Designing a Marketing Logistics System

  • Graham Buxton


In this chapter we are concerned with the development of appropriate procedures for the setting up of a marketing logistics system. The model which we shall use as a basis for our design framework can be defined in terms of the major steps, or stages, of the planning process: that is, the stages involved in designing a marketing logistics system are viewed as being analogous to the accepted stages of the planning process in management. Therefore, we need to spend a little time clarifying what we mean by planning, and then we shall elaborate on a planning model in order to set the scene for a more detailed evaluation of the system design process as it applies to marketing logistics.


Planning Process Service Level Logistics System Conceptual Foundation Channel Member 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    George A. Steiner, Top Management Planning (New York: Macmillan, 1969) p. 8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The word ‘plan’ is used here, rather than ‘strategy’, in order to avoid confusion over the difference between strategy and tactics. The differences between strategic and tactical planning are often obscure, but strategy is used throughout this book to refer to the broad policies governing a company’s actions to meet objectives; tactics refer to the detailed deployment of resources and are often problem-solving in nature. For a more comprehensive conceptual distinction, see Steiner, Top Management Planning, pp. 37–41.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Martin G. Christopher, ‘The New Science of Logistics Systems Engineering’, International Journal of Physical Distribution, vol. 2, no. 1 (Oct. 1971) p. 7.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See, for example, David Walters, ‘Planning the Distribution System’, International Journal of Physical Distribution, vol. 3, no. 2 (Monograph Series, autumn 1972) pp. 130–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    See J. B. Quinn, ‘Technological Forecasting’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 45, no. 2 (Mar./Apr. 1967) pp. 89–106; G. S. C. Wills, ‘The Preparation and Development of Technological Forecasts’, Long Range Planning, vol. 2, no. 3 (Mar. 1970) pp. 44–54.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Raymond A. Bauer, ‘Social Psychology and the Study of Policy Formulation’, American Psychologist, vol. 21, no. 10 (Oct. 1966) p. 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Donald J. Bowersox, Edward W. Smykay and Bernard J. La Londe, Physical Distribution Management, 2nd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1968) pp. 314–21.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    For a summary review of the literature on the service—demand interface, see Mark Ellsmore, Evaluating Logistics Service—A Model Building Approach, unpublished M.Sc. dissertation (University of Bradford Management Centre, Emm Lane, Bradford 9, Yorkshire, 1974).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Ronald Stephenson and Ronald P. Willett, ‘Selling with Physical Distribution Service’, Business Horizons, vol. 11, no. 6 (Dec. 1968).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Of course, different types of objectives may be set for each product-market segment — some segments may be set cost-minimisation objectives, others may be measured in profit rather than cost performance terms.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bowersox, Smykay and La Londe, Physical Distribution Management, pp. 319–21.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ansoff defines synergy as a ‘measure of joint effects’, denoting the fact that a firm ‘seeks a product-market posture with a combined performance that is greater than the sum of its parts’ (often known as the ‘2+2 = 5’ effect). See H. Igor Ansoff, Corporate Strategy (London: Penguin, 1968) pp. 72–93.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. H. Miner, ‘The Timely Emergence of the Distribution Audit’, Handling and Shipping, vol. 12 (Apr. 1971) pp. 55–8.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    James L. Heskett, Robert M. Ivie and Nicholas A. Glaskowsky, Jr., Businees Logistics: Management of Physical Supply and Distribution (New York: Ronald Press, 1964) p. 43.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    So called because products can, as a result of this analysis, be grouped into A, B and C (or more) categories.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    James L. Heskett, ‘Sweeping Changes in Distribution’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 51, no. 2, (Mar./Apr. 1973) pp. 123–32.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    This section concentrates on consumer goods channels — for a discussion of channels for industrial products, see Maureen Guirdham, Marketing: The Management of Distribution Channels (Oxford: Pergamon, 1972) pp. 79–90.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    For a thorough review of the growth and future of franchising in the UK, see Dov Izraeli, Franchising and the Total Distribution System (London: Longman, 1972), esp. Part One.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    David Walters, ‘Distribution and Retailing in the Eighties’, Cranfield Research Papers in Marketing and Logistics, 1973/1974 (Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, England) p. 5.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Walters, ‘Distribution and Retailing in the Eighties’, p. 22.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Walters, ‘Distribution and Retailing in the Eighties’, p. 22.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    ‘A Discount at Every Corner’, Retail and Distribution Management, vol. 1, no. 2 (Mar. 1973) p. 28.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    See Kelsey van Musschenbroek, ‘Spending: Mail Order’s Battle to Keep up with the Boom’, Financial Times, 6 Sep. 1972.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Walters, ‘Distribution and Retailing in the Eighties’, pp. 24–7. The questions relate to the grocery trade specifically, but are of general applicability in that they raise important issues pertaining to all trades.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Graham Buxton 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Graham Buxton

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations