Advertisement

Cases of Damage in Third-Party Logistics Businesses

  • Berrin DenizhanEmail author
  • K. Alper Konuk
Chapter

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Reverse Logistics Construction Machine General Cargo Boxed Product Incoming Container 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

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.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Dowlatshahi S (2000) Developing a theory of reverse logistics. Interfaces 30(3):143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fleischmann M, Krikke HR, Dekker R, Flapper SDP (2000) Characterization of logistics networks for product recovery. Omega 28:653–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guide VDR Jr, Van Wassenhove Luk N (2009) The evolution of closed-loop supply chain research. Oper Res 57(1):10–18zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brito MP, Dekker R (2002) Reverse logistics—a framework. Econometric Institute Report EI 2002-38Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hertz S, Alfredsson M (2003) Strategic development of third-party logistics providers. Ind Mark Manag 32(2):139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bloomberg DJ, LeMay S, Hanna JB (2002) Logistics. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  8. 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
  9. 9.
    Prahinski C, Kocabasoglu C (2006) Empirical research opportunities in reverse supply chains. Omega 34(6):519–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang Y, Sang D (2005) Multi-agent framework for third party logistics in E-commerce. Expert Syst Appl 29(2):431–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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. 12.
    Blumberg DF (2005) Introduction to management of reverse logistics and closed -loop supply chain processes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 23–43Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krumwiedea DW, Sheu C (2002) A model for reverse logistics entry by third-party providers. Omega 30(5):325–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Selviaridis K, Spring M (2007) Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda. Int J Logist Manag 18(1):125–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lynch CF (2000) Managing the outsourcing relationship. Supply Chain Manag Rev 4(4):90–96Google Scholar
  16. 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
  17. 17.
    Razzaque MA, Sheng CC (1998) Outsourcing of logistics functions: a literature survey. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 28(2):89–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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
  19. 19.
    Stock GN, Greis NP, Kasarda JD (1998) Logistics strategy and structure—a conceptual framework. Int J Oper Prod Manag 18(1):37–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mina H, Kob H (2008) The dynamic design of a reverse logistics network from the perspective of third-party logistics service providers. Int J Prod Econ 113(1):176–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim C, HoonYang K, Kim J (2008) A strategy for third-party logistics systems: a case analysis using the blue ocean strategy. Omega 36(4):522–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringSakarya UniversitySakaryaTurkey
  2. 2.Borusan Logistics, GemlikBursaTurkey

Personalised recommendations