Systems Thinking and Scenario Planning: Application in the Clothing Sector

  • Rosiane Serrano
  • Luis Henrique Rodrigues
  • Daniel Pacheco Lacerda
  • Priscila Bonalume Paraboni
Original Paper
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Industrial sectors that operate in uncertain environments - with demand variability, product seasonality and different industrialisation structures - need studies that enable identification and forecast trends. Therefore, the development of competitiveness extends beyond a company’s individual performance. Collective action, whether toward consumer markets, supplier markets, competitors and substitutes, can reinforce or help reformulate the current practices of an organisation, besides providing better results in the development of strategies and competitive positioning. Thus, clothing, the sector addressed in this work, is characterised by a long, fragmented, heterogeneous production chain, the competitiveness of which is linked to product differentiation. Therefore, the use of systemic approaches to study this sector is effective. In this sense, this research aims at adapting Systems Thinking and Scenario Planning (STSP) so that it supports the development and planning process in a given sector. Thus, this research applies STSP adapted to an analysis of the clothing sector in the northern region of Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil. As a result, in academic terms, this research proposed and validated a method for analysing industrial sectors of the clothing industry. In the sectoral context, this research identified elements that leverage the sector’s competitiveness, besides generating knowledge and learning aimed at strengthening the sectoral structure identified, and fostering the formation of a new clothing cluster.

Keywords

Clothing sector Systems thinking Scenario planning Sector competitiveness 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Serrano, Rosiane, the author of this article is grateful to IFRS - Campus Erechim (Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Rio Grande do Sul - Campus Erechim) for the financial support to the development of this paper.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abecassis-Moedas C (2006) Integrating design and retail in the clothing value chain. Int J Oper Prod Manag 26:412–428.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570610650567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abernathy FH, Volpe A, Weil D avi. (2006) The future of the apparel and textile industries: prospects and choices for public and private actors. Environ Plan A 38:2207–2232.  https://doi.org/10.1068/a38114
  3. Allen P, Maguire S, McKelvey B (2011) The SAGE handbook of complexity and management, 1st edn. SAGE Publications Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Allwood JM, Laursen SE, Russell SN et al (2008) An approach to scenario analysis of the sustainability of an industrial sector applied to clothing and textiles in the UK. J Clean Prod 16:1234–1246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.06.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson G (2013) Rethinking regional innovation. Syst Pract Action Res 26:99–110.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9265-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrade AL, Seleme A, Rodrigues LH, Souto R (2006) Pensamento Sistêmico: caderno de campo. Bookman, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  7. Antero SA (2006) Articulação de políticas públicas a partir dos fóruns de competitividade setoriais: a experiência recente da cadeia produtiva têxtil e de confecções. Rev Adm Pública 40:57–79.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122006000100004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barton J, Stephens J, Haslett T (2009) Action research: its foundations in open systems thinking and relationship to the scientific method. Syst Pract Action Res 22:475–488.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-009-9148-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Becker HS (1983) Scenarios: a tool of growing importance to policy analysts in government and industry. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 23:95–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(83)90049-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett RJ, Smith C (2002) Competitive conditions, competitive advantage and the location of SMEs. J Small Bus Enterprise Dev 9:73–86.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000210419509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brazilian Agency for Industrial Development- ABDI (2010) Estudo Prospectivo Setorial: Têxtil e Confecção. Série Cadernos da Indústria ABDI- vol 18Google Scholar
  12. Brendehaug E (2013) How local participation in national planning creates new development opportunities. Syst Pract Action Res 26:75–88.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9264-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brito L, Vasconcelos F (2004) How much does country matter. In: Relatório Pesqui. 41. http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/3012/P00308_1.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 5 Feb 2014
  14. Cabrera D, Colosi L, Lobdell C (2008) Systems thinking. Eval Program Plann 31:299–310.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2007.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chi T (2010) Corporate competitive strategies in a transitional manufacturing industry: an empirical study. Manag Decis 48:976–995.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011053497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Christensen CM (1997) The innovator’s dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  17. Coughlan P, Coghlan D (2002) Action research for operations management. Int J Oper Prod Manag 22:220–240.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210417515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Costa ACR da, Rocha ÉRP da (2009) Panorama da cadeia produtiva têxtil e de confecções e a questão da inovação. Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES)Google Scholar
  19. Davis AP, Dent EB, Wharff DM (2015) A conceptual model of systems thinking leadership in community colleges. Syst Pract Action Res 28:333–353.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-015-9340-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Lima DD, Lacerda DP, Sellitto MA (2016) Systemic analysis of the Brazilian production chain of semiconductors: graphic representation and leverage points. Syst Pract Action Res.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-016-9392-5
  21. Demczuk A, Padula AD (2017) Using system dynamics modeling to evaluate the feasibility of ethanol supply chain in Brazil: the role of sugarcane yield, gasoline prices and sales tax rates. Biomass Bioenergy 97:186–211.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.12.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dobbs ME (2014) Guidelines for applying porter's five forces framework: a set of industry analysis templates. Compet Rev 24:32–45.  https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-06-2013-0059Google Scholar
  23. Dresch A, Lacerda DP, Antunes Jr JAV (2015) Design science research. A Method for Science and Technology Advancement, 1st edn. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. European Apparel and Textile Organisation- EURATEX (2004) European technology platform: for the future of textiles and cloting- a vision for 2020. European Apparel and Textile OrganisationGoogle Scholar
  25. Flood RL (2010) The relationship of “systems thinking” to action research. Syst Pract Action Res 23:269–284.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-010-9169-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ford DN, Sterman JD (1998) Dynamic modeling of product development processes. Syst Dyn Rev 14:31–68.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199821)14:1%3C31::AID-SDR141%3E3.0.CO;2-5
  27. GMAP|UNISINOS (ed) (2015a) Avenidas para o crescimento e desenvolvimento sustentável- Guarapari 2030. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São LeopoldoGoogle Scholar
  28. GMAP|UNISINOS (ed) (2015b) Avenidas para o crescimento e desenvolvimento sustentável- Anchieta 2030. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São LeopoldoGoogle Scholar
  29. Godet M, Durance P, Dias JG (2008) A prospectiva estratégica para empresas e os territórios. Laboratoire d’Innovation de Prospective Stratégique et d’OrganisationGoogle Scholar
  30. Goodman M (1997) Systems thinking: what, why, when, where, and how? Syst Thinker 8:5–7Google Scholar
  31. International Institute for Sustainable Development- IISD (2002) Towards change- The work and results of MMSD-North America. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2002/mmsd_mining_toward_change.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2012
  32. Jin B (2004) Achieving an optimal global versus domestic sourcing balance under demand uncertainty. Int J Oper Prod Manag 24:1292–1305.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570410569056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kachba YR, Hatakeyama K (2013) Estratégias de inovação em APLs: viés para o desenvolvimento de produtos de moda. PRO 23:751–761.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132013005000012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Karlsen J (2013) The role of anchor companies in thin regional innovation systems lessons from Norway. Syst Pract Action Res 26:89–98.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9266-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lundberg H (2010) Strategic networks for increased regional competitiveness: two Swedish cases. Compet Rev 20:152–165.  https://doi.org/10.1108/10595421011029866Google Scholar
  36. Macchion L, Moretto A, Caniato F et al (2015) Production and supply network strategies within the fashion industry. Int J Prod Econ 163:173–188.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mahony TO, Zhou P, Sweeney J (2013) Integrated scenarios of energy-related CO2 emissions in Ireland: a multi-sectoral analysis to 2020. Ecol Econ 93:385–397.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCann BT, Folta TB (2008) Location matters: where we have been and where we might go in agglomeration research. J Manag 34:532–565.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316057Google Scholar
  39. McGahan AM, Porter ME (1997) How much does industry matter, really? Strateg Manag J 18:15–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Menezes FM (2008) Proposta de desenvolvimento de um método sistêmico de formulação estratégica integrando planejamento estratégico, pensamento sistêmico e planejamento por cenários. Dissertação de Mestrado- Programa de Pós Graduação em Engenharia de Produção e Sistemas da Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos- UNISINOSGoogle Scholar
  41. Mingers J, White L (2010) A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science. Eur J Oper Res 207:1147–1161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.12.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego- MTE (2012) Relação Anual de Informações Sociais-RAIS. bi.mte.gov.br/bgcaged/login.php. Accessed 1 Jun 2013Google Scholar
  43. Morandi MIWM (2008) Elaboração de um método para o entendimento da dinâmica da precificação de commodities através do pensamento sistêmico e do planejamento por cenários: uma aplicação no mercado de minérios de ferro. Dissertação de Mestrado- Programa de Pós Graduação em Engenharia de Produção e Sistemas da Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos- UNISINOSGoogle Scholar
  44. Morandi MIWM, Rodrigues LH, Lacerda DP, Pergher I (2014) Foreseeing iron ore prices using system thinking and scenario planning. Syst Pract Action Res 27:287–306.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9277-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moreira G (2005) Cenários Sistêmicos: proposta de integração entre princípios, conceitos e práticas de pensamento sistêmico e planejamento por cenários. Dissertação de Mestrado- Programa de Pós Graduação em Administração da Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos- UNISINOSGoogle Scholar
  46. Nakatani-Macedo CD, Fiuza-Moura FK, da Câmara MRG, Sesso Filho UA (2015) Decomposição estrutural da variação do emprego nos setores industriais no brasil entre os anos de 2000 e 2009. Rev Econ Contemp 19:235–260.  https://doi.org/10.1590/198055271923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nehme CC et al (2009) Foresight : proposta de uma metodologia visando ao fortalecimento da competitividade dos setores industriais brasileiros. Parcerias Estratégicas 14:7–20Google Scholar
  48. Osarenkhoe A (2010) A coopetition strategy – a study of inter-firm dynamics between competition and cooperation. Bus Strateg Ser 11:343–362.  https://doi.org/10.1108/17515631011093052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Paraboni PB, Rodrigues LH, Serrano R (2014) Avaliação sistêmica do eventual lançamento de novos produtos universitários: uma abordagem baseada no Pensamento Sistêmico. Gestão & Produção 21:853–864.  https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X0902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Porter M (1998) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Porter ME (2000) Location, competition, and economic development: local clusters in a global economy. Econ Dev Q 14:15–34.  https://doi.org/10.1177/089124240001400105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Porter ME (2008) As cinco forças competitivas que moldam a estratégia. In: Harv. Bus. Rev. http://hbrbr.uol.com.br/materia-privada/?redirect_to=/as-cinco-forcas-competitivas-que-moldam-a-estrategia/. Accessed 1 June 2016
  53. Porter M (2009) Competição, 1st edn. Elsevier, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  54. Porter ME, Kramer MR (2002) The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. In: Harv. Bus. Rev. https://hbr.org/2002/12/the-competitive-advantage-of-corporate-philanthropy. Accessed 1 June 2016
  55. Porter ME, Van Der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9:97–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Prusty SK, Mohapatra PKJ, Mukherjee CK (2017) Using generic structures in system dynamics model building: reflection from modeling for Indian shrimp industry. Syst Pract Action Res 30:19–44.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-016-9378-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Quraeshi ZA, Luqmani M (2011) A framework for building competitive sectoral capabilities in developing countries. Compet Rev An Int Bus J Inc J Glob Compet 21:47–65.  https://doi.org/10.1108/10595421111106229
  58. Regional Center of the Euvaldo Lodi Institute- IEL-RN/RS (2008) Cenários de futuro para a cadeia do biodiesel do Rio Grande. Núcleo Regional do Instituto Euvaldo Lodi/ Rio Grande do SulGoogle Scholar
  59. Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovations, 3rd edn. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Sankaran S, Dick B, Shaw K et al (2013) Application of scenario-based approaches in leadership research: an action research intervention as three sets of interlinked practices. Syst Pract Action Res 27:551–573.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9308-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Saritas O, Nugroho Y (2012) Mapping issues and envisaging futures: an evolutionary scenario approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 79:509–529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.09.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schoemaker PJH (1995) Scenario planning : a tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Manag Rev 36:25Google Scholar
  63. Schwartz P (2003) Cenários: surpresas inevitáveis. Campus, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  64. Şen A (2008) The US fashion industry: a supply chain review. Int J Prod Econ 114:571–593.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.05.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Senge PM (2009) A quinta disciplina: arte e prática da organização que aprende, 25th edn. BestSeller, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  66. Senge P, Ross R, Smith B et al (2000) A quinta disciplina: caderno de campo. Qualitymark, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  67. Serna LP, Jara M (2010) Mapa tecnológico estratégico, nuevos escenarios para el futuro de la cadena productiva fibra textil confección de Colombia. Editorial Universidad del Rosario, BogotáGoogle Scholar
  68. Serrano R, Lacerda DP, Cassel RA et al (2017) Systemic analysis of the soccer (football) value chain: learning from the Brazilian context. Syst Pract Action Res.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9425-8
  69. Shoushtari KD (2013) Redesigning a large supply chain management system to reduce the government administration: a socio-functional systems approach. Syst Pract Action Res 26:195–216.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9244-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stephens J, Barton J, Haslett T (2009) Action research: its history and relationship to scientific methodology. Syst Pract Action Res 22:463–474.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-009-9147-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sterman JD (2002) System dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex word. ESD Internal Symposium. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engineering Systems Division, Cambridge, p 31Google Scholar
  72. Thiollent M (1998) Metodologia da Pesquisa-Ação. Cortez, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  73. Vaccaro GLR, Pohlmann C, Lima AC et al (2010) Prospective scenarios for the biodiesel chain of a Brazilian state. Renew Sust Energ Rev 14:1263–1272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.12.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. van der Heijden K (2009) Planejamento por Cenários: a arte da conversação estratégica, 2nd edn. Bookman, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  75. Vila N, Kuster I (2007) The importance of innovation in international textile firms. Eur J Mark 41:17–36.  https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710718094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wack P (1985) Scenarios : uncharted waters ahead. Harv Bus Rev 63:72–90Google Scholar
  77. Woodward DP (2012) Industry location, economic development incentives, and clusters. Rev Reg Stud 42:5–23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of the Rio Grande do SulErechimBrazil
  2. 2.Production and System Engineering Graduate ProgrammeUniversidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos – UNISINOSSão LeopoldoBrazil
  3. 3.Instituto de Estudos Sistêmicos do Brasil – IESBPorto AlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations