Policy Design for Sustainable Supply Chain Through Training

The Case of XYZ Packaging Company
  • Ijaz YusufEmail author
  • Tashfeen M. Azhar
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)


Trainings imparted to the company employees are prerequisite for organizational transformation. Impact of the trainings appears in the form of changed behavior and attitude of the employees that contribute significantly for enhancement of the supply chain score of the focal firm. This chapter discusses the types of trainings generally categorized in soft skills and hard skills. Training need analysis is the best proven method utilized to identify the competency gaps of current employees. Soft skills trainings and hard skills trainings are designed for capacity building in order to reduce the gap and raise the employee productivity toward the sustainable supply chain management. Soft skills trainings not only change the attitude and behavior of the employee but as well enhance the motivational level of the employees that ultimately contribute in terms of better product quality and waste reduction. Hard skills trainings improve the technical capabilities of the workers. Reduced waste percentage, improved process settings, declining cost of quality, mistake proofing in product design, and enhanced productivity are the contributing factors for sustained supply chain performance.

Training need analysis is the most appropriate method in the case company for assessing the competency gap. Training budget is allocated accordingly to reduce the competency gap. The objective of this chapter is to design the plausible policies for enhanced supply chain performance conducting experimentation with the simulated system dynamics model. What type of the training is required more and how significantly these training impact the supply chain score for enhanced supply chain performance are the research questions being explored. Experimentation with the model unveils the underlying symptoms and keeps on playing with the model to make the system better behaved. Training which is usually considered as an expenditure can be a valuable asset if its effectiveness improves the supply chain performance.

System dynamics simulated model is developed to design the policy streams for improved supply chain performance.


Soft skills trainings Hard skills trainings Supply chain score System dynamics Policy design 


  1. Adm, et al. (1997). An International study of quality improvement approach and firm performance. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 17(9), 842–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahire, S. L., Golhar, D. Y., & Waller, M. A. (1996). Development and validation of TQM implementation constructs. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 23–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, et al. (1995). A path analytic model of theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method: preliminary empirical findings. Decision Sciences, 26(5), 637–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beamon, B. M. (1998). Supply Chain Design and Analysis: Models and Methods. International Journal of Production Economics, 55(3), 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dow, D., Samson, D., & Ford, S. (1999). Exploding the myth: do all quality management practices contribute to superior quality performance. Production and Operations Management, 8(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duggan, J. (2008). Equation based policy optimization for agent-oriented system dynamics models. System Dynamics Review, 24(1), 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Flynn, B. B., & Flynn, E. J. (2005). Synergies between supply chain management and quality management: emerging implications. International Journal of Production Research, 43(16), 3421–3436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flynn, et al. (1995). The impact of quality management practices on performance and competitive advantages. Decision Sciences, 26(5), 659–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Forrester, J. W. (1968). Principles of systems. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Forrester, J. W. (1987). 14 Obvious Truths. System Dynamics Review, 3(2), 156–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forrester, J. W., & Senge, P. M. (1980). Tests for Building Confidence in System Dynamics Models, TIMS Studies in Management Sciences (Vol. 14, pp. 209–228). North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  13. Kaynak, H. (2003). The relationship between total quality practices and their effects on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(4), 405–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lane, C. D. (2007). The power of the bond between cause and effect: Jay Wright Forrester and the field of system dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 23(2–3), 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Meadows, D. L., et al. (1974). Dynamics of growth in finite world. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained methodologies implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 1(1), 48–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oliva, R., et al. (2006). Loop eigenvalue elasticity analysis: three case studies. System Dynamics Review, 22(2), 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pidd, M. (2010). Why modelling and model use matter. Journal of Operations Research Society, 61, 14–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Qudrat-Ullah, H. (2008). Behaviour validity of a simulation model for sustainable development. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 9(2), 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Qudrat-Ullah, H., & Seong, B. S. (2010). How to do structural validity of a system dynamics type simulation model: The case of an energy policy model. Energy Policy, 38, 2216–2234 Elsevier Journal.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Richardson, G. P. (1986). Problems with Causal-loop Diagrams. System Dynamics Review, 2(2 Summer), 158–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Richmond, B. (1993). Systems Thinking: critical thinking skills for the 1990 and beyond. Systems Dynamics Review, 9(2), 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Saeed, K. (1991). Slicing a complex problem for system dynamics modelling. AIT, IE&M#275.Google Scholar
  24. Saeed, K. (2008). Towards sustainable development: Essays on system dynamics of National Policy. Lahore: Progressive Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Sila, I., & Ebranhimpour, M. (2005). Critical linkages among TQM factors and business results. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(11), 1123–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sterman, J. D. (1987). Testing Behavioural Simulation Models by Direct Experiment. Management Science, 3(12), 1572–1592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. published by Irwin McGraw-Hill, USA.Google Scholar
  28. Sterman, J. D. (2007). Exploring the next great frontiers: system dynamics at fifty. System Dynamics Review, 23(2–3), 89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sushil. (1993). System dynamics a practical approach for managerial problems, published by H.S.Popali for Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  30. Tan, et al. (1999). Supply chain management: an empirical study of its impact on performance. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(10), 1034–1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Towill, D. R. (1996). Industrial dynamics modelling of supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 26(2), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yusuf, I., & Azhr, T. M. (2017). Dynamics of costs of quality: The case of Expresspac Pvt Ltd., 2nd International Conference on Dynamic Innovation held at MUST University in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 2017.Google Scholar
  33. Yusuf, I., & Ramish, A. (2011). Modelling the factory dynamics: The case of CCRS, International Conference on Business held at UCP, Lahore 2011.Google Scholar
  34. Zagonel, A. A. (2002). Model conceptualization in group model building, proceedings of 2002 international system dynamics conference, Palermo, Italy.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business and EconomicsUniversity of Management and TechnologyLahorePakistan

Personalised recommendations