Abstract
Recently the authors have explored strategic, tactical and operative key success factors for the humanitarian supply chain. Moreover, they have developed and tested a holistic and applicable performance measurement system for the humanitarian supply chain. Based on these results the impact of key success factors on performance is investigated: An impact model of key success factors on key performance indicators is developed and formulated. The evaluation of the model will be based on sequential qualitative system analysis for a first testing and analytical insights. Findings reveal that performance measurement in humanitarian logistics and humanitarian supply chains is still an open area of research, especially compared to the commercial logistics and supply chain sector. Moreover, it highlights how to identify and measure success in humanitarian supply chains. The results help humanitarian logistics and humanitarian supply chain actors to conduct further research in this area and to develop key performance indicators and measurement frameworks that suit the humanitarian logistics sector.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abidi H, Klumpp M, De Leeuw S (2013) Measuring Success in Humanitarian Supply Chains. In: Schoenherr T (eds) Proceedings of the 24th annual production and operations management society conference. Denver, Colorado, 03–06 May 2013
Albers O, Broux A (1999) Zukunftswerkstatt und Szenariotechnik. Ein Methodenbuch für Schule und Hochschule, Weinheim
Altay N, Green WG (2006) OR/MS research in disaster operations management. Eur J Oper Res 175(1):475–493
Beamon BM, Balcik B (2008) Performance measurement in humanitarian relief chains. Int J Pub Sect 21(1):4–25
Blecken AF, Hellingrath B, Dangelmaier W (2009) A humanitarian supply chain process reference model. Int J Serv Technol Manage 12(4):391–413
Chang SE, Nojima N (2001) Measuring post-disaster transportation system performance: the 1995 Kobe earthquake in comparative perspective. Transport Res Part A Policy Pract 35(6):475–494
De Leeuw S (2010) Towards a reference mission map for performance measurement in humanitarian supply chains. In: IFIP international federation for information processing, pp 181–188
Dupont A, Pearman G (2006) Heating up the planet: climate change and security. In: Lowy institute paper 12. The Lowy Institute, Double Bay
Geschka H, Hammer R (1997) Die Szenario-Technik in der strategischen Unternehmensplanung. In: Hahn D, Taylor B (eds) Strategische Unternehmensplanung. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 464–489
Grosskurth J, Rotmans J (2005) The SCENE model: getting a grip on sustainable development in policy making. Environment, Development and Sustainability, pp 135–151
Guha-Sapir D, Vos F, Below R, Ponserre S (2012) Annual disaster statistical review 2011: the numbers and trends, Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) Brussels
Gunasekaran A, Ngai EWT (2003) The successful management of a small logistics company. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 33(9):825–842
Helbing D, Kühnert C (2003) Assessing interaction networks with applications to catastrophe dynamics and disaster management. Physica A 328(3/4):584–606
HolguÃn-Veras J, Jaller M, Wachtendorf T (2012) Comparative performance of alternative humanitarian logistics structures after the Port-au-Prince earthquake: ACEs, PIEs, and CANs. Transp Res Part A 46:1623–1640
Komrska J, Kopczak L, Swaminathan JM (2013) When supply chains save lives, available at http://www.unicef.org/supply/files/SCMR1301_Unicef.pdf
Kovács G, Spens KM (2007) Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 37:99–114
Lang DJ, Binder CR, Scholz RW, Schleiss K, Staubli B (2006) Impact factors and regulatory mechanisms for material flow management: integrating stakeholder and scientific perspectives—the case of biowaste delivery. Resour Conserv Recycl 47:101–132
Lin YH, Batta R, Rogerson PA, Blatt A, Flanigan M (2009) Application of a humanitarian relief logistics model to an earthquake disaster. Transport Res Record J Transport Res Board, pp 1–14
Lu D-K, Pettit S, Beresford A (2006) Critical success factors for emergency relief logistics. WHAMPOA Interdisc J 51:177–184
Medina-Borja A, Pasupathy KS, Triantis K (2007) Large-scale data envelopment analysis (DEA) implementation: a strategic performance management approach. J Oper Res Soc 58(8):1084–1098
Mingers J, Rosenhead J (2004) Problem structuring methods in action. Eur J Oper Res 152:530–554
Moe TL, Gehbauer F, Senitz S, Mueller M (2007) Balanced scorecard for natural disaster management. Disaster Prev Manage 16(5):785–806
Mwenja D, Lewis A (2009) Exploring the impact of the board of directors on the performance of not-for-profit organizations. Bus Strat Ser 10(6):359–365
Neely A, Gregory M, Platts K (1995) Performance measurement systems design: a literature review and research agenda. Int J Oper Prod Manage 15(4):80–116
Oloruntoba R (2005) A wave of destruction and the waves of relief: issues, challenges and strategies. Disaster Prev Manage 14(4):506–521
Oloruntoba R (2010) An analysis of the cyclone larry emergency relief chain: some key success factors. Int J Prod Econ 126:85–101
Oloruntoba R, Gray R (2006) Humanitarian aid: an agile supply chain? Int J Supply Chain Manage 11(2):115–120
Pettit S, Beresford A (2009) Critical success factors in the context of humanitarian aid supply chains. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 39(6):450–468
Power DJ, Sohal AS, Rahman SU (2001) Critical success factors in agile supply chain management. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 31(4):247–265
Razzaque MA, Cheng CC (1998) Outsourcing of logistics functions: a literature survey. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manage 28(2/3):89–107
Reibnitz U (1991) Szenario-Technik: Instrumente für die unternehmerische und persönliche Erfolgsplanung. Wiesbaden
Rongier C, Galasso F, Lauras M, Gourc D (2010) A method to define a performance indicator system for the control of a crisis. In: 8th international conference of modeling and simulation, Hammamet
Santarelli G, Abidi H, Regattieri A, Klumpp M (2013) A performance measurement system for the evaluation of humanitarian supply chain. In: Schoenherr T (eds) Proceedings of the 24th annual production and operations management society conference, Denver, 03–06 May 2013
Scholz R, Tietje O (2002) Embedded case study methods: integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge. SAGE, Thousand Oaks
Schulz SF, Heigh I (2009) Logistics performance management in action within a humanitarian organization. Manage Res News 32(1):1038–1049
Thomas A, Kopczak LR (2007) Life-saving supply chain–challenges and the path forward. In: Lee HL, Lee CY (eds) Building supply chain excellence in emerging economies. Springer Science & Business Media, New York, pp 93–111
Tomasini R, Van Wassenhove LN (2009) From preparedness to partnerships: case study research on humanitarian logistics. Int Trans Oper Res 16:549–559
United Nations (2006) Strengthening of the coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations. United Nations. Available at http://www.un.org/docs/ecosoc/documents/2006/reports/ECOSOC%202006%20-%20Humanitarian%20Coordination.pdf
Van Der Laan EA, De Brito MP, Vergunst DA (2009) Performance measurement in humanitarian supply chains. Int J Risk Assess Manag 13(1):22–45
Van Wassenhove LN (2006) Humanitarian aid logistics: supply chain management in high gear. J Oper Res Soc 57(5):475–484
Wiek A, Lang D, Siegrist M (2008) Qualitative system analysis as a means for sustainable governance of emerging technologies: the case of nanotechnology. J Clean Prod 16(8–9):988–999
Acknowledgments
This research is connected to the national excellence research cluster LogistikRuhr (www.effizienzcluster.de), funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in the project funding line 01|C10L19D.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix I
Appendix I
Category | KPIs | Description | Equation | Type | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Qualitative | Quantitative | ||||||
Financial | No-Financial | ||||||
Response time | Duration of the project | The indicator measures the duration of the project | Number of months | Â | Â | Ù§ | |
Average response time | The indicator measures the average response time between the occurrence of the disaster and arrival time of the organisation’s first supplies (personnel and goods) | Average number of days (personnel) |  |  | ٧ | ||
Average number of days (goods) | |||||||
Delivery date reliability | The indicator measures the accuracy of delivery date of goods to the disaster area both in the first aid and at steady-state | First aid (<3Â months) \(\frac{\text{Number of deliveries on time}}{\text{Total number of deliveries}}\) | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
Steady-state (>3months) \(\frac{\text{Number of deliveries on time}}{\text{Total number of deliveries}}\) | |||||||
Goods-to-delivery time | The indicator measures the time between when goods are purchased and when they arrive at the disaster site | Average number of days to purchase goods | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
Average number of days to transport goods from the organisation’s warehouse to the disaster area | |||||||
Average number of days to deliver goods to the staging area | |||||||
Presence of organisation’s warehouse in loco | The indicator expresses the presence of a warehouse with prepositioned materials in a radius of 200 km around the disaster area | Yes/no |  |  | ٧ | ||
Reliability/Flexibility | Volume flexibility | The indicator measures the organisation’s ability to respond to different magnitudes of disasters | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | |
Mix flexibility | The indicator measures the organisation’s ability to change the variety of goods sent to the disaster area | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | ||
Percentage of prepositioned goods | The indicator measures the percentage of goods (drugs and no-drugs) prepositioned in organisation’s warehouses, both at regional and international level | Drugs | \(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{prepositioned}}} \\ {{\text{goods}}\;{\text{at}}\;{\text{regional}}\;{\text{level}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) |  |  | ٧ | |
\(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{prepositioned}}} \\ {{\text{goods}}\;{\text{at}}\;{\text{international}}\;{\text{level}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | |||||||
\(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{no}} - } \\ {{\text{prepositioned}}\;{\text{goods}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | |||||||
No- Drugs | \(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{prepositioned}}} \\ {{\text{goods}}\;{\text{at}}\;{\text{regional}}\;{\text{level}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | ||||||
\(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{prepositioned}}} \\ {{\text{goods}}\;{\text{at}}\;{\text{international}}\;{\text{level}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | |||||||
\(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{no}} - } \\ {{\text{prepositioned}}\;{\text{goods}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | |||||||
Cooperation/Standardisation | Degree of information sharing | The indicator measures the degree of information sharing between actors of the organisation, involved in the disaster | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | |
Degree of cooperation | The indicator measures the degree of cooperation between actors of the organisation, involved in the disaster | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | ||
Degree of standardisation | The indicator measures the degree of standardisation of procedures | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | ||
Beneficiaries and donors satisfaction | Number of relief workers | The indicator measures the number of relief workers (national and international staff) employed during the resolution of the disaster | Number of relief workers at national level | Â | Â | Ù§ | |
Number of relief workers at international level | |||||||
Percentage of people engaged on dispensing aid | The indicator measures the percentage of people engaged on dispensing aid (doctors and health personnel, logisticians, etc.) | \(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{workers}}\;{\text{engaged }}} \\ {{\text{on}}\;{\text{dispensing}}\;{\text{aid}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{workers}}}}\) | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
Total dollars spent | The indicator measures the organisation in financial terms | Dollars given by institutional donors | Â | Ù§ | Â | ||
Dollars given by private donors | |||||||
Number of people helped | The indicator measures the efficiency of the organisation in terms of people helped (direct and indirect beneficiaries) | Number of people helped | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
Donor’s auditing | The indicator expresses if donors monitor the work of the employees | Yes/no |  |  | ٧ | ||
Spending capacity | The indicator measures the ability of the organisation to respect the account of money requested to institutional donors | \(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Dollars}}\;{\text{spent}}\;{\text{given}}\;{\text{by }}} \\ {{\text{institutional}}\;{\text{donors}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Total}}\;{\text{dollars}}\;{\text{requested}}\;{\text{to }}} \\ {{\text{institutional}}\;{\text{donors}}} \\ \end{array} }}\) | Â | Ù§ | Â | ||
Satisfaction level | The indicator measures the satisfaction level of donors | [1–5] (1 very low; 5 very high) | ٧ |  |  | ||
Cost performance | Cost of goods | The indicator measures the percentage of the cost of goods on the cost of the project | \(\frac{{{\text{Cost}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{dollars}}\;{\text{spent}}}}\) | Â | Ù§ | Â | |
Transportation cost | The indicator measures the incidence of the transportation cost (by air, sea and truck) during the whole period in which the organisation stays in the disaster area | \(\frac{{{\text{Transportation}}\;{\text{cost}}}}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{dollars}}\;{\text{spent}}}}\) | Â | Ù§ | Â | ||
Warehousing cost | The indicator measures the percentage of the warehousing cost to store goods in the surroundings of the disaster area on the cost of the project | \(\frac{{{\text{Warehousing}}\;{\text{cost}}}}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{dollars}}\;{\text{spent}}}}\) | Â | Ù§ | Â | ||
Percentage of claims | The indicator measures the percentage of claims | \(\frac{{{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{orders}}\;{\text{claimed}}/{\text{year}}}}{{{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{orders}}/{\text{year}}}}\) | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
Percentage of goods not distributed | The indicator measures the percentage of goods (drugs and no-drugs) not distributed | \(\frac{{{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{drugs}}\;{\text{not}}\;{\text{distributed}}}}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) | Â | Â | Ù§ | ||
\(\frac{{\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\text{Number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{no}} - {\text{drug}}\;{\text{goods }}} \\ {{\text{not}}\;{\text{distributed}}} \\ \end{array} }}{{{\text{Total}}\;{\text{number}}\;{\text{of}}\;{\text{goods}}}}\) |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Abidi, H., Klumpp, M., de Leeuw, S. (2015). Modelling Impact of Key Success Factors in Humanitarian Logistics. In: Dethloff, J., Haasis, HD., Kopfer, H., Kotzab, H., Schönberger, J. (eds) Logistics Management. Lecture Notes in Logistics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13177-1_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13177-1_33
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13176-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13177-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)