|
Editorial: Hardnosed Science
The Supply-Chain Council, a global non-profit industry group dedicated to supply chain education and research, recently released Version 6.1 of its “Supply-Chain Operations Reference-model” (SCOR) - the eighth revision since the model was introduced in 1996. The SCOR model has been developed by the Council as a diagnostic tool for supply chains that gives users a standardized model of supply-chain best practices and enables them to understand and improve their supply chains and communicate those changes as required. It can also be used as a benchmarking tool.
Over its previous releases, the SCOR model has evolved to be more inclusive, according to Melinda Spring, the Council's communications director. When I spoke with her a few weeks ago, Spring told me that when the SCOR model was introduced it was quite closely geared towards the manufacturing market, not surprising considering that when the Council was launched in 1996 one of the co-organizing bodies was AMR Research, which has a decidedly manufacturing-focused orientation.
“The SCOR model was more manufacturing-oriented two or three revisions back,” Spring told me. “That would be versions 4.0 and 5.0, about three years ago. Since then it has been adapted to the point that it's now for the service industries as well.” In fact version 5.0 expanded to include service transactions as well as physical material transactions: the change was made to better reflect the increasing trend to bundle goods and services. The main changes in version 6.1 are in the areas of return processes, and the updating of best practices. The Council's web site suggests that version 7.0 of the model is likely to be revised in the near future to include post-delivery customer support. Spring says that the Council plans to release 7.0 sometime in the fall.
Member feedback from the Council's 800-odd corporate members around the world is the primary driver, but despite the democratic input the entire review and revision process is very rigorous. The change process is overseen by the Council's Technical Development Steering Committee (TDSC), a body whose elected membership is divided into five subcommittees. The TDSC must approve each proposed change, and as Spring says “it's extremely hard to get things through that committee."
We haven't devoted very much attention to the SCOR model in these pages, and it's something I'd like to focus on a bit more in future. The model is extremely detailed and, from what I was able to see of it at the Council's web site, makes for some tough, technical reading in places. But what struck me particularly was that while the SCOR model is maintained and developed at a technical level that might make it seem pretty much the stuff of theory, direct user experience with the model is highlighted in an exhaustive list of real-world case studies accessible at the Council's web site. (Council membership gets you electronic access to the full text of the model as well as the case studies, but it costs a hefty US$2000.)
The case studies seem to be drawn from user companies around the world, and judging by the large file sizes involved, probably compete with their high-level business-school and academic counterparts in terms of detail.
By the way, even if you're not a member you can still get a lot of useful information at the Council's web site. Have a look at www.supply-chain.org.
Andrew Brooks
Editor
|
