Sustainable Solutions for SCM

After having described the elements of a maturity assessment model it is necessary to see how the set-up of a model and its implementation can be organised. This is shown in Figure 3.16. De Bruin et al. promote a basic framework for developing maturity assessment models [8]. In the first step, it should be defined whether the scope of the model is general, domain specific and academia or practitioner focused. In the second step, the architecture for further design and application should be determined. This includes the definition of the audience (internal, external), method of application (self-assessment, third party assessment or certified practitioner), the respondents (management, staff, business-partners) and the application (one entity, multiple entities etc.). In the third phase (populate) it has to be identified what needs to be measured and how this can be measured. After the first three phases, the model has to be tested, deployed and maintained. Figure 3.16 Phases of model development Maturity assessments are a very powerful and flexible tool for supply chain PMMS. Besides the structured methodology to measure and evaluate the performance, it focuses very much on the process and is therefore useful to manage the performance actively. As it is very flexible, it is able to integrate easily aspects of supply chain management and sustainability. 3.4 Summary and outlook The presented instruments can be evaluated with regard to firstly whether the mentioned guidelines and secondly whether they are able to cover sustainability in an appropriate way. In the synopsis shown in Table 3.2, all these aspects are discussed for each instrument. Table 3.2 Evaluation of PMMS approaches with regard to the fulfilment of guidelines

KPIs

TCO

Value Driver Trees

Balanced Scorecard

Maturity Assessments

Multidimensionality Yes, KPIs can be very diverse.

No, only focus on cost and cost-evaluated effects.

Possible.

Yes, instrument was designed to cover multiple dimensions.

Yes, instrument is flexible enough to cover many dimensions. Yes, possibly based on empirical evidence. Possible, but it has to be addressed in the process of designing the instrument.

Understandable and evidence-based

Not necessarily. Only with focus on cost and cost-evaluated effects.

Yes, possibly based on empirical evidence. Possible risk, but because of calculation

Yes, possibly based on empirical evidence.

cause-effect- relationships

Free of redundancies and inconsistencies

High risk.

Limited risk as only cost are calculated.

Preparation of strategy map limits the risk .

method, limited.

71