International Journal of Operations & Production ManagementQuality management in a supply chain perspective: Strategic and operative choices in atextile-apparel networkPietro Romano Andrea Vinelli

Article information:To cite this document:Pietro Romano Andrea Vinelli, (2001),"Quality management in a supply chain perspective", InternationalJournal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 Iss 4 pp. 446 - 460Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570110381363

Downloaded on: 30 January 2015, At: 02:45 (PT)References: this document contains references to 39 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4587 times since 2006*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Margaret Bruce, Lucy Daly, Neil Towers, (2004),"Lean or agile: A solution for supply chain management inthe textiles and clothing industry?", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol.24 Iss 2 pp. 151-170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570410514867Jimmy K.C. Lam, R. Postle, (2006),"Textile and apparel supply chain management in HongKong", International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 18 Iss 4 pp. 265-277 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09556220610668491S. Gary Teng, Hector Jaramillo, (2005),"A model for evaluation and selection of suppliers in global textileand apparel supply chains", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol.35 Iss 7 pp. 503-523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600030510615824

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 601940 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

446

International Journal of Operations &Production Management,Vol. 21 No. 4, 2001, pp. 446-460.# MCB University Press, 0144-3577

Quality management in asupply chain perspective

Strategic and operative choices in atextile-apparel networkPietro Romano and Andrea Vinelli

Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova,Vicenza, Italy

Keywords Supply-chain management, Quality management, Textile, Industry

Abstract Supply chain management (SCM) is conceived by academics and practitioners aseither an extension of logistics or an all-encompassing approach to business integration. From theauthors' point of view, SCM involves not only logistic activities but also other processes such asquality management. This paper seeks to understand how quality can be managed using a supplychain perspective and what the operative and strategic consequences are for both the individualcompanies and the whole supply network. It reports a case study conducted on Marzotto, animportant Italian textile and apparel company, and its supply chain relationships. The studycompares the quality practices in the two different kinds of supply network of which Marzotto isthe focal firm. One is managed using a traditional customer-supplier approach and the other abroader and more co-ordinated perspective. In the latter case, it was found that the whole supplynetwork could improve its ability to meet the expectations of the final consumer in terms of qualitythrough the joint definition and co-management of quality practices/procedures.

Introudction`` Supply chain management'' (SCM) and other similar terms such as `` networksourcing'', `` supply pipeline management'', `` value chain management'', and`` value stream management'' have, in recent years, been receiving increasingattention from academics, consultants and operational managers (Scott andWestbrook, 1991; Saunders, 1995; Cooper et al., 1997; Tan et al., 1998; Croom etal., 2000). Such terms are used to refer to the integrated management of anetwork of entities, that starts with the suppliers' suppliers and ends with thecustomers' customers, for the production and delivery of goods and services tothe final consumers (Lee and Ng, 1997). According to this approach, companiesdo not seek to achieve cost reductions or profit improvements at the expense oftheir supply chain partners, but rather seek to make the supply chain morecompetitive as a whole.

Although SCM is a frequently encountered acronym these days, supplychains have not yet been well understood. Many authors still tend to considerSCM as being the same as integrated logistics management, and focus oninventory reduction both within and across firms in the supply chain (Jonesand Riley, 1985; Davis, 1993; van Hoek, 1998; Boyson et al., 1999; Naylor et al.,1999). On the other hand, many authors use the term `` supply chainmanagement'' to mean either the management of the supplier network (orupstream network) or as a synonym of integration with suppliers, thus

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available athttp://www.emerald-library.com/ft

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

447

considering it as just a development of the traditional purchasing and supplymanagement activities (Hines, 1994; Macbeth and Ferguson, 1994; Lamming,1996; Banfield, 1999).

A debate has been developing in literature about what SCM really is andabout the ways in which it differs from integrated logistic management,purchasing and supply management, materials management, and so on. Slacket al. (1998) suggest that what distinguishes such different terms/practices isthe scope of the supply network they refer to (Figure 1). According to theauthors, SCM has developed into a concept with a broad span of concern and aholistic approach to managing across company boundaries. In other words,purchasing and supply, as well as physical distribution, relate to only one partof the whole supply network, upstream and downstream respectively. Logisticand material management take in larger parts of the supply network, whileSCM includes the whole network.

According to other authors (Hewitt, 1992, 1999; Stewart, 1995; Bechtel andJayaram, 1997; Cooper et al., 1997a; GSCF, 2000), what distinguishes SCM fromthe terms/practices highlighted in Figure 1 is not just the scope, but also theprocesses/activities it involves. Cooper et al. (1997a), for example, suggest thatSCM goes beyond integrated logistics because it aims to integrate all thebusiness processes, from end users to original suppliers, which provideproducts, services and information that add value for the customers. TheGlobal Supply Chain Forum, a group of international companies and a team ofacademic researchers, states that `` successful SCM requires a change frommanaging individual functions to integrating activities into key supply chain

Figure 1.Some of the terms used

to describe themanagement of different

parts of the supplynetwork

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

448

processes'' (GSCF, 2000). From this point of view, SCM involves not onlylogistic activities (e.g. inventory management, transportation, warehousing,order processing, etc.) even if extended to the whole supply network butalso other processes (e.g. customer relationship management, demandmanagement, order fulfilment, procurement, product development andcommercialisation, etc).

In this context, this paper aims to highlight how even quality managementcould be an important process which characterises SCM.

Given this objective, this study tries to explain how quality can be managedfrom a supply chain perspective and what the operative and strategic choicesand consequences are for the single companies and the whole supply chain.

This problem has been investigated by comparing quality practices in twodifferent types of supply network with the same focal firm: one managed usinga `` traditional'' customer-supplier approach and the other from a broader `` co-ordinated'' perspective. This analysis is based on the case study of a textile andapparel company and its relationships with both upstream and downstreamsupply network.

Quality in the textile apparel chainThe high quality of both products and services at each level of the supplynetwork has been recognised as an essential part of successful SCM (Johnsonand Wood, 1996; Coyle et al., 1996; Choi and Rungtusanatham, 1999).Improving the quality of all supply chain processes leads to cost reductions,improved resource utilisation and improved process efficiency (Beamon andWare, 1998). Several research studies have investigated how supplier-customerrelationships can affect the quality of both products/services and processes.These studies, however, focused on the single company or on its immediatesuppliers and customers (Ebrahimpour and Johnson, 1992; Richardson, 1993;Powell, 1995; Tan et al., 1998) and very few studies have considered qualitymanagement from an SCM perspective (Forker et al., 1997; Choi andRungtusanatham, 1999). Indeed, in terms of product and process quality,several advantages can be gained from managing the whole flow of materialsand information between customers' customers and suppliers' suppliers.Furthermore, the quality level delivered to the final customer is the result of thequality management practices of each link in the supply chain, thus each actoris responsible for the final result.

This issue is particularly relevant in the textile apparel industry. This is asector where quality is one of the key competitive factors, and currentcompetition does not only concern the individual firm but, rather, involves theentire supply chain (Evans et al., 1993; Forza et al., 2000). Indeed, the quality ofthe final product that reaches the customer is clearly the result of a chain ofsuccessive, inter-linked phases: spinning, weaving, apparel and distribution. Inthe new competitive situation that has been developing within the sector,quality can no longer be considered the preserve of high fashion or expensiveclothing, but must be a feature of all market segments and meet the specificrequirements and tastes of all types of customers (Forza and Vinelli, 1996; Itex,1997). Furthermore, quality cannot be restricted to the area of perceived

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

449

quality, but must also take even more operational aspects into account. Forexample, design should not only consider the style but also the specifications ofthe finished product which must, in itself, be the reference point when checkingon quality during production. Likewise, requirements for supplier qualityassessment, raw materials, in-process material quality control and qualityprocedures must also be defined.

All these aspects are particularly important in the sector which producesclassic menswear, because it is the most sensitive to questions of productquality. Indeed, in this sector the problems of fashion/style are less importantthan in the parallel sector for women, but the accuracy and quality of thetailoring (i.e. clothing items are almost entirely hand made), the wearability/practicality (i.e how the article of clothing feels when it is on, the right sizingetc.) and the longevity and resistance of the textiles used are, perhaps, the mostimportant. The quality of the details, such as the accuracy of the stitching(correct distances, no ruffling or pleating, etc.), the characteristics of thematerials used for linings, the extent to which the cloth stretches or maintainsits shape (suitability of the model for the customer's physiology, tailoring to fitthe shoulder blade, etc.), the quality and perfection of the garment's finalpressing (cfr. wearability) and the reproducibility of colours (shades), must alsobe guaranteed.

Research approachThis study is based on data and information gathered directly by the authorsduring an in-depth case study carried out within the Marzotto Group andincluding its relationship with both upstream and downstream supply networkmembers. The Marzotto Group is one of the most important Italian textile andapparel manufacturers. In 1999, the overall group turnover was 1,400 millionEuro and apparel turnover was 280 million Euro (58 per cent exported). Inparticular, the case study analysed the quality management process withinMarzotto's menswear division (1999 turnover around 110 million Euro, 50 percent exported) and its supply network. Figure 2 shows the value tree ofMarzotto's menswear division. The value tree is an image that evokes thesupply network analogy: the trunk represents the focal firm, the branchesrepresent the suppliers, the roots represent the customers, and the thickness ofthe branch/root indicates the degree of partnership present in each linkage(Cooper et al., 1997b).

The supply network, for which Marzotto's menswear division is the focalfirm, can be divided into two sub-networks. In the first type of sub-network,Marzotto's menswear division copes with suppliers and customers in atraditional way to manage garment production, interacting upstream with boththe textile suppliers and the sub-suppliers for external production, anddownstream with the distribution chains. In the second type of sub-network, adifferent perspective has been adopted. Here, Marzotto has established apartnership relationship with its largest customer (about 15 per cent of overallvolume, equal to about 40,000 garments per year), an important internationaldistribution chain. This relationship envisages channel co-ordinationthroughout the whole supply chain (i.e. suppliers of thread and textiles).

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

450

We refer to the first type of sub-network as `` traditional'' and to the second typeas `` co-ordinated''. Co-ordination relates to the use of the mechanisms employedto sustain inter-firm co-operation: communication/decision/negotiationmechanisms, social co-ordination and control, integration and link-pin roles/units, common staff, hierarchy/authority relations, planning and controlsystems, incentive systems, selection systems, information systems, and publicsupport and infrastructure (Grandori and Soda, 1995).

In order to highlight how quality management could be an importantprocess which characterises SCM, the quality management practices of the twotypes of sub-network in which Marzotto's menswear division is involved aredescribed and compared.

In particular, the research intends to explore whether there are anydifferences in terms of quality management practices and procedures withinthe two sub-networks:

(1) At the strategic level: evaluation and choice of suppliers, critical factorsin determining competitiveness in the market, innovations in products/processes in order to meet final consumer requirements, etc.

Figure 2.The value tree ofMarzotto's mensweardivision

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

451

(2) At the operative level: definition and choice of specific manufacturingprocesses, procedures for checking, inspections and quality controls,identification of parameters that need to be monitored, use of feedbackfrom quality control activities, etc.

The study seeks to analyse such strategic and operative choices in terms ofconsequences for the single companies and the whole supply network.

Case descriptionThis section describes some practices and procedures for quality managementimplemented in the traditional sub-network and in the co-ordinated one.

Choice and evaluation of thread and textile suppliersIn the co-ordinated sub-network, Marzotto's menswear division and thedistributor act jointly in choosing and evaluating thread and textile suppliers.It is usually the distributor who suggests to Marzotto the names of the clothand lining producers who could be contacted, and then Marzotto itself addsfurther names to the list. The final choice is supported by a supplier ratingsheet that evaluates both the product (quality and price) and the suppliercompany (dependability, commitment to a long-term relationship and to aninter-firm work group, etc.). Moreover, every second week a team of five to sixdistribution managers visits Marzotto's factories and workshops in order tocheck on and evaluate not only the production but also the threads and textilesbeing used in the firm.

In the traditional sub-network, on the other hand, Marzotto is autonomous inthe choice and evaluation of its textile suppliers, and the latter are free tochoose and evaluate their thread suppliers.

Choice of the dyeing processOne fundamental requirement for all textiles used in men's suits is that thereshould be `` no shading'', i.e. the colour should not vary at all and should respectpre-set standards. In the co-ordinated sub-network, a perfect, homogeneousshading of the cloth is a factor of strategic differentiation in determiningcompetitiveness in the market segment served by the distributor. In order tomeet final consumer quality requirements, Marzotto and its major customerdecided jointly to stop using the process in which the weaver dyes rolls of cloth.They chose a different process in which the spinner dyes either the threads orthe hanks. The preferred process moves the dyeing phase `` back'' from weavingto spinning and is more costly and slower, but it does ensure colourhomogeneity, which is important to the final consumer.

In the traditional sub-network, Marzotto does not interfere with decisionsmade on the dyeing processes adopted by its textile suppliers. In this case,therefore, the process of dyeing hanks/threads as well as cloth is used.

Definition of the `` ready to be made up'' procedure for checking textilesRegarding the procedures for checking textiles, Marzotto decided jointly withselected textile suppliers to eliminate double-checks on rolls of cloth (by

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

452

weavers in output and by Marzotto in input) and to buy textiles that were`` ready to be made up'' i.e which did not need further checking before being sentfor processing. Indeed, in the packing list which is attached to the consignmentof materials that are physically sent, the supplier not only states the length andwidth of the material but also notes any defects that there might be, andspecifies where the defects are, their gravity (according to a taxonomy ofdefects previously defined together with Marzotto), and periodically emits atest certificate for Marzotto. During the past year this procedure has made itpossible to cut the checking costs and has noticeably raised the level of service(i.e. there has been a large drop in the number of returned textiles). Today thisprocedure, first introduced in the co-ordinated sub-network, is fully used in theco-ordinated sub-network and, to some extent, also in the traditional sub-network.

Definition of the procedures for checking quality aspects that are important tothe final consumersIn the co-ordinated sub-network, Marzotto's menswear division and thedistributor act jointly to define three procedures for checking some qualityaspects that are very important to final consumers:

(1) Colour homogeneity.

(2) Physical parameters (reaction to water cleaning, dry cleaning, ironing,perspiration).

(3) Chemical parameters (pollution loading, level of free formaldehyde).

As highlighted above, colour homogeneity is a fundamental requirement for alltextiles used in men's suits. In the co-ordinated sub-network the distributor,after having carried out various studies, advised Marzotto to change thetraditional procedure used to check on colour constancy based on a D65 neonlamp and use a TL24 neon lamp instead, which is considered to be morereliable and effective. One consequence of the use of all these new processesand procedures for managing quality in the supply chain, from spinningthrough to the finished garment, is that a customer can buy a classic model ofjacket in Hong Kong and then, two years later, buy the trousers in London andbe sure that not only all the other details but also the colour shade of the twogarments will be exactly the same.

Regarding the physical properties of the cloth, the fastness of the dye, itsreaction to sweating and water, machine washing and dry cleaning, the effectsof sunlight, dry and steam ironing, etc., are all checked. Other tests concern:piling, resistance to tearing; stitch/seam evenness and stability of size.

In recent years the general public has become much more aware of theproblems of environmental pollution and the use of eco-compatible chemicalproducts has become one of the ways of evaluating the quality level of aproduct. A product parameter, termed `` pollution loading'', is thereforeconstantly monitored and kept within pre-agreed limits.

Although all these physical and chemical tests are used in both the sub-networks, textiles are checked in the traditional sub-network by the garment

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

453

manufacturer, who uses standard laboratory procedures laid down in the IWS(for wool) and UNI norms.

In the co-ordinated network, however, many tests have been `` personalised''at the request of the distributor in order to meet the specific requirements ofand to fulfil the specific criteria for a garment's success in each sales channel.Many of the tests, such as dry cleaning, water 378C, perspiration, rubbing andlight are, obviously, still carried out in the garment manufacturer'slaboratories, but they have been specially developed by the distributor and aremarkedly more selective, specific and precise than the UNI tests, as far asmeasurements and evaluations are concerned.

A very important test required by the distributor in the co-ordinated sub-network, for example, is the one which measures the level of free formaldehydein linings. Formaldehyde is a chemical compound that is used during thefinishing stages of both textiles and lining materials. Formaldehyde tends toevaporate over time but is very harmful for health as it can cause digestivetract problems, such as ulcers, or, in more serious cases, cancer. Initially,Marzotto only used to carry out the test for free formaldehyde on garments itproduced within the co-ordinated sub-network, but after a period itautonomously decided to extend this check to all the produced garments.

Definition of new product/process solutions in order to meet final consumerrequirementsIn the co-ordinated sub-network, Marzotto's menswear division and thedistributor act jointly to define new product/process solutions in order to meetfinal consumer requirements. For example, on the basis of some consumers'suggestions, a new innovative shape for pockets, designed to stop small changefalling out when the consumer is seated, was put into production. Anotherexample is an entire batch of trousers that did not pass the final check becausethe lining of some pairs had not been pressed well at knee height and couldhave proved uncomfortable for the final consumer. Personalisation of theservice to the final consumer has reached the point where the consumer should he wish to can take the suit home to try it on better before purchasing.Each suit is also guaranteed even after it has been sold. Should defects or otherproblems come to light later (for example if the stitching breaks on an innerlining) the consumer can take the suit back to the distributor's shop, fromwhere it is sent back to Marzotto, who carries out the necessary repairs. On thecontrary, no specific innovative solutions were found within the traditionalsub-network.

Definition of the `` super check'' procedure for checking the garmentsIn the co-ordinated sub-network, Marzotto and the distributor decided tochange the procedures traditionally used to check garments by adding a `` supercheck'' on the final products. The traditional test consists of a rapid check inorder to detect visible defects (such as holes, marks, loose threads and creases)and evaluates the garments from a `` commercial point of view'' or `` through theeyes of the final customer'' (i.e. the garment should be well presented and lookgood/clean, which means that it could attract at first sight). On the other hand,

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

454

the super check is more detailed and precise, and evaluates a number ofimportant quality points for classic menswear from a `` technical point of view''.At the start of each season, in fact, the designer determines what the keyquality requirements should be for the new collection. This process defines the`` important quality points'' that a garment must have and which each phase ofproduction, cutting out, sewing up and pressing, must respect. During thesuper check, the specialised checkers must ensure that these important qualitypoints have been respected. The super check is carried out on samples of finalgarments by means of quality charts containing the list of the parts that need tobe checked, as well as the detailed checking instructions/pictures for each part.

Experience has shown that some garments which passed the traditionalchecks did not pass the super check. By highlighting the technical defects, thesuper check reveals itself as a means and an opportunity for the firm to learnfrom its `` mistakes'', thus improving operational processes. Quality controltechniques such as Pareto diagrams, cause/effect diagrams and check cards are extensively used in the super-check phase to identify the reasons for anydefect, not only within the menswear division but also across the whole supplynetwork. For example, a defect may be the result of defective raw materials,such as the cloth or the linings. In this case the information is sent immediatelyto the supplier, whose responsibility it is to solve the problem.

Quality management in the supply chain perspectiveMany differences have been found between the traditional sub-network and theco-ordinated sub-network in quality management practices and procedures,both at the strategic and the operational level (see Table I).

Regarding the strategic aspects, differences identified include the choice andevaluation of thread and textile suppliers, the identification of qualitycharacteristics that are fundamental for competitiveness in the market and thedefinition of new product/process solutions in order to meet the finalconsumer's requirements.

Regarding the operative aspects, the differences are mainly related to thechoice of the dyeing process, the definition of the `` ready to be made up''procedure and the definition of procedures for checking quality aspects that areimportant to final consumers (i.e colour homogeneity, physical and chemicalparameters, quality points).

What makes it possible to manage the quality process in such a differentway is the level of co-ordination reached within the two sub-networks as aconsequence of the use of different co-ordination mechanisms.

First, contacts between actors are far more frequent and close in the co-ordinated sub-network. Communication and exchanges of information go wellbeyond the dyadic interfaces between contiguous members of the supplynetwork. As an example, a variety of different supply network actors areinvolved in the selection and evaluation of thread and textile suppliers, and thesame is true for the dyeing process. Moreover, the exchange of information atthe interface may be more intense, as in the case of the `` ready to be made uptextiles'' procedure. This allows greater co-ordination between the textilemakers and the menswear division through faster levels of information

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

455

Table I.Comparison of qualitymanagement practices

between the`` traditional'' and the

`` co-ordinated'' sub-network

Traditional sub-network Co-ordinated sub-network

Spinners Dyeing of hanks or threads(sometimes)

Dyeing of hanks or threads (always)Definition of the dyeing process, taking account

of the process characteristics jointly required bythe distributor and the menswear division

Frequent visits to menswear division plants andto weavers in order to check on how theirproducts are used and the performance

Weavers Thread suppliers chosen byweavers

Dyeing of rolls of cloth(sometimes)

Use of both traditional end-process checks and `` readyto be made up'' procedure

No dyeing of rolls of clothFrequent visits to menswear division plants in

order to check how their products are used andthe performance

100 per cent use of `` ready to be made up''procedure for end-process checking

Marzotto'smensweardivision

Textile suppliers chosen bytailor

Usually 100 per cent checkson incoming rolls of cloth(except those suppliers whouse `` ready to be made up''procedure)

100 per cent colourhomogeneity checks onincoming rolls of clothusing D65 neon lamp

Physical and chemicalchecks on incoming textilesamples on the basis ofstandard norms

Check on finished garmentsfrom the `` commercial pointof view''

Co-operation with the distributor in choosingthread and textile suppliers

Co-operation with the distributor in choosing thedyeing process

0.0 per cent checks on incoming rolls of cloth,due to the use of the `` ready to be made up''procedure

100 per cent colour homogeneity checks onincoming rolls of cloth using TL24 neon lamp

Physical and chemical checks on incoming textilesamples on the basis of the distributor'sspecifications (design specifications)

Co-operation with the distributor in defining newproduct/process solutions in order to meet thefinal requirements of the consumer

Check on finished garments from the`` commercial point of view''

Super checks on samples of garments from the`` technical point of view''

DistributorsRetailers

100 per cent checks ongarments (incoming)

Co-operation with the tailor in choosing threadand textile suppliers

Co-operation with the tailor in choosing thedyeing process

Definition of procedures for checking colourhomogeneity and physical/chemical parameters

Co-operation with the tailor in defining newproduct/process solutions in order to meet thefinal consumer requirements

Checks on samples of garments (incoming)Frequent visits to the tailors' and weavers'

plants and to laboratories where chemical andphysical tests are carried out

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

456

exchange and the fact that textile checking systems have been made uniform.Indeed, the double-check on textiles is still carried out, but only when themenswear division has not been able to co-ordinate its activities with those ofthe textile supplier. In this case, the check on textiles coming in just translatesthe `` language'' used to warn of defects into one which will be understood by themenswear division.

In the co-ordinated sub-network, co-ordination is also achieved by sub-dividing and integrating the tasks of the different actors in the supply network.Indeed, the actors downstream use their privileged position to betterunderstand the needs of the final consumer, and to then translate them intorequirements for the entire network. Actors upstream, who are better versed inthe more technical and operative aspects, are responsible, in their turn, forputting into practise and monitoring these requirements. For example, theexchange of information between the distributor and the menswear division inthe co-ordinated sub-network has made it possible to make joint decisionsregarding the modification of some design details of the clothing itemsproduced, such as the pockets and trouser linings, which in turn makes itpossible to meet the customer requirements passed on by the distributor.

Even hierarchical relations and those of authority are used as a mechanismof co-ordination: the distributor is the most important customer of themenswear division and, analogously, the latter is an important customer for thetextile and thread suppliers. Furthermore, it should be emphasised that in theco-ordinated sub-network, co-ordination has also been achieved by means offormal meetings, such as frequent visits by the distributor's managers andinspectors to Marzotto's plants, chemistry/physics laboratories and to thesuppliers and sub-suppliers. Both the textile and the thread suppliers haveoften been invited to visit the Marzotto plants and in this way have the chanceto see how their products were used in the production process and how theproducts they supplied actually performed.

Moreover, a further co-ordination mechanism that distinguishes the two sub-networks is that of non-permanent inter-firm work groups, made up ofpersonnel from the distributor and the menswear division, who take decisionsregarding the choice of suppliers, the procedures that should be used in thechemistry/physics laboratories and which changes could and should be madeto the clothing items on the basis of final customer requirements.

Last, a core aspect that differentiates the two sub-networks concerns theincreasing importance of final consumers and the way in which their needs/requirements are transformed into requirements for all the members of thesupply network. In this way, the co-ordinated sub-network operates accordingto a pull logic, in which each individual actor contributes in an integratedmanner to satisfying the final consumer.

The rationale behind such logic is that the quality of the finished garmentstems directly from the choice of raw materials, i.e. threads and textiles, andfrom the fact that the downstream actors in the supply network (i.e. thegarment manufacturers, and above all the distributors/retailers) are in aprivileged position when it comes to discovering customer requirements andtranslating them into product characteristics. Thus, for example, in the co-

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

457

ordinated sub-network it is fundamental that the garment manufacturer andthe distributor act together when choosing thread and textile suppliers, andwhen evaluating and defining the processes and procedures which influencethe quality delivered to the downstream phases.

The impact of such an approach on quality delivered to the final consumer istremendous. Thanks to the innovative way of interacting between all thepartners within the supply network, the choice offered in the distributor's salesoutlet is very well focused on the expectations and requirements of the marketsegment: each line on sale is the result of a design and quality control processwhich has been carried out by a team of technicians supplied by both thedistributor and the tailor.

ConclusionsThe two main differences in quality management between the co-ordinatednetwork and the traditional sub-network are:

(1) The development and use of distinctive practices/procedures, at both thestrategic and the operative level, for managing processes within thetransformation phases of threads into textiles, and lastly into finishedgarments.

(2) The development and use of distinctive co-ordination mechanisms formanaging relationships between all the partners.

Indeed, not only are the practices/procedures which regulate relations betweenpartners decided and evaluated by different actors in the chain (e.g. selectionand evaluation of suppliers of raw materials, procedures for checking thetextiles), but also the definition and application of the procedures involved inthose processes traditionally checked autonomously by individual actors (e.g.dyeing, checking physical/chemical parameters) are decided upon jointly.

In synthesis, the combined effects of points (1) and (2) are what characteriseco-ordinated quality management practices and procedures within this textileapparel supply chain.

Applying innovative procedures and establishing new, more frequent andcloser relationships with suppliers and customers in the co-ordinated sub-network has meant increased investments and higher production costs, bothtechnological and organisational, for Marzotto. However, the specificapplication of quality procedures and the constant attention to qualityparameters at every stage of production within the supply network havealtered the way in which not only Marzotto, but also all the actors in thenetwork, operate.

In particular, the fact that Marzotto has been able to satisfy the requirementsof its most important customer has allowed it to improve the overallperformance of its own production. The quality of the final garments has beenimproved by the introduction of technical-organisational routines for qualitymanagement which, after being initially proposed by the distributor, have nowbegun to be used and improved upon by both Marzotto and other members ofthe supply network. A large number of such routines, the application of which

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

458

was initially limited to the co-ordinated sub-network, has been extended to thewhole production, making Marzotto, de facto, more competitive overall.

Indeed, increased feedback from the final customer has enabled Marzotto torespond better to customer expectations and has led to increased internalawareness of just how important final consumer satisfaction is forcompetitiveness today. Thus, as an experiment, Marzotto decided that when itsgarments are sold by other distributors in the traditional sub-network, eachitem should be accompanied by a short questionnaire asking for the consumer'sevaluations. This questionnaire aims to improve the firm's knowledge aboutthe consumer's requirements and expectations, so that Marzotto can seewhether the quality standards it has set are really those that the final consumerboth recognises and appreciates.

In conclusion, this paper contributes to the literature on quality managementand supply chain management by describing and analysing a case in whichquality is managed within a supply network in an innovative way. In this way,it confirms the point of view of those authors (Hewitt, 1992, 1999; Stewart, 1995;Bethel and Jayaram, 1997; Cooper, Lambert and Pagh, 1997; GSCF, 2000) whoargue that SCM goes beyond integrated logistics and involves other processestoo such as quality management that add value for final consumers. It hasbeen seen, in fact, how highly co-ordinated quality management practices/procedures and continuous monitoring of quality parameters are the `` glue'' thathas allowed the supply network to operate as a `` whole system'' (Christopher,1992; Davis, 1993; Lee and Ng, 1997). Procedures are elaborated in the light ofthe needs of the whole supply chain, with the ideas, suggestions andexperiences of every person being shared and considered. The influence area ofthe quality management process described in this case is therefore clearly thewhole supply network (Harland, 1996, 1997; Slack et al., 1998; Handfield andNichols, 1999), ranging from the thread suppliers to the final consumers.

The true innovation lies in the way in which each firm participates activelyin the life of the network and in final consumer satisfaction using co-ordinationmechanisms (Grandori and Soda, 1995) such as communication systems andprocedures that are easy to assimilate and transmit, complementary methodsand technologies, and by sharing the same mentality and philosophy of qualitymanagement. Each partner in the chain knows what the final aims are in termsof the quality demanded by the final user and there are no longer any secrets ortacit collaboration. The final result is the kind of system where every article ofclothing is the sum of the different operating stages (i.e. spinning, weaving,making up and distribution) carried out by legally separate firms, thecompetitiveness of which on the market is unique (Evans et al., 1993).

References

Banfield, E. (1999), Harnessing Value in the Supply Chain, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Beamon, B.M. and Ware, T.M. (1998), `` A process quality model for the analysis, improvementand control of supply chain systems'', Logistics Information Management, Vol. 11 No. 2,pp. 105-13.

Bechtel, C. and Jayaram, J. (1997), `` Supply chain management: a strategic perspective'', TheInternational Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 15-34.

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

Qualitymanagement

459

Boyson, S., Corsi, T.M., Dresner, M.E. and Harrington, L.H. (1999), Logistics and the ExtendedEnterprise, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Choi, T.Y. and Rungtusanatham, M. (1999), `` Comparisons of quality management practices:across the supply chain and industries'', The Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 35No. 1, pp. 20-7.

Christopher, M. (1992), Logistics and Supply Chain Management Strategies for Reducing Costsand Improving Services, Pitman Publishing, London.

Cooper, M.C., Lambert, D.M. and Pagh, J. D. (1997a), `` Supply chain management: more than anew name for logistics'', The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8 No. 1,pp. 1-13.

Cooper, M.C., Ellram, L.M., Gardner, J.T. and Hanks, A.M. (1997b), `` Meshing multiple alliances'',Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 18 No.1, pp. 67-88.

Coyle, J.J., Bardi, C.J. and Langley, C.J. (1996), The Management of Business Logistics, WestPublishing Company, St Paul, MN.

Croom, S., Romano, P. and Giannakis, M. (2000), `` SCM: an analytic framework for criticalliterature review'', European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 6,pp. 67-83.

Davis, T. (1993), `` Effective supply chain management'', Sloan Management Review, Summer,pp. 35-46.

Ebrahimpour, M. and Johnson, J.L. (1992), `` Quality, vendor evaluation and organisationalperformance: a comparison of US and Japanese firms'', Journal of Business Research,Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 129-42.

Evans, G.N., Naim, M.M. and Towill, D.R. (1993), `` Dynamic supply chain performance: assessingthe impact of information system'', Logistic Information Management, Vol. 6 No. 4,pp. 15-25.

Forker, L.B., Mendez, D. and Herhauser, J.C. (1997), `` Total quality management in the supplychain: What is its impact on performance?'', International Journal of Production Research,Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1681-1701.

Forza, C. and Vinelli, A. (1996), `` Design towards quick response: an analytical scheme for thechange'', International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 28-43.

Forza, C., Romano, P. and Vinelli, A. (2000), `` Information technology for managing the textileapparel chain: current use, shortcomings and development directions'', InternationalJournal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 3 No. 3.

Global Supply Chain Forum (2000), `` Issue in supply chain management'', in Lambert, D.M. andCooper, M.C. (Eds), Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29, pp. 65-83.

Grandori, A. and Soda, G. (1995), `` Inter-firms networks: antecedents, mechanisms and forms'',Organisation Studies, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 183-214.

Handfield, R.B. and Nichols, E.L. (1999), Introduction to Supply Chain Management, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Harland, C.M. (1996), `` Supply chain management: relationship, chains and networks'', BritishJournal of Management, Vol. 7, March, pp. 63-80.

Harland, C.M. (1997), `` Supply chain operational performance roles'', Integrated ManufacturingSystems, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 70-8.

Hewitt, F. (1992), `` Supply chain integration'', Council of Logistics Management, AnnualConference Proceedings, Oak Brook, IL, pp. 334-41.

Hewitt, F. (1999), `` Supply or demand? Chains or pipeline? Co-ordination or control?'', in Muffatto,M. and Pawar, K.S. (Eds), Logistics in the Information Age, Proceedings of 4th

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

IJOPM21,4

460

International Symposium on Logistics, University of Padova and Nottingham University,Florence, 11-14 July, pp. 785-90.

Hines, P. (1994), Creating World Class Suppliers Unlocking Mutual Competitive Advantage,Pitman Publishing, London.

Itex - Information technology for the Textile & Clothing Industry (1997), The Itex Surveys,Brussels.

Johnson, J.C. and Wood, D.F. (1996), Contemporary Logistics, Prentice-Hall, Upple Saddle Creek,NJ.

Jones, T.C. and Riley, D.W. (1985), `` Using inventory for competitive advantage through supplychain management'', International Journal of Physical Distribution and MaterialsManagement, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 16-26.

Lamming, R.C. (1996), `` Squaring lean supply with supply chain management'', InternationalJournal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 183-96.

Lee, H.L. and Ng, S.M. (1997), `` Introduction to the special issue on global supply chainmanagement'', Production and Operations Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 191-2.

Macbeth, D.K. and Ferguson, N. (1994), Partnership Sourcing An Integrated Supply ChainApproach, Pitman Publishing, London.

Naylor, J.B., Naim, M.M. and Berry, D. (1999), `` Legality: integrating the lean and agilemanufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain'', International Journal of ProductionEconomics, Vol. 62, pp. 107-18.

Powell, T.C. (1995), `` Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review andempirical study'', Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp. 15-37.

Richardson, J. (1993), `` Restructuring supplier relationship in US manufacturing for improvedquality'', Management International Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 53-67.

Saunders, M.J. (1995), `` Chains, pipelines, networks and value stream: the role, nature and value ofsuch metaphors in forming perceptions of the task of purchasing and supplymanagement'', 1st World-wide Research Symposium on Purchasing and Supply ChainManagement, Tempe, Arizona, 23-25 March, pp. 476-85.

Scott, C. and Westbrook, R. (1991), `` New strategic tools for supply chain management'',International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 21 No. 1,pp. 23-33.

Slack, N., Harland, C.M., Chambers, S., Harrison, A. and Johnston, R. (1998), OperationsManagement, Pitman Publishing, London.

Stewart, G. (1995), `` Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals key to supply chainexcellence. Helping companies in their pursuit of supply chin excellence'', LogisticsInformations Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 38-44.

Tan, K.C., Kannan, V.R. and Handfield, R.B. (1998), `` Supply chain management: supplierperformance and firm performance'', International Journal of Purchasing and MaterialsManagement, Summer, pp. 2-9.

van Hoek, R.I. (1998), `` Reconfiguring the supply chain to implement postponed manufacturing'',International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 95-109.

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

This article has been cited by:

1. Haiju Hu, Barbara FlynnEffect of Supply Chain Quality Management on Performance 361-392. [CrossRef]2. Scott A. Dellana, John F. Kros. 2014. An exploration of quality management practices, perceptions and

program maturity in the supply chain. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 34:6,786-806. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

3. Marc-Arthur Diaye, Nathalie Greenan, Sanja Pekovic. 2014. Sharing the fame of ISO standard adoption:quality supply chain effects evidence. International Journal of Production Research 1-19. [CrossRef]

4. Shu-Mei Tseng, Pin-Hong Wu. 2014. The impact of customer knowledge and customer relationshipmanagement on service quality. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 6:1, 77-96. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]

5. E.W.T. Ngai, S. Peng, Paul Alexander, Karen K.L. Moon. 2014. Decision support and intelligent systems inthe textile and apparel supply chain: An academic review of research articles. Expert Systems with Applications41, 81-91. [CrossRef]

6. Rafaela Alfalla-Luque, Carmen Medina-Lopez, Prasanta Kumar Dey. 2013. Supply chain integrationframework using literature review. Production Planning & Control 24, 800-817. [CrossRef]

7. Jing Zeng, Chi Anh Phan, Yoshiki Matsui. 2013. Supply chain quality management practices andperformance: An empirical study. Operations Management Research 6, 19-31. [CrossRef]

8. Frank Wiengarten, Brian Fynes, George Onofrei. 2013. Exploring synergetic effects between investmentsin environmental and quality/lean practices in supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An InternationalJournal 18:2, 148-160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

9. Luai E. Jraisat, Ihab H. Sawalha. 2013. Quality control and supply chain management: a contextualperspective and a case study. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 18:2, 194-207. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]

10. Siew-Phaik Loke, Alan G. Downe, Murali Sambasivan, Khalizani Khalid. 2012. A structural approach tointegrating total quality management and knowledge management with supply chain learning. Journal ofBusiness Economics and Management 13, 776-800. [CrossRef]

11. Massimo Biotto, Alberto F. De Toni, Fabio Nonino. 2012. Knowledge and cultural diffusion along thesupply chain as drivers of product quality improvement. The International Journal of Logistics Management23:2, 212-237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

12. Chul-Soon Park. 2012. The Impact of Supplier Involvement, Customer Involvement, and EmployeeLearning/Training on Product Quality and Organizational Performance. Journal of the Korean society forquality management 40, 1-14. [CrossRef]

13. Xingxing Zu, Hale Kaynak. 2012. An agency theory perspective on supply chain quality management.International Journal of Operations & Production Management 32:4, 423-446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

14. W.H. Ip, S.L. Chan, C.Y. Lam. 2011. Modeling supply chain performance and stability. IndustrialManagement & Data Systems 111:8, 1332-1354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

15. Mohamed M. Naim, Jonathan Gosling. 2011. On leanness, agility and leagile supply chains. InternationalJournal of Production Economics 131, 342-354. [CrossRef]

16. Faisal Talib, Zillur Rahman, M.N. Qureshi. 2011. A study of total quality management and supply chainmanagement practices. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 60:3, 268-288.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

17. Ben Clegg, Patrick Sitek, Marcus Seifert, KlausDieter Thoben. 2010. Towards an interorganisationalperspective for managing quality in virtual organisations. International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement 27:2, 231-246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

18. Paolo Taticchi, Luca Cagnazzo, Paolo Taticchi, Alessandro Brun. 2010. The role of performancemeasurement systems to support quality improvement initiatives at supply chain level. International Journalof Productivity and Performance Management 59:2, 163-185. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

19. Assadej Vanichchinchai, Barbara Igel. 2009. Total quality management and supply chain management:similarities and differences. The TQM Journal 21:3, 249-260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

20. Adelheid Holl, Ruth Rama. 2009. An exploratory analysis of networking, R&D and innovativeness inthe Spanish electronics sector. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management 9,68. [CrossRef]

21. Cristina Gimnez, Helena R. Loureno. 2008. eSCM: internet's impact on supply chain processes. TheInternational Journal of Logistics Management 19:3, 309-343. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

22. C.Y. Lam, S.L. Chan, W.H. Ip, C.W. Lau. 2008. Collaborative supply chain network using embeddedgenetic algorithms. Industrial Management & Data Systems 108:8, 1101-1110. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

23. Alice H.W. Yeung, Victor H.Y. Lo, Andy C.L. Yeung, T.C. Edwin Cheng. 2008. Specific customerknowledge and operational performance in apparel manufacturing. International Journal of ProductionEconomics 114, 520-533. [CrossRef]

24. Shams-Ur Rahman. 2008. Quality management in logistics services: A comparison of practices betweenmanufacturing companies and logistics firms in Australia. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence19, 535-550. [CrossRef]

25. Angappa Gunasekaran, Amir M. Sharif, Zahir Irani, Don Lloyd. 2007. Information technology andperformance management for buildtoorder supply chains. International Journal of Operations &Production Management 27:11, 1235-1253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

26. Maria Holmlund. 2007. Suggesting and Comparing Different Scopes on Quality Management:Production, Service, Relationship, and Network. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 18,847-859. [CrossRef]

27. Arni Halldorsson, Herbert Kotzab, Juliana H. Mikkola, Tage SkjttLarsen. 2007. Complementarytheories to supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 12:4, 284-296.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

28. Vijay R. Kannan, Keah Choon Tan. 2007. The impact of operational quality: a supply chain view. SupplyChain Management: An International Journal 12:1, 14-19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

29. Krisztina Demeter, Andrea Furlan, Roberto Grandinetti, Arnaldo Camuffo. 2007. How do subcontractorsevolve?. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 27:1, 69-89. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

30. Ismail Sila, Maling Ebrahimpour, Christiane Birkholz. 2006. Quality in supply chains: an empiricalanalysis. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 11:6, 491-502. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

31. Shaohan Cai, Minjoon Jun, Zhilin Yang. 2006. The Impact of Interorganizational Internet Communicationon Purchasing Performance: A Study of Chinese Manufacturing Firms. The Journal of Supply ChainManagement 42:10.1111/jscm.2006.42.issue-3, 16-29. [CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)

32. Andrea Furlan, Pietro Romano, Arnaldo Camuffo. 2006. Customersupplier integration forms in the airconditioning industry. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 17:5, 633-655. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]

33. Professor Fiorenzo Franceschini, Dr Maurizio Galetto, F. Franceschini, M. Galetto, P. Cecconi. 2006. Aworldwide analysis of ISO 9000 standard diffusion. Benchmarking: An International Journal 13:4, 523-541.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

34. Paul D. Cousins. CoEditors: Benn Lawson, Brian Squire, Kevin Burgess, Prakash J. Singh, Rana Koroglu.2006. Supply chain management: a structured literature review and implications for future research.International Journal of Operations & Production Management 26:7, 703-729. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

35. Suhong Li, Bhanu Ragu-Nathan, T.S. Ragu-Nathan, S. Subba Rao. 2006. The impact of supply chainmanagement practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance. Omega 34, 107-124.[CrossRef]

36. Ypatia Theodorakioglou, Katerina Gotzamani, George Tsiolvas. 2006. Supplier management and itsrelationship to buyers' quality management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 11:2,148-159. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

37. Mart Casadess, Rodolfo de Castro. 2005. How improving quality improves supply chain management:empirical study. The TQM Magazine 17:4, 345-357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

38. Carol J. Robinson, Manoj K. Malhotra. 2005. Defining the concept of supply chain quality managementand its relevance to academic and industrial practice. International Journal of Production Economics 96,315-337. [CrossRef]

39. Cristbal Snchez-Rodrguez, David Hemsworth. 2005. A structural analysis of the impact of qualitymanagement practices in purchasing on purchasing and business performance. Total Quality Management& Business Excellence 16, 215-230. [CrossRef]

40. Cristbal SnchezRodrguez, ngel R. MartnezLorente. 2004. Quality management practices in thepurchasing function. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 24:7, 666-687.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

41. Pietro Romano. 2003. Co-ordination and integration mechanisms to manage logistics processes acrosssupply networks. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 9, 119-134. [CrossRef]

42. Pietro Romano. 2002. Impact of supply chain sensitivity to quality certification on quality managementpractices and performances. Total Quality Management 13, 981-1000. [CrossRef]

43. Sandra Marcela Herrera Bernal, Caroline Burr, Rhona E. Johnsen. 2002. Competitor networks:international competitiveness through collaboration. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &Research 8:5, 239-253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

44. Chris K. Y. LoQuality and Environmental Management Systems in the Fashion Supply Chain 21-39.[CrossRef]

45. Chris K. Y. LoQuality and Environmental Management Systems in the Fashion Supply Chain 111-129.[CrossRef]

46. Iraj Mahdavi, Namjae Cho, Hamed Fazlollahtabar, S. Hosna Shafieian, Nezam Mahdavi-Amiri, ShimaMohebbiAgent-Based Dynamic Route Selection for Multilayer Electronic Supply Network 347-365.[CrossRef]

47. Iraj Mahdavi, Namjae Cho, Hamed Fazlollahtabar, S. Hosna Shafieian, Nezam Mahdavi-Amiri, ShimaMohebbiAgent-Based Dynamic Route Selection for Multilayer Electronic Supply Network 344-360.[CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by D

haka

Uni

vers

ity o

f Eng

inee

ring

and

Tech

nolo

gy A

t 02:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

15 (P

T)