Search results

While most researchers would generally agree that the field of logistics has been maturing over recent decades, this maturation has not yet been empirically established. The purpose of this paper is to assess the maturity of research in the field by measuring author concentration in logistics journals over a sixteen‐year period.

Research propositions of logistics author concentration are first developed from the extant literature. The propositions are then tested by assessing author concentration across 1,796 articles from five scholarly, peer‐reviewed logistics journals from 1992‐2007. The results are compared to similar studies of other academic business disciplines, including accounting, finance, management, and marketing. We also apply regression analysis to the time series data to verify changing author concentration trends.

The results indicate that logistics publications generally have higher author concentration than other business disciplines, suggesting that logistics research is less expansive and still maturing compared to these other disciplines. However, logistics author concentration has continued to decrease since 1992 relative to schools, countries, degree‐granting schools, and individual authors. This suggests that the field has been expanding and will continue to do so at a consistent pace in the near future.

This paper allows logistics researchers to better understand the recent research history of the field as well as its future research prospects. Additionally, The implication for is presented the international expansion of the field as well as the increasing acceptance of logistics journals by other academic disciplines. In addition, concerns about increased author competition and research proliferation are voiced.

This “thought paper” is written by the special issue editors as a part of the five papers accepted and published in response to the special issue call for papers on logistics and SCM in the context of relief for refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on “refugee logistics” and analyse the nature and challenges of displacement from a displaced person’s perspective. The paper also argues for a more critical appreciation of the role and value that research in logistics, operations and supply chain management (LOSCM) can play in the delivery of services and care for refugees and IDPs from the perspective of preparedness and logistics planning of humanitarian organisations. The paper further outlines basic challenges to undertaking innovative, boundary pushing valuable and impactful research on “refugee logistics” given the difficult ideological, political and policy context in which “refugee logistics research” will be undertaken. The paper also advocates for more critical research in humanitarian logistics (HL), that explicitly acknowledges its ontological, epistemological and methodological limitations even when ethically sound. The paper concludes by suggesting a future research agenda for this new sub-field of humanitarian logistics research.

Conceptual paper utilising viewpoints, literature reviews as well as original ideas and thoughts of the authors.

The new field of “refugee logistics research” is important. It has been neglected in humanitarian logistics research for too long. Hence, there needs to be more research in this sub-field of humanitarian logistics.

This is a “thought paper”. It is the basic conceptual ideas of the authors. While it is not based on empirical work or data collection, it is based on a comprehensive literature research and analysis.

This paper advocates for the universal human rights of IDPs and refugees and their dignity, and how LOSCM can contribute to upholding such dignity.

It contributes indirectly to logistics policy and refugee policy as well as logistics service quality and advocacy for human rights and human dignity.

Traditional methods of capturing and determining logistics attribute importance have serious research limitations. The purpose of this paper is to introduce maximum difference (MD) scaling as a new research methodology that will improve validity in measuring logistics attribute importance, overcoming many of the limitations associated with traditional methods. In addition, this new research method will allow logistics researchers to identify meaningful need‐based segments, an important goal of logistics research.

This paper provides an overview of MD scaling along with important research advantages, limitations, and practical applications. Additionally, a detailed research process is put forth so that this technique can be implemented by logistics researchers. Finally, an application of this technique is presented to illustrate the research method.

The importance of truck driver satisfaction attributes was analyzed using bivariate correlation analysis as well as MD scaling analysis. The two sets of results are compared and contrasted. The resulting rank order of attributes is very different and MD scaling results are shown to possess important advantages. As a result of this analysis, MD scaling analysis allows for meaningful, need‐based segmentation analysis, resulting in two unique need‐based driver segments.

From a practitioner viewpoint, knowing which attributes are most important will help in investing scarce resources to improve decision making and raise a firm's ROI. Although a number of relevant applications exist, the most important may include examining: the importance of customer service attributes; the importance of logistics service quality attributes; and the importance of customer satisfaction attributes.

MD scaling is a relatively new research technique, a technique that has yet to be utilized or even explored in existing logistics and supply chain literature. Yet, evidence is mounting in other fields that suggest this technique has many important and unique advantages. This paper is the first overview, discussion, and application of this technique for logistics and supply chain management and creates a strong foundation for implementing MD scaling in future logistics and supply chain management research.

This paper aims to review logistics and supply chain management topics where theories have been applied to better understand the supply chain management (SCM) discipline identity. The purpose is threefold: to identify research topics in logistics and supply chain management where one or more theories have been examined; provide commentary on the theories that have been applied to the various logistics and SCM research topics; and to provide reference material and direction for future research.

This structured literature review (SLR) examines research papers in logistics and SCM from 1991 to 2015 published in eight leading academic journals. Papers in the data set are grouped by topic and further analyzed in terms of research method, purpose, year and journal.

This research categorizes papers by the topics that were studied to understand important insights about how these topics have been examined by researchers. Within each topic area, theories that researchers have used to investigate the topics are identified. This method exposes insights such as: how topics have evolved over time, which topics have lost prominence, which topics may be particularly promising for future research and how topics are treated in the literature.

Despite multiple calls for clarification regarding how theory has been used in logistics and SCM, the logistics and SCM disciplines continue to grow without adequate research on how theory has been used to examine SCM topics. This SLR therefore provides a broad compilation of logistics and SCM research that uses named theories and that is organized by SCM topic to better understand the SCM discipline.

The purpose of this paper is to develop the paradigmatic justification for the use of case studies in logistics research. The argument is based on a critical realist (CR) ontology and epistemology. The current logistics paradigm's flat ontology – based on regularity – is replaced by an ontology emphasising structures and mechanisms underlying actual events in the form of logistics practice and performance.

The approach takes the form of desk research, conceptual work and theorizing.

Based on this CR view of the logistics domain it is argued that the justifications for conducting case studies lie in their ability: to reach the causal depth required for revealing the real domain of logistics activities and performance: to reveal the working of mechanisms in loosely coupled structures showing open systems characteristics through a constant alternation between abstract and concrete reasoning and; to include the causal powers and effects of agents' ascribed meanings. Also, it is argued, in contrast with Yin's work which refers to the possibility of generalising case studies, that the justification of case studies not only must refer to their complementary role in research but also must build on groundings that allow this form of research to take a primary role in knowledge creation.

The arguments have direct implications primarily for the scientific justification for case studies in logistics. CR thinking in this respect offers a view in which case studies should be seen as a more legitimate method in logistics inquiries. Second, the paper has implications for further work on the methods of using case studies in logistics: between what types of case studies can one distinguish, and which practical guidelines regarding design and reasoning can be developed based on the CR view?

The paper problematizes current research methodology in logistics. Based on critical realism, it presents a thorough and systematic justification for using case studies as a research approach.

Outlines possible ways to question “what logistics knowledge is” and “how it comes about”, as a means to improve the craftsmanship in logistics research. The logistics knowledge‐creation activity is examined with respect to its content, context and processes. A framework distinguishing three levels of abstraction (philosophy of science, methodology and theory, and practice) is presented and discussed. This framework highlights some key issues to be considered when research in logistics and supply‐chain management is to be carried out. The implications of the paper should be considered as complementary to increased rigor and borrowing theories from other disciplines as a means to enrich the logistics discipline.

The purpose of this research is to track the evolution of logistics research with a focus on the methods and orientation of the research from the past to the present. Specifically, this paper investigates the evolution of logistics research methodologies in an attempt to address previous calls for a paradigm discussion aimed at assessing the current direction and proposing a future direction for research in the logistics discipline.

The authors chose a previously established framework which describes and evaluates alternative research paradigms. A content analysis of articles in selected journals allows published research of the logistics discipline to be evaluated and categorized. The categorization process uses a two‐dimensional framework which then allows the authors to classify research into cells in a matrix which represent a variety of research paradigms.

The results illustrate that the methodologies employed in logistics have evolved during the period of analysis. The logistics discipline appears to focus on survey‐based research in an attempt to examine attitudinal and behavioral aspects of logistics interactions. Significant amounts of research are also conducted with simulation and mathematical modeling while case study and action research methods comprise a relatively small but growing portion of published logistics research. Nevertheless, the results of the research support the conclusion that the logistics discipline is diversifying its research efforts and expanding the array of issues addressed.

The results are based on a thorough literature review along with the use of well established research frameworks and methodologies. Nevertheless, the research focuses on analyzing the content of logistics discipline research in specific outlets and during specific periods of time. Therefore, while the authors believe the results provide a useful guide for assessing the evolution of research in the discipline, it is not all‐inclusive in nature.

Based on our research results in general logistics, researchers appear to be responding to the evolution of the discipline by expanding their efforts to conduct applied research. It appears that common interests are being identified and in many cases, academicians and practitioners are working together to build an alliance designed to benefit the discipline by building on the strengths of each group.

Research plays an important role in furthering any discipline by enhancing our understanding of issues pertinent to those studying and practicing the discipline. This paper helps academicians and practitioners of the logistics discipline to better understand the direction of the profession and to assist us in shaping the future of the discipline.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a structured literature review (SLR) and systematic insight into logistics outsourcing research, in order to identify gaps in knowledge, and provide future research direction in the logistics outsourcing discipline.

This paper identifies and synthesises information from academic journals and examines research designs and methods, data analysis techniques, geographic locations, industry engagements, year of publication, publishers, university and author affiliations. A collection of online databases from 1991 to 2016 were explored, using the keywords “third-party”, “logistics” and “outsourcing” in their title and/or abstract, to deliver an inclusive listing of journal articles in this discipline area. Based on this approach, a total of 263 articles were found and data were derived from a succession of variables.

There has been a significant increase and concentration by researchers over the past 25 years focussing on logistics outsourcing. A need to implement best practice has been universally identified, owing to increasing global supply chain complexity. This analysis shows that only seven literature reviews were published in the logistics outsourcing discipline. Additionally, this study revealed that 42 per cent of the work in this field was found to be survey based and this trend in research indicates the development of the structural equation modelling and multi-criterion decision-making methods. Investigations between 2010–2012 and 2015–2016 accounted for 151 of the total 263 articles published. Finally, reverse logistics is an area that requires special attention.

This paper is limited to a review of academic articles obtainable from online databases, containing the words “logistics” and “outsourcing” in the title and/or abstract. Additionally, only papers from high quality, peer-reviewed journals were evaluated. Other academic sources such as books and conference papers were not included in this study.

This review will provide an increased understanding of the existing state of current research, trends and future research directions in the logistics outsourcing discipline.

This paper aims to advocate and facilitate undertaking research focused on the effects of human behaviour, judgment and decision making in logistics and supply chain management (SCM).

In addition to providing an overview of the potential benefits of behavioural research, this paper presents two modified frameworks for identifying and addressing behavioural issues in logistics and SCM.

Behavioural research can significantly advance both theory and practice in logistics and SCM. Little behavioural research appears in top logistics journals. As researchers begin to conduct more such projects, knowledge pertaining to issues of importance to logistics and SCM will be created.

This paper highlights an important research area and a methodology, (controlled behavioural experiments), that are currently underutilized in logistics and SCM. It further presents potential research questions and suggestions for ways in which interested researchers could begin to address such issues.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which research opportunities on China's logistics have been identified in the field.

In order to fulfill the research objective, a literature-based survey was executed in eight peer-reviewed logistics and supply chain management journals during the 2001-2012 timeframe. In total, 91 articles were examined and analyzed from three perspectives: research focus, theoretical base and methodological approach. A content analysis was used to classify and assess the analytical units with selected examples from the articles surveyed.

The analysis reveals that a number of research foci have been addressed, but there are some fertile areas that researchers could explore in view of the evolution of logistics and transitional trends in present-day China. Theory applications were applied in few papers, showing a low rate of usage of theories. Different research techniques have been applied, but greater methodological rigor is expected to be achieved, given the unique research setting in China.

While the study has consulted the major logistics journals in the logistics field in which researchers aim to pursue their publications regarding China-based logistics research, it should be noted that contributions in other journals may have been missed.

The study sheds new light on the research needs and opportunities for advancing China-based logistics research; for those researchers interested in China's logistics, it provides options which may lead to further, valuable research in this area.

This paper represents the first attempt to examine a body of literature on China-based logistics research. It provides implications for future study.