Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 181, Issue 1, pp 813–827 | Cite as

Modeling the synergy level in a vertical collaborative supply chain through the IMP interaction model and DEA framework

  • Edgar Alfonso
  • Dusko Kalenatic
  • Cesar López


This work develops a mathematical programming model that characterizes the main variables present in the interaction dynamics of each agent in a collaborative vertical logistical system, such as a supply chain, and measures the synergy level of such system. The model is based on the interaction model developed by the IMP (Industrial Marketing and Purchasing) group and also on the DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) framework. The basics of these two approaches allow modeling of the characteristics of an agent as well as the collaborative relationships with other agents within the chain. The model was validated using information of supply chain of leather and its products, classified by DANE (Departamento Nacional de Estadistica—Colombia) as the sector CIIU323.


Vertical collaborative supply chain Interaction model IMP Synergy DEA (Data envelopment analysis) 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barratt, M. A., & Oliveira, A. (2001). Exploring the experiences of collaborative planning: the enablers and inhibitors. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 31(2), 266–89. Google Scholar
  2. Browning, B., & White, A. (2000). Collaborative transportation management. Logility, Inc. White Paper.
  3. Chandra, C., & Kumar, S. (2001). Enterprise architectural framework for supply-chain integration. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 101(5/6), 290–304. Google Scholar
  4. Charnes, A., Cooper, W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Charnes, A., Cooper, W., Golany, W., Seiford, L., & Stutz (1985). Foundation of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. Journal of Econometrics, 30(1–2), 91–107. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charnes, A., Cooper, W., Lewin, A., & Seiford, L. (1994). Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology, and applications. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  7. Chen, Y., & Zhu, J. (2002). Data envelopment analysis interpretation and uses by multiple objective linear programming (Working paper). Google Scholar
  8. Chong, A., Ooi, K., Lin, B., & Tang, S. (2009). A study on impact of Malaysian SMEsInter-organizational relationships and knowledge management towards E-Business supply chain technology implementation. Internet Research, 19(3), 313–331. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooke, J. (1998). Into the great wide open. Logistics Management and Distribution Report, 37(10), 84–87. Google Scholar
  10. Dyer, H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. (1994). Production frontiers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  12. Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Google Scholar
  13. Giannakis, M., Croom, S., & Slack, N. (2004). Understanding supply chains: concepts, critiques, and futures. London: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  14. Ghiani, G., Laporte, G., & Musmanno, R. (2004). Wiley-Interscience series in systems and optimization. Introduction to logistics systems planning and control. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Google Scholar
  15. Gunnar, S., & Russel, D. (2008). Supply chain interfaces: defining attributes and attribute values for collaborative logistics management. Journal of Business Logistics, 29(1), 347–359. Google Scholar
  16. Hakansson, H., & Ostberg, C. (1975). Industrial marketing: an organizational problem? Industrial Marketing Management, 4, 113–23. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holmstrom, J., Framling, K., Kaipia, R., & Saranen, J. (2002). Collaborative planning forecasting and replenishment: new solutions needed for mass collaboration. Supply Chain Management, 7(3/4), 136–145. Google Scholar
  18. Hopp, W. J., & Spearman, M. L. (2001). Factory physics: foundations of manufacturing management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
  19. IMP Group (1999). Understanding business marketing and purchasing: an interaction approach (pp. 235–247). Thomson learning. Google Scholar
  20. Jatusripitak, S., Fahey, L., & Kotler, P. (1985). Strategic global marketing: lessons from the Japanese. Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(1), 47. Google Scholar
  21. Kalenatic, D., López, C., & González, L. (2006). Modelo integral de producción en empresas manufactureras. Bogotá: Universidad Católica de Colombia. Google Scholar
  22. Karolefsky, J. (2001). Collaborating across the supply chain. Collaboration in practice. In Food logistics and reailtech magazines (pp. 24–34). Fall 2001. Google Scholar
  23. Lambert, D. M., & Pohlen, T. L. (2001). Supply chain metrics. International Journal of Logistics Management, 12(1), 1–19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leontief, W. (1986). Input-output economics. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  25. Pramatari, K., Evgeniou, T., & Doukidis, G. (2009). Implementation of collaborative e-supply chain initiatives: an initial challenging and final success case from grocery retailing. Journal of Information Technology, 23(4). Google Scholar
  26. Salmon, K. (1993). Efficient costumer response: enhancing consumer value in the grocery industry. Washington: FMI. Google Scholar
  27. Seifert, D. (2003). Collaborative planning, forecasting, and replenishment: how to create a supply chain advantage. New York: Amacom. Google Scholar
  28. Simatupang, T. M., & Sridharan, R. (2008). Design for supply chain collaboration. Business Process Management Journal, 14(3), 401–418. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simchi-Levi, D., & Simchi-Levi, E. (2001). Logistics systems modeling. In Handbook of industrial engineering (pp. 2007–2019). New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  30. Terry, L., & Williams, L. (2003). The value of collaborative transportation management (CTM): its relationship to CPFR and information technology. Transportation Journal, 42(4), 55–65. Google Scholar
  31. Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: a slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 243–252. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Udin, Z., Khan, M., & Zairi, M. (2006). A collaborative supply chain management: Part 2—The hybrid KB/gap analysis system for planning stage. Business Process Management Journal, 12(5), 671–687. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. VICS (Voluntary Inter-Industry Commerce Standards Association) (1998). Collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR).
  34. Zhu, J. (2002). Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking: data envelopment analysis with spreadsheets and DEA excel solver. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Group Logistic Systems, School of EngineeringUniversidad de La SabanaBogotá D.C.Colombia

Personalised recommendations