.369 achiev. --> impact -0.1606 2.0259 0.054 reasuncB -0.4219 2.2362 0.035 achPurchB -0.4383 1.5972 0.123 purch P. --> achiev. 0.1765 2.1808 0.039 reasuncC 0.3733 1.2001 0.241 achPurchC 0.6555 3.0395 0.005 uncert. --> purch P. -0.4192 5.4058 0.000 reasuncD -0.4318 1.1568 0.258 achPurchD 0.3819 1.7152 0.099 reasuncE -0.2822 1.4894 0.149 achPurchE -0.0968 0.5051 0.618 reasuncF 0.2177 1.0907 0.286 achPurchF 1.0038 2.4103 0.024 reasuncG 0.2269 1.3184 0.199 achPurchG -0.5278 1.4743 0.153 reasuncH -0.1758 0.9494 0.352 achPurchH 0.3438 1.2617 0.219 reasuncI -0.3411 1.6839 0.105 reasuncJ 1.0563 5.7894 0.000Product Development PostponementUncertainty weight T statistic p-value Aim weight T statistic p-value Path coefficients coefficient T Statistics p-value reasuncA 0.0235 0.2257 0.823 achPrDevA 0.6398 2.0274 0.053 achiev. -> impact 0.2933 3.1323 0.004 reasuncB 0.2714 1.8281 0.079 achPrDevB 0.4112 2.0464 0.051 prod.dev. P. -> achiev. 0.2914 3.4927 0.002 reasuncC 0.3041 1.303 0.204 achPrDevC -0.3973 1.6808 0.105 uncert. -> prod.dev. P. 0.6034 10.6417 0.000 reasuncD 0.1253 0.6133 0.545 achPrDevD -0.242 0.7624 0.453 reasuncE -0.4583 3.5787 0.001 achPrDevE 0.1785 0.4419 0.662 reasuncF 0.231 1.5565 0.132 achPrDevF -0.3314 1.6419 0.113 reasuncG 0.0929 0.9826 0.335 achPrDevG -0.1615 0.469 0.643 reasuncH -0.0867 0.6723 0.508 achPrDevH 1.0124 2.564 0.017 reasuncI 0.2906 1.8372 0.078 reasuncJ 0.3343 2.0292 0.053
= positive significance expected = significant at 5% = slightly above 5%
Reasons underlying demand uncertainty Achievements/AimsA - price fluctuations (compet. Product) A- Overall cost reductionB - price fluctuations (material/component) B- Lead time reductionC - chang. customer preferences (pr. line) C- Inventory reductionD - chang. customer preferences (new prod.) D- Product price optimizationE - irregular purchases E- Benefit from decreasing material pricesF - innovation F- Increased customer responsiveness (short-term)G - change in market share G- Increased customer orientation (long-term)H - many different customer groups H- Increased innovativenessI - high seasonalityJ - weather
Table 3: PLS PM results per postponement strategy
5. Chapter: Findings
47
5.2.1. Link 1: Uncertainty – Postponement Strategies
First of all, the results show that all postponement strategies except purchasing postponement
indicate high path coefficients between 0.5 and 0.6, indicating a strong influence of
uncertainty reasons on postponement implementation. This indirectly confirms earlier
research that corroborated that postponement strategies are applied in reaction to demand
uncertainty. Purchasing postponement is the only exception, which shows a negative path
coefficient of -0.4192. This may be due to the fact that companies want to assure supply and
thus in situations of high uncertainty will not postpone purchasing to a later point in time but
rather advance the moment of purchase.
Based on the results provided in table 3, it can be stated that five of eleven hypotheses turn
out to be significant, of which however two prove to have the opposite sign (highlighted as
well as circled p-values in table 3). Logistics postponement is indeed positively influenced by
irregular purchases. Production postponement is indeed positively influenced by changing
customer preferences and various different customer groups, however negatively influenced
by demand changes due to weather conditions. Finally, purchasing postponement turns out to
be negatively and not positively influenced by price fluctuations of materials and components.
Eight additional relations turn out to be significant. These are highlighted but not circled in
the first column of table 3.
5.2.2. Link 2 and 3: Postponement Aims and Performance Impact
The second link was established to provide a clearer picture of the value of postponement
strategies in given market dynamics, analyzing the resulting achievement and their impact on
company performance. All path coefficients between latent variables are significant. The
results are provided in the second column of table 3.
Four of ten expected links between postponement and aims could be confirmed. Price
postponement is indeed positively related to product price optimization. Logistics
postponement strives for lead time reduction. Production postponement is in fact aiming at
increased customer responsiveness in the short-term and product development postponement
results in increased innovativeness. Five additional factors were found to be significant. These
are highlighted but not circled in the second column of table 3.
5. Chapter: Findings
48
Finally the results for the third link, namely the impact on company performance, demonstrate
that the aims of all postponement strategies except purchasing postponement have a path
coefficient on performance impact that is significant at 5%. The path coefficient for
purchasing postponement however has a p-value of only slightly above 5% and may therefore
also be considered significant. The p-values for the path coefficients are reported in column
three of table 3. Note however, that price and purchasing postponement have a negative path
coefficient of -0.1956 and -1.606 respectively. In both cases this may be due to hedging
against price risk by advancing instead of postponing activities.
5.3. Cross-validation with other statistical approaches
Tow questions arise with regard to the first link (uncertainty-postponement), which will help
to answer the problem statement. Firstly, should the latent factors determined by means of the
PLS PM analysis be taken for granted? Thus, canonical correlation analysis will be used to
determine latent factors based on the actual data. As discussed this analysis however requires
hard assumptions and cannot cope with multicollinearity. Thus, factor D is eliminated for this
analysis due high correlation with factor C and relatively high VIF of > 3.3 (Diamantopoulos
and Siguaw 2006). The second question follows from this argumentation. Can factor D be
integrated into the analysis? PLS Regression can accomplish this, as it can cope with
multicollinearity. Therefore, the following paragraphs will provide the results of Canonical
Correlation as well as PLS Regression to cross-validate the findings from the PLS PM
analysis. Cross-validation is only conducted for the first model link, as this link is the main
focus of this thesis. The corresponding tables are provided in Appendix V and VI,
respectively.
Canonical Correlation Analysis
As Canonical Correlation Analysis assumes low multicollinearity, factor “D- Changing
customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated products” was eliminated for
this test. It should be taken into consideration that the canonical weights may be
underestimated due to a small sample size and thus may reveal insignificant results. Analysis
outputs as well as explanations are provided in Appendix V.
It can be observed that merely logistics postponement, production postponement and product
development postponement show significant relations with demand uncertainty reasons. Four
of seven significant canonical loadings support significant indicators found by means of the
5. Chapter: Findings
49
PLS PM analysis. Not all significant relations from the PLS PM analysis could be validated,
as canonical correlations may be underestimated due to the hard assumptions of canonical
correlation. Overall, only two hypotheses could be confirmed (H4.1, H4.4 (negative)),
underlining the importance of other factors than expected.
PLS Regression
As the results of the canonical correlation may be unstable due to a small sample size and
presence of multicollinearity, the results are verified by means of Partial Least Squares
Regression (PLS R). This additional analysis may also render conclusions to price
postponement and product development postponement, which could not be significantly
interpreted by means of canonical correlation. Furthermore uncertainty factor D may now be
included in the analysis, because PLS R can handle multicollinearity for formative constructs,
representing thereby an alternative to PLS Path Modelling (Tenenhaus, Vinzi et al. 2005).
Table 4 shows the significant indicators determined by PLS R. Analysis outputs as well as
explanations on PLS R are provided in appendix VI.
For all postponement strategies significant indicators were found. However, only five of the
twelve factors that are significant by PLS R support the findings from the PLS PM Analysis.
The other factors indicate that more uncertainty reasons may be important. Two hypotheses
could be confirmed. However, these results should be interpreted with caution as PLS
Regression does not draw clear links between postponement strategies and uncertainty
indicators but rather forms new latent variables with a combination of several variables.
Table 4 summarizes all findings of the link between demand uncertainty and postponement
strategies. Comparing the results of all statistical approaches, it can be concluded that they are
too a great extent confirming the results of PLS Path Modelling. The difference in significant
factors in the cross-validation analyses opposed to significant factors with PLS PM should be
judged with caution, as this discrepancy may be due to statistical constraints.
5. Chapter: Findings
50
Canonical loadings
PLS Regression Hypothesis
Price Postponement 0.694Uncertainty weight T statistic p-value reasuncA -0.0286 0.209 0.836 H1.1 reasuncB 0.2027 1.4714 0.154 reasuncC 0.2216 0.9502 0.351 0.472 reasuncD 0.2453 0.9699 0.341 0.486 reasuncE 0.0349 0.3183 0.753 reasuncF 0.9304 4.3106 0.000 0.384 reasuncG -0.0366 0.3677 0.716 reasuncH -0.5791 2.5547 0.017 reasuncI -0.4026 2.0458 0.051 reasuncJ 0.1074 0.8275 0.416Logistics Postponement -0.687 0.581Uncertainty weight T statistic p-value reasuncA -0.0884 0.6799 0.503 reasuncB 0.4543 2.4935 0.020 reasuncC 0.5875 1.9506 0.062 reasuncD -0.1043 0.4997 0.622 reasuncE 0.4677 2.9732 0.006 H2.2b reasuncF -0.2025 1.3903 0.177 reasuncG 0.4373 2.7834 0.010 -0.572 0.493 reasuncH -0.1167 0.9133 0.370 reasuncI -0.0635 0.5585 0.581 reasuncJ -0.4856 2.5177 0.019 0.485 -0.582Production Postponement -0.687 0.597Uncertainty weight T statistic p-value reasuncA 0.2934 1.3947 0.175 reasuncB -0.3168 1.9386 0.064 reasuncC 0.5799 2.4229 0.023 H2.1a reasuncD -0.0724 0.3611 0.721 reasuncE 0.0953 0.7349 0.469 H2.2a reasuncF -0.3339 1.8269 0.080 reasuncG 0.1286 1.1134 0.276 -0.572 0.493 reasuncH 0.4377 2.8093 0.010 H4.1 reasuncI 0.1241 0.805 0.428 reasuncJ -0.9303 6.5523 0.000 0.485 -0.582 H4.4Purchasing Postponement 0.787Uncertainty weight T statistic p-value reasuncA 0.1006 0.6593 0.516 0.418 reasuncB -0.4219 2.2362 0.035 0.591 H1.2 reasuncC 0.3733 1.2001 0.241 reasuncD -0.4318 1.1568 0.258 reasuncE -0.2822 1.4894 0.149 reasuncF 0.2177 1.0907 0.286 -0.534 reasuncG 0.2269 1.3184 0.199 H4.2 reasuncH -0.1758 0.9494 0.352 reasuncI -0.3411 1.6839 0.105 H4.3 reasuncJ 1.0563 5.7894 0.000 -Product Development Postponement -0.821 0.769Uncertainty weight T statistic p-value reasuncA 0.0235 0.2257 0.823 reasuncB 0.2714 1.8281 0.079 0.472 reasuncC 0.3041 1.303 0.204 -0.692 0.486 reasuncD 0.1253 0.6133 0.545 H2.1b reasuncE -0.4583 3.5787 0.001 reasuncF 0.231 1.5565 0.132 H3.1 reasuncG 0.0929 0.9826 0.335 reasuncH -0.0867 0.6723 0.508 reasuncI 0.2906 1.8372 0.078 -0.596 reasuncJ 0.3343 2.0292 0.053 -0.697
Reasons underlying demand uncertainty = positive significance expected A - price fluctuations (compet. Product) = significant at 5% B - price fluctuations (material/component) = slightly above 5% C - chang. customer preferences (pr. line) = - signifiance D - chang. customer preferences (new prod.) = + significance E - irregular purchases
F - innovationG - change in market shareH - many different customer groupsI - high seasonalityJ - weather
PLS PM
Table 4: Overview of cross-validation
5. Chapter: Findings
51
5.4. Conclusion
This chapter provided the findings of the empirical research which is investigating the
relationship between demand uncertainty and postponement strategies as well as the influence
on postponement aims and the impact on company performance. From PLS PM analysis it
can be concluded that only five of the eleven hypothesis regarding demand uncertainty
reasons were confirmed and seven additional relations were identified. Cross-validation by
means of canonical correlation and PLS Regression confirmed the findings from PLS PM to a
great extent. The following chapter will discuss the findings in more detail, including
discrepancies between expectations and findings. The discussion chapter will conclude with
the development of a decision matrix for postponement strategy choice.
6. Chapter: Discussion
52
6. Discussion
In the following sections each postponement strategy will be discussed by interpreting the
findings of the statistical analysis. Hereafter, the findings will be summarized by means of a
postponement decision matrix and recommendations for its application will be presented.
6.1. Postponement Strategies
The five postponement strategies will be discussed along the upwards direction of the supply
chain including all three model links.
6.1.1. Price Postponement
Uncertainties
Price postponement was expected to be positively influenced by demand uncertainty resulting
from price fluctuations of competitive products (H1.1). However, the findings in this thesis do
not confirm this hypothesis. A possible explanation for this outcome is that frequent price
adaptations, apart from promotional campaigns, do generally not occur. For this reason, price
postponement is not applied to existing products, but rather applied to new products that are
introduced into the market. The researcher however expects this factor to be significant for
service firms, which were not included in this study. By setting the price of a service, which
will take place at a fixed future time, as late as possible, revenue can be maximized. For
instance, in the airline industry, ticket prices are adapted according to demand development
throughout the time period prior to flight. Thereby, a low price can initially foster demand and
a high price can finally take advantage of the urgent need for this service. Revenue or demand
management is therefore a special case of price postponement and should be covered in future
research.
Furthermore, price postponement is found to be positively influenced by a high degree of
innovativeness within the industry at hand. In particular, final price determination in this kind
of situation turns out to be difficult. The reason is that market and competitor behaviour can
only be anticipated to a limited extent due to short life-cycles and a variety of customer
preferences. Hence, the pricing decision is postponed as much as possible to base it on the
most complete set of market information available.
On the contrary, the factor variety of different customer groups is and should be negatively
related to price postponement. Price discrimination may prove to be too complex and may
6. Chapter: Discussion
53
even be legally forbidden. Evidently, a teenager may not be charged a different price than a
senior. Due to different demand characteristics of various customer groups, a unique view of
demand can not be established, therefore not allowing price postponement to deliver benefits
when compared to prior to production price setting. However, price differentiation according
to a few very specific customer characteristics is allowed and even beneficial. This is as
mentioned above conducted by demand management that discriminates prices for example
according to early and late bookers.
Moreover, high seasonality is also negatively related to price postponement. In the presence
of high seasonality, prices rise and decrease according to season specific conditions. In
particular, the degree of demand uncertainty as well as customers’ price sensitivity is reduced
thanks to seasonality. Thus, as these price fluctuations can be forecasted relatively precisely,
price postponement is not necessary and does not lead to great benefits. The cost-benefit
analysis may well show that the costs are higher than the benefits associated with price
postponement in this case.
Aims
Moving one step forward in the causal link, the analysis in chapter 5 indicates that companies
aim to achieve product price optimization. Final price determination is postponed or is subject
to future adaptations in order to benefit from better market information leading to an
optimization of product pricing that maximizes revenue. Again not that in the service industry,
which was not subject to this study, continuous price adaptation prior to the service, referred
to as demand management, may also be seen as price postponement that maximizes revenues,
a potential additional aim.
Performance Impact
Even though the explanations stated above may sound logical, it was discovered that price
postponement actually had a negative impact on company performance. Although it was
assumed that price postponement would lead to price optimization and should have lead to
revenue maximization, the model showed that this was not the case. A possible explanation is
that price postponement could lead to unclear price communication to the customer, which
could result in confusion, irritation and annoyance on the side of the customer. Consequently,
customer satisfaction is reduced and the product buying decision could be postponed or
suspended.
6. Chapter: Discussion
54
6.1.2. Logistics Postponement
Uncertainties
Logistics Postponement was expected to be positively related to irregularity of purchases
(H2.2b). The results published in this thesis confirm this hypothesis. It was argued that in case
of short lead times being very important, direct shipments from a central distribution centre
could be beneficial in situations of irregular purchases. Nonetheless, it is important to take
into account that stocking all items at a distribution centre, while demand is highly variable,
will lead to a high level of space, handling and thus cost requirements. Obviously, customers
always prefer shorter lead times, but the actual benefits of this have to be precisely analysed
and compared to higher space and distribution costs to avoid unnecessary costly stock. In the
situation of irregular purchases, logistics postponement should therefore only be applied to
items for which short lead times are essential.
Additional uncertainty factors were also found to be significant. First of all, price fluctuations
of materials or components show to positively influence logistics postponement. It has to be
noted here that this result may well have been reached due to logistics postponement being
confused with purchasing postponement. Despite early purchases, the delivery of purchased
material may have been postponement instead of the final good. Therefore, this cannot be
considered as logistics postponement.
Thirdly, a changing market share also has a significantly positive effect on logistics
postponement. Despite this surprising outcome, a possible explanation is that in this situation,
product lines should be pooled in one distribution centre to offset the demand variability of
different products. As such, variability in stock requirements and hence warehouse space can
be balanced out. As a matter of fact, changes in market share could be translated into demand
variability across and between product lines. Consequently, the pooling effect of a distribution
centre also applies in this situation.
Finally, weather conditions are negatively related to logistics postponement. Evidently, this
result refers to products whose demand is sensitive to weather conditions. For instance, in
cold summers, sunscreen experiences a much lower demand than in warm summers. Hence,
high levels of inventory at distribution centres should be avoided, if weather conditions have a
strong influence on actual demand.
Aims
Observing the results of logistics postponement, the hypothesis with respect to lead time
reduction was confirmed. Naturally, direct deliveries from stock ensure the shortest possible
6. Chapter: Discussion
55
lead time. Furthermore, the aim of increased customer orientation in the long-run was found
to be significantly negatively related to logistics postponement. In fact, logistics
postponement rather focuses on short-run customer orientation by being flexible in quickly
fulfilling certain needs as opposed to a long-run customer orientation, where customer
preferences are taken into account with regard to new product development.
Performance Impact
The performance impact of logistics postponement is found to be significantly positive. In
particular, the higher the level of centralization of inventory, the higher are the pooling effects
and consequently the higher are also the associated cost savings. Furthermore, short lead
times will increase customer satisfaction and may thus generate more demand. Nevertheless,
it should not be neglected that logistics cost may increase significantly due to costly direct
shipments instead of transportation bundling.
6.1.3. Production Postponement
Uncertainties
Production Postponement was expected to be positively related to changing customer
preferences across product lines, irregular purchases, various different customer groups and
weather conditions. Apart from the factor irregular purchases, all factors have proven to be
significantly related to production postponement; the latter however shows the opposite sign.
Changing customer preferences across product lines (H2.1a) is indeed positively related to
production postponement. The reasoning is such that product modules or differentiations are
applied or added upon customer request and thus only the basic products need to be on stock.
Evidently, if demand varies a lot between differentiations within a product line, production
postponement can react to this flexibly with only limited amounts of stock levels.
The presence of various different customer groups (H4.1) also proves to have a significantly
positive effect on production postponement. These customer groups are characterised by
different customer characteristics and thus a segmented market. Production postponement
does not only achieve flexibility for local demand differences across product lines; but also
addresses geographic differences as well as variation between product lines. As a matter of
fact, this positive effect can be amplified by centralizing production at a distribution centre.
Hence, the benefits of logistics postponement and production postponement can be combined.
The mutual effect could be further investigated by future research.
6. Chapter: Discussion
56
Weather conditions (H5.1) are significantly negatively related to production postponement.
This is surprising as it was expected that uncertain weather conditions and the resulting
variable demand would require production postponement. Nonetheless, this negative relation
may be explained due to the fact that in this situation a demand decrease or increase requires
capacity flexibility and not production flexibility. In fact, demand in this situation is not
shifting, but increasing or decreasing, which renders production postponement as ineffective.
A second explanation may be that unstable weather conditions may influence materials and
components needed for product differentiations, which increases safety stock requirements.
As low stock levels should be maintained, while materials availability must be high,
production postponement may result to be inappropriate.
The forth hypothesis regarding irregular purchases (H2.2a) could not be confirmed. Similar
to the reasoning for the influence of weather conditions, capacity flexibility and not
production flexibility is required in this case. The reason is that irregular purchases lead to
demand swings. Consequently, capacity has to be flexible regarding output levels. Combined
with inventory methods based on pull principles, such as Kanban systems7, overproduction
can be avoided. Especially in cases of little product modularity or differentiations, production
postponement cannot cope with irregularity of purchases.
Aims
Increased customer responsiveness in the short-term is confirmed to be significant. The
reason is that customer preferences regarding product modules and differentiations can
thereby be satisfied quickly. The other two hypotheses relating inventory reduction and
overall cost reduction to production postponement were not confirmed. This is surprising;
nevertheless the reasoning could be explained as follows. A significant inventory reduction
may not be achieved, if the amount of differentiation or the modularity per product is
relatively low. The reason for this is that in such a case the benefit from merely stocking base
products instead of finished product is limited. Moreover, overall cost reduction may not be
accomplished as the production set-up needs to be flexible and their cost might offset a
potential inventory reduction.
Two further aims were found to be significant: product price optimization (positive relation)
and the benefit from decreasing material prices (negative relation). Product price optimization
7 A Kanban system is a materials management system, which “pulls” replenishment, if a certain inventory level is reached. This system is often managed by two buckets, where an empty bucket is handed over to replenishment, as soon as it is empty.
6. Chapter: Discussion
57
can be achieved by adapting the product modules to the customer that will achieve optimal
cost-benefit for the customer. The automotive industry exemplifies this observation by taking
pricing decision upon defining the modularity of a car during customer contact. In fact,
modules, price and customer satisfaction is balanced to reach the optimal product price.
Furthermore, benefiting from decreasing material prices is not an aim of production
postponement. Production postponement focuses on flexibly meeting customers’ needs and
not on increasing the cost structure of production. Decreasing material prices should instead
be taken into account throughout the purchasing process.
Performance Impact
With regard to company performance it could be confirmed that production postponement has
a positive impact. In particular, increased customer satisfaction due to increased
responsiveness as well as inventory reduction in case of high product modularity, improve
company performance.
6.1.4. Purchasing Postponement
Uncertainties
Purchasing postponement was expected to be positively related to price fluctuations of
materials, changes in market share and seasonality. Only price fluctuations of materials
(H1.2) turned out to be significant, however with a negative relationship. For example, a
harvest of wheat depends on weather conditions and determines the available quantity of
supply and sets price. Therefore, purchasing of wheat is expected to be postponed until a
forecast on the harvest can be made and therefore on the price that it can be bought for. On
the contrary, explaining the resulting negative relationship, it can be argued, that an early
purchase with direct full delivery or later delivery arrangements are submitted to hedge
against potential price fluctuations. Evidently, this constitutes rather an advancement of
purchasing instead of postponement.
Frequent changes in market share (H4.2) were assumed to lead to purchasing postponement
to assure flexibility in case of unstable market share division. This relation was not confirmed
by the findings in this thesis. One could assume that not many companies go through quick
market share shifts. In addition, the market introduction of new competitive products should
usually be managed by market studies and forecasts, good product positioning and fast
reaction by product differentiation, which renders purchasing postponement to have a minor
importance in this situation.
6. Chapter: Discussion
58
Furthermore, high seasonality (H4.3) did also not prove to be significant. As a matter of fact,
in this situation forecasts usually are relatively precise due to the fact that high season timing
is known and planning can account for seasonality in advance. Hence, the use of purchasing
postponement realizes no incremental benefits.
A factor that may render the forecast of a season as imprecise is unforeseen weather
conditions, which is another indicator found to be significant by this research. In case that the
demand for certain products is influenced by weather conditions, such as for ice cream, the
purchase of materials (ingredients) may be postponed to the forecasted season start.
Aims
The expected aims, namely overall cost reduction and benefit from decreasing materials
prices, are not found to be significant in the case of purchasing postponement. The aim of
overall cost reduction may be rather substituted by risk or loss avoidance. Traceable cost
reductions are not achieved. Moreover, the benefit from decreasing material prices seems to
be of minor importance. A possible explanation is that the benefit of purchasing
postponement rather results from shorter inventory ownership than from the benefit from
decreasing material prices. However, two other aims were found to be significant in the
executed research instead. Inventory reduction is another significant aim. Due to shorter
material ownership, inventory levels and thus costs can be decreased. One way of maintaining
low inventory levels is by managing close supplier cooperation such as by means of VMI.
Materials are thereby only ordered, when needed which is continuously controlled by the
supplier. It follows that no bulk purchases are required that cover a certain demand horizon.
Finally, increased customer orientation in the long-run proves to be significant. If purchasing
of new components during new product development is postponed, more accurate
specifications can be taken into account, when developing a new product. Similarly, if the
purchase of materials for product differentiation can be postponed, new and more economic
materials, or materials of higher quality, could be used. This can in turn lead to continuous
improvement and increased customer satisfaction.
Performance Impact
Finally, the impact of aims and thus achievements of purchasing postponement on company
performance is only significant at a significance level of slightly above 5%. The impact is
furthermore negative. It can be argued that, as mentioned before, purchasing postponement is
frequently used to mitigate risk instead of proactively reducing cost. Furthermore, purchasing
6. Chapter: Discussion
59
postponement is only indirectly influencing customer satisfaction, and thus the benefit is
difficult to measure.
6.1.5. Product Development Postponement
Demand Uncertainties
Product Development Postponement was expected to be positively related to changing
customer preference in the long term and little market information in innovative industries.
Both hypotheses were however not confirmed by the findings of this thesis. This is surprising;
however potential explanations could be as follows. Changing customer preferences may not
demand for product development postponement, because new market information gained
through postponement may already indicate another new potential product. In innovative
industries with little available market knowledge, product development of any kind should not
be postponed, due to the extreme importance of the first-mover advantage. Furthermore,
innovations are completely new products, something that a customer could not really imagine
yet. It follows that most information necessary for new innovations does not necessarily come
from the target market but rather from the ideas of developers or from other markets.
Finally, irregularity in purchases is found to be significantly negatively related to product
development postponement. This result should be interpreted with caution. Irregular
purchases can only occur, when a product already exists and an adaptation or new module is
developed. In this situation, it could be argued, that product development should not be
postponed. The reason is that adapting the product as soon as possible and thereby positioning
it better in the market may smoothen demand. On the other hand, the negative outcome can
mean that the bullwhip effect created by irregular purchases should be taken care of by using
other and potentially more effective methods.
Aims
As expected a significant aim of product development postponement is increased
innovativeness. In particular, the product development process is optimized since the project
subtasks are organized in a way that takes as much market information into account as
possible. Thereby, the quality of new product development is maximized; hence innovation is
accelerated.
6. Chapter: Discussion
60
Performance Impact
The overall performance impact of product development aims is positively significant.
Although the performance impact of product development postponement does not have a
direct impact on the bottom line of a company, it has a clear impact on demand as well as
customer satisfaction. Thereby it clearly results in a positive company performance impact.
Concluding on the discussion of the five postponement strategies, this subsection has
provided a deeper insight into the findings of the statistical analysis and offered the
opportunity to understand the relationship between uncertainty, aims, performance impact and
the respective postponement strategy in more depth. An explanation for all significant factors,
expected or unexpected, was provided. Note that uncertainty factors D and I as well as aims E,
G and H did not show any positive, significant influences. Thus, these factors are no triggers
for certain postponement strategies. In fact, for product development postponement this study
could not find any significant reason for uncertainty that positively triggers its implementation.
Summarizing, Figure 14 shows the research model adapted for the discussed findings of this
thesis. All positive effects and thus triggers are displayed. In order to make the findings
adequate for practical use, the following subsection will develop a postponement decision tool.
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
4.2 Change in Market share
4.3 High seasonality
5.) Other
5.1 Weather
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H2.1a
H2.2b
H4.1
H5.1
•Product price optimization
•Lead time reduction
•Increased customer responsiveness (short-term, operational)
•Inventory reduction
•Overall cost reduction
•Benefit from decreasing material prices
•Increased customer orientation (long-term, e.g. regarding new product development)•Increased innovativeness
Postponement Aims
Performance Impact
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies
Purchasing Postponement
Product Development
Postponement
Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Price Postponement
Postponement Strategies1.) Operative
1.1 Price of competitive products (substitutes + complements)
1.2 Price of materials/components
2.) Customers
2.1 Changing customer preferences/tastes across product lines
2.2 Changes in customer preferences/tastes in regard to new or differentiated product
2.3 Irregularity of purchases (bullwhip etc.)
3.) Product Characteristics
3.1 Insufficient information for product development/Innovations
4.) Market
4.1 Various customer groups with different characteristics
4.2 Change in Market share
4.3 High seasonality
5.) Other
5.1 Weather
Reasons for Demand Uncertainty
H2.1a
H2.2b
H4.1
H5.1
•Product price optimization
•Lead time reduction
•Increased customer responsiveness (short-term, operational)
•Inventory reduction
•Overall cost reduction
•Benefit from decreasing material prices
•Increased customer orientation (long-term, e.g. regarding new product development)•Increased innovativeness
Postponement Aims
Performance Impact
Figure 14: Research model adapted for the findings of this study
6. Chapter: Discussion
61
6.2. The Decision Matrix
After discussing the findings of this research throughout the previous section, this subsection
summarizes the findings by means of presenting a postponement strategy decision matrix
based on the findings of this thesis as shown in Figure 15. In fact, the goal of this decision
matrix is to support managers, when analyzing and deciding on an appropriate postponement
strategy for their company. Based on the findings of this thesis, the matrix gives an indication
on which postponement strategy is and which one is not appropriate for the demand
uncertainty and postponement aim structure of the company at hand. Before being able to
evaluate the decision matrix for a specific company, the following steps have to be carefully
taken to retrieve the necessary input.
Demand Uncertainty Reasons
do not apply/ negative impact of uncertainty
Lead time reduction
Inventory reduction
Product price optimization
Benefit from decreasing
material prices
Increased customer
responsiveness (short-term)
Increased customer ori-
entation (long-term)
Increased innovativeness
Price fluctuations (material/component)
Purchasing Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Chang. customer preferences (prod. line)
Production Postponement
Production Postponement
Chang.customer preferences (new prod.)
Irregular purchases
Product Development Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Innovation
Price Postponement
Change in market share
Logistics Postponement
Various different customer groups
Price Postponement
Production Postponement
Production Postponement
High seasonality
Price Postponement
Weather
Logistics/ Production
Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Consider applying/ positive impact on company performance
+ Logistics Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Price/Production Postponement
Price Postponement
Production/ Purchasing
Postponement
Product Development Postponement
Do not apply/ negative impact on company performance
- Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Aims/Achievements
Figure 15: Postponement strategy decision matrix
In the first place, it is important to gain a clear understanding of the reasons underlying the
demand uncertainty that the company is facing. The following questions help to gather the
necessary information:
How variable is the demand uncertainty? Which data indicates demand variability?
Why do we face demand uncertainty? What are the reasons of demand uncertainty?
6. Chapter: Discussion
62
In the second step, the aims and desired achievements, which the company is striving for in
order to effectively cope with the effects of demand uncertainty, have to be defined. The
following questions support this process:
Which difficulties/challenges do we face with regard to demand uncertainty?
How do we currently respond to demand uncertainty?
What do we want to achieve in the near future? On which aspects do we want to improve?
Subsequently, after these two aspects are clearly analysed and defined, the postponement
strategy decision matrix can be evaluated to determine, if and how postponement could
support the business goals. If the matrix indicates a certain postponement strategy to be
appropriate, the explanations regarding this type of postponement strategy throughout this
thesis can be considered to evaluate in what way this strategy could fit to the company needs.
In addition, several case studies can be found in literature, that are also included in the
references of this thesis, providing ideas on how to implement such postponement strategies.
The argumentation along the matrix evaluation can be elaborated upon by using interview
results that were acquired from the interview with Company 1. In the first place, reasons for
demand uncertainty as well as aims that shall be achieved in order to reduce the demand
uncertainty effects need to be identified. Referring to the reasons of demand uncertainty,
Company 1 indicated that the weather has a great influence on the variability of their demand.
If the weather is unexpectedly bad during the summer months, demand will decrease, in
contrast to the forecast. In order to cope with this kind of demand uncertainty, Company 1 put
forward the goals, which they want to achieve in coping with the identified demand
uncertainty. In the first place, their aim is to achieve increased customer-orientation in the
short term to be able to react to customer needs in a flexible way. Furthermore, they aim to
ensure that inventories remain minimal, even in periods, when demand is lower than expected.
On the other hand, availability needs to be guaranteed, even when demand turns out to be
higher than expected.
Subsequent to the identification of reasons for demand uncertainty and aims, the decision
matrix is evaluated. As illustrated in Figure 16, it can be observed that seasonality in
combination with the aims of inventory reduction and increased customer orientation in the
short-term indicate purchasing postponement to be the adequate postponement strategy. The
reasoning for this combination has been explained in subsection 6.1 above. Company 1 has
6. Chapter: Discussion
63
already implemented purchasing postponement in form of vendor managed inventory. In this
case, not Company 1 but the supplier is responsible for replenishing inventory as needed,
thereby reducing safety stock requirements due to shorter lead times. On the other hand, the
supplier receives accurate and timely demand data and can thereby adapt his offering in order
to satisfy Company 1’s needs in the long-term. Additionally, other ways of applying
purchasing postponement should be explored. For instance, the product range could be
analysed for potential opportunities for just-in-time supplies. Also the potential from
deepened supplier relationships should be analysed to reduce inventory. At this point of the
matrix evaluation, it is important to search for implementation ideas of the identified
postponement strategies and to examine their suitability for the specific company processes.
Finally, the matrix also indicates that production postponement may also reach one of their
aims, but in presence of the given demand uncertainty reason, production postponement
should not be applied. Also Logistics postponement is not appropriate in the presence of
changing weather conditions, as indicated in the second column. This empirical research
could unfortunately not conclude on the adequacy of price and product development
postponement in this study, as no significant results were found.
Demand Uncertainty Reasons
do not apply/ negative impact of uncertainty
Lead time reduction
Inventory reduction
Product price optimization
Benefit from decreasing
material prices
Increased customer
responsive-ness (short-term)
Increased customer ori-
entation (long-term)
Increased innovative-ness
Price fluctuations (material/component)
Purchasing Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Chang. customer preferences (prod. line)
Production Postponement
Production Postponement
Chang.customer preferences (new prod.)
Irregular purchases
Product Development Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Innovation
Price Postponement
Change in market share
Logistics Postponement
Various different customer groups
Price Postponement
Production Postponement
Production Postponement
High seasonality
Price Postponement
Weather
Logistics/ Production
Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Consider applying/ positive impact on company performance
+ Logistics Postponement
Purchasing Postponement
Price/Production Postponement
Price Postponement
Production/ Purchasing
Postponement
Product Development Postponement
Do not apply/negative impact on company performance
- Production Postponement
Logistics Postponement
Aims/Achievements
Figure 16: Example of matrix evaluation
6. Chapter: Discussion
64
Concluding, the postponement strategy decision matrix indicates which postponement
strategy is appropriate in the company specific situation, as well as which strategy is not
appropriate. Postponement strategies that are not indicated for a certain combination of
indicators, neither positively nor negatively, should be subject to further investigation as no
significant conclusion in this respect could be drawn from this research. ^
6.3. Conclusion
This chapter discussed the research findings for each postponement strategy in detail. For all
significant relations, suggestions for interpretation were provided. The findings were
additionally summarized by means of a postponement strategy decision matrix, which links
demand uncertainty reasons and aims to postponement strategies. Guidelines for how to apply
this matrix were provided, which enable managers to evaluate postponement opportunities
within their company. Note that it is very important to evaluate and assess the outcome of the
matrix in light of company specific processes and market specific characteristics.
7. Chapter: Conclusion
65
7. Conclusion and Future Research
This final chapter will in the first place conclude this research by answering the research
question, followed by an overview of the theoretical as well as managerial contributions.
Finally, the limitations of this research are discussed and future research opportunities
highlighted.
7.1. Problem Statement
The sub-questions8 developed for answering the problem statement, can be answered as
follows. First of all, this thesis defines postponement as the action of delaying certain
activities of the supply chain downstream of the customer-order decoupling point in order to
achieve more flexibility and responsiveness to demand uncertainty. A variety of
postponement strategies exist which can focus on any activity of the supply chain. From the
literature review it resulted that the most widely discussed and applied postponement
strategies are price postponement, logistics postponement, production postponement,
purchasing postponement and product development postponement. This group of strategies
was chosen for this research, also because it covers extensive parts of a companies supply
chain. Furthermore, this thesis positions demand uncertainty into relation with the just
mentioned postponement strategies. “Uncertainty is best understood as an information defect”
(Spender 1993, p.16). When incomplete demand information is available, demand cannot be
predicted with certainty. The literature review in combination with field interviews resulted in
a list of ten reasons underlying demand uncertainty that were expected to affect the choice of
postponement strategies, and which became part of the research model.
Based on the findings and discussion of the previous chapters, the research question,
including the last three sub-questions, can be answered. The research question asked: “How
do the reasons underlying demand uncertainty affect the choice of an appropriate
postponement strategy?” It can be concluded that demand uncertainty reasons indeed have a
8 Sub-questions: - How is postponement defined?
- Which postponement strategies do exist and what is their specific purpose? - How is demand uncertainty defined? - Which are the most important reasons for demand uncertainty? - Which postponement strategy reacts to which demand uncertainty dimension? - Which postponement strategy has what operational goal? - What is the impact of postponement strategies on company performance?
7. Chapter: Conclusion
66
significant effect on the choice of postponement strategies. Demand uncertainty and its
reasons are affecting a company’s supply chain and specific postponement strategies that can
be applied in these situations in order to mitigate the uncertainty risk or to improve company
performance under these conditions. Five hypotheses could be confirmed of which however
two proved to have a negative impact on the respective postponement strategy. In addition
eight other significant factors were found to be significant, four with a negative impact. These
results emphasize that demand uncertainty reasons cannot only foster postponement
implementation, but may also render a postponement strategy inappropriate. All positive
triggers are visualized by the adapted research construct in Figure 14. Furthermore, the
postponement strategy decision matrix as shown in Figure 15 shows in detail, which demand
uncertainty reasons have a significantly positive or negative impact on a certain postponement
strategy. In addition, the matrix visualizes which operational goals are achieved with which
postponement strategy. Finally, the findings of this thesis indicate a positive impact of
logistics, production and product development postponement and a negative impact of price
and purchasing postponement on company performance. The negative impact should however
not be overestimated, as price and purchasing postponement are frequently seen as a means to
ensure instead of create high profit.
7.2. Theoretical contributions
First of all, this study contributes to the understanding of postponement strategies in currently
published literature, by explaining their specific purpose and providing a discussion on
existing strategy decision tools. One aspect that is discussed several times in the literature
regarding postponement strategy choice is the link between postponement application and the
level of demand uncertainty. The research at hand extends this aspect by not only considering
the level of demand uncertainty, but also additionally analysing the reasons underlying
demand uncertainty, when investigating the question of which strategy to chose in which
specific situation. A causal chain including demand uncertainty – postponement strategy –
postponement aims – performance impact was developed and tested empirically. The causal
chain together with the resulting decision matrix results in a clear contribution to current
literature and to a deeper understanding of demand uncertainty in regard to postponement
strategy choice. Moreover, currently very little empirical research has been conduct in the
field of postponement strategies. This study conducted an empirical investigation and thereby
contributes to overcoming this gap in current literature.
7. Chapter: Conclusion
67
7.3. Managerial contributions
The thesis focuses on postponement strategy choice and thus leads to several managerial
implications. In the first place, when initiating a postponement evaluation process, managers
should first analyze their environment as well as their processes. In particular, this study
encourages managers to understand the reasons and sources of demand uncertainty their
company is facing, in contrast to merely focusing on the level of demand uncertainty.
Depending on the discovered reasons underlying uncertainty, certain postponement strategies
will result to be most appropriate and whose application possibilities should be explored. First
of all, managers should follow a postponement choice process that conducts certain analysis
steps that were explained in section 6.2. The evaluation of their analysis can in turn be based
on the postponement strategy decision matrix that was developed by means of the empirical
investigation of this study. The matrix gives a clear indication of which postponement
strategy appears most appropriate within the companies demand uncertainty situation and
thereby offers managers a good starting point for in depth investigation of potential
postponement applications. The literature review of this thesis supports practitioners to
understand, what postponement strategies are and provides them with insights into specific
postponement application. Furthermore, the presentation of existing postponement decision
tools provides management the opportunity to reflect on and evaluate their own possible
postponement implementations.
7.4. Limitations and future research
This final section will shed light on the limitations of this study and the resulting future
research opportunities. The first shortcoming concerns the choice of uncertainty indicators for
this research. Due to the fact that reasons and types of demand uncertainty are only rarely
discussed in literature, the reasons underlying demand uncertainty used in this thesis could not
be drawn on an established list of factors. The final list of indicators, which was created by
means of a literature review and the conducted interviews, may not be complete. Further
research should therefore focus on verifying and extending the list of uncertainty factors that
influences postponement strategy choice.
Furthermore, some surprising results of the online survey indicate that there might well have
been one or more possible misinterpretations of questions by respondents. As a consequence,
slightly inaccurate results may have occurred. This possibly stems from the fact that even
7. Chapter: Conclusion
68
though the concepts of postponement and demand uncertainty are generally applied, these
could well be named and defined differently throughout different companies and industries.
Therefore, future empirical research in the field of postponement as well as demand
uncertainty could focus on refining the questionnaire of this thesis, ensuring a clear common
understanding of stated concepts and survey questions among respondents.
Moreover, the focus of this study was not on one or two specific industries but on any non-
service firm. As not much research has been conducted in the field of postponement strategy
choice, the aim was to retrieve a broad picture that in turn offers the starting point for more
focused studies within specific industries. This high level point of view should be kept in
mind, when applying the proposed decision matrix. Furthermore, the sample size of this
research (n=53) could be considered to be relatively small, even though the study was not
limited to a certain industry. The limited amount of data may have caused some links of the
model to be incorrectly insignificant. Future research should therefore check this model by
using a larger sample and focus on specific industries to discover differences in postponement
applications across industries. This will help to improve the effectiveness of the postponement
strategy decision matrix.
Following from the argumentation above, it is important to note that the research at hand did
not include service firms into its analysis. The reason is that their business processes and thus
their postponement application may evolve quite differently. As mentioned throughout the
discussion of this thesis, demand and revenue management is increasingly gaining importance
in the service sector and can be categorized as a special kind of price postponement.
Therefore, future research could focus on the application of postponement strategies in service
firms as well as the applicability of postponement choice parameters, especially with regard to
demand management.
Furthermore, postponement strategies can differ for different company processes, depending
on the company size, main tasks and the supply chain structure. Thus, future research could
investigate what postponement strategies mean for different supply chain structures.
Furthermore, the findings discovered a common factor between logistics and production
postponement, which may also have caused certain misunderstanding of the postponement
concepts. If production postponement is located and applied in the same facility as a
centralized DC, meaning logistics postponement, it is difficult to clearly distinguish the
7. Chapter: Conclusion
69
effects of these two postponement strategies. In addition, future research could examine, if in
such a situation these two postponement strategies create a mutual positive effect.
Finally, this research could only draw conclusions on the effect of indicators on their LVs as
well as on the effect of LVs among each other. It could not draw clear conclusions on the
relation between indicators of different latent variables. Future research could accomplish this
by analysing mediation models, in which the relation between different indicators is mediated
by a latent variable, using a set of bootstrap methods as explained by Shrout and Bolger
(2002).
Despite these limitations, this study has provided valuable theoretical and practical
contributions and offers a good starting point for future research. Hopefully, this study will
foster further research efforts into the still widely unrevealed field of postponement strategies
and further support management activities in companies facing demand uncertainties.
Postponement success stories such as of the company Benetton are surely going to proliferate.
In light of the current progress in present literature on the topic of postponement facing
demand uncertainties, this thesis will help company decision making until future models can
be established.
Appendix
70
Appendix
Appendix I: Unstructured questionnaire for interviews
Guideline for interviews
1. Which product segments does your company serve?
2. How does the corresponding supply chain look like?
3. What degree of demand uncertainty is your division facing?
4. What are the reasons for this demand uncertainty?
5. How do you cope with this demand uncertainty?
6. Are you also using postponement strategies to cope with this demand uncertainty?
a. Or to cope with other phenomena?
b. Which postponement strategies?
c. Examples
7. In general, what do you think about the relations of the research model?
Appendix
71
Appendix II: Online questionnaire
Appendix
72
Appendix
73
Appendix
74
Appendix
75
Appendix
76
Uncertainty:
No uncertainty:
Appendix
77
Appendix
78
Appendix III: Variance Inflation Factors (VIF)
1.) Variance Inflation Factors for reasons underlying demand uncertainty
Uncertainty VIFA - Price fluctuations (compet. Product) 1.544B - Price fluctuations (material/component) 1.306C - chang. customer preferences (pr. line) 4.584D - chang. Customer preferences (new product) 5.125E - irregular purchases 1.205F - innovation 1.825G - change in market share 1.467H - many different customer groups 1.893I - high seasonality 1.795J - weather 1.525
2.) Variance Inflation Factors for postponement aims per strategy
Aim Price Logistics Production Purchasing Prod. Dev.A- Overall cost reduction 2.301 1.875 3.342 1.105 4.723B- Lead time reduction 6.906 1.302 2.657 1.691 2.24C- Inventory reduction 6.203 1.733 2.56 1.184 2.936D- Product price optimization 1.732 1.716 2.218 1.336 6.081E- Benefit from decreasing material prices 2.08 1.531 2.414 1.29 2.419F- Increased customer responsiveness (short-term) 1.279 1.642 1.819 2.606 1.289G- Increased customer orientation (long-term) 1.696 2.094 2.343 3.075 3.019H- Increased innovativeness 2.586 1.803 1.962 2.145 3.007
VIF
Appendix
79
Appendix IV: Sample Characteristics 1.) History of postponement application
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
< 3 years 3-5 years 5-10 years > 10 years
length of application
perc
enta
ge o
f res
pond
en
price postponement
logistics postponement
production postponement
purchasing postponement
product developmentpostponemnt
2.) Impact on company performance
0.00
0.100.20
0.30
0.400.50
0.60
0.700.80
0.90
verynegative
negative neutral positive verypositive
impact on company performance
perc
enta
ge o
f res
pond
e price postponement
logistics postponement
production postponement
purchasingpostponementproduct developmentpostponemnt
3.) Independent Samples T-Test
Appendix
80
Appendix V: Canonical Correlation Analysis
The canonical correlation results show that only the first two canonical roots are significant at
5-10% significance level. The remaining roots can therefore be neglected. By squaring the
first two canonical correlations, they are found to explain 51.6 % and 39.8 % respectively of
the variance in the corresponding dependent variable. To assure comparability of the
coefficients, which are also called canonical weights, standardized coefficients are used for
interpretations. Their magnitudes represent the relative contribution to the corresponding root.
Since a small sample size as well as multicollinearity can cause instability in canonical
coefficients, canonical loadings also need to be considered. The loadings of the first canonical
root demonstrate that Product Development Postponement represents by far the most
influential factor. Among the demand uncertainty factors, factors C, I, and J are most
influential. Factors that have negative coefficients equal each other out and represent positive
relationships. Loadings of root 2 show a high influence of Postponement Strategies B and C,
that are mainly affected by uncertainty factor G (positively related) and J (negatively related).
The cross-loadings indicated that 34.7 % of the variance in Postponement Strategy E is
explained by root 1 and 17.7 % and 18.8 % of the variance in Postponement Strategy B and C
are explained by root 2.
1.) Significance of Canonical Roots
Test that remaining correlations are zero:Canoncial Correlations Wilk's Chi-SQ DF Sig
1 0.718 0.183 77.251 45 0.0022 0.631 0.378 44.295 32 0.0733 0.469 0.627 21.221 21 0.4464 0.395 0.804 9.941 12 0.6215 0.218 0.953 2.211 5 0.819
Appendix
81
2.) Raw and Standardized Canonical Coefficients Raw Canonical Coefficients Standardized Canonical Coefficients
1 2 1 2reasuncA -0.007 -0.003 reasuncA -0.008 -0.004reasuncB -0.246 -0.147 reasuncB -0.258 -0.154reasuncC -0.356 -0.467 reasuncC -0.430 -0.564reasuncE 0.313 -0.135 reasuncE 0.349 -0.151reasuncF -0.129 0.426 reasuncF -0.172 0.570reasuncG -0.193 -0.397 reasuncG -0.240 -0.494reasuncH 0.132 -0.157 reasuncH 0.151 -0.179reasuncI -0.114 -0.153 reasuncI -0.162 -0.217reasuncJ -0.341 0.490 reasuncJ -0.501 0.719PosStrA 0.041 0.433 PosStrA 0.052 0.548PosStrB -0.294 -0.636 PosStrB -0.390 -0.843PosStrC 0.076 -0.439 PosStrC 0.103 -0.597PosStrD 0.357 0.000 PosStrD 0.462 0.000PosStrE -0.909 -0.282 PosStrE -1.009 -0.313
3.) Canonical Loadings and Cross Loadings Canonical Loadings Cross Loadings
1 2 1 2 sqrt(1) sqrt(2)reasuncA -0.400 -0.075 reasuncA -0.287 -0.047 8.24% 0.22%reasuncB -0.380 -0.274 reasuncB -0.273 -0.173 7.45% 2.99%reasuncC -0.692 -0.358 reasuncC -0.497 -0.226 24.70% 5.11%reasuncE 0.134 -0.172 reasuncE 0.096 -0.109 0.92% 1.19%reasuncF -0.398 0.095 reasuncF -0.286 0.060 8.18% 0.36%reasuncG -0.278 -0.572 reasuncG -0.200 -0.361 4.00% 13.03%reasuncH -0.175 -0.268 reasuncH -0.125 -0.169 1.56% 2.86%reasuncI -0.596 0.018 reasuncI -0.428 0.011 18.32% 0.01%reasuncJ -0.697 0.485 reasuncJ -0.501 0.306 25.10% 9.36%PosStrA -0.316 0.064 PosStrA -0.227 0.040 5.15% 0.16%PosStrB -0.038 -0.668 PosStrB -0.027 -0.421 0.07% 17.72%PosStrC 0.194 -0.687 PosStrC 0.140 -0.433 1.96% 18.75%PosStrD 0.333 -0.364 PosStrD 0.239 -0.229 5.71% 5.24%PosStrE -0.821 0.024 PosStrE -0.589 0.015 34.69% 0.02%
Appendix
82
Appendix VI: PLS Regression
Not taking the postponement variables for granted as latent variables, we can evaluate the
latent factors resulting from the PLS Regression instead. Analysing the table “proportion of
variance explained”, it can be concluded that it is sufficient to evaluate the first five latent
factors, because the adjusted R² decreases for the subsequent factors, indicating a penalty for
complexity. The values for the first five latent factors are shown in Table 1.
The factor loadings indicate certain relations between postponement strategies and reasons
underlying demand uncertainty. A cut-off value of 0.4 is used for latent factors loadings,
which proved to be adequate for exploratory research purposes (Hulland 1999). These results
show that different postponement strategies may be influenced by the same uncertainty
factors.
As also the table “variable importance in the projection” illustrates, reason for uncertainty H
is of minor importance (all VIP < 0.8). Reason A also shows low VIPs. However, as the
values are only slightly below the cut-off value and prove to have a positive effect in the
loadings analysis, this factor should not be neglected.
Table 1
Appendix
83
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
References
84
References
Alderson, W. (1950). "Marketing efficiency and the principle of postponement." Cost and Profit Outlook 3: 15-18.
AMR Research (2009). Factors impacting demand variability.
Bagozzi, R. P., C. Fornell, et al. (1981). "Canonical correlation analysis as a special case of a structural relations model." Multivariate Behavioral Research 16(4): 437.
Bernhardt, I. (1977). "Vertical integration and demand variability." The Journal of Industrial Economics 25(3): 213-229.
Biller, S., A. Muriel, et al. (2006). "Impact of price postponement on capacity and flexibility investment decisions." Production & Operations Management 15(2): 198-214.
Bollen, K. and R. Lennox (1991). "Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective." Psychological Bulletin 110(2): 305.
Boone, C. A., C. W. Craighead, et al. (2007). "Postponement: an evolving supply chain concept." International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 37(8): 594-611.
Bowersox, D. J., T. P. Stank, et al. (1999). "Lean Launch: Managing product introduction risk through response-based logistics." Journal of Product Innovation Management 16(6): 557-568.
Bucklin, L. P. (1965). "Postponement, speculation and the structure of distribution channels." Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) 2(1): 26-31.
Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly: 1-1.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling, Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
Cooper, R. G. and E. J. Kleinschmidt (1987). "New products: What separates winners from losers?" Journal of Product Innovation Management 4(3): 169-184.
Dapiran, P. (1992). "Benetton - Global logistics in action." International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 22(6).
Diamantopoulos, A. and J. A. Siguaw (2006). "Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration." British Journal of Management 17(4): 263-282.
Duncan, R. B. (1972). "Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty." Administrative Science Quarterly 17(3): 313-327.
References
85
Esposito Vinzi, V., G. Russolillo, et al. (2009). "A joint use of PLS Regression and PLS Path Modelling for a data analysis approach to latent variable modelling." Retrieved 03-03, 2010, from http://www.statssa.gov.za/isi2009/ScientificProgramme/IPMS/0185.pdf.
Granot, D. and S. Yin (2008). "Price and order postponement in a decentralized newsvendor model with multiplicative and price-dependent demand." Operations Research 56(1): 121-139.
Guinot C., J. Latreille, et al. (2001). "PLS Path Modelling and multiple table analysis. Application to the cosmetic habits of women in Ile-de-France." Chemometrics and Intelligent Systems 58: 247-259.
Heskett, J. L. and S. Signorelli (1984). "Benetton (A)." Harvard Business School Cases.
Hsu, S.-H., W.-H. Chen, et al. (2006). "Robustness testing of PLS, LISREL, EQS and ANN-based SEM for measuring customer satisfaction." Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 17(3): 355-371.
Hulland, J. (1999). "Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent." Strategic Management Journal 20(2): 195.
Kumar, S. and S. Craig (2007). "Dell, Inc.'s closed loop supply chain for computer assembly plants." Information Knowledge Systems Management 6(3): 197-214.
Kutner, M. H., C. J. Nachtsheim, et al. (2004). Applied Linear Regression Models, McGraw-Hill Irwin, inc, Boston.
Lee, H. L. (2002). "Aligning supply chain strategies with product uncertainties." California Management Review 44(3): 105-119.
Lee, H. L. and V. Padmanabhan (1997). "Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip effect." Management Science 43(4): 546.
Lee, H. L. and C. S. Tang (1997). "Modelling the costs and benefits of delayed product differentiation." Management Science 43(1): 40.
Lee, H. L. and S. Whang (2001). "Winning the Last Mile of E-Commerce. (cover story)." MIT Sloan Management Review 42(4): 54-62.
Liker, J. K. and T. Y. Choi (2004). "Building deep supplier relationships." Harvard Business Review 82(12): 104-113.
Matthews, P. and N. Syed (2004). "The power of postponement." Supply Chain Management Review 8(3): 28-34.
Mullins, J. W. and D. J. Sutherland (1998). "New Product Development in rapidly changing markets: An exploratory study." Journal of Product Innovation Management 15(3): 224-236.
References
86
Olhager, J. (2003). "Strategic positioning of the order penetration point." International Journal of Production Economics 85(3): 319-329.
Pagh, J. D. and M. C. Cooper (1998). "Supply Chain Postponement and Speculation Strategies: How to choose the right strategy." Journal of Business Logistics 19(2): 13-33.
Petter, S., D. Straub, et al. (2007). "Specifying formative constructs in information systems research." MIS Quarterly 31(4): 623-656.
Prockl, G., A. Bauer, et al., Eds. (2004). Entwicklungspfade und Meilensteine moderner Logistik, Gabler.
Shrout, P. E. and N. Bolger (2002). "Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations." Psychological Methods 7(4): 422-445.
Spender, J. C. (1993). "Some frontier activities around strategy theorizing." Journal of Management Studies 30(1): 11-30.
Stigler, G. (1939). "Production and distribution in the short run." The Journal of Political Economy 47(3): 305-327.
Tenenhaus, M. (2005). "PLS methodology to study relationships between hedonic judgements and product characteristics." Food Quality and Preference 16: 315-325.
Tenenhaus, M., V. E. Vinzi, et al. (2005). "PLS path modeling." Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 48(1): 159-205.
Thompson, B. (1984). Canonical Correlation Analysis: uses and interpretations, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA , .
van Hoek, R. I. (2001). "The rediscovery of postponement a literature review and directions for research." Journal of Operations Management 19(2): 161-184.
Van Mieghem, J. A. and M. Dada (1999). "Price versus Production Postponement: Capacity and Competition." Management Science 45(12): 1631.
Vinzi, V. E., W. W. Chin, et al. (2010). Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer Handbooks of Computational Statistics.
Weele, A. J. v. (2005). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. London, UK, Thomson Learning.
Wetzels, M., G. Odekerken-Schröder, et al. (2009). "Using PLS Path Modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration." MIS Quarterly 33(1): 177-195.
Yang, B. and N. Burns (2003). "Implications of postponement for the supply chain." International Journal of Production Research 41(9): 2075-2090.
References
87
Yang, B., N. D. Burns, et al. (2004). "Management of uncertainty through postponement." International Journal of Production Research 42(6): 1049-1064.
Yang, B., N. D. Burns, et al. (2005). "An empirical investigation into the barriers to postponement." International Journal of Production Research 43(5): 911-1005.
Yang, B., Y. Yang, et al. (2007). "Postponement: an inter-organizational perspective." International Journal of Production Research 45(4): 971-988.