Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Istanbul, Turkey, July 3 6, 2012 Analysis of al Supply Chain Management Model: A Case Study Approach Bishwajit Banik Pathik epartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering American International University Bangladesh, Banani, haka 1213, Bangladesh Musawer Tahsin Chowdhury American International University Bangladesh, Banani, haka 1213, Bangladesh r. Md. Mamun Habib epartment of Operations Management American International University Bangladesh, Banani, haka 1213, Bangladesh Abstract This paper demonstrates the first practical investigation of ITESCM (Integrated Tertiary al Supply Chain Management) model which was developed by Habib (2010) for any tertiary educational institution. ITESCM consists of education supply chain, research supply chain and education management as a major constituents. The model furnishes stakeholders of the supply chain with appropriate strategies to review and appraise their performance toward fulfillment of ultimate goals, i.e. producing high-caliber graduates and high impact research outcomes, which represent two main contributions, for the betterment of the end customer, i.e. the society. As a case study approach, the authors depict the application of ITESCM model on a pioneer private University in Bangladesh, namely American International University-Bangladesh (AIUB). A survey was conducted among all stakeholders, including Employers,, Current students, University management, Faculty members, etc. to scrutinize the quality outcomes towards the consumer. Keywords ITESCM, case study, supply chain, education, research. 1. Introduction Only a few addressed issues in Supply Chain Management (SCM) for the service industry (ibb and Simkin 1993; Sampson 2000; Nixon 2001; Sengupta and Turnbull 1996; Fernie and Clive 1995; Kathawala and Khaled 2003). Very few focused on educational supply chain management. Just two papers (Lau 2007; O Brien and Kenneth 1996) were found to be relevant to the educational supply chain management. Consequently, ITESCM model is the first empirical study on educational supply chain management (Habib 2009d, 2011d; Habib and Jungthirapanich, 2010e). The ITESCM (Integrated Tertiary al Supply Chain Management) Model represents supply chain management for the academia (Habib 2010, 2011b, 2011c; Habib and Jungthirapanich, 2010f). This model depicts the integrated form of educational supply chain and educational management for the universities. al supply chain also consists of education supply chain and research supply chain. The ITESCM model was developed based on exploratory research; therefore, the authors applied this model on a leading private University as case study approach that presents first application of that model. American International University-Bangladesh (AIUB) is a government approved private University in 1994. It envisions promoting and creating a learning environment through state-of-the-art facilities, expanded frontier of research based knowledge. AIUB offers several degree programs at graduate and undergraduate level, including four distinct faculties namely Faculty of Arts and Social Science, Faculty of Science, Faculty of Engineering and Faculty 1082
of Business Administration. The university produced over 6500 graduates as well as it has over 10,000 students with over 350 faculty members as of ecember, 2011. This paper illustrates sequentially Literature eview, Methodology, ITESCM Model Evaluation, Case-Study Analysis, and Conclusion in the following sections. 2. Literature eview One of the main goals of an educational supply chain is to improve the well-being of the end customer, i.e. the society. To achieve this goal, educational institutions need to have a certain degree of knowledge about the partners in their supply chains including suppliers, customers, and the consumer. The performance of the supply chain management depends on the seamless coordination of all supply chain stakeholders to ensure attainment of desirable outcomes (Habib and Jungthirapanich 2010b, 2010d; Habib, 2011b). An integrated supply chain involves coordination and information sharing up and down the process. However, it is very difficult to determine the supplier and customer of the intangible product in the service industry. Suppliers, the service provider, customers, and the consumer have been identified in this research. ITESCM also identifies supplied inputs, customer-consuming output (O/P), customer-supplying input (I/O) and finally supplied outputs. Some of the graduates would be added in the service provider as the supplied input. On the other hand, some graduates would be acted as the supplied output to the end customer. Therefore, graduates were identified as the supplying input customer in that supply chain (Habib, 2011c, 2011d). Suppliers - Suppliers - Suppliers Supplied Inputs aw Materials Service Provider (University) - evelopment - - evelopment - Customer Customers Supplying I/P Customers Customer Consuming O/P Customers Supplied Outputs Finished Products Consumer Society Figure 1: Simplified Form of Supply Chain Management for the Universities In this supply chain, raw materials are students as well as internal and external projects. Finished products are graduates and research outcomes (Habib and Jungthirapanich 2009a; Habib 2010f). Figure 2 illustrates an education supply chain and a research supply chain, which together form the integrated supply chain for the tertiary educational institutions, i.e. universities (Habib 2010d; 2010e). Suppliers Supply Chain Students evelopment Customers Society Customers evelopment Outcomes Projects Suppliers Supply Chain Suppliers Supplied Inputs University (Process) Supplied Outputs Customers Consumer 1083
Figure 2: An Integrated Supply Chain for the Universities In educational management, three decision levels, as illustrated in Figure 4 are involved in the process of the university: Phase 1 Strategic Level: The strategies for producing graduates and research outcomes are formulated for the development and assessment in both education and research activities. The procedure is shown in Figure 3. Academic evelopment Academic University Performance evelopment Outcomes Figure 3: Strategic Level in the Universities Phase 2 Planning Level: Academic and research plans, as well as quality assessment plans for both education and research are developed in the planning level. Phase 3 Operating Level: Academic operation and research performance, as well as academic quality assessment and research performance evaluation are carried out in operating level. The overall performance would be assessed by academic and research performance indicators, survey of all stakeholders, including university administrators, graduates, employers etc. The ITESCM Model supply chain and research supply chain were evolved in ITESCM model. ifferent components of ITESCM model were illustrated in Figure 4. Suppliers: In that model, two major parts in the suppliers, namely education suppliers and research suppliers for the universities (Habib and Jungthirapanich 2009c, 2010d; Habib 2010a; 2011c, 2011d). o Suppliers: Human suppliers: Suppliers of the student (High school/college), suppliers of the faculty (other universities), Self funding students Suppliers of fund: Family (parents, siblings), relatives, etc. government and private organizations (scholarship) Non-human suppliers: Suppliers of assets or equipment (furniture, computer, networking equipment, etc.), suppliers of educational materials (stationery, instruction materials, etc.). o Suppliers: Internal Suppliers: Suppliers of internal research projects (university self funding) External Suppliers: Suppliers of external research projects (external research funds, Ministry of education, private organizations, etc.). Service Provider: A university is regarded as a service provider in ITESCM model. Two major wings including development and assessment for both education and research activities in the university. Figure 4 represents educational supply chain for the universities in four aspects, including programs establishment, university culture, faculty capabilities, and facilities, are considered for development and assessment in both education and research activities (Habib and Jungthirapanich, 2009b, 2009c, 2010c). 1084
Customers: Two major parts in the customers namely education customers and research customers for the universities were notified in ITESCM model (Habib and Jungthirapanich 2010a; Habib 2009b). o Customers:, family (parents, siblings, relatives, etc.), employers of government and private organizations o Customers: Funding organizations of research projects, research outcomes (writers, research publications, findings etc.), Others (research professional organizations -IEEE, INFOMS, ACM, Society of manufacturing engineers etc. and Trade associations -American trade association, Grocery manufacturers association, etc.). Supply Chain Supply Chain Suppliers Suppliers Students Projects University E E E E E E E E A A A A A A A A PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC FC SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL SL E E E E E E E E A A A A A A A A PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL E E E E E E E E A A A A A A A A PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC FC FA PE UC OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL OL SL FC PL FC OL FA SL FA PL FA OL Outcomes Customers Customers Society E A evelopment SL PL OL Strategic Level Planning Level Operating Level PE UC FC FA Figure 4: ITESCM Model for the Universities. Consumer: The society was identified as the end customer or the consumer in ITESCM model. As universities are the part of the society, the final outcomes of this supply chain, including graduates with desirable quality and quality research outcomes are delivered to the society (Habib and Jungthirapanich 2008a, 2009c, 2009d). ifferent Aspects in the Universities (Lau 2007; Habib and Jungthirapanich 2008b, 2009a, 2009c, 2010a) s (PE): Universities design different programs, to enhance the diversification in education development and establish various programs to assess the development. Universities also intend different programs to increase the diversification in research development and research assessment. Universities have to attempt product differentiation, i.e. programs establishment. Hands-on experience, industrial placements, social demand, 1085
provision of IT facilities, and innovative academic methods all demonstrate attempts to differentiate programs establishment (Kotler and Bloom 1984). (FC): Faculty members establish good communication, provide rich environment for classroom observation, model best practices, create opportunities for reflection, and support students' participation in curriculum planning, teaching and research. Traditionally, university faculty members are evaluated according to the three major criteria: teaching, research, and services (Comm and Mathaisel 1998). (UC): The concept of organizational culture would be applicable for the universities by the name of. However, the type of the university culture will fully depend on the university management or administrator. In fact, university culture is the personality of the university (Habib 2009b). (FA): Universities offer a wide range of modern facilities to their students for teaching and research. Lecture rooms are principally conducted using state-of-the-art distance learning technology, online education. Online databases, e-journal, digital library, etc. represents modern research facilities in the universities (Habib 2009b). Final Outcomes with esirable Quality: Benchmarking and value enhancement determinants are identified and incorporated in the process of the university to produce graduates with desirable quality. (a) benchmarking includes knowledge (tacit or explicit), skills, competencies, capabilities, ethics, career development programs, etc. (b) value enhancement includes source of fund (self-funding, scholarship, etc.), wisdom, faculty capabilities, facilities, Information & Communication Technology (ICT), research involvements, etc. Quality Outcomes: Quality research outcomes may include problem solution, pure theory, internal and external projects applications, thesis findings, research publications, or research findings, etc. 3. Methodology ITESCM, an empirical research model, was developed based on primary and secondary data. This paper was the extensive work as descriptive study, a case study approach on AIUB, of ITESCM model. Survey research technique was utilized to analyze all stakeholders observation towards the university. 307 respondents of all stakeholders, including faculty members, students, alumni, parents, employers of AIUB graduates, university management were participated in this survey through simple random sampling procedure. Five-point Likert Scale (1= Strongly isagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) were asked to the respondents to conduct the survey. The researchers used SPSS as statistical tools to furnish the data input and analysis. 4. ITESCM Model Evaluation (Habib, 2009a, 2010a) As per the ITESCM model, graduates were identified as final outcomes of the education part in the university. part is divided into two segments including education development and education assessment. Model 1 contains education development and education assessment. There are four subgroups namely programs establishment, university culture, faculty capabilities and facilities. 1086
Err 25 Err 26 Err 27 Err 28.39.49.42.39.63.70.65.63.94 evelopment Err 33.97 Err 29 Err 30 Err 31 Err 32.46.54.47.44.68.74.69.66.84.92 Err 34 Figure 5: AMOS Graphics Output of Model 1 (Standardized Estimates) (Habib 2010a) Multiple Linear egression (ML) Equations: F evelopment = 0.63 f + 0.70 f + 0.65 f + 0.63 f F = 0.68 f + 0.74 f + 0.69 f + 0.66 f F = 0.97 F evelopment + 0.92 F (1) According to the ITESCM model research outcomes was mentioned as final outcomes in the research wing of the university. outcomes was divided into two segments namely research development and research assessment. Both the research development and research assessment have four subgroups, namely programs establishment, university culture, faculty capabilities and facilities, illustrated in Model 2. Err 67 Err 68 Err 69 Err 70.36.51.40.45.60.71.63.67.98 evelopment Err 75.99 Err 71 Err 72 Err 73 Err 74.46.52.54.47.67.72.74.69.79.89 Err 76 Outcomes Figure 6: AMOS Graphics Output of Model 6 (Standardized Estimates) (Habib 2010a) Multiple Linear egression (ML) Equations F evelopment =.60 f + 0.71 f + 0.63 f + 0.67 f F =.67 f + 0.72 f + 0.74 f + 0.69 f 1087
F Outcomes = 0.99 F evelopment + 0.89 F (2) The main outputs of the universities, including graduates and research outcomes would be delivered to the education customers and research customers respectively. Finally, all outcomes would be generated for the betterment of the society. Err 1.11.34 Err 4.37 Customers.61 Err 2.02 Outcomes.15.36 Customers.61 Society Err 5 Figure 7: AMOS Graphics Output of Model 3 (Standardized Estimates) (Habib, 2010) Multiple Linear egression (ML) Equations F Society = 0.61 f Customers + 0.61 f Customers = 0.61 [0.34 f ] + 0.61 [0.15 f Outcomes ] = 0.21 f Graduate + 0.09 f Outcomes (3) From the research findings, the society i.e. the consumer of ITESCM model, consists of graduates and research outcomes. The authors defined the society as the function of graduates and research outcomes (Habib and Jungthirapanich, 2009b, 2009c, 2010d, 2010e; Habib, 2010a, 2011c, 2011d). Society = f (, Outcomes) 5. Case-Study Analysis Based on the survey of all AIUB stakeholders, including University administrators, faculty and staff, graduates, employers, etc. the researchers applied the outputs for each parameter in the equation (1), (2) and (3). The outputs, e.g. education development, education assessment, research development, research assessment, were derived from the mean of the survey data. findings of this paper were determined based on inputs from the stakeholders, therefore, the validity of the outcomes depends much on the completeness and the accuracy of this input data. F = 0.97 F evelopment + 0.92 F = 0.97*3.628 + 0.91*3.235 = 6.495 F Outcomes = 0.99 F evelopment + 0.89 F = 0.99*3.521 + 0.89*3.466 = 6.571 The outcomes for and Outcomes through Equation (1) and (2) are 6.495 and 6.571 respectively. F Society = 0.21 F Graduate + 0.09 F Outcomes = 0.21*6.495 + 0.09* 6.571 = 1.955 Finally, the value of the Society in terms of equation (3) is 1.955. Furthermore, if the researchers select highest value 5(strongly agree) for this function (3) in that case the maximum value is 2.8 and lowest value would be 0.56 if the researchers select the lowest value 1(strongly disagree). According to Habib s (2009d, 2010a) suggestion, the cut off value for the function of the Society at fifty percent could be accepted. In this paper the researchers found that the cut off value was 1.68. The value of the Society is acceptable as it exceeds the cut off value (1.955>1.68). Therefore, quality outcomes in terms of graduates and research outcomes have been produced by AIUB for the well being of the society. 6. Conclusion ITESCM model represents the first large scale empirical study that systematically investigate input of the university, output of the university through educational supply chain. That model for the universities provides two main contributions to the end customer, i.e. the society, including human resource contribution and research contribution. 1088
This paper, a novel approach for decision makers, demonstrates the first practical investigation of ITESCM model upon American International University-Bangladesh (AIUB) which represents a leading private University in Bangladesh. One of the main goals of an educational supply chain is to improve the well-being of the end customer or the society. Improved Well-being society would be possible if we could able to produce quality graduates and quality research outcomes by implementing proper educational supply chain for the universities from the raw materials, i.e. students and research projects to finished products, i.e. graduates and research outcomes. Findings of this study, the value of the Society, is quite satisfactory which has come up through the application upon AIUB. The university administrators who need to improve their outcomes may apply the research equations of ITESCM model to their universities. In that case, this paper would unlock further frontiers for university management. eferences 1. Comm, C.L. and Mathaisel,.F.X., Evaluating teaching effectiveness in America s business schools: implications for service marketers, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 163-70, 1998. 2. ibb, S. and Simkin, L., Strategy and tactics: marketing leisure facilities, The Services Industries Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 110-24, July 1993. 3. Fernie, John and Clive ees, Supply chain management in the national health service, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 83-92, 1995. 4. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, Integrated al Supply Chain Management (IESCM) for the Universities, Sixth AIMS International Conference on Management, India, ec., 2008a. 5. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, An integrated framework for research and education supply chain for the universities, IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology, Thailand, Sep., 2008b, pp. 1027-1032. 6. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, Framework of Supply Chain, Supply Chain and al Management for the Universities, International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management (IJCIM), Thailand, Vol. 17, No. SP1, 2009a, pp.24.1-8. 7. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, Integrated educational management for the universities, The Journal of China-USA Business eview, avid Publishing Company, USA, Vol. 8, No. 8, pp. 25-38, 2009b. 8. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, Framework of al Supply Chain Management for the Universities, IEEE International Conference on Engineering Management and Service Sciences EMS, China, Sep., 2009c. 9. Habib, M. An Integrated al Supply Chain Management (ITESCM), Ph.. issertation, Graduate School of Information Technology, Assumption University of Thailand, ecember, 2009d. 10. Habib, M., Supply Chain Management for Academia, LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany, ecember 2010a, ISBN 978-3-8433-8026-3. 11. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, International Supply Chain Management: Integrated al Supply Chain Management (IESCM) Model for the Universities, International etailing: Text and Cases, S L Gupta (Ed.), India, 2010b. 12. Habib, M., An Empirical of ITESCM (Integrated Tertiary al Supply Chain Management) Model, Management and Services, Sciyo.com, October, 2010c, ISSN 978-953-307-118-3. 13. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, An Empirical of al Supply Chain for the Universities, The 5th IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology, Singapore, June, 2010d, ISBN: 978-1-4577-0738-4. 14. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, An Empirical Study of al Supply Chain Management for the Universities, INFOMS International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Bangladesh, January, 2010e. 15. Habib, M. and C. Jungthirapanich, An Empirical of Integrated al Management for the Universities, The 2nd IEEE International Conference on Information Management and Engineering, China, April, 2010f. 16. Habib, M. An Empirical Study of Tertiary al Supply Chain Management, International Conference on Knowledge globalization, 2010, Bangladesh, May, 2010g, ISBN 978-984-33-1691-2 1089
17. Habib, r. Md. Mamun, An Exploratory Study of Supply Chain Management for Tertiary al Institutions, IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ITMC) 2011, San Jose, California USA, June, 2011a. 18. Habib, r. Mamun, An Exploratory on al Supply Chain Management, The IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Singapore, ecember, 2011b. 19. Habib, r. Md. Mamun, An Exploratory Analysis of al Management for the Universities, International Journal of Engineering, Business, Management (IJEBM), Croatia, Vol. 3, No. 3, September, 2011c, ISSN 1847-9790. 20. Habib, Md. Mamun, Supply Chain Management (SCM): Theory and Evolution r. Md. Mamun Habib (Editor), Supply Chain Management Applications and Simulations, InTech Open Access, Croatia, September 2011d, ISBN 978-953-307-250-0. 21. Kotler, P. and Bloom, P., Marketing Professional Services, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984. 22. Kathawala, Y. and Khaled Abdou, Supply chain evaluation in the service industry: a framework development compared to manufacturing, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp.140-149, 2003. 23. Lau, A.K.W., al supply chain management: a case study, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1074-8121, Vol. 15 No.1, pp.15-27, 2007. 24. Nixon, M., Innovations in logistics technology: generating top-line value and bottom-line OI, World Trade, June, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 62-4, 2001 25. O Brien, E.M. and Kenneth., al supply chain: a tool for strategic planning in tertiary education, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp.33-40, 1996. 26. Pathik, B. B., Chowdhury M. T., Habib, M., A descriptive study on Supply Chain Management Model for the Academia, Accepted in The 6 th IEEE Conference of Management Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), Indonesia, June 2012. 27. Pathik, B. B., Habib, M., An Investigation of and Management for The TertiaryAcademic Institutions, International Journal of Engineering, Business, Management (IJEBM), Croatia, 2012, ISSN 1847-9790. 28. Sampson, S. E., Customer-supplier duality and bidirectional supply chains in service organization, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp.348-364, 2000. 29. Sengupta, S. and Turnbull, J., Seamless optimization of the entire supply chain, IIE Solutions, Vol. 28, No. 10, pp.28-33, 1996. 1090