See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221184052

Systemic Assessment of SCOR for Modeling

Supply Chains.

Conference Paper · January 2005

DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2005.574 · Source: DBLP

CITATIONS READS

26 122

1 author:

Vijay Kasi
Georgia State University
9 PUBLICATIONS 144 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Reverse Auctions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vijay Kasi on 12 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Systemic Assessment of SCOR for Modeling Supply Chains

Vijay Kasi,
Center for Process Innovation, Georgia State University
vkasi@gsu.edu .

Abstract introduced the Supply Chain Operation Reference

(SCOR) model for modeling supply chains. This model
The recent introduction of Supply Chain Operations has gained widespread use among industry practitioners
Reference (SCOR) approach for modeling supply chains and consultants.
has been positively received by practitioners and
consultants. SCOR is perceived to provide a simple The paper organization is as follows: This section
though powerful standard for modeling supply chains. As provides an introduction to supply chains, models,
SCOR is emerged from a practitioner’s perspective, modeling approaches and modeling assessments. The
comparatively less little academic attention has been paid following section introduces the SCOR approach for
to SCOR to date. This paper aims to address one aspect of modeling supply chains. The framework for evaluation
SCOR while at the same time providing a short overview forms the basis for the third section of the paper. Section
of its concepts and use. Specifically, we examine SCOR four presents a case study of TimeWise. Section five then
from a methodological perspective, by adopting a systems examines the SCOR approach for modeling supply chains
development framework and using a socio-technical lens based on the assessment framework. Finally, in section
as a basis for assessment. To effect such an assessment, a six some conclusions and recommendations are made.
fictitious timing instrument manufacturing company
supply chain case (TimeWise) is used to create the context 1.1. Supply chain and supply chain modeling
for developing and assessing SCOR approach. It was
found that SCOR was strong on technical dimensions A supply chain consists of a network of business
such as modeling process and techniques but weak on the entities such as suppliers, manufacturers, distributors and
social dimensions. The contribution of the paper includes retailers interconnected by material flow, information
an overview of SCOR and a systemic assessment of a flow and financial flow [7]. Supply chains are business
method to develop a SCOR model in order to highlight the processes [13]. Davenport [8] defines a business process
strengths and limitations of the approach and to guide as a set of related tasks and activities with inputs and
future research in this domain. outputs to achieve a common business objective. Supply
chains can be seen as a set of activities (e.g.
1. Introduction and background manufacturing, distribution) with inputs (e.g. raw
materials) and outputs (e.g. finished goods) to achieve a
Organization change and improvement remain common business objective (low cost, customer
important and prominent themes within the practitioner satisfaction, etc.).
and academic research community for the past several
decades. Researchers have proposed various theories to There are many challenges associated with improving
examine the important characteristics of organization an existing supply chains process. First, supply chains
change. One of the popular theories includes Leavitt’s have been hitherto seen as unique and have lacked
socio-technical approach to produce organization change standard definitions and terminology; i.e., the terminology
[17]. Process-oriented approaches have dominated since used to describe supply chains has varied across
the nineties, of all the approaches to effect organization functions, organizations and industries. Second, supply
change. Some of the initiatives to effect organization chains (in part as a consequence of standard definitions)
change includes: Business process redesign, business lack standardized metrics. This has hampered attempts to
process re-engineering, process innovation, business improve supply chains and prevented organizations from
process modeling and total quality management. comparing themselves to others. Lack of standard
definitions also prevent companies to employ best
Supply chains are gaining prominence of all the practices from other successful companies. Third,
business processes[7, 10, 14]. This prominence has decisions regarding the design (or re-design) of supply
generated a considerable interest and research in supply chains involve trade offs among these metrics -- efforts to
chain modeling [2, 19]. For instance, the Supply Chain achieve one often cause problems to the other such as
Council, a consortium of supply chain companies, total cost reduction and increased customer satisfaction.

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 1

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Fourth, the preceding problem compounds itself when perceived, but does not limit the modeler in how he/she
looking across a multi-company supply chain – a more goes about mapping these concepts to the domain of
holistic (or systemic) approach would improve the supply investigation In short, the descriptive modeler can freely
chains due to various dependencies within the across the choose and name the objects perceived, their relationships
supply chain partners. Finally, the knowledge required to (and names) and which properties to capture. As such,
improve the supply chains increases exponentially with descriptive models offer a great deal of freedom and
the scope (i.e. number of tiers) of the supply chain. flexibility to the modeler.

1.2. Models and modeling approaches Normative models restrict how the system being
investigated can be represented. It forces the modeler to
A model is an abstract representation of the real world select from a pre-specified set of object and relationship
that reduces complexity and represents only the details instances and essentially map the perceived system into
necessary for a specific purpose [15, 27]. Modeling is this pre-specified set. This substantially reduces the
widely used to represent supply chains to improve the freedom (and variety) of models produced. However, it
efficiency and effectiveness of supply chains [2, 13, 19]. produces models that can, at a minimum, be compared.
People have developed models using various approaches And since everyone is working from the same set, it
and methods to understand, analyze and improve supply makes possible the notions of common metrics,
chains [3, 7, 11, 22, 25]. Various approaches to model prescriptions of “better” models (e.g. best-practice models
supply chains have strengths and weaknesses as widely or sub-models). It also substantially reduces
discussed in the literature [2, 11, 27]. Some of the popular representational complexity. However, normative models
classifications of models in the literature include: analytic are difficult to develop as they require agreement across a
and simulation models and descriptive and normative relatively broad set of modelers of such systems.
models. Normative models are also referred to as Process
reference models in some business process literature [24].
1.2.1. Analytic and simulation models: Analytical
models typically represent supply chains in the form of 1.3 Modeling assessments
symbolic/logical (mathematical) formulations (equations).
This treatment allows usage of optimization techniques With the proliferation of models and modeling
such as linear programming to design solutions that approaches, problem arises with the confidence on the
improve the supply chains. Although analytical modeling effectiveness of all models and approaches. Thus
approaches are useful for parts of supply chains, researchers have come up with meta models to specify
increasing the scope of the supply chain increases the how a modeling approach ought to be. Thus a modeling
complexity of the model. The application of this approach approach can be assessed based on a relevant meta model.
to supply chain modeling can be found in [1, 5, 18]. In addition to identifying the strengths and limitations of a
particular modeling approach, meta models also help to
Simulation models are dynamic representations of identify the critical elements and missing elements in a
supply chains executed step-wise within a computer model or a modeling approach. These modeling
program. Transactions, events and time can be readily assessments are helpful to choose a right modeling
included in the simulation model to assess how the approach depending on the purpose of modeling.
performance changes over time. A simulation model can
easily capture the dynamic nature of supply chains. A When choosing a modeling approach, Davis lays
simulations can also better handle the complexity importance on matching the modeling approaches and the
involved in supply chains. Broadly speaking, two kinds of situations, precisely the uncertainty of the situation and
simulation models exist: discrete-event simulation models the extent of uncertainty the modeling approach can
and continuous simulation models. Simulation approaches handle [9]. Checkland considers the ability of the
have been very successful in modeling and improving modeling approach to address the unstructured or ill
supply chains in industry even though such approaches structured situation to be an important factor for choosing
have been out of favor with the general academic a modeling approach [6]. Nielsen in his work focuses on
community for some time. Examples where simulation modeling approach’s answer to domain of use, conditions
has been successfully used for simulating supply chains of use and consequences of use before choosing a
are [16, 21, 25, 26, 28]. modeling approach [20].

1.2.2. Descriptive and normative models: Descriptive Jayaratna proposed NIMSAD framework (Normative
models are models where the real world is simply Information Model based Systems Analysis and Design)
“described”. A descriptive modeling technique limits the for evaluation of modeling approaches. He identifies three
types of objects, relationships and properties to be elements that modeling approach need to address:

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 2

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Problem domain, Methodology user and methodology o A framework of relationships among the standard
process* [15]. This framework has been adapted and processes
extended in this paper as can be found in section three of o Standard metrics to measure process performance
the paper. o Management practices that produce best in class
performance
2. Supply chain operations reference (SCOR) o Standard alignment to features and functionality.
model
Business process reengineering concepts capture the
Supply Chain operations reference (SCOR) is a “as-is” state of the process and derive the desired “to-be”
modeling approach that provides standard guidelines for future state. Benchmarking concepts quantify the
companies. These standard guidelines help to examine the operational performance of similar companies and
configuration of their supply chains, identify and measure establish internal targets based on “best in class” results.
metrics in the supply chain. In addition SCOR helps to Best practices analysis characterizes the management
adopt best practices where deemed appropriate [23] and practices and software solutions that result in “best in
thus SCOR can be classified as a Normative modeling class” performance. Thus SCOR combines all these three
approach based on previously discussed classification. concepts into a cross functional framework. SCOR has
SCOR has been continually evolving through work by the been warmly greeted by the industry. This success of
Supply Chain Council (SCC) since Version 1.0 was SCOR has led to the development of various tools for
published, and the latest to their additions is Version 6.0. building models using SCOR.

Plan P1: Plan Supply Chain

P2: Plan Source P3: Plan Make P4: Plan Deliver P5: Plan Returns

Source Make Deliver

SI: Source MI: Make-to- DI: Deliver
Stocked Products Stock Stocked Products
S2: Source M2: Make-to- D2: Deliver
MTO Products Order MTO Products
S3: Source M3: Engineer-to- D3: Deliver
ETO Products Order ETO Products

Return Source SCOR Return Delivery

RSI: Return RDI: Return
Defective Products (Supply Chain Operations Defective Product
RS2: Return Reference model) RD2: Return
MRO Product MRO Product
RS3: Return RD3: Return
Excess Product
Enable Excess Product

Figure 1: SCOR Approach

2.1. SCOR scope

SCOR Methodology falls under the classification of The SCOR model has been developed to define all
normative models, where it provides standard definitions business activities associated with the supply chain [12,
of measures and procedure for calculating the metrics. 23]. It spans: all customer interactions (order entry
SCOR thus, provides a common language for through paid invoice), all physical material transactions
communication. SCOR is a process reference model (supplier’s supplier to customer’s customer, including
which combines the concepts of business process equipment, supplies, spare parts, bulk product, software,
reengineering, benchmarking and best practices. Thus etc.) and all market interactions (from the understanding
SCOR as a process reference model contains: of aggregate demand to the fulfillment of each order). It
o Standard descriptions of management practices does not attempt to describe every business process or
activity. Specifically, the Model does not address: sales
* and marketing (demand generation), product
Jayaratna considers methodology as explicit structuring development, research and development, and some
of actions to arrive at final model. For the paper we elements of post-delivery customer support [12, 23].
consider a methodology same as modeling approach

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 3

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

The return process is associated with returning or

Table 1: Performance Attributes receiving returned products for any reason.
Performance Performance Level 1 Metric
Attribute Attribute Definition 2.3. SCOR levels
The performance of the Delivery SCOR is a based on hierarchical modeling. The first
supply chain in Performance level represents the core management processes and the
delivering: the correct Fill Rates
product, to the correct metrics and measures corresponding to the management
place, at the correct processes. The three types of processes are represented in
Supply Chain
time, in the correct level two of the model. The plan process types are
Delivery
Reliability
condition and
Perfect Order
represented as P2, P3. P4 and P5 for plan source, plan
packaging, in the make, plan deliver and plan return. The basic source
correct quantity, with Fulfillment
makes, deliver and return have variants like make to
the correct
documentation, to the stock, make to order and engineer to order. Thus the
correct customer. process type execute have the three variants of these
The velocity at which a processes. Each of the core process has an enable process
Supply Chain supply chain provides Order Fulfillment as indicated.
Responsiveness products to the Lead Times
customer.
Each of the level 2 process elements is further detailed
The agility of a supply Supply Chain
chain in responding to Response Time
in level 3 of the model. The level 3 consists of process
Supply Chain elements and the input measures, parameters and output
marketplace changes to
Flexibility Production metrics associated with it. For example a level 2 process
gain or maintain
Flexibility
competitive advantage. element S1 represents a Source stocked product. Thus it is
Cost of Goods a source process with the level 2 variant or the make to
Sold stock strategy. SCOR defines five level 3 process
Total Supply Chain
The costs associated elements for this level 2 process as indicated in the figure.
Supply Chain Management Costs
with operating the Each process element has a set of inputs and outputs as
Costs Value-Added
supply chain. indicated in the figure. SCOR presents the best practices
Productivity
Warranty / Returns at both level 2 and level3. SCOR defines its scope only
Processing Costs until level 3 processes. For the sake of implementation the
The effectiveness of an Cash-to-Cash model has to be taken further down into lower level of
organization in Cycle Time detail. The level 4 represents the tasks associated with a
managing assets to Inventory Days of
Supply Chain process element. Process element D1.2 is received enter
support demand Supply
Asset and validate order. The tasks that may be associated with
satisfaction. This
Management these process elements are to receive order, enter order,
includes the
Efficiency
management of all Asset Turns check credit and validate price. These tasks are dependent
assets: fixed and on the individual company or industry. This level of detail
working capital. is necessary for implementation purposes [12, 23].

2.4. SCOR measures

2.2. SCOR processes SCOR defines metrics and measures in addition to the
The SCOR model consists of five basic processes plan, structured vocabulary of definitions of supply chain
source, make, deliver and return. In addition to these basic processes, the SCC also defined a set of measures that one
processes, there are three process types or categories, can use to evaluate processes at each level of the process
Enable, Planning and Execute. The SCOR modeling hierarchy [12, 23]. The metrics cater to various goals
approach starts with the assumption that any supply chain different companies might have. Thus choice of measures
process can be represented as a combination of the five and metrics to depend on the company’s strategy and
basic processes plan, source, make, deliver and return. focus and it is upon the company to choose the metrics
The plan process balances the demand and supply to best they desire. The SCOR model thus instead of dictating
meet the sourcing, manufacturing and delivery strategy, defines a measure at a high level. The SCOR
requirements. The source process procures goods and model calculates the measures based on precise formulae
services to meet planned or actual demand. The Make for each measure defined by a standard definition.
process transforms product to a finished state to meet
planned or actual demand. The Deliver process provide The SCOR methodology defines a dictionary of all the
finished goods and services to meet planned or actual definitions of terms and measures to standardize across all
demand, typically including order management, domains. The metrics are calculated at each level of the
transportation management and distribution management. model [12, 23]. The performance attributes and measures

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 4

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

are measured in four different categories namely delivery framework, except part of it accounted in modeling
reliability, responsiveness and flexibility, assets and costs. process element.

In the next section, we develop the framework for Actors

evaluating SCOR.

3. Framework for assessment

Structure Technology
The proposed assessment is termed as systemic
assessment borrowing the term from Checkland’s soft
systems’ and system’s thinking tradition [6]. Systemic
represents the holistic perspective, thus the modeling Task
approach is assessed by examining it in the context of
problem domain and organization. Jayaratna’s NIMSAD Figure 2: Leavitt’s Model
framework is another instance of systemic assessment
applicable for information systems development Framework includes the fourth element, “Modeling
methodologies [15]. Jayaratna defines systemic tools and techniques” (See Figure 3) to correspond to the
assessment as the critical enquiring process using the Leavitt’s model. Each element of assessment is detailed
notion of systems for defining systems that are considered below:
as relevant to the situation of concern. Jayaratna’s
NIMSAD framework is further elaborated to develop this 3.1. Problem domain
framework for assessing SCOR. The purpose of a model is to understand, analyze and
solve problems in the problem domain. Thus the
A good modeling approach guides the model building modeling approach should consider the problem situation
addressing and incorporating the various elements of this in a problem domain. Model should be developed after
framework. If the modeling approach fails to identify the considering the views of problem owners or the people.
right variables for building the model, then the whole The problem situation can be ill structured situations,
process of analysis and implementation is bound to fail. semi-structured or highly structured situation. It is not
Similarly, if a modeling approach doesn’t consider the necessary that all modeling approaches apply to all kinds
business strategy while deriving the solution, then it may of situations. Modeling approach should capture the
not produce the desired change in the company. Thus this problem situation from consideration of various problem
framework serves as a normative guide to look into what owners.
an ideal modeling approach should address. Thus this
gives us a good guide to strengths and limitations of a 3.2. Methodology user (Modeler)
modeling approach. This helps us to identify the stages Methodology users or the modelers are the people who
where caution has to be exercised while using a modeling use the methodology in the problem domain to bring
approach. about changes to the situation by defining problems,
designing solutions and implementing the designed
Based on Leavitt’s socio-technical model (see Figure 2), solutions. A methodology user (modeler) plays an
four elements are important for successful organizational important role in the success of a modeling approach.
change namely: Structure, Actors, Tasks, Technology and Each modeler may have different value sets, experiences
the interactions between them [17]. Jayaratna’s NIMSAD and abilities. Each modeler may have a different mental
framework is based on three elements: 1) Problem domain construct formed by their beliefs, value sets etc. The
or the situation of concern 2) Methodology user 3) modeling approach should account for the bias of the
Methodology process. Aligning NIMSAD framework to modeler in the process of model development.
Leavitt’s diamond: Structure element in Leavitt’s model
represents the organization where the change is to be
effected; problem domain element in Jayaratna’s
framework is exactly dealing with organization where 3.3. Modeling process
model is being developed. The second element in The modeling process includes the process of problem
Leavitt’s model, Actors is being represented in formulation, model building, solution designing and
Jayaratna’s model as Methodology user. The third solution implementing. A modeling approach should
element in Leavitt’s model, Task is represented in assist modeler for each step of the model building
Jayaratna’s framework as Modeling Process. The fourth process. The modeling approach should assist in deriving
element, Technology is not represented in Jayaranta’s the boundary conditions, identifying and formulating the

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 5

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Figure 3: Framework for Evaluation

problems. A model is developed to understand and

analyze the present situation apart from designing This section presented the four elements of the
solution to improve the present situation. A modeling framework chosen to evaluate SCOR model. The next
approach thus should assist to derive a “to-be” model and section describes the case study of TimeWise, for which
also means to implement this “to-be” model in the the SCOR model was developed.
organization.
4. A case study with TimeWise
3.4. Modeling techniques
A modeling approach provides tools, notations and TimeWise manufactures a line of sophisticated timing
techniques for developing a model. The suitability of instruments used in commercial and military vehicles.
these tools, notations and techniques for developing the The company started out manufacturing three different
model should be an important factor for a modeling products: blue sapphire, black diamond and grey pearl for
approach. These tools, notations and techniques should its two established customers. TimeWise has its set four
aid the ease of building the model and facilitate the extent suppliers and three customers. The company was still in
of understanding of the model. The techniques should the growth phase and it was one of the good companies in
also be suitable to represent a specific domain which is the timing instrument industry. TimeWise was able to
being modeled. Supply chains being the domain of accurately forecast the demand 90% of the time. The
interest, the tools, techniques and notations provided by company followed a make-to-order strategy as their lead
the modeling approach should suitable for supply chains. time allowed this. The competition was not threatening.
The typical elements of supply chains include the entities Desired metrics such as order fill rate, cost of sales and
such as suppliers, manufacturer, distributors and most importantly net profit on sales were looking good.
customers. The products and information has to flow from The company followed its own standard terminology for
one entity to others. There are many metrics that need to calculating the metrics. The company remained self
be calculated at various stages and phases. The tools and content and unconcerned about how the outside world
notation provided by the modeling approach should be would calculate the same metrics.
suitable to represent supply chains, analyze the
performance and design the solutions to improve the
performance of supply chains.

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 6

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

As the global competition increased, the customers TimeWise realized that it needed to improve its
started to bargain for price concessions. The competition processes but remained unsure about how and where to
forced TimeWise to reduce their prices. The customers improve. TimeWise decided to use a normative model for
also demanded personalized products from TimeWise. modeling its supply chains and to see what improvements
Responding to these requests, TimeWise added two more to make to its supply chain to increase efficiency, and
products to their product line. TimeWise could acquire effectiveness of the supply chain. TimeWise decided to
two new customers because the company increased the use SCOR approach for modeling its supply chain to
number of products. Now, they have four customers and improve it. TimeWise followed the SCOR model as
nine products in their product lines. The company prescribed in SCC's SCOR Version 6.0 and followed the
expecting an increase in sales volume doubled its steps specified in [4, 12].
employees apart from acquiring two new suppliers. The

Figure 4: eSCOR model of TimeWise

competition also forced TimeWise to shorten lead times.

In order to be able to respond more quickly to customer,
TimeWise piled on their inventory. So competition caused The company first performed SWOT analysis to
TimeWise not only to shorten lead times but also reduce identify the key strengths and issues within the company.
errors. TimeWise needed to improve the efficiency of The SCOR team developed the “As-Is” model of the
supply chain processes on demand as well as supply side. supply chain, using the standard SCOR notations and
On the supply side, an early order from supplier required terminology. The scope of the model included the
handling and storage and thus increased costs. If suppliers on supply side and TimeWise’s customers on
TimeWise ordered late, they disrupted replenishment and the demand side. SCOR has five broad performance
caused a stock out. On the demand side, the company measures: supply chain reliability, responsiveness,
needed to increase the delivery speed, responsiveness, and flexibility, costs and asset management efficiency. The
cost efficiencies while decreasing the order lead time. business strategy of TimeWise decided the desired
TimeWise, in the end piled up a lot of inventory. outcomes of the company and thus the modeling process.
Inventory being a surrogate from inefficiency, drastically Table 2 represents the “as-is” and “to-be” process (“to-
reduced the performance of TimeWise. be” is based on business strategy). SCOR Version has the
best practices listed from all the SCC members which are
listed in SCOR Version 6.0. TimeWise, based on its “to-

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 7

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

be” model, identified the following changes: cycle time developing the model. SCOR does not have explicit steps
reduction, smaller batch size, reduction of number of parts to understand the problems situation. Bolstroff and
to build product (using modular products) and reduction Rosenbaum suggest preparing Business context summary
of production cycle time. to understand the problem situation [4]. A business
context summary may include Strategic background,
Table 2: Competition Model financial performance and SWOT analysis of the
Competition Model company. This helps in the SCOR team to understand the
Performance Vs Competition companies needs and the corporate strategy [4].
Performance Attributes AS-IS TO-BE Davenport, in his book on “Process Innovation” stresses
Supply Chain Reliability Advantage Advantage the importance on creating process vision and defining
Responsiveness Advantage Superior business strategy before reengineering the process [8].
This suggests that SCOR needs some explicit steps to
Flexibility Parity Parity
understand the problem situation.
SC Management Costs Parity Advantage
SC Asset Utilizations Parity Advantage
Methodology user element is the most difficult to
Superior, Advantage, Parity evaluate. Most modeling approaches fail to address this
element explicitly and instead try to avoid this problem by
TimeWise, identified the concepts of lean production detailing specific steps that the modeler has to take in the
(pull based model) from the best practice analysis process of developing the model. Soft systems
available in SCOR. SCOR best practices also suggested methodology suggests developing multiple rich pictures
the use of Kanban cards†. Figure 4 shows the SCOR to account for this which may not be a feasible approach
model of TimeWise developed using eSCOR (a every time. A good composition of SCOR team and active
simulation tool to build SCOR model). involvement of all the participants in the process of model
development could be a reasonable guard towards this.
5. Evaluation and discussion of SCOR
modeling approach The modeling process includes: problem formulation,
solution design and implementation. SCOR emphasizes
The evaluation of SCOR modeling approach is based the notion of benchmarking and best practices. By
on existing studies on SCOR and personal experience in defining standard measures and metrics, SCOR allows
modeling TimeWise supply chain using SCOR. The one to benchmark the companies’ performance against
examined studies on SCOR include: (1) Supply chain other companies’ performance. Thus, SCOR assists in
council’s SCOR version 6.0 (2) Bolstroff and problem formulation. The best practices that are built into
Rosenbaum’s book titled “Supply chain excellence” on SCOR are another helpful resource for solution designing
the use of SCOR [4] and (3) Paul Hermon’s paper titled that does not exist in many other modeling approaches.
“Introduction to SCOR methodology” in Business process “To-be” model can identify the areas where company
trends (BPT), a popular domain for practitioners. The needs to improve. SCOR does not deal with
framework of evaluation discussed in section three was implementation of the solution into the supply chain.
used to evaluate SCOR. Framework consists of four SCOR model, being a generic model applicable for all
elements: problem domain, methodology user, modeling supply chains can be part of the reason why SCOR does
process and modeling techniques. not devise any strategies for implementation issues.

The problem domain consists of three aspects: 6. Conclusion

Assumption of the situation, problem owners and problem
situation as perceived by the company. SCOR can be The paper adopts socio-technical systemic assessment
applicable to situations where the problems are not of the SCOR approach for modeling supply chains. The
exactly known. SCOR helps in identifying the areas SCOR approach has been developed by practitioners and
where the company is performing well and the areas consultants. Research community has paid little attention
where the company needs to tighten. SCOR does not to SCOR until now. This paper introduces SCOR
consider the multiple view of the problem owners concepts and approach for modeling supply chains to the
explicitly. Soft systems methodology for example would research community. This paper also examines SCOR
consider the views of multiple problem owners in from methodological perspective by adopting systems
development framework and using a socio-technical lens
† as a basis for assessment.
Kanban card is a pull signaling system, used for lean
production. It enables a controlled flow of work by
releasing materials only when the customer demands The SCOR was examined using four elements of the
them. framework: problem domain, methodology user,

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 8

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

modeling process and modeling techniques. It was found and process postponement," Interfaces, vol. 30, no. 4,
that SCOR is strong on modeling process and modeling 2000, pp. 65-80.
techniques. These two represent the technical dimensions
in the discussed socio-technical model. SCOR is [6]P.B. Checkland, System Thinking, New York: Wiley,
relatively weak on addressing the issues in problem 1981.
domain and does not take into account the limitations of
methodology user. These two dimensions represent the [7]M. Christopher, Logistics and Supply Chain
social dimension of Leavitt’s socio-technical model. Thus Management, Logistics and Supply Chain Management,
it can be said that SCOR is strong on the technical ed. 2nd Ed, Great Britain: Prentice Hall, 1998.
dimensions and relatively weak on the social dimensions.
Leavitt’s organizational change model emphasizes the [8]T.H. Davenport, Process Innovation: Reengineering
importance of the social dimension for effective Work Through Information Technology (Hardcover), in
organizational change [17], thus SCOR needs to be Harvard Business School Press Books. 1992, pp. 1.
strengthened on this dimension.
[9]G.B. Davis, "Strategies for Information Requirements
SCOR’s core strengths lies in its ability to define Determination," IBM Systems Journal, vol. 21, no. 1,
standard measures and metrics. These standard measures 1982, pp. 4.
and metrics enable SCOR to identify and apply best
practices to various supply chains. Thus further research [10]T. Davis, "Effective supply chain management,"
should look into strengthening SCOR along the social Sloan Management Review, vol. 34, no. 4, 1993, pp. 35.
dimension. This includes steps involving people within
the company, getting opinion from multiple people within [11]G.M. Giaglis, "A taxonomy of business process
the company etc. modeling and information systems modeling techniques,"
International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems,
One of the main purpose of this article is to introduce vol. 13, no. 2, 2001, pp. 209-228.
SCOR to the research community by providing an
overview of concepts and techniques of the methodology. [12]P. Hermon, An Introduction to the Supply Chain
This article also provides an overall high level evaluation Council's SCOR Methodology, Business Process Trends,
of SCOR to guide further research in this area. 2003,

Acknowledgements [13]P. Hermon, Supply Chains as Business Process,

I am grateful to Dr. Lars Mathiassen and Dr. Richard Business Process Trends, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2003,
Welke for helping me crystallize some of the ideas in the
paper. [14]H.W. Ittmann, "Introduction to Supply Chain
Management," Interfaces, vol. 29, no. 3, 1999, pp. 111-
10. References 114.

[15]N. Jayaratna, Understanding and Evaluating

[1]Y. Aviv, "The effect of collaborative forecasting on Methodologies, London: McGraw Hill, 1994.
supply chain performance," Management Science, vol. 47,
no. 10, 2001, pp. 1326-1343. [16]J.P.C. Kleijnen, "Simulation and optimization in
production planning : A case study," Decision Support
[2]B. Beamon, "Supply Chain Design and Analysis: Systems, vol. 9, no. 3, 1993, pp. 269-280.
Models and Methods," International Journal of
Production Economics, vol. 55, no. 3, 1998, pp. [17]H. Leavitt, The Volatile Organization: Everything
Triggers Everything Else, Chicago: University of Chicago
[3]S. Bhaskaran, "Simulation Analysis of a Press, 1972.
Manufacturing Supply Chain," Decision Sciences, vol. 29,
no. 3, 1998, pp. [18]H.L. Lee, V. Padmanabhan, and S. Whang,
"Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip
[4]P. Bolstroff and R. Rosenbaum, Supply Chain effect," Management Science, vol. 43, no. 4, 1997, pp.
Excellence, American Management Association, 2003. 546-558.
[5]A.O. Brown, H.L. Lee, and R. Petrakian, "Xilinx [19]H. Min and G. Zhou, "Supply chain modeling: past,
improves its semiconductor supply chain using product present and future," Computers & Industrial Engineering,
vol. 43, no. 1-2, 2002, pp. 231-249.

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 9

 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

[20]Nielsen, Using and learning IS Development

methodologies, PhD, Lancashire University, 1990.

[21]P.R. Panchalavarapu, "Modeling the Supply Chain,"

Interfaces, vol. 32, no. 6, 2002, pp. 95-96.

[22]C.E. Riddalls, S. Bennett, and N.S. Tipi, "Modelling

the dynamics of supply chains," International Journal of
Systems Science, 2000, pp.

[23]SCOR, "Supply Chain Operations Reference Model

Version 6," Supply Chain Council, 2003, pp.

[24]G. Steward, "SCOR: the first cross industry

framework for integrated supply chain management,"
Logistics Information Management, 1997, pp.

[25]J.M. Swaminathan, S.F. Smith, and N.M. Sadeh,

"Modeling supply chain dynamics: A multiagent
approach," Decision Sciences, vol. 29, no. 3, 1998, pp.
607-632 26 pages.

[26]J.G.A.J.v.d. Vorst, A.J.M. Beulens, and P.v. Beek,

"Modelling and simulating multi-echelon food systems,"
European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 122, no.
2, 2000, pp. 354-366.

[27]B. Wahlstrom, "Models, modelling and modellers: an

application to risk analysis," European Journal of
Operational Research, vol. 75, no. 3, 1994, pp. 477-487.

[28]M. Waller, M.E. Johnson, and T. Davis, "Vendor-

managed inventory in the retail supply chain," Journal of
Business Logistics, vol. 20, no. 1, 1999, pp. 183-203.

0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 10

View publication stats