Improving the return on investment in ports: opportunities in data management

  • G. N. Kenyon
  • M. Goldsmith
  • B. D. Neureuther
  • D. Zhou
Original Article


Ports provide a critical link in the supply chain by connecting sea, air, and land transport. They provide facilities and services for the transfer, storage, inspection, and control of the goods moving both in and out of a country. Inefficient port management can increase costs considerably and hamper the timeliness of delivery. Many traditional industry techniques fail to capitalize on the global nature of data, thereby omitting the maximum benefit available. The objective of this research is to investigate issues associated with inefficient port operations and suggest new disruptive methods for resolving them. This research proposes to examine the factors of accepted industry practice, data management, and enterprise asset management to help link and streamline operational processes at sea ports. Specifically, we look at the accepted definition of a Port Community System and expand this to a Port Eco-System (PES), a system that includes the addition of interdependent stakeholders. Through the lens of a PES, this research concludes that ports can substantially improve their existing return on investment, by as much as 30% or more, through the streamlining of operational processes.


Port management Data management Operational streamlining Transportation Return on investment 


  1. Ascencio, L.M., R.G. Gonzalez-Ramirez, L.A. Bearzotti, N.R. Smith, and J.F. Camacho-Vallejo. 2014a. A collaborative supply chain management system for a maritime port logistics chain. Journal of Applied Research and Technology 12 (3): 444–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ascencio, L., R. Gonzales-Ramirez, L. Bearzotti, N. Smith, and J. Camacho-Vallejo. 2014b. A collaborative supply chain management system for maritime port logistics chain. Journal of Applied Research and Technology 12: 444–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borgman, C.L. 2012. The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63 (6): 1059–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brooks, M. R. 2001. Good governance and ports as tools of economic development: Are they compatible? Proceedings of the International Association of MAritime Economists Annual Conference, 1–19. Hong Kong: International Association of MAritime Economists.Google Scholar
  5. Brooks, M.R. 2004. The governance structures of ports. Review of Network Economics 3 (2): 168–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, I.J., and K. Popovich. 2009. Understanding customer relationship management (CRM). Business Process Management Journal 9 (5): 672–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, X., D. Dollar, and A. Micco. 2004. Port efficiency, maritime transport costs, and bilateral trade. Journal of Development Economics 75: 417–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clearswift. 2015. Information visibility: Reducing business risk. White Paper.
  9. CMAIS. 1999. Applying advanced information systems to ports and waterways management. National Academy of Science, Committee on Maritime Advanced Information Systems. Washington, DC: Nation Academies Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cong, G., Fan, W., Geerts, F., and Jia, X. (2007). Improving data quality: Consistency and accuracy. Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on Very large data bases, 23–27. Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  11. Deming, W.E. 1982. Out of the crisis. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Studies.Google Scholar
  12. Dseed, K.A., M.K. Malhotra, and V. Grover. 2005. Examining the impact of interorganizational systems on process efficiency and sourcing leverage in buyer-supplier dyads. Decision Sciences 36: 365–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ESCAP. 2016. Regional study: The use of Logistics Information Systems for increased efficiency and effectiveness. New York: Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Transport and Tourism Division, United Nations.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission. 2016.
  15. Ford, R., and D. Zussman. 1997. Alternative service delivery: Transending boundaries. In Aternative service delivery: Sharing governance in Canada, ed. R.Z. Ford. Toronto: IPAC/KPMG.Google Scholar
  16. Frink, C., A. Mattoo, and I.C. Neagu. 2002. Trade in international maritime service: How much does policy matter? The World Bank Economic Review 16 (1): 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gagassi, E., N. Athanasopoulos, G. Aifadopoulou, and D. Makris. 2013. ICT for cooperative supply chain visibility within a port centric intermodal setting: The case of the Thessaloniki port-rail-dryport integration. International Journal of Advanced Logistics 2 (1): 38–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ghalayini, A.M., and J.S. Noble. 1996. The changing basis of performance measurement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 16 (8): 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldsmith, M. 2016. CEO, I2A Phillipines, Bonifacio Global City, Philippines.Google Scholar
  20. Handfield, D. 2002. Creating information visibility in the chain.
  21. IPCSA. (2014). Port community systems. (I. P. Association, Editor).
  22. Jacobs, R., and F.C. Weston. 2007. Enterprise resource planning (ERP)—a brief history. Journal of Operations Management 25 (2): 357–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Klein, R., and A. Rai. 2009. Interfirm strategic information flows in logistics supply chain relationships. MIS Quarterly 33 (4): 735–762.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, H.L., V. Padmanabhan, and S. Whang. 1997. Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip effect. Management Science 43: 546–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Legner, C., and J. Schemm. 2008. Towards the inter-organizational product informaiton supply chain: Evidence from the retail and consumer goods industry. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 9 (3/4): 115–150.Google Scholar
  26. Mathas, S., N. Ramasubbu, and V. Sambamurthy. 2001. How information management capability influences frim performance. MIS Quarterly 35 (1): 237–256.Google Scholar
  27. McCalla, R.J. 1999. Global change, locale pain: Intermodal seaport terminals and their service areas. Journal of Transport Geography 7: 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MSPCC. 2006. The maritime infrastructure recover plan for the National Strategy for Maritime Security. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Maritime Security Policy Coordinating Committee.Google Scholar
  29. Muro, S., Ibaraki, T., Miyajima, H., and Hasegawa, T. 1983. File redundancy issues in distributed database systems. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, 275-277. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Nakatani, k, T.T. Chuang, and D. Zhou. 2006. Data synchronization technology: Standards, business values, and implimentations. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 17 (1): 44.Google Scholar
  31. Noordewier, T.G., G. John, and J.R. Nevin. 1990. Performance system utilization strategy for supply chain integration. Journal of Marketing 54 (4): 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Notteboom, T., and J.P. Rodrigue. 2006. Challenges in the maritime-land interface: Maritime freight and logistics. In The master development plan for port logistics parks in Korea, ed. C.E. Target, 301–332. Soeul: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
  33. Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T. 1992. Introduction: An American perestroika. In Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  34. Pires, A., G. Putruik, and P. Avila. 2012. A survey analysis of the resource selection models in agile/virtual enterprises. Journal of Applied REsearch Technology 10: 416–427.Google Scholar
  35. Raghunathan, S. 1999. Interorganizational collaborative forecasting and replenishment systems and supply chain integration. Decision Sciences 30: 1053–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rodal, A., and N. Mulder. 1993. Partnerships, devolution and power sharing: issues and implications for management. Optimal, the Journal of Public Sector Management 24: 27–48.Google Scholar
  37. Sahin, F., and E.P. Robinson. 2002. Flow coordination and information sharing in supply chains: Review, implications, and decisions for future research. Decision Sciences 33: 505–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Straub, D.W., D.L. Hoffman, B.W. Weber, and C. Steinfield. 2002. Toward new metrics for net-enhanced organizations. Information Systems Research 13: 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Street, C.T., and D.B. Meister. 2004. Small business growth and internal transparency: The role of information systems. MIS Quarterly 2 (3): 473–506.Google Scholar
  40. Tongzon, J., Y.T. Chang, and S.Y. Lee. 2009. How supply chain oriented is the port sector? International Journal of Production Economics 122: 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. UNCTAD. 2016a. Harnessing emerging technological breakthroughs for the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Policy Brief No. 45, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.Google Scholar
  42. UNCTAD. 2016b. Review of maritime transport 2016. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. New York, NY: United Nations.
  43. van Hoek, R.I. 1999. Postponement and the reconfiguration challenge for food supply chains. Supply Chain Management 35 (3): 16–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Verhoeven, P. 2009. European ports policy: Meeting contemporary governance challenges. Maritime Policy & Management 39 (1): 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Waller, M., M.E. Johnson, and T. Davis. 1999. Vendor-managed inventory in the retail supply chain. Journal of Business Logistics 20 (1): 183–203.Google Scholar
  46. Wang, E.T., and H.L. Wei. 2007. Interorganizational governance value creation: Coordinating for informaton visibility and flexibility in supply chains. Decision Sciences 38 (4): 647–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. World Bank. 2016. Port Reform Toolkit.
  48. Xue, Y., H. Liang, W.R. Boulton, and C.A. Snyder. 2005. ERP implementation failures in China: Case studies with implimentations for ERP vendors. International Journal of Production Economics 97: 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhou, D., K. Nakatani, and T.T. Chuang. 2011. Data quality in collaborative commerce. International Journal of Information Quality 2 (3): 264–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. N. Kenyon
    • 1
  • M. Goldsmith
    • 3
  • B. D. Neureuther
    • 2
  • D. Zhou
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Business and Public AdministrationEastern Washington UniversitySpokaneUSA
  2. 2.School of Business and EconomicsState University of New York College at PlattsburghPlattsburghUSA
  3. 3.I2A PhillippinesBonifacio Global CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations