A quantitative framework for lean and green assessment of supply chain performance

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to propose a balanced scorecard (BSC)- and strategy map-based quantitative framework for assessing the lean and green performance of the supply chain (SC). As the SC competitiveness demands efficient and effective utilization of resources throughout the value chain, not only adoption of lean and green SC paradigms but simultaneously its performance evaluation is also vital.

Design/methodology/approach

The lean and green SC performance measures are classified into four categories of BSC. A fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) methodology combined with analytical network process is proposed for examining the causal relationships between BSC perspectives and respective assessment criteria. The application of the proposed assessment framework is demonstrated for the case of Indian textile SC.

Findings

The research delivers a quantitative assessment framework for evaluating lean and green performance of the SC. The results obtained for a typical case of Indian textile SC revealed that “delivery performance,” “profitability” and “operational cost” are the most crucial performance measures. The perspective of “internal processes” is the most significant of all BSC perspectives while “learning and growth” perspective acts as the driving force to improve lean and green SC performance.

Originality/value

The paper makes two contributions in the domain of lean and green assessment of SC performance. First, it proposes an evaluation framework to investigate into the causal relationships among the BSC perspectives and related factors. Second, it undertakes an empirical investigation for Indian textile SC to develop key managerial insights and provide policy-related recommendations.

Citation

Thanki, S. and Thakkar, J. (2018), "A quantitative framework for lean and green assessment of supply chain performance", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 366-400. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-09-2016-0215