Cases of Damage in Third-Party Logistics Businesses
Although the goal of Third-Party Logistics (3PL) providers is to transport goods without incidents, cases of damage do occur making the control and prevention of damage one of the significant quality concerns of Closed-Loop Supply Chain s (CLSC) and Reverse Logistics (RL) systems. The costs incurred through damage are often viewed as a necessary type of operating cost but there is no standard procedure for documenting and evaluating cases of damage. This chapter describes common types of damage sustained during the 3PL process and proposes a damage classification system which will improve the quality of 3PL services through an efficient tracking and evaluating system. This system will enable 3PL providers to identify and correct the systemic sources of incidents of damage. It also suggests that damages can be classified according to the location of the occurrence of damage, the type of damaged product, and the means by which damage is defined. Using a case study approach, this research analyzes incidents of damage that occurred at Borusan Logistics in Turkey, between 2005 and 2007. Based on this analysis, this study suggests that by designating its own risk expert to evaluate and manage cases of damage, a 3PL provider will benefit in several ways, as will the manufacturer of transported goods and the insurance company. These benefits include a more accurate and efficient damage evaluation process, expedited processing of insurance claims, and refinements to the stipulations of liability contracts. The proposed model may reduce cases of damage both by making patterns of damage visible and by clarifying appropriate corrective actions.
KeywordsReverse Logistics Construction Machine General Cargo Boxed Product Incoming Container
This work was conducted as part of the MBA Project based at the School of Business of the University of Sakarya. The authors would like to thank Borusan Logistics Company for research support. We would like to thank the editor for his constructive comments on our chapter. We also would like to thank Brent Curdy for his interest and thoughtful comments regarding this chapter.
- 5.Brito MP, Dekker R (2002) Reverse logistics—a framework. Econometric Institute Report EI 2002-38Google Scholar
- 7.Bloomberg DJ, LeMay S, Hanna JB (2002) Logistics. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
- 8.Results and Finding of the 14th Annual Study (2009) The state of logistics outsourcing in 2009. John Langley, Jr., Ph.D., and Capgemini U.S. LLCGoogle Scholar
- 11.Green FB, Turner W, Roberts S, Nagendra A, Wininger E (2008) A practitioner’s perspective on the role of a third-party logistics provider. J Bus Econ Res 6(6):9–14Google Scholar
- 12.Blumberg DF (2005) Introduction to management of reverse logistics and closed -loop supply chain processes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 23–43Google Scholar
- 15.Lynch CF (2000) Managing the outsourcing relationship. Supply Chain Manag Rev 4(4):90–96Google Scholar
- 16.Boyson S, Corsi T, Dresner M, Rabinovich E (1999) Managing effective third party logistics relationships: what does it take? J Bus Logist 20(1):73–100Google Scholar
- 18.Langley CJ, Newton BF, Tyndall GR (1999) Has the future of third party logistics already arrived?. Supply Chain Manag Rev, Fall, pp 85–94Google Scholar