Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation method of path selection for smart supply chain innovation

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The smart supply chain innovation (SSCI) has become the key way for enterprises to enhance their competitiveness. Therefore, it is very important for the current supply chain enterprises to choose a reasonable innovation path. Through the literature review method, this paper summarizes the four main evaluation indicators of path selection for smart supply chain innovation, which are technical indicators, organizational environment indicators, operational efficiency indicators, risk prevention and control indicators. According to the characteristics of evaluation index, the improved Fuzzy Entropy-Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method is proposed. This method considers the situation that the original data contains both interval value and fixed value data. Firstly, the standardized decision matrix is constructed, and then the optimal index weight is established by Fuzzy Entropy method. Secondly, this paper calculates the weighted decision matrix by using the method of sub item weighting of hierarchical indicators. Finally, the improved TOPSIS method is used to determine the relative closeness of each scheme. According to the weighted decision matrix, the innovation path index of the smart supply chain (SSC) is further calculated. We use the actual case of a company to analyze the evaluation method for three different SSCI paths. This paper provides a reference for the path selection of SSCI from the aspects of theory and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig.1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. JD.com is a comprehensive online retailer in China, and one of the most popular and influential e-commerce websites in the field of e-commerce in China.

  2. In order to protect the privacy of the company, the company investigated in this paper is called Company A.

References

  • Ageron, B., Lavastre, O., & Spalanzani, A. (2013). Innovative supply chain practices: The state of French companies. Supply Chain Management-An International Journal, 18(3), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artsiomchyk, V., & Zhivitskaya, H. (2015). Designing sustainable supply chain under innovation influence. IFAC PapersOnline, 48(3), 1695–1699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barczak, A., Dembińska, I., & Marzantowicz, L. (2019). Analysis of the risk impact of implementing digital innovations for logistics management. Processes, 7(11), 815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechtsis, D., Tsolakis, N., Vlachos, D., & Srai, J. S. (2018). Intelligent autonomous vehicles in digital supply chains: A framework for integrating innovations towards sustainable value networks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 181, 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitzer, V., & Bijman, J. (2015). From innovation to co-innovation? An exploration of African agrifood chains. British Food Journal, 117(8), 2182–2199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y. J., & Chris, K. Y. L. (2020). Omni-channel management in the new retailing era: A systematic review and future research agenda. International Journal of Production Economics, 229, 107729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M., et al. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H. H., Wong, K. H., & Chiu, W. S. (2019). The effects of business systems leveraging on supply chain performance: Process innovation and uncertainty as moderators. Information & Management, 56(6), 103140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chien, C. F., & Huynh, N. T. (2018). An integrated approach for IC design R&D portfolio decision and project scheduling and a case study. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, 31(1), 76–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, B. D., Kim, S. I., & Lee, J. S. (2018). Dynamic supply chain design and operations plan for connected smart factories with additive manufacturing. Applied Sciences-Basel, 8(4), 583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, J. E., & Moon, H. C. (2019). An empirical study on the smart technology acceptance and global supply chain innovation in Korean small and medium trading companies-focusing on the key technologies of 4th industrial revolution. Korea Trade Review, 44(4), 169–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai, J., Cantor, D. E., & Montabon, F. L. (2015). How environmental management competitive pressure affects a focal firm’s environmental innovation activities: A green supply chain perspective. Journal of Business Logistics, 36(3), 242–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehie, I., & Ferreira, L. M. D. F. (2019). Conceptual development of supply chain digitalization framework. IFAC PapersOnLine, 52(13), 2338–2342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fallahpour, A., Wong, K. Y., Rajoo, S., & Mardani, A. (2020). An integrated fuzzy carbon management-based model for suppliers’ performance evaluation and selection in green supply chain management. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 22(5), 712–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrer, M., Santa, R., Storer, M., & Hyland, P. (2011). Competences and capabilities for innovation in supply chain relationships. International Journal of Technology Management, 56(2–4), 272–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, D., Xu, Z., Ruan, Y., & Lu, H. (2017). From a systematic literature review to integrated, definition for sustainable supply chain innovation (SSCI). Journal of Cleaner Production, 142(4), 1518–1538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, G. J. (2020). Industry 4.0 a supply chain innovation perspective. International Journal of Production Research., 58(5), 1425–1441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heavey, C., & Simsek, Z. (2017). Distributed cognition in top management teams and organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management, 43(3), 919–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, W., Shou, Y., Kang, M., & Park, Y. (2020). Risk management of manufacturing multinational corporations: The moderating effects of international asset dispersion and supply chain integration. Supply Chain Management, 25(1), 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia, Z., Cai, Y., Chen, Y., & Zeng, W. (2018). Regionalization of water environmental carrying capacity for supporting the sustainable water resources management and development in China. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 134, 282–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ju, K. J., Park, B., & Kim, T. (2016). Causal relationship between supply chain dynamic capabilities, technological innovation, and operational performance. Management and Production Engineering Review, 7(4), 6–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabadurmus, F. N. K. (2020). Antecedents to supply chain innovation. International Journal of Logistics Management, 31(1), 145–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., Choi, T. Y., & Skilton, P. F. (2015). Buyer-supplier embeddedness and patterns of innovation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 35(3), 318–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucukaltan, B., Irani, Z., & Aktas, E. (2016). A decision support model for identification and prioritization of key performance indicators in the logistics industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 346–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kusi-Sarpong, S., Gupta, H., & Sarkis, J. (2019). A supply chain sustainability innovation framework and evaluation methodology. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 1990–2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lii, P., & Kuo, F. I. (2016). Innovation-oriented supply chain integration for combined competitiveness and firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 174, 142–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L., Chen, G., & Niu, X. (2015). Game analysis of the knowledge sharing mechanism for the supply chain collaborative innovation. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management-JIEM, 8(1), 152–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L., & Tang, M. (2014). Effects of collaborative knowledge innovation on supply chain performance. World Sci-Tech R&D., 36(2), 182–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., Deng, M., Liang, Y., Long, S., & Wei, S. (2020). Research on the path design of smart supply chain innovation. Supply chain management, 1(01), 46–57. (In Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W., Liang, Y., Bao, X., Qin, J., & Lim, M. K. (2020). China’s logistics development trends in the post COVID-19 era. International Journal of Logistics Research and Application. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2020.1837760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luomaranta, T., & Martinsuo, M. (2019). Supply chain innovations for additive manufacturing. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 50(1), 54–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lv, B., & Qi, X. (2019). Research on partner combination selection of the supply chain collaborative product innovation based on product innovative resources. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 128, 245–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandal, S. (2015). Towards an empirical-relational model for supply chain innovation. International Journal of Information Systems and Supply Chain Management, 8(4), 14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandal, S. (2016). A social-exchange perspective on supply chain innovation. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 8(3), 36–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maniya, K., & Bhatt, M. G. (2010). A selection of material using a novel type decision-making method: Preference selection index method. Materials & Design, 31(4), 1785–1789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukundan, R., & Thomas, S. (2016). Collaborative and open innovation: Supply chain planning as an effective source. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 12(1), 128–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oke, A., Prajogo, D. I., & Jayaram, J. (2013). Strengthening the innovation chain: The role of internal innovation climate and strategic relationships with supply chain partners. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 49(4), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, S., Zhong, R. Y., & Qu, T. (2019). Smart product-service systems in interoperable logistics: Design and implementation prospects. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 42, 100996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimann, M., Xiong, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Managing a closed-loop supply chain with process innovation for remanufacturing. European Journal of Operational Research, 276(2), 510–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaie, K., Ramiyani, S. S., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., & Badizadeh, A. (2014). Evaluating performance of Iranian cement firms using an integrated fuzzy AHP-VIKOR method. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38(21–22), 5033–5046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabahi, S., & Parast, M. M. (2019). Firm innovation and supply chain resilience: A dynamic capability perspective. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 23(3), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabri, Y., Micheli, G. J. L., & Nuur, C. (2018). Exploring the impact of innovation implementation on supply chain configuration. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 49, 60–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahu, A. K., Datta, S., & Mahapatra, S. S. (2017). Evaluation of performance index in resilient supply chain: A fuzzy-based approach. Benchmarking: An International Journal., 24(1), 118–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamout, M. D. (2019). Does supply chain analytics enhance supply chain innovation and robustness capability? Organizacija, 52(2), 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shan, H., Li, Y., & Shi, J. (2020). Influence of supply chain collaborative innovation on sustainable development of supply Chain: A study on Chinese enterprises. Sustainability, 12(7), 2978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shete, P. C., Ansari, Z. N., & Kant, R. (2020). A Pythagorean fuzzy AHP approach and its application to evaluate the enablers of sustainable supply chain innovation. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 23, 77–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shibin, K. T., Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Luo, Z., Papadopoulos, T., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Frugal innovation for supply chain sustainability in SMEs: Multi-method research design. Production Planning & Control, 29(11), 908–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, V. L., Kovaleski, J. L., & Pagani, R. N. (2019). Technology transfer in the supply chain oriented to industry 4.0 : A literature review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31(5), 546–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skippari, M., Laukkanen, M., & Salo, J. (2017). Cognitive barriers to collaborative innovation generation in supply chain relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 108–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sodero, A., Jin, Y. H., & Barratt, M. (2019). The social process of big data and predictive analytics use for logistics and supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 49(7), 706–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spieth, P., & Schneider, S. (2016). Business model innovativeness: Designing a formative measure for business model innovation. Journal of Business Economics, 86(6), 671–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storer, M., & Hyland, P. (2011). Reconfiguration or innovation in supply chains? International Journal of Technology Management, 56(2–4), 188–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trimi, S., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2012). Business model innovation in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(4), 449–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ucler, C. (2017). Intelligent assignment in clusters to enhance collaboration and innovation. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 28(5), 554–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoef, P. C., Kannan, P. K., & Inman, J. J. (2015). From multi-channel retailing to omni-channel retailing. Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 174–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Wen, Z., & Dong, J. (2020). The city-level precision industrial emission reduction management based on enterprise performance evaluation and path design: A case of Changzhi, China. The Science of the Total Environment, 734, 139350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, X., & Yang, Y. (2020). Research on the evaluation and improvement path of local government’s network public opinion response ability. Modern Information, 40(01), 144–151. (In Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., Han, Q., Zhou, J., & Yuan, C. (2015). The influence of environmental management practices and supply chain integration on technological innovation performance-evidence from China’s manufacturing industry. Sustainability, 7(11), 15342–15361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, X., Bao, X., & Meng, J. (2019). Research on the efficiency evaluation and optimization path of science and technology resources allocation in high-end industries. Science & Technology for Development, 15(10), 1075–1085. https://doi.org/10.11842/chips.20190603001. (In Chinese).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S. N., Lee, D. H., & Schniederjans, M. (2016). Effects of innovation leadership and supply chain innovation on supply chain efficiency: Focusing on hospital size. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 113, 412–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H. (2015). An agent-based simulation model for supply chain collaborative technological innovation diffusion. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 14(2), 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Major Program of the National Social Science Foundation of China (grant number No. 18ZDA060). The reviewers’ comments are also highly appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, No.92, Weijin Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, 300072, China

    Weihua Liu, Siyu Wang & Jingkun Wang

Authors
  1. Weihua Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Siyu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jingkun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weihua Liu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Authors

Content of relevant literature on path of SSCI

Technical factors

Organizational environment

Operational efficiency

Risk prevention and control

Technical difficulty

Technical application

Internal organizational environment

External organizational environment

Innovation time and cost

Expected effect

Risk identification

Risk control

Ageron et al. (2013)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Artsiomchyk and Zhivitskaya (2015)

✓

 

✓

 

Barczak et al. (2019)

✓

✓

 

✓

Bechtsis et al. (2018)

 

✓

  

Bitzer and Bijman (2015)

✓

✓

 

✓

Chang et al. (2019)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Chung et al. (2018)

✓

 

✓

 

Chien and Huynh (2018)

✓

   

Dai et al. (2015)

 

✓

 

✓

Chung and Moon (2019)

✓

 

✓

 

Ehie and Ferreira (2019)

✓

 

✓

 

Ferrer et al. (2011)

  

✓

 

Gao et al. (2017)

 

✓

  

Hu et al. (2020)

 

✓

✓

✓

Ju et al. (2016)

✓

   

Kabadurmus (2020)

 

✓

  

Hahn (2020)

✓

 

✓

 

Kim et al. (2015)

 

✓

 

✓

Lii and Kuo (2016)

  

✓

 

Kusi-Sarpong et al. (2019)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Liu and Tang (2014)

 

✓

✓

 

Luomaranta and Martinsuo (2019)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Lv and Qi (2019)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Mandal (2015)

   

✓

Mandal (2016)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Mukundan and Thomas (2016)

 

✓

✓

✓

Oke et al. (2013)

✓

✓

✓

 

Pan et al. (2019)

✓

✓

  

Reimann et al. (2019)

  

✓

 

Sabahi and Parast (2019)

 

✓

 

✓

Sabri et al. (2018)

✓

   

Shamout (2019)

 

✓

✓

 

Shan et at. (2020)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Shibin et al. (2018)

 

✓

✓

 

Shete et al. (2020)

 

✓

✓

 

Silva et al. (2019)

✓

  

✓

Skippari et al. (2017)

 

✓

 

✓

Sodero et al. (2019)

✓

✓

  

Spieth and Schneider (2016)

  

✓

 

Storer and Hyland (2011)

   

✓

Trimi and Berbegal-Mirabent (2012)

 

✓

  

Ucler (2017)

 

✓

 

✓

Yang et al. (2015)

✓

✓

✓

✓

Yoon et al. (2016)

  

✓

 

Zhang (2015)

✓

✓

  

Liu, Deng, et al. (2020), Liu, Liang, et al. (2020))

✓

✓

✓

✓

Liu et al. (2015)

 

✓

 

✓

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, W., Wang, S. & Wang, J. Evaluation method of path selection for smart supply chain innovation. Ann Oper Res 322, 167–193 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04031-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04031-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation