Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Logistikinnovationsökosysteme und -plattformen – Die Logistik und ihre verknüpfende Rolle zwischen Industrien

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Logistik-Start-ups

  • 4125 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Die Logistik hat sich stets als ein Dienstleister für produzierende und handelnde Unternehmen verstanden und somit primär als eine unterstützende Industrie als eine treibende (Heistermann et al., Digitisation in Logistics: Answers to Questions that Concern Companies, 2017). Parallel gab es Ansätze und Aussprüche, die Logistik gar als eigenständige wissenschaftliche Disziplin zu positionieren (Delfmann et al., Bundesvereinigung Logistik (BVL) 11:1–13, 2018). Durch die sukzessive Durchsetzung von Start-ups in dieser Industrie kam es zu einem generellen Umdenken und zu neuen Geschäftsmodellarchetypen (Möller et al., Archetypes of digital business models in logistics start-ups, 2019). Eben diese Start-ups bringen neue digitale Geschäftsmodelle (Keen & Williams, MIS Quarterly, 37:643–648, 2013) und somit Konzepte der Open Innovation (Chesbrough, Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm, Oxford University Press, 2006) in diese Branche. Dies sorgte für ein Durchrütteln und eine Neuausrichtung der betroffenen Logistikunternehmen. Dieses Umdenken soll nun als Plädoyer für die Logistik formalisiert und postuliert werden.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Adams, F. G., Richey, R. G., Autry, C. W., Morgan, T. R., & Gabler, C. B. (2014). Supply chain collaboration, integration, and relational technology: How complex operant resources increase performance outcomes. Journal of Business Logistics, 35(4), 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ager, V. (2020). E-Commerce-Logistik: alle Möglichkeiten und Vorteile auf einen Blick. https://www.sendcloud.de/e-commerce-logistik/. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akdoğan, M. Ş., & Durak, A. (2016). Logistic and marketing performances of logistics companies: A comparison between Germany and Turkey. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 576–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, B. N., & Khanna, T. (2000). Do firms learn to create value? The Case of Alliances, Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 295–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barratt, M. (2004). Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9(1), 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basole, R. C., & Rouse, W. B. (2008). Complexity of service value networks: conceptualization and empirical investigation. IBM Systems Journal, 47(1), 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhatnagar, R., & Viswanathan, S. (2000). Re-Engineering global supply chains: Alliances between manufacturing firms and global logistics services providers. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 30(1), 13–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitran, G. R., Gurumurthi, S., & Sam Lin, S. (2006). Emerging trends in supply chain governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bitran, G. R., Gurumurthi , S., & Sam Lin, S. (2007). The need for third-party coordination in supply chain governance. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(3), 30–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowersox, D. J., & Closs, D. J. (2007). Logistical management: The integrated supply chain process. Intern. ed. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowersox, D. J., Daugherty, P. J., Droge, C. L., Germain, R. N., & Rogers, D. S. (1992). Logistical excellence: It’s not business as usual. Digital Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camarinha-Matos, L. (2004). Virtual enterprises and collaborative networks: IFIP 18th World Computer Congress : TC5/WG5.5 – 5th Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, 22–27 August 2004, Toulouse, France. Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers (International Federation for Information Processing (Series))

    Google Scholar 

  • Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2008). On reference models for collaborative networked organizations. International Journal of Production Research, 46(9), 2453–2469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, C., & Santaló, J. (2019). Generativity tension and value creation in platform ecosystems. Organization Science, 30(3), 617–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M. C. B., & Wang, J. J. (2016). An integrative approach in measuring hub-port supply chain performance: Potential contributions of a logistics and transport data exchange platform, case studies on transport policy. World Conference on Transport Research Society, 4(2), 150–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open platform innovation: Creating value from internal and external innovation. Intel Technology Journal, 07(03), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Hrsg.), Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm (S. 1–12). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2007a). Business model innovation: It’s not just about technology anymore. Strategy and Leadership, 35, 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2007b). Have open business models. MITSloan Management Review, 48(2), 22–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M. C., Lambert, D. M., & Pagh, J. D. (1997). Supply chain management: More than a new name for logistics. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. (2013). Supply chain management terms and glossary. http://www.clm1.org/. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Daugherty, P. J. (2011). Review of logistics and supply chain relationship literature and suggested research agenda. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41(1), 16–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delfmann, W., ten Hompel, M., Kersten, W., Schmidt, T., & Stölzle, W. (2018). Logistics as a science: Central research questions in the era of the fourth industrial revolution. Bundesvereinigung Logistik (BVL), 11(9), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durst, S., & Poutanen, P. (2013). Success factors of innovation ecosystems: Initial insights from a literature review. Co-Create, 27–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett, S. E., & Magnan, G. M. (2002). The rhetoric and reality of supply chain integration. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 32(5), 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gattorna, J. (1998). Fourth-party logistics. In Strategic supply chain alignment (S. 425–445). Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawer, A. (2010). Towards a general theory of technological platforms. In Druid summer conference: Opening up innovation: Strategy, organization and technology (S. 1–40).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 417–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göpfert, I., & Seeßle, P. (2019) Innovative Startups in der Logistikbranche – Eine Betrachtung der neuen Marktteilnehmer und empirische Erkenntnisse einer Fragebogenstudie. In I. Göpfert (eds.), Logistik der Zukunft – Logistics for the Future. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golicic, S. L., Foggin, J. H., & Mentzer, J. T. (2003). Relationship magnitude and its role in interorganizational relationship structure. Journal of Business Logistics, 24(1), 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graça, P., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2017). Performance indicators for collaborative business ecosystems — Literature review and trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 116, 237–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grover, V., & Saeed, K. A. (2007). The impact of product, market, and relationship characteristics on interorganizational system integration in manufacturer-supplier dyads. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(4), 185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruenderszene Da muss sich was bewegen – Deutschlands Logistik-Startups verpassen den Anschluss (2017). https://www.gruenderszene.de/automotive-mobility/logistik-freight-flexport-waren-transport. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., Wohlgezogen, F., & Zhelyazkov, P. (2012). The two facets of collaboration: Cooperation and coordination in strategic alliances. Academy of Management Annals, 6, 531–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heistermann, F., ten Hompel, M., & Mallée, T. (2017). Digitisation in logistics: Answers to questions that concern companies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henfridsson, O., & Bygstad, B. (2013). The generative mechanisms of digital infrastructure evolution. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 907–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, E., & Osterwalder, F. (2017). Third-party logistics providers in the digital age: Towards a new competitive arena? Logistics, 1(2), 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Hompel, M., & Heidenblut, V. (2011). Taschenlexikon Logistik. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R., & Bruce, R. (2000). CPFR: Only the beginning of collaboration (S. 80–88). Supply Chain Management Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1995). Specific and general knowledge, and organizational structure. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 8(2), 4–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. C., & Riley, D. W. (1985). Using inventory for competitive advantage through supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Materials Management, 15(5), 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keen, P., & Williams, R. (2013). Value architectures for digital business: Beyond the business model. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 643–648.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamberjohann, M., & Otto, B. (2020). A systematic literature review of ecosystems: An approach to introduce logistics ecosystems into academia. In G. Alpan, T. Ekin, & J. Gonzalez-Feliu (Hrsg.), Interconnected supply chains in an era of innovation (S. 29–36). Austin, TX, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, D. M. (2014). Supply chain management: Processes, partnerships, performance (4th ed.). Supply Chain Management Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, D. M., & Cooper, M. C. (2000). Issues in supply chain management. Industrial Marketing Management, 29, 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, D. M., García-Dastugue, S. J., & Croxton Keely, L. (2005). An evaluation of process-oriented supply chain management frameworks. Journal of Business Logistics, 26(1), 25–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., Luo, J., & Zhou, L. (2010). Modular logistics service platform. In Proceedings of 2010 IEEE international conference on service operations and logistics, and informatics (S. 200–204). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., & Pekkarinen, S. (2011). QFD-based modular logistics service design. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(5), 344–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., Pekkarinen, S., & Ma, S. (2015). Service-dominant logic for managing the logistics-manufacturing interface: A case study. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 26(1), 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Londe, B. J., & Masters, J. M. (1994). Emerging logistics strategies: Blueprints for the next century. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 24(7), 35–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, A., Mercier, P., Gstettner, S. (2018). The death of supply chain management. Herausgegeben von Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/06/the-death-of-supply-chain-management. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Mathauer, M., & Hofmann, E. (2019). Technology adoption by logistics service providers. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 49(4), 416–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathur, P. (2019). Becoming a unicorn is more expensive than ever. https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/becoming-a-unicorn-is-more-expensive-than-ever. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • McCarthy, S., & Golocic, S. (2002). Implementing collaborative planning to improve supply chain performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 32(6), 431–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey & Company. (2017). Container shipping: The next 50 years. https://www.mckinsey.com/media/mckinsey/industries/traveltransportandlogistics/ourinsights/howcontainershippingcouldreinventitselfforthedigitalage/container-shipping-the-next-50-years-103017.ashx. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Mentzer, J. T. (2001). Supply chain management. Herausgegeben von J. T. Mentzer. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer, J. T., Foggin, J. H., & Golicic, S. L. (2000a). Collaboration: The enablers, impediments, and benefits. Supply Chain Management Review, 52–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer, J. T., Min, S., & Zacharia, Z. (2000b). The nature of interfirm partnering in supply chain management. Journal of Retailing, 76(4), 549–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. (2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Möller, F., Bauhaus, H., Hoffmann, C., Niess, C., & Otto, B. (Hrsg.) (2019). Archetypes of digital business models in logistics start-ups.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nix, N. W. (2001). Customer service in supply chain management context. In Mentzer, J. T. (Hrsg.), Supply chain management (S. 347–369). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver Wyman Asiens Großangriff auf Europas Logsitker (2019). https://www.oliverwyman.de/media-center/2019/feb/logistik-start-ups-analyse.htm. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Peltoniemi, M. (Hrsg.) (2004). Cluster, value network and business ecosystem: Knowledge and innovation approach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pil, F. K., & Holweg, M. (2006). Evolving from value chain to value grid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47, 72–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. G., Roath, A. S., Whipple, J. M., & Fawcett, S. E. (2010). Exploring a governance theory of supply chain management: Barriers and facilitators to integration. Journal of Business Logistics, 31(1), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rong, K., Hou, J., Shi, Y., & Lu, Q. (2010). From value chain, supply network, towards business ecosystem (BE): Evaluating the BE concept’s implications to emerging industrial demand. In 2010 IEEE International Conference 2010, S. 2173–2177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubens, N., Still, K., Huhtamaki, J., & Russell, M. G. (2011). A network analysis of investment firms as resource routers in chinese innovation ecosystem. Journal of Software, 6(9), 1737–1745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabath, R., & Fontanella, J. (2002). The unfulfilled promise of supply chain collaboration. Supply Chain Management Review, July/August, 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeed, K. A., Malhotra, M. K., & Grover, V. (2011). Interorganizational system characteristics and supply chain integration: An empirical assessment. Decision Sciences, 42(1), 7–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, E. (2007). Logistics collaboration in supply chains: Practice vs. Theory. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 18(2), 274–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, H.-J., Czaja, C. N., Dittrich, M., & Mentschel, M. (2019). Current advancements of and future developments for fourth party logistics in a digital future. Logistics, 3(1), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srai, J. S., & Lorentz, H. (2019). Developing design principles for the digitalisation of purchasing and supply management. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 25(1), 78–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varella, L., & Gonçalves, M. B. (2013). Information technology as the main competence in the design of the strategic planning of logistics platforms. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 8(3), 160–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wax, M. (2020). FreightHub is becoming forto: The road from digital freight forwarder to supply chain technology company. https://forto.com/en/blog/freighthub-is-becoming-forto/. Zugegriffen: 31. Aug. 2021.

  • Webster, F. E. (1993). The changing role of marketing in the corporation. IEEE Engineering Management Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., Wang, J., Wong, C. W. Y., & Lai, K.-H. (2008). Relational stability and alliance performance in supply chain. Omega, 36, 600–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The New Organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Deutschland

    Marvin Lamberjohann

Authors
  1. Marvin Lamberjohann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marvin Lamberjohann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fraunhofer IIS, Fraunhofer Arbeitsgruppe für Supply Chain Services, Nürnberg, Deutschland

    Martin Schwemmer

  2. DB Systel GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland

    Patrick Seeßle

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert durch Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lamberjohann, M. (2021). Logistikinnovationsökosysteme und -plattformen – Die Logistik und ihre verknüpfende Rolle zwischen Industrien. In: Schwemmer, M., Seeßle, P. (eds) Logistik-Start-ups . Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-35030-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-35030-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-35029-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-35030-7

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation