The customers customer is upstream in the supply chain. group of answer choices true false

Related Papers

Suppliers are expected to reduce manufacturing firm supply risks by minimizing supply failures and by resolving supply problems, even those ones resulting from firm’s actions. Integration mechanisms may enhance interaction and collaboration in the firm supply chain, especially in the buyer-supplier interface, to reach these goals. Based on case studies in four North-American manufacturing companies in the electronic and aerospace industries, we analyzed the importance of integration mechanisms for manufacturing firms to address supply problems. We also explored some drivers supporting those mechanisms. Supplier commitment was found to be a key integration factor to address supply problems. This may be accomplished by trust and power mechanisms. Internal integration between purchasing and manufacturing groups also played a significant role in supplier collaboration at the problem solving process. Customer integration seemed more important to address supply problems for contract manufacturers than for Original Equipment Manufacturing (OEM) firms. Although supply problems might originate several stages upstream in the supply chain, surprisingly there was no integration beyond direct suppliers in the manufacturing firm supply chain.

As companies attempt to shed old habits and begin to view procurement as a strategic resource from which a competitive advantage can be gained, there is a great deal of corporate baggage that must be shed. More importantly, there is a new mindset that must be instilled both in procurement and across the firm. Strategic supply symbolizes the importance of enterprise wide thinking where functional units inside the firm and key suppliers from the firm's supply chain all work in concert to bring value to the marketplace. This paper presents data from the US and the UK that helps us better understand and address issues that are key to managing across an independent supply chain partners. We also address some of the barriers to implementing such a supply strategy. These barriers exist inside the firm as well between the firm at its key suppliers. Whilst we acknowledge that progress is being made but the data suggest that the journey is far from over.

Most SMEs do not try to engage in co-operative purchasing arrangements, and even those that do don’t handle them very well. Examining a sample of SME engineering firms from the UK Midlands for signs of more advanced practice, the authors identify three types of behaviour: firms with deliberate strategies (where co-operative purchasing is a consciously-designed and long-term part of management policy); firms with close ties with their suppliers but which still operate fundamentally adversarial policies (where, despite some development of practice, defensive, short-term and ‘low trust’ attitudes still predominate) and those whose strategies, maybe of long standing, ‘just happened’ and are described as still emergent. The article analyses these positions to yield lessons for managers, recognising that, as firms grow, emergent strategies will need replacing with something more codified.

Innovation is by far one of the most important competitive priorities in the current business context. Companies increasingly rely on their supply base to support their innovation potential. As a consequence, the purchasing department might dramatically affect the firm’s innovation capability. This paper aims to investigate—using a multiple case study approach—how the organizational design of the purchasing department could determine a firm’s capability to foster and manage innovation. Seven highly innovative companies were visited and the structures of their purchasing departments were analyzed. Three different configurations for the purchasing department were identified and described.

Strategic supply chain management connects existing bodies of theory — strategic management, organizational theory and supply chain management. This approach promotes the supply chain as an organizational form in its own right and the platform for cooperation and innovation at an industry, national and global level, with many academics and practitioners already advocating greater levels of integration alignment and cooperation in supply chains utilizing innovative electronic business systems. Problems exist, however, for academics, practitioners and government policy developers due to the emergent nature of the academic literature and the shortage of empirical studies in the field. In addressing some of the gap this study is conducted in the context of the wide-spread roll-out of industry-led electronic business systems innovation in the Australian beef industry and addresses the central research question: How does organization size, preparedness to innovate and taking a strategic supply chain approach to industry-led innovation utilization influence performance outcomes? Using a positivist framework and a multi-disciplinary approach through the combined lenses of a Resource-Based View and Relational View of the firm and the supply chain this research is conducted through two separate empirical studies using quantitative methods to analyze the data. A pilot study of 143 supply chain operatives undertaking a cross-section of supply chain activities across four states in Australia is analyzed using multiple regression analysis to gain insight into the predictable nature of supply chain relationships and strategic supply chain capability in the form of dynamic capability on developing supply chain innovation capacity. Findings from this study then inform a single industry study reported through three related papers that use exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling to analyze data from 412 supply chain operatives in the Australian beef industry. Combined, these studies examine the predictability of relationships between supply chain relational capability, supply chain dynamic capability, supply chain performance differential capability, supply chain synchronization capability, and supply chain innovation utilization capability as strategic capabilities and supply chain performance outcomes in the Australian beef industry. Findings support empirically the argument presented that strategic supply chain relational states influence certain types of strategic supply chain capability and supply chain performance outcomes. Furthermore, a supply chain operative's size and preparedness to innovate mitigate these results. Finally, an integrated framework is put forward based on the findings to provide guidance for further theoretical and empirical study of this topic by academe in other industry sectors and through the use of other more in-depth research methods such as qualitative or mixed method studies. Further study in this way would mitigate any limitations that may exist in this study in terms of a lack of generalization of these results due to the singular nature of the industry supply chain study and the singular nature of the quantitative nature of the research methods used. This framework also encourages industry practitioners and government policy makers to consider the intersecting nature of these strategic factors and their influence on supply chain and industry performance. In conclusion, these results contribute to extending and addressing some of the gap in existing bodies of knowledge developed by authors in this field such as Ketchen and Hult (2007); Craighead, Hult and Ketchen (2009); Shook et al. (2009); Wang et al. (2009); and Boyd et al. (2010) that argue the need for a strategic supply chain management approach. This research suggests it is important to understand the strategic nature of relational and capability approaches and their impact on supply chain and industry performance outcomes. Additionally, with internet-based communication and sophisticated electronic business systems expanding to address supply chain communication and efficiency needs there is a need to understand what strategic data is and how the strategic nature of relationships and capabilities influence the use and communication of this data to optimize supply chain performance and competitive advantage. Findings suggest academe, practitioners and policy makers need to move away from viewing the activities of a focal firm or dyadic and triadic supply chain relationships. Examining the supply chain as an organizational form in its own right at a specific point in time acknowledges the specific relationships and capabilities present at the time and the effect those relationships and capabilities can have on supply chain and industry outcomes.

Are customers upstream or downstream?

Is customer downstream in the supply chain?

What are upstream supply chains?

Is a supplier upstream or downstream?