Interacting Standards a basic element in logistics networks

Transcription

1 Interacting Standards a basic element in logistics networks Professor * Research Professor ** Ph.D. student Aurelien Rouquet* *CRET-LOG, Université de la Méditerranée Aix-Marseille II **Dept. of Strategy and Logistics, Norwegian School of Management

2 The Setting The role of standards for coordination and integration, i.e. Managing in Networks Adaptations between standards and other resource elements in a network (also other standards) The case concerns distribution of automotive parts involving one message, several packages and three labels Picture here of the Boxes with labels Falling down I have it

3 Background and Purpose Supply chains vs. networks how to coordinate and integrate? Standards as a coordination mechanism Standards for efficiency and effectiveness; adaptation and adaptability Interaction between standards vs. use and development of one PURPOSE: Contribute to greater understanding of how standards, upon which logistics systems are designed, developed and coordinated, interact with each other and with other resources in a logistics network for the purpose of improving efficiency and effectiveness.

4 Theoretical starting points Standards as a co-ordination mechanism (Brunsson and Jacobsson 2000); defining standards According to what they are (e.g. Brunsson and Jacobsson 2000) According to how they are used (e.g. David 1997) According to how they develop (e.g. David and Greenstein 1990) Standards and logistics literature (Bredillet 2003, Stock and Lambert 2001, Simchi-Levy et al 2000) Definitions in standardisation literature Physical vs. Process standards Advantages and disadvantages of standards from a logistical viewpoint Standards and technology development literature (Utterback & Co., 1989, 1975, 1995; David 1985; Håkansson and Waluszewski 2002) The concept of standard vs. dominant design and basic technology Path-dependence

5 Major points of interest from the literature: The role of standards for integration: Development and use cannot be separated Standards can lead to positive effects in chain or network context because coordination becomes easier Standards can lead to lock-in ; trade-off between adaptation and adaptability previous standards must be taken into account when introducing new ones, not only when one replace the other, but in the case of adaptations between standards Standardized interface by use of standards to connect to other resource elements Can provide efficiency and effectiveness Lock-in effect: the resource structures in which the standard is embedded A standard is not given, but is defined by how it influences and is influenced by other resources A standard is developed by other resources connected to it and through a number of actors using it. Standards can be looked upon as basic technologies in logistics, e.g. the EURO-pallet, the ISO-container Picture here of ISOcontainer I have it Picture here of europallet I have it

6 The case: methodology Case study research One case is relevant: our purpose is theory development (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) Focus on the automotive sector: Started to develop and use logistics standards in 1984 Many changes occurred since 1984: implementation of just-in-time models and/or lean management, networking, company mergers and acquisitions, internationalization and globalization, etc. During this 20-years of history, the needs of actors related to standards have changed, new standards have been developed and existing standards have changed or disappeared Use of the systematic combining approach for case study (Dubois & Gadde, 2002): The case study is composed of 9 sub-case studies conducted within: 3 car manufacturers 5 of their suppliers The French standardization body Focus on a specific standards interaction: between labels and packages Data has been triangulated as we have used three main sources: Observations during 2 years Documents: drafts of standards, minutes of meetings, etc. 90 interviews conducted Part of a PhD work (Rouquet, 2005)

7 The case: the standardization bodies in the automotive industry JAMA JAPIA ODETTE AIAG (Japan) (Europe) (US) VDA Odette Benelux GALIA Odette Sweden (Germany) (Benelux) (France) (Sweden) SMMT ANFAC Odette Czech (UK) (Spain) (Czech Republic)

8 The case: the GALIA/Odette standards Evalog EDI/WEB-EDI Logistics Protocol Service level SUPPLIER LABEL Parts PACKAGES CUSTOMER

9 From one European standard label... The first Odette standards ( ): Between 1984 and 1988, Odette develop: A range of standard packages: 20 different cardboard packages 8 reusable packages, in plastic, with a label-folder: two are pliable and six are not A range of standard labels: Transport label (210x148mm) developed for the handling unit (HU); typically a pallet containing several packaging units (PU) Handling label (210x102mm) developed for PU which fits with large reusable standards package, especially with its label-porting Handling label (210x48mm) developed for PU which fits with small reusable standards package, especially with its label-porting Both the ranges of packages and labels have over the years been widely adopted by the European automotive industry Changing the logistics process: impact on the label standards (1999): In , European car manufacturers decided to change their logistics process: the objective was to reduce the order unit and transport the packaging units directly to the assembly lines As a consequence, new information was required on the handling label However, the handling label (210x48mn) was too small In order to save changing costs, Odette decided to replace the handling label by the transport label

10 Picture here of the Boxes with labels Falling down I have it

11 ...to four different standard labels The different solutions in Europe ( ): The German standard: When the label problem appeared in Germany, the VDA decided to develop a new standard They did not conferred with Odette and conceived a German standard in 1999 This German standard has been widely adopt in this country by VW, Audi, Daimler, etc. The Global standard: Just after the label problem appeared, Odette, AIAG and JAMA and JAPIA decided to launch a global label project The conception of the standard started in mid 1999 and lasted until the end of 2001 It turned out that this standard never became a standard! Only GM adopted the global label The French standard: As a Global label project started just after the label problem appeared in France in 1999, GALIA first decided to wait for this standard When it turned out in 2002 that the global label was not a good solution for the French companies, GALIA then tried to find a solution, but: Changing the label-folder = changing all the packages Use a thicker paper that would not fall down = buy different printing machine Use the German label = the size of the print was too small and the location of data was inconvenient Set-up a European project = the German were satisfied and would not take part Finally, they decided in 2003 to develop a French standard This French standard has been widely adopt in this country by PSA, Renault, etc. In parallel, the Toyota standard in France( ): Toyota set up a plant in France in 1999 They started they production in late 2001 As in Japan and the US, they use with their suppliers their own standards (EDI, labels, packages, etc.)

12 Conclusions Theoretical implications Empirical implications Lessons from the case and theoretical propositions Conclusions and further research The story about the label, the package and the distribution network for automotive parts provide a good illustration of the merits, but also the difficulties of developing and using standards Loose vs. tight couplings: adaptation vs. adaptability Nature of interfaces: standardized (Tassey) vs. specific (Håkansson and Waluszewski)

13 Questions? Now or later to : marianne.jahre@bi.no : nfc@univ-aix.fr