Printer Friendly

Logistics optimizing and operational plans and systems and their role in the achievement of corporate goals.

For many executives, the term "budget" brings negative connotations because of pressure from superiors, frustration from having budget proposals rejected, and indifference from not knowing how budget achievement affects corporate goals.(1)

The budget and budget process need not be negative. A budget is nothing more than a price placed on the objectives and actions planned to help achieve a goal. The budget should not manage executives; rather, it should serve as a tool for communicating plans and accomplishments to other areas within the firm and to supplier and customer channel members.

Unfortunately, in many firms, the budget is a game to play and to beat.(2) Performance systems are set to discourage positive variances in the budget and to concentrate on functional, rather than overall, firm performance. Logistics budgets are no exception to these games and inefficiencies. Logistics managers are constantly reminded about minimizing costs contained in the budget while being strongly encouraged to maintain or even increase service levels. Reducing costs and increasing service can be accomplished up to a point, after which successive attempts to achieve these sometimes contrary goals result in the failure of the logistics system. Even if these goals are accomplished within budget, rarely are they tied to the achievement of corporate goals.

Finally, the quality movement in U.S.-based firms has required many changes in the way businesses are managed. One of these changes is the management of processes which cross functional and firm boundaries. The ideas presented in this article address the need for a planning and control system that will facilitate the requirement of process management in the quality movement.

This article introduces the concept of Logistics Optimizing and Operational Plans and Systems (LOOPS) as a replacement for the term "budget." LOOPS is more of a thinking process than a budgeting document. The use of LOOPS is intended to help open the lines of communication between corporate and logistics planners so that both corporate and logistics goals can be achieved. LOOPS implementation will also help those involved develop a more positive attitude toward the planning process. In order to develop the concept of LOOPS, this article will 1) discuss the "fit" of logistics strategy into corporate strategy, 2) present the underlying characteristics of budgets, and 3) suggest a process for the development of LOOPS.


A firm's strategy is dictated by its goals and mission and those of the channels in which it is a member. This is called the grand strategy because it is the mechanism by which the separate entities within the firm develop their strategies and operational plans. Figure 1 proposes a framework for the strategic planning process: The grand strategy is a result of the firm's mission and an analysis of the environment in which it operates. The implementation of the grand strategy allows the firm to achieve its long-term objectives (quantifiable measures of mission achievement) and should take the firm on the path to mission accomplishment. As such, the grand strategy must be developed with input from all other areas of the firm that will be responsible for its implementation. It is here that logistics can provide input to the formulation of corporate strategy. Once formulated, the grand strategy can be translated into what can be called functional strategies. This method of plan development is called the "bottom up, top down" approach because it begins with inputs from within the organization that rise to the top of the organization and then flow down again for implementation.(3)

Functional strategies take the form of marketing, manufacturing, and logistics strategies; support strategies might take the form of accounting, finance, legal, and R&D strategies. If the functional strategies are developed in coordination with the grand strategy, then the implementation of the functional strategies will in turn implement the grand strategy. Not only must functional strategies be consistent with the grand strategy, they must also be consistent with one another. Although each functional area adds its own type of value to the firm's output and has its own objectives, common values and objectives exist. Figure 2 shows examples of common goals among the functional areas of the firm.

Logistics and manufacturing share capacity goals -- manufacturing is concerned with having adequate capacity to manufacture products and store raw material, WIP, and finished goods; logistics is concerned with supplying the production line with adequate raw materials and with turning inventory fast enough to allow for the storage of WIP and finished product. Logistics and marketing share availability goals -- both are concerned with making the product available at the right time, at the right place, in the right quantity, at the right price. Marketing and manufacturing share demand goals -- both are concerned with the level of demand and making sure it is satisfied. All three areas share the same goal of customer service -- satisfying the customer's needs.

Because these functions have links outside the firm, they also share common goals with suppliers and customers. For example, suppliers are also concerned about capacity goals and requirements while customers are concerned with availability goals and requirements. These common concerns require that the functional strategies also include channel member strategies and be consistent with them.

The process used to develop functional strategies is similar to that used to develop the grand strategy. A proposed framework for the development of a logistics strategy is presented in Figure 3. This framework also shows where the logistics strategic planning process fits into the corporate strategic planning process. The logistics mission is a product of the firm's grand strategy and its annual objectives. This mission statement is followed by an environmental analysis and interactive opportunity analysis (IOA). The latter is a process wherein management must evaluate and determine the most cost/service effective network for logistics.(4) Trade-offs, hand-off points for the management of processes, and the proper coordinating mechanisms must be identified within the logistics system. IOA, then, establishes the proper linkages within logistics and between logistics and the other functional areas to facilitate the formulation and evaluation of logistics strategies. The logistics strategy or strategies chosen help generate policies for implementation that fit into the firm's policies for the implementation of the grand strategy. Typically these policies take the form of budgets. As a result, the budget appears in the strategic planning process as the mechanism used to implement strategy on a yearly, quarterly, or monthly basis. Although the strategy developed is often the result of coordinated input, and is intended to be a coordinated plan, the budget representing this plan is usually narrow in its focus and is incomplete. The LOOPS concept is simple: The mechanism used to implement the strategy on a timely basis should fully correspond to and represent the plan to which it is dedicated. The next section presents the underlying characteristics of budgets as a prelude to the development of the LOOPS concept.


LOOPS and budgets both represent plans and operating objectives necessary to accomplish a goal. Budgets are usually functional in nature, e.g., marketing or manufacturing, and contain cost standards. LOOPS, on the other hand, cross both functional and firm boundaries and should contain the detailed elements of a plan that, when implemented and controlled, will result in the achievement of logistics goals which in turn should correspond with achievement of corporate goals.(5) Before developing the concept of LOOPS, it is necessary to review the shortcomings of traditional budget usage to discover why there is a need to rethink their development.

All too often budgets manage the manager or are managed rather than used as a management tool. For example, the continuous drive to "beat the budget" by driving down costs often does so at the expense of service. This mentality is driven by a performance measurement system that supports cost reduction but does not necessarily reward it. For example, a manager who ends up with a positive budget variance because of special productivity improvements in the logistics system might be criticized for intentionally "padding the budget" when it was developed so a positive variance would occur.

Logistics managers might also have a fear of the financial experts within the organization. Such fear is often justifiable in instances where top management lacks awareness of the impact of logistics decisions on the firm's balance sheet and income statement.

In many organizations, budgets tend to create a "variance" mentality, i.e., it is the variance from budget that is measured. With this mentality, managers might be less inclined to communicate truthfully the real costs associated with the logistics system since the performance system is set up to encourage positive variances and punish negative variances.(6) This practice ties up funds unnecessarily in logistics resources when they could be used more effectively in other areas of the firm. For example, rather than holding these extra funds in a freight budget, they could be used more effectively in a brand manager's promotion budget.

As previously mentioned, budgets are usually narrowly focused plans. They are implemented at the functional level, usually do not contain cross-functional goals, and hardly ever consider cost and service standards of other channel members. This narrow focus can sometimes create an optimization of the function at the expense of sub-optimization for the firm and the channel. So, the budget tends to become a device that is managed, rather than helping to manage. This characteristic of the budget and the budgeting process can force the manager to be counterproductive at managing the important issue: adding value to the firm's output to satisfy customer needs. To alleviate this problem, the manager needs a tool that focuses explicitly on the management processes of education, communication, and participation as well as other dimensions of the management process. A generic process used to develop LOOPS that emphasizes these three key budget characteristics will be introduced and discussed in the next section.


Every firm is different in its organization structure, communication processes, planning systems, people, and strategy. The process to be discussed in this section is generic; that is, some of the steps might need to be adapted for some firms. In fact, some of the suggestions that will be made for the development of LOOPS might require substantial cultural change within some firms. However, knowledge of the LOOPS steps can help a manager identify changes the firm must make and how those changes will be made.

The entire LOOPS development process relies on communication, participation, and education.(7) These three activities occur from the top down through the organization and from bottom up and horizontally. The "horizontal" must include not only the other functions within the firm but also suppliers and customers. When this is accomplished, the entire channel will be linked with common goals and strategies allowing for its optimization. While Figure 4 shows an example of these vertical and horizontal flows of communication, participation, and education, it must be noted that in this example, there are three types of horizontal flows: among channel members, among the functional areas within the firm, and among the logistics activities themselves. Two types of vertical flows exist: between the logistics activities and the logistics function and between the logistics function and the firm. When these flows exist, the information necessary for planing, implementation, and control of LOOPS will be equally accessible to all parties.

When information is truly available at all levels within the firm and the channel, the structure of the firm (e.g., centralized vs. decentralized) and the channel (e.g., type and number of intermediaries) will not be a very influential factor in the implementation of LOOPS. This is an important characteristic of the LOOPS concept. Because it relies on communication, participation, and education, LOOPS is flexible enough to withstand the dynamics of changing structures, employees, customer demands, laws and regulations, costs and pricing, and competition.

The following steps therefore outline the development of LOOPS, the process for which takes place in the "policies" step, as shown in Figures 1 and 3.

Step 1: Identify and Understand Corporate and Channel Goals

As seen in Figure 3, the logistics strategy provides the basis for the development of LOOPS in the form of policies. Prior to developing an operating plan to implement a strategy, it is important to understand the goal(s) of the strategy. Typical examples of corporate and channel goals include return on investment, maximization of shareholder wealth, and increasing market share. The goal(s) will drive the grand strategy and in turn the logistics strategy.

By participating in the strategic planning process, the logistics manager will already be aware of corporate goals. This will allow the development of LOOPS that will link with the corporate goals and the grand strategy as well as allowing the logistics manager to be aware of corporate constraints or opportunities on resources, i.e., facilities, people, and money. Because LOOPS allocates resources for implementation, it must take into consideration corporate resource availability.

Including the functional managers in the corporate strategic planning process allows them to participate in a bottom-up communication and education process. Once this activity has ended, upper management must communicate to, and educate functional managers on, the firm's common corporate and channel goals, and allow the logistics manager to initiate horizontal activities.

Step 2: Identify and Understand Other Functional and Channel Strategies

Because logistics interacts very closely with marketing and manufacturing, it is critical to understand and interact with their managers' efforts to achieve corporate and channel goals. All too often, functional strategies, although striving to achieve the same goal, are counterproductive with one another. In concept, logistics, marketing, and manufacturing should coordinate their efforts to arrive at one operational plan that optimizes the entire operation to achieve the goal. Unfortunately, this optimization might cause functional sub-optimization, resulting in those areas' reluctance to participate in the joint plan. Such a situation necessitates joint performance standards among the functional areas (discussed in a subsequent section).

In manufacturing, the logistics manager should be concerned about such things as production capacity, production location, changeover costs, inventory requirements, and quality expectations because of their substantial impact on daily operations. In marketing, awareness needs to be fostered for issues such as product mix, volumes and their timing, geographic dispersion of products, new markets, service requirements, and margin requirements, most of which impact mid- to long-term logistics planning.

Logistics provides the linking mechanism from the firm to other channel members. Relationships with carriers and other suppliers provide the inbound link; relationships with carriers, outside storage, and customers provide the outbound link. So it is imperative that the logistics manager identify and understand their strategies. For example, a change in a supplier's delivery policy or quantity discount might influence inbound inventory levels and carrier mode. On the outbound side, a customer's plans concerning a pick-up program might change the supplying firm's plans for its transportation network. In addition, there might be some logistics operations that can be more effectively and efficiently performed by other channel members. For example, a carrier might be able to provide final packing and bar coding for a firm's products because of advantages in labor costs and/or technology or scale. Another example might include a supplier holding excess inventory because its cost of money is lower than the buying firm's cost. These examples reinforce the importance to logistics managers of two-way communication and knowledge of channel member plans, strengths, and weaknesses. A strong side benefit of this learning process is the understanding of the motivation behind daily operational decision making that impacts logistics. With this external knowledge (corporate, functional, and channel) in hand, LOOPS can begin to be developed.

Step 3: Analyze Current Logistics Capabilities

As with any planning process, an audit of current capabilities is necessary to identify opportunities and constraints. With corporate and channel goal(s) in mind and an understanding of manufacturing and marketing plans, the logistics manager must assess whether or not the current logistics system is capable of meeting the goals and complementing the plans of the functional areas. For the purpose of this discussion, it will be assumed that the logistics function will consist of the following activities: transportation, warehousing, purchasing, inventory control, and production scheduling. The logistics audit, then, would analyze each of these activities for its cost and service capabilities and identify where conflicts exist. This analysis, coupled with the requirements put on the logistics system by corporate and channel goals and marketing and manufacturing plans, would help the logistics manager to identify any necessary changes.

Step 4: Identify Logistics Efforts to Achieve Corporate and Channel Goals

Armed with an assessment of current capabilities and the external requirements identified, the logistics efforts necessary to achieve corporate and channel goals can be estimated. These efforts must include both service and cost requirements in combination. Some plans contain only cost requirements; others both cost and service requirements but separately. LOOPS must tie service and cost requirements together into "service packages." A service package states very specifically the cost for a certain required level of service and that a lower level will cost less, a higher level, more. A good example of the construction of these service packages can be seen in how UPS structures its services. An overnight delivery costs more than a two-day delivery; a heavier package, more than a lighter package.

The logistics manager must determine whether or not the service package requirements are achievable with the current logistics system, and determine whether they conflict or complement the manufacturing and marketing plans. If in conflict, that fact must be communicated horizontally, i.e., the logistics manager needs to talk to the marketing and manufacturing groups about potential conflicts and what actions are necessary to arrive at LOOPS that fully complement the marketing and manufacturing plans. This process might also require critical vertical communication and education by notifying upper management of potential conflicts among functional plans, attempts to eliminate these conflicts, and potential sub-optimizations for any of the functional areas. To gain the cooperation of any of the functional areas to be sub-optimized for the sake of overall functional area optimization, upper management needs to be educated on this systems concept to allow performance evaluation systems to accommodate specific joint performance goals. In many corporate cultures, this change will not be easy. But properly communicating to and educating upper management on the benefits of functional system optimization and joint performance standards is necessary to begin the process of cultural change.

It must also be determined whether these efforts will complement or conflict with the plans made by other channel members, thus requiring more horizontal communication and education. For example, a manufacturer's desire to implement a slip-sheet program to save on pallet costs might conflict with a customer's plans to continue receiving product on pallets. Although possibly minimizing the manufacturer's costs, the total costs of the channel might increase because of changes the customer might have to make or because of inefficiencies created by the two different systems. These trade-offs must be analyzed to determine that system which optimizes the channel and subsequently communicates to upper management to preclude any penalties for undertaking a project that ultimately optimizes the channel.

Step 5. Repeat Steps 3 and 4 for Each Functional Area of Logistics

Just as logistics must analyze its roles vis-a-vis the channel, the firm, marketing, and manufacturing, so must each logistics activity (e.g., transportation, warehousing) analyze its roles. The activities of logistics, as previously identified, must analyze their relationships both with each other and with the total logistics system. This step has two parts: part one involves analyzing current logistics activity capabilities; part two identifies those efforts necessary to achieve logistics functional goals. If the logistics activity efforts complement overall logistics function efforts and these in turn complement firm and channel efforts, then implementing LOOPS at the logistics activity level will serve to achieve firm and channel goals. Requirements for this integrated systems concept include 1) clear lines of communication both horizontally and vertically from each activity all the way to the board room and out to the channel; 2) a method for educating other parties in the trade-offs necessary to achieve channel optimization; 3) allowing implementers of the plan to participate in the planning process; and 4) a performance goal setting and appraisal process that transcends traditional narrowly focused views and encompasses joint performance standards and appraisal systems.

Step 6: Establish Joint Performance Goals

One of the more important concepts in LOOPS is the establishment of joint performance goals which require the cooperation of all of the parties involved to achieve optimization. Traditional functionally oriented goals force each function or activity to optimize its own performance, often at the expense of the firm's performance. Firms practicing this in the extreme will require a significant change in culture before being able to accept joint goals in concept.

Figure 2 shows some examples of common strategic concerns among functional areas, the firm, suppliers, and customers. These can be translated into joint performance goals. For example, logistics and manufacturing can share a capacity goal where manufacturing provides the capacity and logistics provides a certain level of raw material in a timely manner that will support that capacity. At one large consumer products manufacturing firm, the vice presidents of marketing, manufacturing, and logistics share common customer service goals. These force the parties to consult one another before making decisions that will affect the goals, hence promoting participation and communication (see Step 2).

Joint performance goals must also connect with the firm's goals. If the firm has a goal of increased revenue through improved service, the joint goals among manufacturing, marketing, and logistics should promote customer service. These must be communicated to both suppliers and customers. If service is the goal and the firm is using JIT, suppliers must be made aware and must be able to participate in the goal-setting process.

Customers, although not expected to achieve the firm's goals, are responsible for the process of setting the firm's goals. Goals are set to respond to customer needs and provide customer satisfaction. Before setting these goals, then, it is important to determine what the customer wants, what types of goals will satisfy these needs, and what it will cost to meet them. Performance goals should be set to include all participants in the channel as this allows all participants to share common concerns in their achievement. Performance evaluation systems must also change from a functional orientation to a systems orientation to facilitate such goal achievement.

Goals can be set at strategic levels, tactical levels, and operational levels. The longer the time span for the goal, the less specific it will be. LOOPS mainly deal with operational goals usually set for a one-year period. These goals, when achieved, allow the firm and channel ultimately to achieve both tactical and strategic goals. In many firms, however, a problem exists with the setting of annual goals in that they remain fixed during the year. The problem arises when the firm's operations substantially change during the year but the goal does not. For example, as shown in Figure 5, this year's goal for transportation cost per hundredweight is $3, based on 1 million pounds of product for the year. This goal takes effect on January 1 and remains in effect until December 31. This goal also includes provisions for inflation and other cost increases. The setting of this goal has required the firm to allocate funds to transportation to cover the $3 per hundredweight for the 1 million pounds. Under this hypothetical situation, transportation enjoys a surplus of funds for the first six months of the year and encounters a deficit the second six months. This occurs because the $3 per hundredweight is an average, or standard, for the year. This means that average cost for the first six months will be under $3 and the average cost for the last six months will be over $3. The hope here is that the surplus will offset the deficit, but the problem is that those "surplus" funds, sitting in the transportation budget, might have offered a better return invested elsewhere in the organization rather than sitting idly. Another problem is that for the first six months the transportation manager looks like a very efficient and effective manager but looks like an inefficient and ineffective manager for the last six months. In reality, on the average, the transportation manager has done well by hitting the goal. Although the example was simplified for this discussion, the point is that goals, or standards, must be flexible and should represent more accurately the operations of the firm during the year. The goal in Figure 5, then, should look like the sloped line rather than the straight line. Changing to this flexible format will likely cause some problems in some firms by requiring changes in accounting practices. Allowing a goal to be flexible will require that accounting systems be flexible to move funds between activities or functions throughout the budget year when and where needed. This will help the firm and channel to better maximize its return on capital and more accurately reflect expenses and operations.

Step 7: Notify Upper Management of Joint Goals/Projects

Communication and education are key elements in this step. If joint goals and projects are undertaken that require sub-optimization of some members for the optimization of the whole, upper management should be notified so performance can be accurately assessed. This also communicates to upper management that the joint goals/projects are being implemented to further the interests of the firm and the channel. Progress towards the achievement of these joint goals/projects must also be communicated throughout the year as this education process allows upper management to see how sub-optimization of some elements actually helps the firm and channel achieve goals. While Step 6 requires horizontal communication and participation, Step 7 requires vertical.

Step 8: Implement LOOPS

Up to this point, all of the steps in LOOPS have been planning steps. Step 8 requires implementation of the plan. Under normal budgeting processes, the planning activities are relatively simple compared to the implementation activity. This results mainly from not including those responsible for implementing the budget in planning activities. However, if the planning activities for LOOPS were performed correctly, participation by the implementers of the plan was encouraged and included in its development. So, by the implementation step, all parties included in the plan are already working towards common goals.

This step also begins the feedback loop by providing data on whether or not goals are being achieved (i.e., this is where actual performance data are generated). These data provide the basis for a logistics performance information system which enables logistics managers to exercise control.

Step 9: Control

Control is a process that helps managers detect and alter performance that is not meeting expectations. Much has been written in the literature concerning the concept of control in logistics.(8) The control system is based on the goals, or standards, set during the planning activities. The nature of these goals will determine the nature of the control system. That is, if the standards are functionally oriented, the control system will also be. Under LOOPS, however, the goals are cross-functional and possibly cross-channel so the control system must be able to accommodate these common goals. This requires an information system that crosses functional and firm boundaries in order to monitor the performance of the system, rather than just the performance of each individual function or activity within the firm.(9) This information system must also be able to link firm goals with functional goals, i.e., to be able to detect the impact on the firm's goals of the achievement of functional goals.

Another requirement of the control system is the ability to identify where a variance from goals is occurring and its cause and what should be done to correct it. This becomes more difficult when dealing with joint performance goals. For example, an unfavorable variance from the $3 per hundredweight standard used in Step 6 could be traceable to the transportation activity. However, an unfavorable variance from the customer service goal shared by manufacturing, marketing, and logistics would be more difficult to trace unless the information system was constructed with the systems concept as its base.

As a consequence, proper control of LOOPS requires an information system that can capture joint performance output and can help pinpoint the source and cause of variances from goals. With this knowledge, corrective action can be taken to prevent the variance from recurring.


While the preceding discussion on the development, implementation, and control of LOOPS sounds similar to that for budgeting processes, there are several distinct differences. First, LOOPS stresses participation. Those who will be responsible for the implementation of LOOPS must be included in its development. When this occurs, the implementers feel that they have "ownership" in the plan and will be more willing to work towards its achievement. Such participation must occur both vertically and horizontally. Vertical participation includes all parties from top management down through, in our example, each logistics activity; while horizontal participation is among the logistics activities, marketing, manufacturing, and logistics, and that among the firm, its suppliers, and its customers.

Second, LOOPS stresses communication, linkages for which must be established both horizontally and vertically within the firm and the channel. Although organization structure is an important element in performance outcome, communication is actually what ties together all of the parties within the firm and the channel.(10) This communication must be established and used in all three phases of LOOPS: planning, implementation, and control.

Third, LOOPS stresses education. Once again, education must be done both vertically and horizontally. Functional areas must educate one another on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats so common plans can be undertaken in response. Incumbent on functional areas is the necessity to educate top management in these four areas, as only then can corporate plans be formulated that integrate the functional areas into an integrated, optimized system. Upper management must also educate the functional areas on the goals of the company.

Finally, while budgeting has a long history and is accepted (although sometimes reluctantly) in most corporate cultures, the LOOPS process is neither. Making functional and firm barriers invisible and changing accounting practices to be more flexible will require significant culture change in some organizations. However, firms on the leading edge are discovering that a strict functional and firm orientation will not be a competitive advantage in the future. The management of processes that cross both functional and firm boundaries will be the approach for managing logistics with a quality focus in the future.(11) To be competitive, flexible logistics systems will require flexible information and accounting systems. So, LOOPS, like quality or JIT, is more of a change in the way the firm thinks than necessarily a change in process. Changing processes is relatively simple compared to the effort required to change thinking; however, firms and logistics professionals must rethink how they manage if they are to remain competitive in the future.


1 See, for example, Kamal E. Said, "The Human Side of the Budgetary Process," Managerial Planning (January/February, 1978), pp. 1-8.

2 See, for example, Frank Collins, Paul Munter, and Don W. Finn, "The Budgeting Games People Play," The Accounting Review, vol. LXII, no. 1 (January 1987), pp. 29-49.

3 Nigel F. Piercy, "The Marketing Budgeting Process: Marketing Management Implications," Journal of Marketing, vol. 51 (October 1987), p. 4-8.

4 James R. Stock and Douglas M. Lambert, Strategic Logistics Management, second edition, (Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1987), p. 713.

5 Srinivasan Umapathy, "How Successful Firms Budget," Management Accounting (February 1987), p. 26.

6 Peter Brownell, "The Motivational Impact of Management-By-Exception in a Budgetary Context," Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 21, no. 2 (Autumn 1983), p. 457.

7 Steven D. Grossman and Richard Lindhe, "Important Considerations in the Budgeting Process," Managerial Planning, vol. 31, no. 2 (September/October 1982), p. 24.

8 For a further discussion on control, see Robert A. Novack, "Quality and Control in Logistics: A Process Model," a monograph published in the International Journal of Physical Distribution and Materials Management, vol. 19, no. 11 (1989); and John T. Mentzer and John Firman, "Logistics Control Systems in the 21st Century," submitted for consideration for publication to the Journal of Business Logistics, (November, 1991).

9 Stephen A. Moscove, "Computerized Budgetary Systems," Managerial Planning, vol. 31, no. 6 (1983), p. 15.

10 J.R. Galbraith and D.A. Nathanson, Strategy Implementation: The Role of Structure and Process (St. Paul, MN: West, 1978), p. 2.

11 See, for example, Robert A. Novack, Lloyd M. Rinehart, and Michael V. Wells, "Rethinking Concept Foundations in Logistics Management," submitted to be considered for publication to the Journal of Business Logistics, (October 1991).

Mr. Novack, CM-AST&L, is associate professor of business logistics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802; Mr. Dunn is assistant professor of management, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho 83209; Mr. Young, CM-AST&L, is an independent consultant for procurement and international logistics strategy, Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601.
COPYRIGHT 1993 American Society of Transportation and Logistics, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1993 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Novack, Robert A.; Dunn, Steven C.; Young, Richard R.
Publication:Transportation Journal
Date:Jun 22, 1993
Previous Article:Customer-focused strategies for motor carriers.
Next Article:Liberalization of market entry for Norwegian regional airlines.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters