Research paper

Effective supply value chain based on

competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu
Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey, and
Gülçin Büyüközkan
Department of Industrial Engineering, Galatasaray University, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract
Purpose – This paper seeks to propose a managerial decision framework for different levels of supply chain, by addressing the strategic importance of
competence values in supply chain effectiveness.
Design/methodology/approach – A conceptual framework for supply chain effectiveness is defined in levels of supply chain targets, knowledge
management dynamics, competence levels and competence success attributes. Analysis of literature in the areas of competence management,
knowledge management, supply chain and value chain management resulted in defining the factors of the model. Surveys of industrial practices were
used to validate the choice of factors. The analytical network process (ANP) is used to determine the most beneficial competence success attributes in a
case study performed for three companies that participate in different stages of the textile supply chain.
Findings – Individual competence in continuous learning and networking, as well as innovativeness of the team are found to be the three most
important competence attributes in supply chain effectiveness.
Research limitations/implications – The case study is executed in the regional textile industry. New case studies in other industries will help improve
the framework. Further international surveys can improve the detail level of factors used.
Practical implications – The study creates awareness of knowledge management dynamics and competence management for companies which are
in need of innovation to improve their supply chain competitiveness.
Originality/value – The proposed decision framework is one of the first efforts to consider the importance of competence in supply chain success. The
ANP method is used to offer an accurate analysis of interdependent factors observed in management of knowledge dynamics and competence levels.

Keywords Competences, Knowledge management

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Supply chains play a significant role in the global knowledge
based economy. Effectiveness of the value fostered has been
the main focus of all parties in a supply chain. Yet,
measurement of the effectiveness has been problematic for
the policy makers when knowledge based attributes have been
as influential as the cost-down or physical assets (Kinder,
2003; Walters, 2006). Two new dimensions are to be taken
into consideration: the significant value of innovation and the
opportunities provided by collaboration. Collaboration needs
to be used in data and knowledge sharing as well as in the
integration of plans and decisions (Queseda et al., 2008). The
value of innovation, on the other hand, is created by the
ability to renew business models and access competencies in
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-8546.htm
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
15/2 (2010) 129– 138
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546]
[DOI 10.1108/13598541011028732]
the chain (Leavy, 2005). Acute awareness of the need for
emphasis on competence management and development is
now attributable to the whole value chain (Chan and Lee,
2005). That is why organisational competence in the chain is
to be explored in interaction with team and individual success
factors of each partner. All three levels of competence are to
be seen as viable resources of integrated business strategies.
Key components of any knowledge based supply chain
system are the people who create and use the knowledge
(Barson et al., 2000), and organisations need to learn from
these internal resources as much as from the external
environment. In this context, there have been numerous in-
depth research studies run by psychologists, sociologists and
epistemologists, each with its own view (Harzallah and
Vernadat, 2001; Lee et al., 2009; Feldman, 2003). In
addition, studies run by knowledge management researchers
The authors would like to express deep gratitude to the industrial experts
from Kipaş İplik A.Ş., Karagözlü Tekstil A.Ş. and Catalys Inc. for their
unlimited support in evaluation of the framework. The authors would like
to thank the Editor and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments
and suggestions, which were helpful in improving the paper. The authors
also acknowledge Ellen Saunders for her help in improving the linguistic
quality of the paper.

129
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138

are focused on technological processes and/or intellectual collaboration both in functional operations and strategies
capital measurement (Hicks et al., 2006) ignoring the (Cox, 1999; Bowersox et al., 2000) will add value to the
multidisciplinary interactions. With the spread of global supply chain as the full potential of information flow re-
competition, the need for collaboration is increased energizes the business (Bowersox et al., 2005). Participation
(Blenkhorn and Fleisher, 2005); and this fact requires the in innovation creates a competitive advantage for the supply
supply value chain players to review their goals by chain (Hou and He, 2008; George et al., 2009) if regulatory
reconsidering the interaction of different levels of and cultural limits of globalisation are removed (Bello et al.,
competence issues with a knowledge-based vision (Lindgren 2004).
et al., 2003). Advanced implementation of virtual teams A supply chain consists of different stages and even includes
facilitates the technological collaboration and leads to the customer (Simchi-Levi et al., 2000). That is why
fundamental changes in supply management strategies (Mo integration gaps are blamed on the competence level of
and Zhou, 2003). Hence, understanding of organisational human resources due to reducing the beneficial influences of
competence is to be raised to embrace supply value chain knowledge management in value generation (Madlberger,
effectiveness (Miocevic, 2008). Exploring and measuring the 2009). Hence, competence created by collaborative
competence priorities through a new dimension will be innovation is to be investigated in individual, team or
beneficial for the company as well as the value chain. organisational levels of human interactions. To this end, the
This paper aims to introduce the important competence literature survey will be focused on four dimensions as shown
management issues of an effective supply value chain in Figure 1: supply value chain effectiveness goals, knowledge
management in a four-level strategic analysis framework that dynamics, competence levels and success attributes in
will aid managerial decision-making. The proposed decision competence levels.
framework is based on literature and practice in the area of
competence management, knowledge management, and 2.1 Dimension of effectiveness
supply chain management. A systematic analytical model, The majority of companies in supply chains target correct
namely the analytic network process (ANP) (Saaty, 1996) will order management, demand forecasting, inventory
be used to determine which competence management management, capital efficiency and reduced time-to market
attributes are most beneficial in the development of an (Tamas, 2000) which are all good responses to market needs.
effective supply value chain. ANP is a suitable technique to Chopra and Meindl (2001) extends the basic goal of
analyse the dynamic characteristics and complexity of supply responsiveness by focusing on originality of the products
value chain management, which is a necessity for strategic and services provided by the chain. Responsiveness is the
analysis. Despite the increase in ANP related studies, to our
minimum goal of responding to customer requests based on
knowledge there is only one ANP study on knowledge
time, product mix, flexibility, quality and price. It should be
management related issues in the supply chain (Raisinghani
applied by companies in all the stages independent of power
and Meade, 2005). This provides an opportunity to discuss
balance or structural differentiation of push or pull (Mentzer
further studies based on a new decision framework and the
et al., 2007).
achievements of a case study.
Perceived differences in difficulty associated with demand
The paper is organised as follows: the first section presents
prediction will restrict full responsiveness; hence, competitive
the key constructs used to build the suggested framework and
advantages of one supply chain over another are to be sought
illustrates the theoretical framework. In the following section,
using the main factors of trust, consistency and further
the research methodology based on the analytic network
uniqueness (Simchi-Levi et al., 2004). Consistency builds
process is outlined. The following sections include initiation
customer trust for the whole chain by sticking to the desired
and detailed illustration of the methodology through the case
level of responsiveness over time (Walters and Lancester,
study and its results. The final section presents some future
research directions and concludes the paper.
Figure 1 High-level graphical representation of proposed evaluation
framework
2. Research constructs and theoretical framework
In our century, knowledge has solidified its position as a key
commodity in the global market; whereas, competence
management strategies continue to be a challenge for
achieving goals not only in manufacturing organizations but
also in the value chain. Many competence systems in current
use are well-designed data repositories (Lindgren, 2005),
devoid of the critical and crucial interest driven dynamism
required. Therefore, most of them cannot respond to the
enhanced goals of the supply value chain (Halley and
Beaulieu, 2009). In the beginning of this century, agility
was the main goal of any value chain, which is not the case
anymore (Raisinghani and Meade, 2005). Currently, the
leading edge goals for holding up the chain are to include
original competitive advantages created by a holistic view of
tangible and intangible components as Kinder (2003)
investigates. This is only possible by considering
collaboration and innovation. Establishing the effective

130
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan
2000). Any small mistake in delivery time, quality and price
may easily cause the customers change the supplier.
Originality guarantees competitive uniqueness in the ever-
changing global world. Innovation, the main result expected
from knowledge management implementations, should bring
up new products, new services, new processes and new
systems by implementing the benefits proposed by advanced
technologies (Mavrotas et al., 2007).
2.2 Dimension of knowledge management dynamics
In order to achieve goals for effectiveness, knowledge
management is to be used as part of a strategy, as an
integration tool and to pertain the relations. Knowledge
management dynamics are clustered as strategies,
infrastructure and distribution and sharing as detailed below.
2.2.1 Knowledge management strategies
To develop process, and share and utilise knowledge in the
value chain landscape, assets, incentives and creativity must
be the central foci. Knowledge strategies are to be defined for
the entire value chain, which can only be done after having
defined the organisational strategies. The first major strategy
is to define the “landscape” (Lee et al., 2009). Using the
governing principles model, the values, goals and expectations
of the value chain should be clarified based on landscapes of
the organisations. This method is concerned with ethical and
judgemental issues (Davenport, 1999; Wiig, 2004).
Knowledge assets inventory is expected to be the second
strategy. Each organisation has his own assets but how much
of these assets will be shared and accepted as the value chain
asset is the question to be answered (National Research
Council, 2000). Structural, human, relational and social
assets are to be determined as internal to the organisation
and/or intra organisations in the chain (Ko et al., 2009). Best
practices, is a good example of knowledge to be shared. While
defining the knowledge to be shared, trust building should be
accomplished by defining the incentives (Edvinsson, 2002).
The last strategy is to define the strength of creativity and
design new ways to improve collaborative creativity.
2.2.2 Knowledge management infrastructure
Information and communication technologies are indeed an
integral part of value chain integration. The decision making
and the technological infrastructure are the two critical
systems in performance (Stapleton et al., 2006). Value adding
network implemented using Internet and the web-based
applications (technological system) will amalgamate the
structural assets, whereas data warehouses and data mining
tools (decision systems) will retrieve the knowledge from
combined information inventories (Edvinsson, 2002). As the
benefits of technology are achieved more advanced technology
is requested. A lexicon for the value chain is to be created to
communicate in the same language independent of culture
and customs, which necessitates the taxonomy work.
Knowledge agents, which are developed using artificial
intelligence techniques, will help semantic interpretation for
the lexicon to be dynamically generated (Kamruzzaman et al.,
2006). Knowledge hubs and knowledge grids will speed up
and regulate the knowledge flow (Brown and O’Hare, 2001).
To avoid turning enterprises off because of the expense of
these technologies, start up should be based on web
applications. A good example of this is the Living Steel
project, which was started by ten steel producers to integrate
the supply chain including construction companies and
131
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138
architects (Lee et al., 2009). The project tries to achieve the
best return on investment in web applications.
2.2.3 Knowledge distribution
Reinvention of the values that can be created through an
integrated value chain can only be possible by building trust
(Walter, 2003). Formalising chain learning, fostering
communities of practice and rewarding systems can be
solutions for building trust if power of stages are balanced
(Walters, 2006). Emphasizing natural human processes like
story telling can empower collaboration. It is only possible
through interest groups and idea exchanges that collaborative
creativity is reinforced. Creativity is an individual skill to
retain and workers of a company should be encouraged to
come up with new ideas by accessing chain knowledge
inventory. Dissemination of the knowledge shared in the value
chain in the organisation and rewarding ideas generated are
part of enterprise leadership and would show the flexibility of
company vision (Miocevic, 2008).
2.3 Dimension of competence levels
Current research has strong findings that human relations are
getting more important in supply chain performance (Shub
and Stonebraker, 2009). No longer limited to relations among
managers, opportunities given to teams by evolution of
information and communication technologies are to be
analysed (Shi et al., 2004). Organisations and teams are
made of individuals. The majority of competence studies
conclude that behavioural, motivational, technical and
knowledge based skills (Lindgren, 2005) influence the
degree of achievement of supply value chain goals. It is
obvious that organisational, team and individual competence
levels are interdependent and one cannot be analysed without
the feedback of the other levels.
Organisational level in the knowledge-based organisations is
expected to consider knowledge landscape, knowledge assets
as well as information sharing, push/pull balance and synergy
creation. Knowledge landscape defines the coverage of
knowledge clustering, processing and creation that will
structure the business strategies. The power of organisations
is dependent on knowledge assets as well as financial assets
(Walter, 2003). Information sharing policies are the basis of
collaboration in the supply chain. The push/pull power
balance among the stages is important in building trust, and
synergy creation is a necessity for originality.
At the team level issues of team success are to be
considered. Cultural integration has become as important
an issue as knowledge sharing in both local and global chains.
Relation among the stages is fragile if the operation teams are
not performing with common integrated goals. Cost can be
reduced also by relying on resource utilisation by either
strategic or operational teams (Madlberger, 2009).
Management and leadership is the crucial attribute of team
success resulting in organisational success. Innovation is the
result of knowledge sharing and can only be measured at the
team level since modifications can neither be decided nor
created by individuals even if it benefits the creativity of the
team members.
Individuals build teams and organisations. Expectations at
this level consist of knowledge acquisition, knowledge
understanding, willingness to do something differently and
experiencing different trials (Hoek et al., 2002). These skills
and abilities lead learning and creativity as a necessity of
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan
knowledge-based organisations and networking for inter-
organisational issues in the supply chain (Lee, 2009). A
purchasing and or supply operator is expected to be as results
oriented as the salesforce. Since turnover will damage
consistency role commitment is inevitable in performance
measures.
3. Research methodology: the analytic network
process
Selecting a suitable methodology that can decode the high-
level relationship model presented in Figure 1 is a critical
issue. This methodology should be able to use quantitative,
qualitative, tangible and intangible factors pertaining to the
decision of whether and which success attributes should be
evaluated. With this trend, ANP is found to be capable of
taking the multiple dimensions of information into the
analysis. It is a method that is widely used in decision making
in supplier selection (Chen et al., 2008; Lee, 2009) and
supplier evaluation (Lin, 2008; Liu and Wang, 2009). It is
also used in performance measures (Thakkar et al., 2007; Lin
et al., 2009).
ANP is a general form of the analytical hierarchy process
(AHP) first introduced by Saaty (1980). While the AHP
employs a unidirectional hierarchical relationship among
decision levels, the ANP enables interrelationships among the
decision levels and attributes in a more general form. The
ANP uses ratio scale measurements based on pair wise
comparisons; however, it does not impose a strict hierarchical
structure as in AHP, and models a decision problem using a
systems-with-feedback approach. The ANP refers then to the
systems of which a level may both dominate and be
dominated, directly or indirectly, by other decision
attributes and levels. The ANP approach is capable of
handling interdependence among elements by obtaining the
composite weights through the development of a
“supermatrix”. Saaty (1980) explains the supermatrix
concept similar to the Markov chain process. The
supermatrix development is defined in the next section.
There are six major steps in the ANP process:
1 Develop an evaluation network hierarchy showing the
relationships among analysing factors.
2 Elicit pair-wise comparisons among the factors
influencing the evaluation.
3 Calculate relative-importance-weight vectors of the
factors.
4 Form a supermatrix (i.e. a two-dimensional matrix
composed from the relative-importance-weight vectors)
and normalize this supermatrix, so that the numbers in
every column sum to one.
5 Calculate converged (“stable”) weights from the
normalized super-matrix.
6 Determine overall weightings of evaluation attributes.
These six steps will be discussed in conjunction with the case
study in the following section.
4. Application of the suggested framework
The proposed framework limits the case study to knowledge-
based organisations with a role in the supply chain. Since
different stages in a supply chain show different issues, it is
preferred to work on the average of responses from three
132
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138
companies representing different stages of a textile chain.
Importance given to competence evaluation and having a
payroll expert also played an important role in the choice of
the companies studied.
Analysis is performed on the average of evaluations by three
assessors from three different companies older than ten years,
all classified as small and medium size, and the all important
textile exporters of Turkey. The first company is a yarn
producer, the second a fabric producer and the third is a
sourcing company.
The yarn producer is constructed and run by a mechanical
engineer brought up in cotton fields. Technology and
information sharing have been the infrastructure of his
strategies since the very first day of establishment. The
youngest brother of the family is trained as a knowledge
engineer in the US to be responsible for organisational
competence management after graduation. Since he is a
knowledge engineer, he has implemented knowledge
management processes in the company and has improved
export volume by 30 per cent in the last four years with the
techniques he applied in competence management. He is the
first assessor in the case study.
The fabric producer was a classical family company
working in the local market until the mathematical engineer
daughter joined. She finished her master of science in UK
before initiating the export operation and managing the
business process-reengineering project in the company. She
recently finalised establishing customer knowledge and
intellectual capital management processes. The performance
system she implemented is based on both intellectual capital
and competence measurements. She is chosen to be the
second assessor.
The third assessor is the company owner of a sourcing
company, a textile engineer with a PhD in process
engineering. Knowledge management was not a choice but
a natural driver for him when he established his company. His
company operates both traditionally and on a collaboration
platform for e-business. He is one of the early appliers of
reverse price forecasting and runs the competence
management himself.
The following sub-sections are the result of interviews with
the above-mentioned assessors. The overall objective of the
framework is to determine which competence levels’ attribute
is most influential in the current supply value chain
management. Knowing this information enables
management to ascertain if the supply chain is positioned
appropriately to meet its strategic objectives.
4.1 The evaluation network hierarchy
The detailed model actually used to evaluate the competence
levels’ success attributes is given in Figure 2.
4.2 Pair-wise comparisons
Eliciting preferences of various components and attributes
will require a series of pair wise comparisons where the
assessor will compare two components at a time with respect
to an upper level ’control’ criterion. In ANP, like AHP, pair
wise comparisons of the elements in each level are conducted
with respect to their relative importance towards their control
criterion (Saaty, 1980).
Saaty has suggested a scale of 1 to 9 when comparing the
two components, with a score of 1 representing indifference
between the two components and 9 being overwhelming
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan
Figure 2 Evaluation network for effective supply value chain management
dominance of the component under consideration (row
component) over the comparison component (column
component). If a component has a weaker impact on the
control criterion, the range of scores will be from 1 to 1/9,
where 1 represents indifference and 1/9 an overwhelming
dominance by a column element over the row element. When
scoring is conducted for a pair, a reciprocal value is
automatically assigned to the reverse comparison within the
matrix. That is, if aij is a matrix value assigned to the
relationship of component i to component j, then aji is equal
to 1/aij (or aij £ aji ¼ 1). Since many of these values have
strategic importance, we again used the strategic group
decision-making tool, Delphi approach, to assign meaningful
values to the pair wise comparisons. Expertise of the assessors
chosen has avoided the issues caused by difficulty of
evaluation.
An example of the pair-wise comparison matrix with respect
to the goal as the controlling factor is shown in Table I. The
weightings have been obtained from our industrial experts by
asking a series of paired comparison questions. For this
matrix in Table I, the experts were asked questions such as:
“In terms of the goal of effective supply value chain what is
the relative importance of the infrastructure dynamic when
compared with the strategies dynamic?” In this example, the
decision maker viewed collection as “slightly more important”
by the score of 3.000 (as shown in the cell at the intersection
of the strategies row and the infrastructure column in Table I).
Table I Pair-wise comparison matrix for KM dynamics elements’
importance relative to the goal
Goal Strategy Infrastructure Distribution Weights
Strategy 1.000 0.333 0.200
Infrastructure 3 1.000 0.333
Distribution 5 3 1.000
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138
Reciprocally, the intersection of the strategies row and
infrastructure column shows a score of 0.333. This pairwise
comparison approach is used to populate the matrix.
4.3 Calculation of relative importance weights
Once all the pair wise comparisons are completed, the relative
importance weight for each component is determined. The
priority vector shows that for this study, the knowledge
distribution dynamic was given the highest rating (0.637) (the
weighted priorities are shown as the last column in Table I).
Given that A is the pairwise comparison matrix, the weights
can be determined by expression:
A w ¼ l max w ð1Þ
where lmax is the largest eigenvalue of A. Saaty provides
several algorithms for approximating w. In this paper a two-
stage algorithm as proposed by Saaty (1996) was used. The
algorithm involves forming a new n £ n matrix by dividing
each element in a column by the sum of the column elements
in the first stage. In the second stage, the elements in each row
of the resultant matrix are summed and divided by the n
elements in the row.
This is referred to as the process of averaging over
normalized columns. The procedure may be algebraically
represented as:
!
PI aij
i¼1 PJ
a
j¼1 ij
wi ¼ ð2Þ
J
0.105 where:
0.258
.
wi is the weighted priority for component i.
0.637
. J is number of columns (components).
.
I is number of rows (components).
133
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138

This algorithm is one of the better methods for estimation of
eigenvalues, as proposed by Saaty (1996). Sarkis (1998) also
recommended this algorithm because it can be easily used by
practitioners who may only have access to simple
spreadsheets. This algorithm has since been used by many
researchers (such as Meade and Sarkis (1998); Chung et al.
(2005); Wong et al. (2008); and Chen et al. (2009)).
In the assessment process there may occur a problem in the
transitivity or consistency of the pair wise comparisons. For an
explanation on inconsistencies in relationships and their
calculations see (Saaty, 1980).
The priority vectors for each pair wise comparison matrix
will be needed to complete the various supermatrix
submatrices. We will need a total of 13 priority vectors to
complete our supermatrix. This requirement means that 13
pair wise comparison matrices must be completed. The pair
wise comparison matrix results used below were all tested for
and achieved the consistency goals.
4.4 Supermatrix formation
ANP uses the formation of a supermatrix to allow for the
resolution of the effects of the interdependence that exists
between the clusters within the evaluation network hierarchy.
The supermatrix is a partitioned matrix, where each
submatrix is composed of a set of relationships between
two clusters in the graphical model. A generic supermatrix is
shown in Figure 3, with the notation representing the various
relationships from Figure 2; for instance, “A” is the
submatrix representing the influence relationship between
KM dynamics elements’ and the control factor of the goal of
determining the weights of competence levels’ success
attributes. Table II is the detailed initial supermatrix of the
proposed model.
Figure 3 General submatrix notation for supermatrix
4.5 Calculation of stable weights from the normalized
super-matrix
The next step with the supermatrix evaluation is to determine
the final relative importance weights of each of the
competence levels. To complete this step and to help
guarantee convergence, the columns of the supermatrix
must be “column stochastic”. That is, the sum of weights of
each column of the supermatrix must be equal to 1. To
complete this task, each of the columns may either be
normalized by dividing the weight in the column by the sum
of that column. For convergence to a final set of weights, we
raise the normalized (column stochastic) supermatrix to the
power 2k þ 1 where k is an arbitrarily large number until
stabilization of the weights occurs (i.e. when values in the
supermatrix do not change when it is multiplied by itself
again, this is also defined as convergence). For our example,
convergence occurred when the supermatrix was raised to the
29th power. The long-term stable weighted values to be used
in the analysis are shown in the converged supermatrix given
in Table III. From the results, it can be observed that the most
important competence level for effective supply value chain is
individual competence (0.487), trailed by team competence
(0.413).
4.6 Final relative importance weight calculation
The sixth and last step in the ANP process is to take the final
results of the converged super-matrix and the eigenvector
values from the earlier pair-wise comparisons and calculate
the relative importance weight for each competence level’s
success attribute. In our model no interdependence between
the competence levels and the attributes level is assumed to
exist.
To analyse success attributes of competence levels, a similar
pair wise comparison that was made in step 2 is made for the
attributes level for relative importance weight calculation (or
eigenvector determination). There are three separate pair wise
comparison matrices that have to be developed for this step in
the analysis. Tables IV to VI give the evaluation results.
Once all the relative weights have been calculated, a
composite (global) weight for each success attribute is
determined. This is accomplished by aggregating the
weights. The result is a single weight value for competence
levels’ success attribute. The combination of all attributes’
weights is given in Table VII. Based on these results, it
appears innovation (0.150), trailed by continuous learning
(0.143), networking (0.142) and role commitment (0.140)

Table II Initial super matrix M for determining the weights of competence levels’ success attributes
SVC targets KM dynamics Competence levels
Goal RESP CONS ORI STRA INF DIST ORG TEAM IND
Goal 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
SVC targets RESP 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.081 0.188 0.072 0.000 0.000 0.000
CONS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.731 0.081 0.649 0.000 0.000 0.000
ORI 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.188 0.731 0.279 0.000 0.000 0.000
KM dynamics STRA 0.105 0.070 0.188 0.651 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
INF 0.258 0.178 0.081 0.223 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
DIST 0.637 0.751 0.731 0.127 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Competence levels ORG 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.055 0.081 0.105 0.223 0.088 0.086
TEAM 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.173 0.188 0.258 0.127 0.243 0.618
IND 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.772 0.731 0.637 0.651 0.670 0.297

134
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138

Table III Converged supermatrix at M29

SVC targets KM dynamics Competence levels
GOAL RESP CONS ORI STRA INF DIST ORG TEAM IND
ORG 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100
Competence levels TEAM 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413
IND 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487

Table IV The relative importance of the organizational competence 5. Concluding remarks and future directions
success attributes
Effectiveness in supply chain is satisfactory if suppliers
KL KA IS PPB SCr identify and share the company value (Cambra-Fierro and
Polo-Redondo, 2008). This paper addresses the need for a
Knowledge landscape 1.000 3.000 3.000 5.000 0.333 strategic analysis model to assist management in identifying
Knowledge assets 0.333 1.000 5.000 3.000 3.000 the competence levels’ success factors for supply value chain
Information sharing 0.333 0.200 1.000 5.000 0.333 management effectiveness. To this end, an evaluation model is
Push/pull power balance 0.200 0.333 0.200 1.000 3.000 developed based on a literature survey and refined with
Synergy creation 3.000 0.333 3.000 0.333 1.000 industrial experts. The model considers tangible, intangible,
quantitative, qualitative and strategic factors in the evaluation.
This model is one of the first efforts to consider competence
Table V The relative importance of the team competence success levels’ success attributes explicitly within a strategic evaluation
attributes process.
Although it was not a surprise for a knowledge management
KS CI RU INV ML expert to see that innovation, continuous learning and
Knowledge sharing 1.000 5.000 7.000 0.200 0.200 networking would be the most influential competence
Cultural integration 0.200 1.000 3.000 0.333 5.000 factors; these are the attributes in which companies do not
Resource utilisation 0.143 0.333 1.000 0.200 0.200 traditionally invest to develop. In a classical industry like
Innovation 5.000 3.000 5.000 1.000 3.000 textiles, competition is forcing supply chain effectiveness and
companies of any stage are focused on design to achieve
Management/leadership 5.000 0.200 5.000 0.333 1.000
competitive uniqueness. Results of the evaluation supported
the managers who are in search of innovation.
The ANP method used in this study offers a more precise and
Table VI The relative importance of the individual competence success accurate analysis by integrating interdependent relationships,
attributes but requires more time and effort (additional interdependency
RO RC CL NW Cr relationships increase geometrically the number of pair wise
comparison matrices). This is why an application of the ANP
Result orientation 1.000 0.200 0.333 0.333 0.333 approach, as proposed in this study should be targeted at more
Role commitment 5.000 1.000 3.000 0.333 3.000 strategic decisions, especially for long-term profit and long-
Continuous learning 3.000 0.333 1.000 3.000 5.000 term competitiveness considerations.
Networking 3.000 3.000 0.333 1.000 5.000 This paper only presented the initial states of the framework
Creativity 3.000 0.333 0.200 0.200 1.000 for which we foresee further developments. The most recent
improvements in research of supply chain effectiveness
(Soosay et al., 2008; Elmuti et al., 2008; Fawcett et al.,
respectively are the success attributes that have the biggest 2008) will provide an opportunity to consider a larger span of
impact on the supply value chain management effectiveness. factors and criteria. Possible extensions include the
Role commitment was shown to be one of the most consideration of knowledge dynamics to be detailed, and
influential factors by human behaviour analysts (Manthou organizational performance objectives to form a new layer of
et al., 2004: Belkadi et al., 2007). Continuous learning supply operations to be considered. The model just
(Koskivaara, 2004; Hult et al. 2006) and innovation (Thakkar considered selective processes and did not cover all possible
et al., 2007; Prasad and Martens, 2008) were proven to be interactions. Including additional interactions between and
highly effective in performance by knowledge experts. The within the decision levels would be an enhancement to the
information technologists emphasize and show importance of model.
networking in supply chain success since the beginning of this Application of the model restricts companies that can
century (Barson et al., 2000; Walter, 2003; Shi et al., 2004; benefit from the framework. Studies are ongoing to improve
Ko et al., 2009). Yet, this study is unique in presenting the the framework to create awareness of knowledge management
important effect of innovation, continuous learning, dynamics and competence management in more traditional
networking and role commitment in the integrated analysis. companies since the methodology is transferable.
That is why, the managers of the case companies in a very This paper has set the foundation for a systematic
classical industry are surprised to see the impressive influence framework in a multidisciplinary approach of investigating a
of those intangible assets. field, which is not yet fully explored in research. We strongly
All three companies have decided to revise and extend their believe that it will contribute to decision-making processes
research and development units to include skill development. both in research and business.

135
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138

Table VII Composite priority weights for competence levels’ success attributes
Competence levels Local weights Success attributes Local weights Global weights
Organizational competence 0.100 Knowledge landscape 0.282 0.028
Knowledge assets 0.263 0.026
Information sharing 0.126 0.013
Push/pull power balance 0.121 0.012
Synergy creation 0.208 0.021
Team competence 0.413 Knowledge sharing 0.203 0.084
Cultural integration 0.197 0.081
Resource utilisation 0.032 0.013
Innovation 0.365 0.150
Management/leadership 0.205 0.085
Individual competence 0.487 Result orientation 0.054 0.026
Role commitment 0.287 0.140
Continuous learning 0.294 0.143
Networking 0.292 0.142
Creativity 0.073 0.036

References Chopra, S. and Meindl, P. (2001), Supply Chain Management:

Barson, R.J., Foster, G., Struck, T., Ratchev, S., Pawar, K.,
Weber, F. and Wunram, M. (2000), “Inter- and intra-
organisational barriers to sharing knowledge in the
extended supply chain”, e2000 Conference Proceedings,
Bremen, Germany, pp. 235-9.
Belkadi, F., Bonjour, E. and Dulmet, M. (2007),
“Competency characterisation by means of work situation
modelling”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 58 No. 2,
pp. 164-78.
Bello, D.C., Lohtia, R. and Sangtani, V. (2004),
“An institutional analysis of supply chain innovations in
global marketing channels”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 33, pp. 57-64.
Blenkhorn, D.L. and Fleisher, C.S. (2005), Competitive
Intelligence and Global Business, Praeger Publishers,
Westport, CT.
Bowersox, D.J., Closs, D.J. and Drayer, R.W. (2005),
“The digital transformation: technology and beyond”,
Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, p. 22.
Bowersox, D.J., Closs, D.J., Stank, T.P. and Keller, S.B.
(2000), “How supply chain competency leads to business
success”, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4,
p. 70.
Brown, R. and O’Hare, S. (2001), The Use of Technology Road-
Mapping as an Enabler of Knowledge Management, IEE
publications, London.
Cambra-Fierro, J.J. and Polo-Redondo, Y. (2008), “Creating
satisfaction in the demand-supply chain: the buyer’s
perspective”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 211-24.
Chan, C.K. and Lee, H.W.J. (Eds) (2005), Successful
Strategies in Supply Chain Management, Idea Group,
Hershey, PA.
Chen, S.-H., Lee, H.-T. and Wu, Y.-F. (2008), “Applying
ANP approach to partner selection for strategic alliance”,
Management Decision, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 449-65.
Chen, M-Y., Huang, M-J. and Cheng, Y-C. (2009),
“Measuring knowledge management performance using a
competitive perspective: an empirical study”, Expert Systems
with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 8449-59.
Strategy, Planning and Operation, Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Chung, S.-H., Lee, A.H.I. and Pearn, W.L. (2005), “Analytic
network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning
in semiconductor fabricator”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 96 No. 1, pp. 15-36.
Cox, A. (1999), “A research agenda for supply chain and
business management thinking”, Supply Chain Management,
Vol. 4 No. 4, p. 209.
Davenport, T. (1999), “Some principles of knowledge
management”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77 No. 1,
pp. 124-36.
Edvinsson, L. (2002), Corporate Longitude, Prentice-Hall,
London.
Elmuti, D., Minnis, W. and Abebe, M. (2008), “Longitudinal
assessment of an integrated industrial supply chain”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 151-9.
Fawcett, S.E., Magnan, G.M. and McCarter, M.W. (2008),
“Benefits, barriers, and bridges to effective supply chain
management”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 35-48.
Feldman, R. (2003), Epistemology, Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
George, M., Jap, S., Palmatier, R.W., Weitz, B. and
Ganesan, S. (2009), “Supply chain management and
retailer performance: emerging trends, issues, and
implications for research and practice”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 84-94.
Halley, A. and Beaulieu, M. (2009), “Mastery of operational
competencies in the context of supply chain management”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14
No. 1, pp. 49-63.
Harzallah, M. and Vernadat, F. (2001), “IT-based
competency modelling and management: from theory to
practice in enterprise engineering and operations”,
Computers in Industry, Vol. 48, pp. 157-79.
Hicks, R.C., Dattero, R. and Galup, S.D. (2006), “The five-
tier knowledge management hierarchy”, Supply Knowledge
Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 19-31.

136
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan
Hoek, R.I., Chatham, R. and Wilding, R. (2002), “Managers
in supply chain management, the critical dimension”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 7
No. 3, pp. 119-25.
Hou, H. and He, M. (2008), “Model of the sustained
innovation system in logistic enterprises”, Service Operations
and Logistics, and Informatics, Vol. 2, pp. 2382-6.
Hult, G.T.M., Ketchen, D.J., Cavusgil, T. and Calantone, R.J.
(2006), “Knowledge as a strategic resource in supply
chains”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 5,
pp. 458-75.
Kamruzzaman, J., Begg, R. and Sarker, R. (2006), Artificial
Neural Networks in Finance and Manufacturing, Idea Group
Publishing, Hershey, PA.
Kinder, T. (2003), “Go with the flow: a conceptual
framework for supply relations in the era of the extended
enterprise”, Research Policy, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 503-23.
Ko, I., Olfman, L. and Choi, S. (2009), “The impacts of
electronic collaboration and information exploitation
capability on firm performance: focusing on suppliers
using buyer-dominated interorganizational information
systems”, International Journal of E-Collaboration, Vol. 5
No. 2, pp. 1-18.
Koskivaara, E. (2004), “Artificial neural networks in
analytical review procedures”, Managerial Auditing
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 191-223.
Leavy, B. (2005), “Supply chain effectiveness: strategy and
integration”, Handbook of Business Strategy, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 331-6.
Lee, H.I.A. (2009), “A fuzzy supplier selection model with
the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and
risks”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 2,
pp. 2879-93.
Lee, S.M., Kim, J., Choi, Y. and Lee, S.-G. (2009), “Effects
of IT knowledge and media selection on operational
performance of small firms”, Small Business Economics,
Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 241-58.
Lin, R.-H. (2008), “An integrated FANP-MOLP for supplier
evaluation and order allocation”, Applied Mathematical
Modelling, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 2730-6.
Lin, Y.-H., Tsai, K.-M., Shiang, W.-J., Kuo, T.-C. and
Tsai, C.-H. (2009), “Research on using ANP to establish a
performance assessment model for business intelligence
systems”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 2,
pp. 4135-46.
Lindgren, R. (2005), “Adopting competence systems in fast-
growing knowledge-intensive organizations”, Journal of
Information and Knowledge Management, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 1-13.
Lindgren, R., Stenmark, D. and Ljungberg, J. (2003),
“Rethinking competence systems for knowledge-based
organizations”, European Journal of Information Systems,
Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 18-29.
Liu, H.-T. and Wang, W.-K. (2009), “An integrated fuzzy
approach for provider evaluation and selection in third-
party logistics”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36
No. 3, pp. 4387-98.
Madlberger, M. (2009), “What drives firms to engage in
inter-organizational information sharing in supply chain
management?”, International Journal of E-Collaboration,
Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 18-43.
Manthou, V., Vlachopoulou, M. and Folinas, D. (2004),
“Virtual e-Chain (VeC) model for supply chain
137
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138
collaboration”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 241-50.
Mavrotas, G., Schorrocks, A. and Sen, A. (2007), Advancing
Development: Core Themes in Global Economics, Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Meade, L. and Sarkis, J. (1998), “Strategic analysis of
logistics and supply chain management systems using the
analytical network process”, Transportation Research Part E:
Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 34 No. 3,
pp. 201-15.
Mentzer, J.T., Matthew, B.M. and Stank, T.P. (2007),
Handbook of Global Supply Chain Management, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Miocevic, D. (2008), “Organizational buying effectiveness in
supply chain environment: a conceptual framework”,
Journal of Business Market Management, Vol. 2 No. 4,
pp. 171-85.
Mo, J.P.T. and Zhou, M. (2003), “Tools and methods for
managing intangible assets of virtual enterprise”, Computers
in Industry, Vol. 5, pp. 197-210.
National Research Council (2000), “Surviving supply chain
integration: strategies for small manufacturers”, Committee
on Supply Chain Integration, Board on Manufacturing and
Engineering Design, Commission on Engineering and
Technical Systems, National Research Council, National
Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Prasad, B. and Martens, R. (2008), “Increasing technological
innovation competence through intra-organizational
communication networks”, Advances in Applied Business
Strategy, Vol. 11, pp. 141-65.
Queseda, G., Rachamadagu, R. and Martinez, J.L. (2008),
“Linking order-winning and external supply chain
integration strategies”, Supply Chain Management:
An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 296-303.
Raisinghani, M.S. and Meade, L. (2005), “Strategic decisions
in supply-chain intelligence using knowledge management:
an analytic-network-process framework”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 114-21.
Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-
Hill, New York, NY.
Saaty, T.L. (1996), Decision Making with Dependence and
Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications,
Pittsburgh, PA.
Sarkis, J. (1998), “Evaluating environmentally conscious
business practices”, European Journal of Operational
Research, Vol. 107 No. 1, pp. 159-74.
Shi, Z., Kunnathur, A.S. and Ragu-Nathan, T.S. (2004),
“IS outsourcing management competence dimensions:
instrument development and relationship exploration”,
Information and Management, December, pp. 3-17.
Shub, A.N. and Stonebraker, P.W. (2009), “The human
impact on supply chains: evaluating the importance of soft
areas on integration and performance”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 31-40.
Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P. and Simchi-Levi, E. (2000),
Designing and Managing the Supply Chain: Concepts,
Strategies and Case Studies, Irwin McGraw-Hill Companies
Inc., Boston, MA.
Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P. and Simchi-Levi, E. (2004),
Managing the Supply Chain: The Definitive Guide for the
Business Professional, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
 Effective supply value chain based on competence success
Gülgün Kayakutlu and Gülçin Büyüközkan
Soosay, C.A., Hyland, P.W. and Ferrer, M. (2008), “Supply
chain collaboration: capabilities for continuous innovation”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 160-9.
Stapleton, D., Hanna, J.B. and Ross, J.R. (2006), “Enhancing
supply chain solutions with the application of chaos
theory”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 108-14.
Tamas, M. (2000), “Mismatched strategies: the weak link in
the supply chain”, Supply Chain Management:
An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 171-5.
Thakkar, J., Desmukh, S.G., Gupta, A.D. and Shankar, R.
(2007), “Development of a balanced scorecard:
an integrated approach of interpretive structural modeling
(ISM) and analytic network process (ANP)”, International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 56
No. 1, pp. 25-9.
Walter, R. (2003), “Competence management strategies:
a future concept in competence management for
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
138
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 15 · Number 2 · 2010 · 129 –138
knowledge-based organizations”, MSc dissertation,
Göteborg University, Göteborg.
Walters, D. (2006), “Demand chain effectiveness – supply
chain efficiencies: a role for enterprise information
management”, Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 246-61.
Walters, D. and Lancester, G. (2000), “Implementing value
strategy through the value chain”, Management Decision,
Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 160-78.
Wiig, K. (2004), People-Focused Knowledge Management,
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.
Wong, J., Li, H. and Lai, J. (2008), “Evaluating the system
intelligence of the intelligent building systems: part 2:
construction and validation of analytical models”,
Automation in Construction, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 303-21.
Corresponding author
Gülçin Büyüközkan can be contacted at: gulcin.buyukozkan@
gmail.com