OP INION

AUTHORS
Tom Zunder
Dewan Md Zahurul
Islam FCILT

:0

I­

V1
~
u
o
u,

30

A new logistics quality standard:

is it necessary?
Quali ty is one of the most critical aspects for the strategic
management of se rvice firms such as transport and logistics
companies. How is it currently measured , and do we need a new
or modified logistics qual ity standard? Tom Zunder and Dewan
Md Zahurul Islam of the Freight Logistics Research Group at the
University of Newcastle upon Tyne discuss the question.

A standard is a docu ment , being a set of rules or
meth od s, de scr ibing definitive procedures, giving a set
of instructio ns for operations or function s, co nt ro lling
produ cts, se rvices, proce sses, production , etc. Brenn an
and Do uglas' argue th at th e stand ard sho uld be precise ,
relevant, re alistic and mean ingful to users. According to
ISIC', the role of sta nda rds is to provide requ irem e nts,
definit ion s, guide lines, cod es of best pra ct ice and
measureme nt method s. St anda rds are int imate ly
connected with qu ality and vice ver sa. Brenn an and
Dou glas defined a sta ndard fo r local govern ment service
as: 'an agreed leve l of service requ ired for a particular
purp ose ; a benchmark used for co mp et it ive ana lysis'.The
ISO 8402 - 1986 stand ard de fines qu ality as: 't he tota lity
o f featu re s and characteristics of a pro duct or service
t hat bea rs its ab ility to satisfy stated o r implied needs'.
 Q uality is o ne of th e most crit ical aspects for the Cou ntry analysis of first roun d De lphi panel
strat egic manage me nt of se rvice firms such as t ran sport 20
and logistics companies. C ustom er sat isfact ion and re
loyalty can be achieved th rou gh high-quality se rv ices 16

providing value for mo ney for the co nsumers th at are '-I

essent ial for lo ng-term survival and success.' Q uality is ~ 12
E 10

~ ;II. II ....
always re lative to a set of inherent charact eristics and a
set of re quireme nts . It may be see n as a question of
deg ree to w hich th e pro d uct o r service meets th e
custom e r's stated re q uirements. The Quality Manual (or I I I • I .. I .• I
Combined Tronsport' defines quality asan underlying part .~ r::- ~ 0 ,(.. M '6 ~ ~~ ~ ~, ,11" oS-'~ s» 'f" \' -D ('

of eac h product th at we identify as a se rvice; it is a

# '$:,<-
~i[ J' (I' ;;,,,,0 ,C'" R 9 '"l ",'" ,.f ,
?" <if ~ £' «,,« if" ~- v~ t-~ F ~ «o' ~ · 9° '
.l f .... ,.jO,#' 1 Y''" )1' 6'~ ,&'
"'~ +,v {§'"f;

j5' Q 'v..:;;.--r ~ '?-t" .,~'6

guarant ee of adhere nce to wh at was agreed upon. ~ ~

Inde ed th e con ce pt act ually goes o ne ste p furthe r ; Figure 1 Ceo- try
qu ality implies a mat ch between the custom e r's
req uirements and t he service-provider's technical
capac ity.' • EN 15696 :200 7 Spec ificatio n for se lf-sto rage se rvices
s
Mora sh et al argued that: 'Logistics quality is defined • ISO 900 I:2008 Q uality manage ment syste ms ­
in t erms o f pe rformance 'gaps' and is me asured as th e re quirements
ability t o distribute a product or mate rials in conformance
• ISO 1400 I Environ men tal management
with custo mer requirements and standard s: The ce nt ral
systems - re quirements wit h guidance fo r use
th e me of this research is to examine w het he r or not we
ne ed a new or modified logistics quality standa rd.To do The last two quality sta ndard s are general and are
this, we need to identify th e current lo gistics qua lity used by all sectors.We have doubt th at th e six ex isting
,:,t.

:>

standards. Accord ingly t he current research ident ified,
th ro ugh lite rat ure reviews and int erviews wit h the
stakeho lde rs , th e following qu ality standards fo r
tran spo rt and logistics services:
• EN 130 I I:2000 De clarat io n of quality pe rformance
in tr anspo rt chains
• C ENIT R 143 10:2002 Declara t ion and re po rting of
environ me ntal pe rformance in freight t ranspo rt
chains
• EN 13876:2002 Code of practice fo r t he provisio n
logist ics q uality standards may not be known t o the
~
stake ho lders, so we included th ese two sta ndard s t o o
.:.!
:>
com pare th e re sult w it h th e logistics quality sta nda rds.
Research meth od
A t wo- stage q ualitative res earc h approach was adopted,
1
31
using on line De lphi surveys. In t he first stage, existing
sta nda rds we re ident ified th rou gh lite rature reviews of
sources including journals, we b sites - for ex ample, of
differe nt standards de veloping organisation (SDO) - and
published literatu re and str ucturedinterviews w ith key

exp erts to ident ify and confirm t he key logistics quality

of cargo t ransp o rt services

standards. In the second stage , opi nions o n t he logistics

• EN 12507:2005 Guidan ce notes o n th e a pplicat ion
quality standa rds we re co ll ected from a pan-European
of EN ISO 900 I:2000 t o th e road transportation,
ex pert panel of differe nt types o f: stake ho lders - for
sto rage, distribut ion and railway goods industries
example , small and medium-sized e nte rprises (SME) vs
 OPINION

no n-SME; level of management - senior, middle, Convergence of consensus view

o perat ional;and servi ce providers - transport or logistics The overall aim of the study was to achieve a consensus
Vl operator, transport of logistics service user, research, among the participant s" which can be based on any
~
U policy-maker, The findings of t he first rou nd Delhi study arbitrary figure - for example, more t han 50% - although
o
u, are reported in t his research, some justification should be made, Some recent studies'
9,10 used the followi ng for mula for average percentage of
32
D elphi study majority opin ion (A PMO), wh ich w as used in t he present
A Delphi technique has been used for quantitative and research to find out t he cut-off point for a consensus:
qualitative data' , w hich is an approach to collecting, APMO ~ Aggcegale d _ a~" - Afg'egaIe d """'Il"'tY ""'&"",""""15 x 100
10taIopinion< expressed
aggregating and analysing the informed judgements of a
group or panel of experts on previously identified issues, Quest ionnaire
McKinnon and Foster noted th e advantages of Delphi A meeting w it h t he parti cipat ion of experts in t he field.
studies as t hat: t hey elicit t he views of panels of experts ; Including t he Union Internationale des Societes de
Transport Combine Rail-Rout e (IJIRR) was held in
t hey employ an iterative pro cess of summarising,
Vilnius, Lithuania in 2009, t hro ugh w hich t he first round
averaging and recycling panel member s' view s to
Delphi questionnaire was prepared, The questionnaire
encourage convergence on a consensus view ; panellists
w as piloted by competent volunt eer s and was designed
are given t he opportu nity to revise earlier answers in the to verity some logistics quality-relat ed ideas, to identity
light of t he general opinions expressed by the panel as a the elements of logistics quality standards, review
whole; information is collected by questionnaire and the usage of t hese standards, and t o examine whet her
does not involve interviews or discussion; and members the re is a need to develop one or mo re quality standards
of th e panel are guaranteed anonymity, for logistics,

Delphi panel according to the experience in logistics D elphi panel according t o t he field of work

34% 6,Cl%

• Transporlor klgtstLG se-vce

provder

- None
- I ·~ Yw-s ~<eJn:h orgatl""lkJ<l (ac. dem;c.
consultancy. ~ CMIre)
6-10 Yea"
10+

Trade assodanon

18.0%

616%

- !'ot,cy-maker ~t cjv;'

wvan1 etc.)

- Other

Figure 2 Figure 3
 The Delp hi stat ements were int ended t o elicit
opinions on:
• W ho should set th e logistics quality standard
requirement
• H ow logistics quality standards can be implemente d
• Th e role of the stat e in t he improvement logistics
service quality
• The necessity of free and fair com petition t o
improve logistic s serv ice quality
• The ro le o f quality contracts
• The necessity of a new or mo dified logistics
standard
There were also questions to examine th e existing
standards,relating t o:
• The ranking of exist ing standards
• W het her these existing standards are known to th e
expert panel or not
• The level of market usage of each standard
quality standard should be implemented by voluntar y
agreement between parties, rat her t han be mandatory
by state legislation. There was also consensus on th e
not ion that free and fair com petition is th e only way to
improve logistics ser vice quality.
There was no consensus on the notion th at th e
logistics secto r needs state inte rventio n to improve its
service quality or on the not ion that quality labels are
only a marketing t ool.
The panel w as divided on th e notion th at we can only
t ru st t r ansport logistics system th rou gh qualit y
contracts, and that there is a need for a new or mod ified
standard in th e t ransport and logistics field.
Importa nt elem ents of st an dards to e nsu re lo gisti cs q uality
Elements of standards Ranking
Individual servi ce quality provisions/crit eria I
Q uality management along supply chain 2
Q uality contract betwe en provider and user 3
Standand combined tran sport product 4

Samp le Qualit y management along transport corrid ors 5

The online surv ey took place from 15th Januar y to 15th
March 20 I 0 among some 200 experts, O ne hundred
part icipants took par t in the first rou nd of which 90 are
valid: 45.5% senior; 40% middle and 14.5% operat ional
management. Of t hem, 61% have more than 10 yeat-s'
experience, 59% belong t o SMEs and 40% are tr ansport
or logistics serv ice providers - see Figures I. 2 and 3.
The Delph i panel is highly dominated by the
N et herlands, th e UK, Belgium, Get-many and A ustri a,
probably due to the fact that t hese countri es have
strong ro les in logistics in Europe, and are proact ive in
t rade associations - most responses from Belgium were
from t rade associations represent ing the whole of
Europe - and research activiti es. Th e dominance may
not be prob lemat ic, if the panel has exten sive and long
experience of t he sector and as such can be seen as
qualified experts.
First ro un d find ings
The De lphi panel show ed consensus on the idea that
logistics quality standand requirement should be set or
developed by th e market, in contra st to by t he regulator
or government. There was consensus t hat t he logistics
St andards of professional competence 6
Standardisation in segments of the supply chain 7
Q uality labelling 8
->t:
Table 1 :l
~
o
..,;,
Th e stat ement s or not ion t hat have achieved
consensus will not be included in t he second round
study.The statements that did not achieve consensus w ill
be included in t he secon d roun d question naire.
1
33
However;input and feedback from th e Delphi panel will
be included. It is one of the novelt ies of Delphi study
th at th e Delphi panel generates new noti ons or ideas
t hat are explored in the subsequent .r?und.
Findings using non -APMO methods
Apart from t he Delphi stateme nt s, th e survey included
some questions that designed to be analysed by ot her
methods. Table I shows the eight element s of logistics
quality standards th at are ranked by the panel, wit h I
represent ing the highest and 8 th e lowest. The study
found that individual service quality provision/criteria
was t op and quality labelling was at th e bottom.

Pe rce nt age of t he pane ll ist s aw are o f th e e xist ing sta ndards

Existing quality standards Total opinion Known, % Unknown. %
Logistics quality standards
EN I 30 I I :2000 Declaration of qualit y perfor mance in transport chains 80 20 00 80.00
CENITR 14310: 2002 Declaration and reporting of environ mental performance 79 17.72 82.28
in freight tran sport chains
EN 13876:2002 Code of practice for the provision of cargo t ransport services 76 14.47 85.53
EN 12507:2005 Guidance not es on the applicatio n of EN ISO 900 I:2000 t o t he 80 38.75 6 1.25
ro ad tran sportation, storage. distribution and railway good s industries
EN 12798:2006 Qu ality management system requirements to supplement 80 4 1.25 58.75
EN ISO 900 I for th e t ransport of dangero us goods wit h regard to safety
EN 15696:2007 Specificat ion for self-storage serv ices 78 7.69 92.31
General quality standards
ISO 900 I :2008 Q ualit y management systems - requirements 81 82.72 17.28
ISO 1400 I Environmental management systems - requirements w it h guidance for use 83 67.47 32.53

Table 2
 OPIN ION
,

A total of eight quality standards were examined, of Conclusion

w hich six we re internat ional.The study found t hat out of
t he six logistics quality standards,two - EN 12507: 2005
Guidance notes on the applicat ion of EN ISO 900 1:2000
t o th e road t ransportation, storage, distribut ion and
railway goo ds industries, and EN 12798: 2006 Q uality
management system - are known - see Table 2 - at a
higher level than the ot hers. T hey also have a
comparat ively higher usage as well. It is impo rta nt to
note that the most of the Delphi panel did not
know t hese six logistics quality standards. O n t he othe r
hand, the general st andards are far more wid ely
known and have a much higher usage th an th e logistics
standards. ISO 900 I, w hich is a general-purp ose quality
management standard, and ISO 14000 I, which is an
environ mental management standard, are w idely know n,
used and rat ed highly.
From t he findings of th e research, we conclude th at
although there are some logistics quality standards that
were developed over t he period of 2000 th rough 2007,
th ey are not wid ely known or used by t he stakeholders
and, by inference, t he logistics sector The panel suppo rts
th e vo luntary and market -led development and
adoption of logistics quality standards. The panel was
divided on t he centra l issue of w hether or not we need
a new or modified standard, but has provided some
impo rtan t feedback.
Before suggesting any new or modified logistics
quality standards, further examination of t he uti lity and
relevance of t he existing standards wi ll examine by
experts, policy-makers and the t ransport and logistics
secto r: Fo r thi s, a second round study w ill be reported.

c
a
e­
~
w
III
o
t­
v
V1
::>
u
o
u...

34

About the author

Tom Zunder is a member of Freight Logistics Research Group, Univer sity of N ewcastl e upon Tyne.

Dewan Md Zahurul Islam FCiLT is Freight Logistics Ac ademic and Researcher at t he N ewRail Centr e for Railway

Research, N ewcastle University. For corr espondence on t his research, contact: Dewan Md Z ahurul Islam.

Tel: 0 19 I 22 2 3972. Email: dewan.islam@ncl.ac.uk

References
I . BR N N A N , C and DOUGLAS,A , 'D eveloping a process model for standard setting in local government
services', in Managing SERICE Quality,Vol 8, No 4, 1998
2. 'Int egrat ed Serv ices in th e Interm odal Chain (ISIC)', final report Task D Improving quality of interm odal
te rminals, Rapp Trans AG for EC DG T REN, 2005
3. RO BLEDO, M A.'Measuring and managing ser vice qualit y: int egrating customer expect at ions', in Managing
Service Quality, Vol I I, N o I , 200 I
4. UIC - Internat ional Un ion of Railways, 200 I , Quality Manual (or Combined Transport, www. uic.org
5. MORAS H, E A, DROGE. C and VICKERY, S, 'Bou ndar y-spanning interfaces between logist ics, pro duction,
market ing and new pro duct development', ljPDLM , MCB University Press,Vol. 27 No 5/6, 1997
6. W ELLINGTON, J, Educational Research - Contemporary Issues and Practical Approaches, UK: Contin uum,
repri nted, 2003
7. MC KINN ON and FOSTER, European Logistical and Supply ChainTrends: / 999-2005,TRILO G Project, full repor t
of the D elphi 2005 Surve y
8. SALDAN HA, J and GRAY, R, T he Potential for Brit ish Coastal Shipping in a Multi modal Chain', Maritime Policy
and Management.Vol 29, No 1.2002
9. HWAN G, K S, 'A Comparat ive St udy of Logist ics Serv ices in t he Co ntainer Liner Shipping Mar-ket in the UK
and South Korea', unpublished t hesis for PhD. Business Schoo l, Univer sit y of Plymo uth, 2004
10. ISLA M. D 11 Z , D IN W O ODIE, J and RO E, M,'Promot ing development through mult i-modal freight t ransport
in Bangladesh', Tmnsporl Reviews,Vol 26, No 5, 2006

Further information
For more inform ation on t he issues raised in thrs article, w hy not join our Benchmarking Forum in our Supply
Chain Pro fessional Secto r? See our web site www.ciltuk.org.uk for more details.