You are on page 1of 7

Int. J.

Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Int. J. Production Economics


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe

SCOR templateA simulation based dynamic supply chain analysis tool


Fredrik Persson
Department of Science and Technology, Link
oping University, 601 74 Norrk
oping, Sweden

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 16 July 2008
Accepted 25 September 2010
Available online 13 October 2010

The supply chain operations reference model model (SCOR) is developed and maintained by the Supply
Chain Council (SCC). The SCOR model is a reference model that can be used to map, benchmark, and
improve supply chain operations. SCOR template is a simulation based analysis tool, developed to capture
the dynamics of supply chain operations. The rst version of the SCOR template was presented in a
previous article by Persson and Araldi (2009). Since the nalisation of the rst article concerning the SCOR
template, a second version of the SCOR template has been constructed and tested in at a case company;
Alfa Laval at Ronneby, Swedena manufacturer of heat exchangers. Version 2 of the SCOR template is
more complete than the previous version. More metrics were introduced and the return processes
included. Emphasis has been on making supply chain analysis simple with the introduction of a new
building blockthe metric module. The case study at Alfa Laval has been based on data from a value
stream mapping (VSM) and aimed at comparing different scenarios in the production networks for one
specic product. The results of the comparison are one of the pieces of data that the company managers
will use when deciding where to allocate production resources in the international production network.
& 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Simulation
SCOR
Arena
Supply chain
Supply network

1. Introduction
A supply network (supply chain) is a complex set of arcs and
nodes, interconnected by information ows, material ows, and
cash ows (Herrmann et al., 2003). Supply chain management is
the attempt to bring order into this complex system. To be able to
manage a supply network, there is a need for knowledge about the
network and the business aspects of network operations.
Quantitative tools for analysing complex systems like supply
networks such as optimisation, simulation, and decision theory,
have been used for some time to gather knowledge of system
behaviour. Many of the supply chain models found in the literature
are models used for optimisation. These models answer questions
about plant location, product mix, choice of technology, means of
distribution, inventory planning and control, choice of vendors,
conguration, and reverse logistics; see Goetschalckx et al. (2002),
Shapiro (2001), Fandel and Stammen (2004) for extensive work on
supply chain optimisation models. Optimising the performance of
each participant in a supply network is important, but for
improving the overall performance of a network you need
simulation (Herrmann et al., 2003). Simulation of complex
systems such as supply network contains a rich description of
the system, which can clarify the interpretation of results and
improve understanding or cause and effect relationships in a way
that can be hard to obtain in optimisation (Barnett and Miller,
2000).

E-mail address: fredrik.persson@liu.se


0925-5273/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.09.029

Simulation, as a generic technique, has been identied as a


suitable tool for the analysis of complex and dynamics systems
such as supply networks (Towill, 1991). Supply chain simulation is
often carried out in general purpose simulation software as
reported in Persson (2003) or using special purpose analysing
tools as reported in Dong et al. (2006). The use of a standardised
reference model such as the SCOR model in supply chain simulation
would allow for quicker model building and introduce
understandable processes and metrics, already dened in the
SCOR model (Albores et al., 2006). The supply chain operations
reference model (SCOR) is a reference model used as a tool to map,
benchmark, and develop the operations of supply chains (SCOR,
2006; SCC, 2008). SCOR provides companies with a basic process
modelling tool, an extensive benchmark database, and guidelines
on how to measure the supply chain operations. However, SCOR is a
static tool that does not include any possibilities to do dynamic
analyses. In supply chain simulation it is always interesting to
analyse lead times and lead time variability, delivery accuracy and
delivery speed, and to locate bottlenecks. Simulation tools that are
based on the SCOR model is however no new concept. Herrmann
et al. (2003) reports on the use of the SCOR model combined with
discrete event simulation. Their goal was to create supply chain
simulation models using the SCOR model and thus, create reusable
components in general purpose discrete event simulation software.
The e-SCOR software suite from Gensym (2008) is a simulation tool
based on the SCOR model. The e-SCOR software works as a building
tool for modelling using the SCOR processes and at the same time it
allows for a dynamic simulation analysis of the modelled system.
Barnett and Miller 2000) reports on the use of e-SCOR in a simple

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

case study. Modelling in e-SCOR is carried out with a drag and drop
functionality and allows for user modied building blocks. The eSCOR simulation model is coordinated with the use of the high level
architecture (HLA). HLA is a coordination mechanism used to run
several independent simulation models as one whole. Coordination
is carried out through a common event list for all models being

coordinated. See also Zulch


et al. (2002) for the use of HLA and
similar concepts in simulation.
Another SCOR model based simulation tool is the IBM SmartSCOR
(Dong et al., 2006). The SmartSCOR is a supply chain transformation
tool that incorporates both simulation and optimisation
techniques. Albores et al. (2006) presents an evaluation of
different modelling techniques based on SCOR. In their paper,
they model the same supply chain in Witness (a general purpose
simulation software), iGrafx process (a business process modelling
tool), and in e-SCOR. They nd that the use of a SCOR based
simulation tool presents an advantage over other more general
simulation tools. The advantages can be summarised as the use of
standardised processes and metrics, allowing for quick model
building and models that are easier to understand (for those
already familiar with SCOR). Disadvantages according to Albores
et al. (2006) with using a SCOR based simulation tool is the lack of
exibility and animation. There is also a risk that reality will be
altered to t the process denitions of SCOR instead of the
opposite. Di Domenico et al. (2007) present a simulation tool
that is based on the value chain operations reference model (VCOR).
In their work they started with a SCOR based tool, but found the
scope of SCOR too narrow since it does not include design aspects
and a customer focus.
This paper reports on the work to develop a simulation tool for
supply chain simulation based on the SCOR model. The SCOR
template is a set of predened SCOR compliant building blocks in
the Arena simulation software. In Persson and Araldi (in press) the
rst version of the tool was described and two tests of the tool were
reported on. The rst version was incomplete since it lacked
the SCOR predened metrics and some of the predened
processes. This paper presents the second version of the SCOR
template that contains all major processes and also a metric
building block used to extract simulation outputs during and
after a simulation run, the Metric module.
The reminder of the paper is organised as follows: Section 2
presents the SCOR model. In Section 3, the SCOR template is
described in detail and the development of the SCOR template
version 2 is highlighted. The fourth section reports on the case
study of Alfa Laval. Conclusions and an outlook for future work in
the eld of supply chain simulation are given in section ve.

2. The SCOR model and supply chain simulation


2.1. The SCOR model
The SCOR model is a reference model with standardised
terminology and processes (Meyr et al., 2002). The SCOR model
is made up of three parts, (i) a modelling tool that utilises
standardised processes as building blocks, (ii) a set of key
performance indicators (KPIs), and (iii) a benchmarking tool
where companies can compare their KPIs to other companies.
The SCOR model is also a methodology for improvements of a
companys supply chain. The SCOR model is being developed by the
Supply Chain Council (SCC, 2008). The SCOR model version 7 is used
throughout this paper.
The SCOR model also includes a glossary of common supply
chain terminology. Common denitions of key metrics ensure that
companies that work with SCOR use the same denitions and thus,
talk the same language.

289

2.2. Modelling with the SCOR model


The SCOR model consists of processes in three hierarchical
levels. Level 1 process denitions consists of the ve different
process types: Source, Make, Deliver, and Return for the information
ow and physical ow, and Plan to coordinate the other four (SCOR,
2006). The process Source contains the procurement of goods and
services to meet the demand of raw material, components, and
other services needed in production. The Make process contains the
activities that transform products to a nished state. The Deliver
process contains the transportation and distribution of nished
products to the companys customers. The process Return is
associated with the returning product to suppliers and receiving
returned products from customers. The Plan process balances the
demand and supply of products and resources in the other
processes.
At level 2 the process type level more details are introduced
in the SCOR model. At level 2, the model distinguishes between
make-to-stock (MTS) products, make-to-order (MTO) products,
and engineer-to-order (ETO) products. Each level 1 process is
divided into subcategories depending on the product. The Make
process (M) e.g. is divided into Make-to-stock (M1), Make-to-order
(M2), and Engineer-to-order (M3). Source and Deliver follows the
same terminology, with an extra process; Deliver retail products
(D4) in the latter. The Plan process contains the overall process Plan
supply chain (P1) and one planning process for each of the other
level 1 processes Source, Make, Deliver, and Return. The Return
process is actually two processes; Source Return and Deliver Return.
These two processes are divided into three sub-processes; return of
defective products, return of MRO (maintenance, repair, and
overhaul) products, and return of excess products. Together with
all of these level 2 processes, the complete SCOR model also
includes the enabling processes. Enabling processes are supporting
the other processes and denes most of the methodologies and
dene planning and control policies.
Level 3 process category describes the underlying processes
of level 2. It is implied by the SCOR model that the level 3 processes
are generic for all companies. As an example, the level 2
process Source stocked product (S1) consists of the sub-processes:
Schedule product deliveries (S1.1), Receive product (S1.2), Verify product
(S1.3), Transfer product (S1.4), Authorise supplier payment (S1.5).

2.3. SCOR metrics


The SCOR model denes two types of performance attributes
(SCOR, 2006). The customer-facing performance attributes are
divided into reliability, responsiveness, and exibility and
the internal-facing attributes are cost and assets. Each of the
performance attributes contains a set of metrics. As an example,
the customer facing attribute named Flexibility is measured by the
three metrics Upside Supply Chain Flexibility, Upside Supply Chain
Adaptability, and Downside Supply Chain Adaptability. Upside refers
to an increase in delivered quantities in the supply chain while
downside refers to a decrease in deliveries. Flexibility is dened as
the number of days required achieving an unplanned sustainable
20% increase in delivered quantities whereas adaptability is
dened as the maximum sustainable percentage increase in
delivered quantities that can be achieved in 30 days (SCOR,
2006). Each metric can be broken down to the lower levels
(levels 2 and 3) and aggregated from the lower levels up to the
top level (level 1). The customer facing metric Perfect Order can
work as an example. The level 1 metric Perfect Order consists of a
number of Perfect Order Lines in level 2, which in turn consists of the
level 3 metrics Product, Quantity, Date, Customer, Documentation,
and Condition. Each process in level 1, 2 and 3 contains a set of

290

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

metrics that can be used for process evaluation. Each process also
contains a list of best practises that can be used in order to improve
the metrics. Best practises are the methods and techniques used in
the best performing companies in that segment.
The SCOR model also provides level 1 metric data to be used for
benchmarking purposes (SCC, 2008). With this benchmarking
database it is possible to map a companys performance against
other companies.
2.4. SCOR methodology
The suggested methodology to implement a SCOR based working environment consists of four steps (Meyr et al., 2002). (i) Analyse
the basis of competition, (ii) congure the supply chain, (iii) align
performance levels, practises and systems, and (iv) implement
supply chain processes and systems. The second step (ii) congure
the supply chain, refers to the modelling using the standardised
processes dened by the modelling tool in the SCOR model. This
modelling is done from the top and down, increasing the level of
detail for each level of the SCOR model. Modelling is only done for
levels 1 and 2 whereas level 3 is generic and left untouched.
The SCOR model has been used as a tool for supply chain
improvements since it was rst dened in 1996. Since then, several
more companies than the original around 70 companies have
adopted the SCOR model and methodology. The SCOR model has
been highlighted in Sweden during the last couple of years and
several companies now adopt the SCOR model in their operations,
see SCC (2008) for a list of member companies.
2.5. Supply chain simulation using SCOR
To use the SCOR model in a simulation study of a supply chain
can simplify the modelling and shorten the time to complete the
study. The benets of using SCOR in supply chain simulation (SCS)
are many. This sub-section will give some insights in some of the
benets. Material, information, and cash ows must be handled in a
supply chain. In conventional SCS, the different ows need to be
separated and dealt with in the model. In SCOR the ows are already
separated in the different SCOR processes. The level of detail in the
supply chain often introduces difculties. In SCS the model need to
handle different levels of detail. Data can be gathered in different
levels of detail and all data must be merged in the model. In SCOR,
data are gathered at predened levels. Also, data are scalable
through the aggregate functionality in SCOR. The validation of
SCS models is often extensive, mostly due to the problem with
different levels of detail, and the fact that supply chain metrics are
not distinctively dened. The use of the SCOR model allows for
comparisons with real data that is dened in the same way as
simulation outputs, thus making validation a simpler task. The same
problems occur in data collection. The SCOR model and all data that
the SCOR model provide is a valuable source for simulation
modelling. The benets of using SCOR, together with the already
referred benets reported by Albores et al. (2006), shows that a
SCOR based simulation tool will be very valuable to industry.

3. The tool should allow for more detailed modelling of selected


parts of the supply chain, should a company want it.
4. The tool should be based on simulation software that is available
to industry and the industrys rst choice.
The progress of the SCOR template project can be viewed in
Table 1. Versions 1 and 2 is already nalised and version 3 is on the
way. The SCOR template has been built on the general purpose
simulation software Arena that allows building, verifying, and
analysing simulation models. The discrete event simulation
software Arena is often used in academics due to the extensive
documentation that follows with the software.
The objective with the SCOR template is to create an easy to use,
graphical interface for simulation modelling, and analysis of supply
chains. Using graphics, easy drag and drop functionality and a set of
predened generic building blocks (the template), SCOR template
realize many of the shortcomings reported earlier with other SCOR
based simulation tools. The possibility to model parts of the supply
chain in a much higher level of detail is the kind of functionality
that makes the SCOR template a exible tool. The template also
utilises the symbols and terminology of the SCOR model. In this
way, the user of the SCOR template only needs to master the SCOR
model and terminology and only need a limited experience in the
use of the Arena software. The Arena software also provides the
user with all the common features of simulation software such as
extensive animation and the possibility to add details in the supply
chain if needed. The possibility to exchange the process produce
and test in the SCOR template, as reported in Persson and Araldi
(2009), with a model representation (in any level of detail and of
unlimited size) also handles the cases when the scope of SCOR
process denitions simply is too narrow. This feature can also help
in the cases where the SCOR process denitions not really t reality.
Still, there is one shortcoming reported by Di Domenico et al.
(2007) that the SCOR template does not address is the lack of design
aspects and customer focus. Since SCOR simply is a supply chain
operations model, neither design aspects nor customer focus is
incorporated. Work within the SCC (2008) is addressing those
issues and the design chain operations reference model (DCOR) is
released and the customer chain operations reference model
(CCOR) is on the way. However, this is not in the focus in this paper.
3.1. Template structure
A template in Arena is composed of simulation building blocks
called modules. The SCOR template version 2 has thirteen modules.
These are; Plan source (P2), Plan make (P3), Plan deliver (P4), Source
stocked product (S1), Source make-to-order product (S2), Make-tostock (M1), Make-to-order (M2), Deliver stocked product (D1), Deliver
make-to-order product (D2), Source Return Defective Product (SR1),
Deliver Return Defective Product (DR1), the modules Metric and
Supply chain resources, which is a data collection module and a data
module that shows the list of the resources of the supply chain
Table 1
Project progress.

3. SCOR template

Objective

Version 1

Version 2

Version 3

The development of the SCOR template is based on four


objectives set up at the start of the development of version 1:

1. SCOR
compliant

1. The tool should be compliant with the SCOR model regarding


processes in level 2 and metrics in levels 1 and 2.
2. The tool should be easy to use so that it would take a company
(already working with SCOR) less than 20 min to get a simulation model running.

2. Ease of use
3. Detailed
modelling
4. Simulation
software

Processes, S1, S2,


M1, M2, D1, D2,
P2, P3, P4
included
o 120 min
Yes

Processes SR1,
DR1 included.
Metrics on level
1
o60 min
Yes

Processes S3,
M3, D3, P1, P5
included, level
1 and 2 metrics
o 20 min
Yes

ARENA

ARENA

Industry
standard

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

respectively. All modules can be found in the second level of the


SCOR model. The SCOR enabling processes are incorporated into
the respective modules. However, the template does not include
modules to simulate all return processes (level 2: P5, DR2, DR3, SR2,
SR3) and the production of engineer-to-order products (level 2: S3,
M3, D3). Engineer-to-order processes will be incorporated in later
versions. Fig. 1 shows the hierarchical structure of SCOR and its
corresponding level in the SCOR template. As an example, the
process Source and S1 are used for illustration.
Level 3 of the SCOR model has been used as a guide to develop the
logic of each module. The example of M1 can depict the hierarchical
construction of the SCOR template as well as the SCOR model. M1
includes sub-processes like Produce and Test (M1.3) or Package (M1.4).
M1 is thus constructed of corresponding Arena processes to be able to
simulate. Resources are dened with name and quantity and connected with each resource are operation times, the time a product or
component occupies the resource. This time can be entered as a xed
number or as a stochastic variable. If this simplied representation of
the M1.3 Produce and test does not t the scope and goal of the supply
chain analysis, there is a possibility to model an extensive manufacturing system parallel with the M1 module. The product ow is
simply rerouted to pass through the user specied manufacturing
system instead of the standardised M1.3.
The Metric module is a new feature in version 2 of the SCOR
template. In the Metric module, performance indicators are gathered and visualised for one product and its components. The user
decides which metrics to include (visualise) in the module by
clicking on the metric in the modules dialog box. Out of the nine
dened metrics in level 1 of SCOR, ve are modelled in the Metric
module. The metrics that are included are listed below. The level 1
metrics are explained using their level 2 metrics since the level
1 metric is an aggregate of the level 2 metrics.
1. Stock levels. Stock levels are calculated as averages over the
simulated time. Inspections of stock levels occur with an even
time interval that can be changed to t the goal of the
simulation. Mean values (with maximum and minimum values)
are reported at the end of the simulation. In the animated Metric

2.

3.

4.

5.

291

module, these data can be viewed during simulation as well. The


stock level can also be viewed as a time series. To do that, stock
level data are exported to a MS Excel spreadsheet.
Order fullment cycle time. This metric consists of the sum of cycle
times from the Source, Make, and Deliver processes. Cycle times are
measured as products ow through the supply chain. When a
product passes a certain process, time identication is stored as an
attribute in the product. When the product passes a process
further down the supply chain, a new identication is stored in the
product and the cycle time between these two processes can be
calculated as the difference between time identications.
Cash-to-cash cycle time. The level 1 metric Cash-to-cash cycle
time is the sum of the level 2 metrics; Inventory Days of Supply,
Days of Sales Outstanding, and Days Payable Outstanding.
Supply chain management cost. This metric calculates the supply
chain management cost that is the sum of several different cost,
namely; Cost to Plan, Cost to Source, Cost to Deliver, and the Cost
to Return (except the Cost of Make which is included in Cost of
Goods Sold). In this metric, management related costs (in all
processes such as Plan, Source, Make and Deliver) are given as
some xed costs and some costs that are dependent on the
number of products in the system.
Cost of Goods Sold. Here, cost of material, component sourcing
cost, and cost of the Make process is added up for each product.

3.2. Supply chain modelling


The modelling is done by dragging and dropping modules of the
SCOR template into the model window, connecting them to
indicate the ow of entities (products) through the modules (for
example: from M1 to D1), and then detailing the modules using
dialog boxes. The modelling activity follows the modelling done
with the SCOR model where a supply chain is represented by the
three modules Source, Make, and Deliver. The three modules P2, P3
and P4 handle the planning of the corresponding processes. Each
Source module has a related P2 module that plans its activities, as
well as each Make, or Deliver module is related to a specic P3 or P4
module, respectively. The user species in a dialog box of an

SCOR Hierarchy

SCOR Template

Level 1: Top Level

Arena Level
Not defined

S
Level 2: Configuration Level

Template Level

S1

Source Make-to-stock Products

S2

Source Make-to-order Products

S3

Source Engineer-to-order Products

S1

S2

(S3)
Not in version 2

Level 3: Process Elements Level

Arena Logic Level

S1.1

S1.2

S1.3

S1.4

S1.5

Schedule
Product
Deliveries

Receive
Product

Verify
Product

Transfer
Product

Authorize
Supplier
Payment

Fig. 1. A conceptual model over SCOR and SCOR template (exemplied by S: source process).

292

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

execution module exactly which Plan module will take care of the
planning in that process. This functionality makes it possible to use
different planning approaches for different products at different
parts of the supply chain.
Customer requirements can be modelled in different ways. A
factory (its P4 module) can receive three different types of customer
requirements, depending on its position, into the supply chain. The
orders for the factory closest to the nal customer of the chain can
be read from an MS Excel le (useful if historical data are available) or
be generated with stochastic values (for example: sampled
from a normal distribution ). The third way of receiving orders is
from the upstream factory in the supply chain, or rather from
the Source module that receives the product. The entities that
generate the material ow write the information of their attributes
or the value that the variables have in specic instants in an output
le. As a result it is possible to calculate SCOR metrics in the Metric
module.
4. Case study
To test the new developments in the SCOR template, a case
study was carried out at Alfa Laval in Ronneby, Sweden. Alfa Laval is
a global provider of specialised equipment, systems and services,
dedicated to heat, cool, separate and transport products such as oil,
water, chemicals, beverages, foodstuffs, starch and pharmaceuticals (Laval, 2008).
4.1. Supply chain structure
The supply chain analysis is part of a larger project reported on
in (Feldmann et al., 2007). One of the main product lines is chosen
to be part of the simulation model built with the SCOR template.
The product line was because of its interesting network properties,
being produced in factories in Europe and Asia. As input data, a
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) performed by Alfa Laval is used. Here,
data about capacities, operation times, set up times, waiting times,
etc. can be found and utilized in the simulation model. The supply
chain for the specic product consists of three manufacturing sites,
two distributors and several suppliers. See Fig. 2 for a conceptual
model over the supply chain.
The supply chain of the specic product starts with suppliers for
the main components and material that is used in manufacturing.
Steel and copper is sourced from several different suppliers to be
used in the component unit in Ronneby where a critical component
is manufactured (both to stock and to order). The critical component is sourced by the supply units in Ronneby, Italy, and China.
Connections are sourced locally for each supply unit. The US and
the aftermarket are supplied by distribution centers. The other
sales companies and end customers are supplied by all supply units
and not through the distribution centers.
With the SCOR template, modelling of the Alfa Laval supply
chain is a simple task. Processes are divided into make-to-stock

processes and make-to-order processes in the component unit.


Otherwise, the supply chain consisted of a straight ow of goods.
The use of Value stream mapping data facilitates the input of
numerical values in all SCOR processes. The VSM contributed
largely to the data requirements needed to build the supply chain
simulation model using the SCOR template. As can be seen in Fig. 3,
time data for different SCOR processes could be collected directly
from the VSM. Also other data as reported on above was collected
from the data set provided by the VSM. When building the model,
only a few extra data needed to be veried by asking people in the
organization. The result of this modelling exercise in the SCOR
template simulation model is depicted in Fig. 4.
The component unit in Ronneby manufactures a critical component used in manufacturing of the end product. The manufacturing of the critical component is divided into one part that supplies
the Ronneby supply unit in a make-to-stock environment. The
other part manufactures the component in a make-to-stock
environment, based on forecasts. In the SCOR template simulation
model, this is modelled as separate processes for the two environments, see Fig. 4. The manufacturing process is carried out in the
same equipment. Therefore, the two separate ows in the
simulation model share the same resource.
4.2. Simulation results
The simulation experiments carried out at Alfa Laval are
designed to test different supply chain structures. Different routings between factories A, B, and C in Fig. 3 are tested and evaluated
with the goal to nd a routing that could handle new future
prerequisites. The analysis, therefore, was an exercise in what-if
analyses. In different scenarios, different routings was tested to nd
a feasible solution given future production levels. The result is one
of the several pieces of data that the company managers are using
when deciding where to allocate production resources in the
international production network. The VSM itself was probably
the largest piece of data that was used in order to nd internal
bottlenecks and improvements areas in the factories. The SCOR
template analysis provided the network view and a dynamic
analysis of the interconnected facilities. Numerical results are
omitted or distorted in this article due to reasons of condentiality.

5. Conclusions
The process of developing the SCOR template has gone through
several stages. First, a test model was developed to see if SCOR
modelling was feasible in Arena. After that, the development of the
SCOR template started and version 1 was soon ready to use. Two
case companies were chosen to test the Template; Ericsson, and
Autoliv. In Persson and Araldi (in press) this development is
reported on. The latest development of the SCOR template
version 2 and the test at the case company Alfa Laval points at

Supplier

Component Unit

Supply Unit

Distributor

Customers

Steel

Factory A
Ronneby

Factory A
Ronneby

After market

After market

Copper

Factory B
Italy

US market

US market

Connections

Factory C
China
Fig. 2. Alfa Laval supply chain.

Other sales
companies

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

Ronneby CU
P2

S1

Ronneby SU

293

Distributor

P3

P4

P2

P3

P4

M2

D2

S2

M2

D2

S1

S1

Italy SU
P2

S1

P3

P4

M1

D1

P2

S1

Distributor

P3

P4

M2

D2

S1

S1

Fig. 3. The Alfa Laval supply chain in SCOR template.

Supply

Supplier

Transport

Receiving

350.4 tu

Make

2978.4 tu
87.6 tu

Make

Shipping

Customer

700.8 tu

876 tu
36.5 tu

1401.6 tu

87.6 tu

Fig. 4. SCOR template and the connection to the VSM analysis (note that all times are time units, tu, with no connection to reality but with equal proportions).

some interesting improvement activities. Table 1 contains the


development of the SCOR template and an outlook to version
3. Going through the four objectives of the SCOR template it is
possible to comment on the results from this study and also
comment on what needs to be done for version 3.

1. SCOR compliant. Still, engineer-to-order processes are out of the


scope for the SCOR template. This must be corrected in version 3

since several interesting industries, such as the construction


industry, have a lot of engineer-to-order processes in their
supply chains. The remaining four metrics should also be
included in the Metrics module. The experiences from the cases
also highlight the need model network structures. Therefore it is
necessary to include functionalities for splitting and merging
product, information, and cash ows.
2. Ease of use. In version 2 it is possible to model a supply chain
(of reasonable size, say three nodes) in about 60 min. The bottleneck

294

F. Persson / Int. J. Production Economics 131 (2011) 288294

in modelling time is different formats of time data. This can be


solved by introducing different formats in the dialog boxes used to
feed the model with data. For example, resource capacity can be
specied as 200 units per hour or as an operation time.
3. Detailed modelling. In the Make process, there is a possibility to
model a complex process instead of the M1.3 Produce and test
that SCOR provides as the standard process. It is possible to
provide this functionality in other processes as well.
4. Simulation software. The current version is developed in Arena,
but there are several other simulation systems available that
contains the same functionality as Arena. It is more important to
nd a simulation system that is widely used by industry than to
continue with something else.
The case study at Alfa Laval provided many insights in the SCOR
template from the user side. Real supply chain or networks are
complex and often contains special features that are difcult to
model with a simulation tool that is based on SCOR. However, that
criticism comes back to the SCC and the fact that the SCOR model is
highly standardised and difcult to use in all instances.

Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank the students Lars Bryngelsson,
Andreas Korhonen, and Andreas Magnusson for their invaluable
work with nalising the SCOR template version 2.
References
Albores, P., Love, D., Weaver, M., Stone. J., Benton, H., 2006. An evaluation of SCOR
modelling techniques and tools. In: Proceedings of the EuroMOT 2006 Conference, URL: /http://www.iamot.org/conference/index.php/ocs/9/paper/
view/2045/965S, Accessed 2008-01-09.

Barnett, M.W., Miller, C.J. 2000. Analysis of the virtual enterprise using distributed
supply chain modeling and simulation: an application of e-SCOR. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 352355.
Dong, J., Ding, H., Ren, C., Wang, W., 2006. IBM martSCORa SCOR based supply
chain transformation platform through simulation and optimisation
techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Winter Simulation Conference,
pp. 650659.
Di Domenico, C., Ouzrout, Y., Savinno, M.M., Bouras, A., 2007. Supply chain
management analysis: a simulation approach of the value chain operations
reference model (VCOR)In: Olhager, J., Persson, F. (Eds.), Advances in Production
Management Systems. Springer.
Fandel, G., Stammen, M., 2004. A general model for extended strategic supply chain
management with emphasis on product life cycles including development and
recycling. International Journal of Production Economics 89, 293308.
Feldmann, A., Olhager, J., Persson, F., 2007. Designing manufacturing networksan
empirical study. In: Olhager, J., Persson, F. (Eds.), Advances in Production
Management Systems. Springer.
Goetschalckx, M., Vidal, C.J., Dogan, K., 2002. Modeling and design of global logistics
systems: a review of integrated strategic and tactical models and design
algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research 143 (1), 118.
Gensym. 2008. URL:/http://www.gensym.comS, Accessed 2008-01-09.
Herrmann, J.W., Lin, E., Pundoor, G., 2003. Supply chain simulation modeling using
the supply chain operations reference model. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2003
Design Engineering Technical Conference and Computers and Information in
Engineering Conference, Chicago, Illinois USA, September 26.
Alfa Laval. 2008. URL: /http://www.alfalaval.comS, Accessed 2008-01-14.
Meyr, H., Rohde, J., Stadtler, H., 2002. Basics for modelling. In: Stadtler, H., Kilger, C.
(Eds.), Supply Chain Management and Advanced Planning second ed. SpringerVerlag, Berlin, pp. 4570.
Persson, F., Araldi, M., 2009. The development of a dynamic supply chain analysis
toolintegration of SCOR and discrete event simulation. International Journal of
Production Economics 121 (2), 574583.
Person, F., 2003. Supply chain simulation: experiences from two case studies. In:
Verbraeck, A., Hlupic, V. (Eds.), Proceedings from the 15th European Simulation
Symposium, Delft, The Netherlands, October 2629, pp. 399404.
Shapiro, J.F., 2001. Modelling the Supply Chain. Duxbury, Pacic Grove.
SCOR. 2006. SCOR Version 7.0 Overview, URL: /http://www.supply-chain.orgS,
Accessed 2006-01-10.
SCC. 2008. URL: /http://www.supply-chain.orgS, Accessed 2008-01-03.
Towill, D.R., 1991. Supply chain dynamics. International Journal of Computer
Integrated Manufacturing 4 (4), 197208.

Zulch,
G., Jonsson, U., Fischer, J., 2002. Hierarchical simulation of complex production systems by coupling of models. International Journal of Production
Economics 77 (1), 3951.