See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351457919

Improving logistics supplier selection process using lean six sigma – an action
research case study

Article in Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing · May 2021

DOI: 10.1108/JGOSS-05-2020-0025

CITATIONS READS

9 1,310

2 authors, including:

Huay Ling Tay

Singapore University of Social Sciences
21 PUBLICATIONS 216 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Huay Ling Tay on 10 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2398-5364.htm

Logistics
Improving logistics supplier selection supplier
process using lean six sigma – an selection
process
action research case study
Huay Ling Tay and Hui Sen Aw
School of Business, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore, Singapore
Received 31 May 2020
Revised 29 December 2020
Accepted 26 February 2021
Abstract
Purpose – Outsourcing logistical activities have become a widely used approach for firms to avoid high
fixed costs and heavy investment requirements and to achieve competitive advantages. Lean six sigma (LSS)
has been accepted globally across sectors as a management strategy for achieving process excellence. The
purpose of this paper is to feature the application of LSS for improving the supplier selection process (SSP) of
outsourced logistics services in a multinational health-care company.
Design/methodology/approach – This study is based on an action research case study conducted on
the SSP of the freight and distribution department in a multinational health-care company. This paper reports
on the application of the LSS define-measure-analyze-improve-control (DMAIC) approach for reducing
supplier selection lead time.
Findings – The study features a real-world case study of the LSS DMAIC application to improve the
supplier selection process of a large health-care company. The key issues that were identified are lack of
information visibility, top-down changes and unclear communication lines. To counteract these three root
causes, the lean six sigma techniques that are implemented are the 5S, stakeholder analysis and standard
operating procedure.
Research limitations/implications – This research provided empirical evidence of how practical
challenges in SSP can be managed with the use of LSS. It further proposed plausible solutions for
reducing and sustaining improved outcomes. As the study is limited to one case, the validity of the
results can be improved by including more organisations and more case studies from other similar
organisations.
Originality/value – Research in supplier selection processes rarely links continuous improvement
ideology such as LSS to support strategic selection and procurement of logistics services. This paper could
serve as a resource for both practitioners to derive useful implications and to academicians as it contributes to
the LSS body of knowledge for further theory testing.

Keywords Procurement, Lean six sigma, Action research, Logistics service providers, Both,
Supplier selection process
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction
Outsourcing is a common approach for organisations to focus on their core competencies
while transferring a portion or all of their non-core functions to external organisations. To
ensure organisational competitiveness and cost efficiency, service outsourcing is important
to practitioners and researchers (Moschuris, 2008; Pemer et al., 2014; Ellram and Tate, 2015).
According to O’Byrne, 2019, organisations including large corporations, medium-sized
companies and even small businesses have a cost base with up to 90% attributed to supply
chain expenditure. Organisations outsource their logistics activities to logistics service Journal of Global Operations and
Strategic Sourcing
providers (LSP), who have the ability to operate a specific and the entire logistics processes © Emerald Publishing Limited
2398-5364
more effectively and efficiently, thus lowering the overall supply chain costs. DOI 10.1108/JGOSS-05-2020-0025
JGOSS Alkhatib (2015) highlighted the changing global trends, coupled with the emergence
of marketplace threats have pressured companies to re-examine their selection process
for external working partners, thus suggesting that there have been shifts in the
logistics outsourcing criteria and methods. If an appropriate LSP is selected, firms can
benefit in many different aspects such as improved service lead time, reduced cost,
increased flexibility and enabling focussed on their core competencies. Therefore,
having an effective supplier selection process for LSP is important as they determine
the supply chain performance of a firm which, in turn, affects the competitiveness of the
company.
Besides outsourcing to focus on core competencies, another reason to outsource can be
attributed to the changing customer demand patterns. To fulfil changing demand, firms are
putting greater emphasis to ascertain and ensure the quality of suppliers, distribution
channels and all associated activities (Gnanasekaran et al., 2006). The supplier selection
process (SSP), which is a primer to the outsourced activities is critical as it indirectly impacts
the company’s profitability and success (Busi and McIvor, 2008; Ware et al., 2012).
As many organisations attempt to systematically improve their service outsourcing
(Pemer et al., 2014), a more thorough understanding of the outsourcing and supplier
selection process is needed. Despite the importance of the topic, most studies have taken a
relatively theoretical focus, with limited process understanding provided (Moschuris, 2007).
In particular, Alkhatib et al., 2015 highlighted the need for the SSP to be updated, refined
and reflective of the changing environment. There also seems to be sparse research that
examines the SSP of logistics services in the health-care industry. Moreover, to our
knowledge, academic research has rarely derived implications from practitioner’s science on
improving processes of supplier selection in the procurement texts. Hence, this research
aimed to deepen the body of knowledge in the supplier selection process by applying Define-
Measure-Analyse-Improve-Control (DMAIC), a structured problem-solving approach widely
known under Lean Six Sigma (LSS) to improve the SSP of a multinational health-care
company.
This article reports our in-depth action research case study of a multinational health-care
company- HC that seeks to streamline and minimise the lead time of its internal SSP. The
following research questions were raised to guide our research trajectory in the execution of
the action case study:

RQ1. What are the factors that contributed to an inefficient SSP in HC?
The first research question aims to understand the current state of HC’s supplier selection
process while identifying possible root causes leading to the inefficient supplier selection
process.

RQ2. How can HC tackle the inefficiency in the SSP using the DMAIC approach?
The second research question aims to apply relevant DMAIC tools to address the root causes
and improve the supplier selection process.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 details the literature review on
the supplier selection process of logistics service providers and LSS, followed by a
description of the research methodology used for the study in Section 3. Section 4 presents
the findings and demonstrates the applications of LSS and relevant DMAIC techniques that
were used to address the two aforementioned research questions. Section 5 discusses the key
lessons learned, implications, limitations of the study and future research directions. The
paper ends with concluding remarks in Section 6.
2. Literature review Logistics
2.1 Supplier selection process of logistics service providers supplier
The selection of competent suppliers for products and services has long been regarded as
one of the most important functions to be performed by a purchasing department. For
selection
example, in one of the earliest purchasing texts, Lewis (1947) stated that amongst all those process
responsibilities which belong to purchasing officer, the selection of proper sources is likely
to be the most important one.
The contemporary business world is not only about the competition between companies
but also the competition between supply chains. Organisations are relying heavily on
suppliers for products and services. With this increased dependence on suppliers and the
growing complexity of products and services, an extended supply chain raises the
importance of having an effective supplier selection process. A supplier plays an important
role in the supply chain in terms of production cost and product quality. To improve the
competitiveness of the entire supply chain and respond quickly to the market demand, the
supplier selection process has become even more critical for most organisations to develop a
closer and long term relationship with their supplier to build an effective supply chain (Xiao
Xia et al., 2008; Fangqi et al., 2009; Saen, 2009).
An effective supplier selection process is needed to gather intelligence on potential suppliers
and select the best suppliers. When developing partnerships with suppliers and maintaining a
relationship with them, an effective supplier selection process is essential. An effective supplier
selection process helps an organisation to improve process capability, improve delivery
schedules, eliminate avoidable costs and improve overall efficiency (Zeng et al., 2008).
Wu et al. (2008) describe the supplier selection process as represented in Figure 1. In the
supplier selection process, an organisation must first determine the start and endpoint to
clearly define the scope of the activities involved throughout the process. In general,
organisations first analyse market conditions before deriving the appropriate supplier
selection criteria and guidelines. Organisation then evaluates and selects the appropriate
suppliers according to the supplier criteria and selection guidelines. Finally, a formal supply
chain cooperation agreement is established between the organisation and supplier to
actualise a working relationship. The supplier’s evaluation and selection information can
also be shared via feedback to open market, resulting in a knowledge and information
sharing database to be built over time to improve the suppliers’ capabilities and abilities.
According to Monczka et al., 2009, Companies that have a competitive supplier base can lead
to a long-term relationship with suppliers. Companies that establish a mechanism of long-term
supplier relationship management help them in the monitoring of the end-to-end procurement
processes and ensure performance improvement through competitiveness in cost, quality,
delivery and time. They argued that a process model should be clearly defined and transaction
efficiency in the process is generated by the appropriate use of communication tools.
Wade (2007) presented supplier relationship management strategy in his research. He
suggested that two parts are considered important in it that is supplier connectivity and
their enablement with the company strategy. These two factors play an important role in
e-procurement as they can guide employees in selecting the supplier and reduce costs of
sending purchase orders and other messages to and from suppliers.
With the growing importance of outsourcing and supplier selection functions, the purchasing
function has become a critical supply chain management component to ensure effective decisions
and executions concerning supplier selection to create a competitive edge in the supply chain for the
organisation (Sarkis and Talluri, 2002). Organisations that strive to enhance flow and reduce
variations in their processes through the implementations of improvement initiatives will stabilise
the process and ensure accuracy and reliability according to the expectations (Goldsby and
JGOSS

Figure 1.
Supplier selection
process

Martichenko, 2005). Conceptually, Lean Six Sigma is focussed on improving flow and variation
reduction. The next section provides a more thorough review of LSS as the fundamental
methodology to drive towards process excellence.

2.2 Lean six sigma for process improvement

LSS is a well-established methodology for improving operational efficiency and
effectiveness in organisations (George, 2003; Hahn et al., 1999; Pande et al., 2000). Snee (2010)
defined LSS as “a business strategy and methodology that increases process performance
resulting in enhanced customer satisfaction and improved bottom-line results”. LSS
methodology can be applied to reduce waste, process variability and errors while Logistics
contributing to improvements in process yield and capability in the business processes supplier
(Bendell, 2006).
Although LSS has its roots in the manufacturing context, it is proven to be a well-
selection
established process improvement methodology that has been applied across many sectors process
regardless of the nature and size of the firm. These include sectors such as health-care (Gijo
and Antony, 2014), higher education (Antony et al., 2018) and the food industry (Dora and
Gellynck, 2015). LSS is widely known because of its stepwise approach to process
improvement, called DMAIC, which is an acronym for Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve
and Control. The scientific approach to problem-solving lays out how a culture of effective
and lasting continuous improvement can be realised (Demast et al., 2016). The DMAIC
approach provides guidelines concerning project selection, as well as deployment, root
causes identifications, measurements and analysis, improvement and control strategies.
LSS can be used as a catalyst for small- and large-scale improvements in any business in
the form of continual improvement projects which leads to sustainable bottom-line results.
The case study organisation in this project has been suffering losses recurrently due to
expired contracts that were never addressed the right first time. LSS is a powerful choice in
situations like this where the solutions are unknown or root causes are not understood. In
addition, though the applicability of LSS in manufacturing and services has been evident,
there seems to be a lack of understanding on how LSS can be applied to improve the supplier
selection process.
In this applied research case study, we focussed on seeking a feasible solution(s) using
the structured problem-solving approach of DMAIC to enhance the SSP of HC. We followed
the following DMAIC steps in examining the challenges in HC’s existing SSP as
summarised in Table 1.
As the two research questions in this study focussed on the “what” and “how”, the use of
comparative analyses of existing cases based on literature to draw references based on prior
cases in the literature is carried out before proceeding with our field research to collaborate
empirical data from the field (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). We identified prior case
studies and literature that are relevant to our studied case – HC and highlighted the learning
and value in relation to our research questions. The focus is to critically review the recurrent
themes and issues identified in the literature that were relevant in terms of examining SSP
and/or have applied LSS as a problem-solving approach in the studies. We then compare
these cases to our focal case in this study to extract insights into our aforementioned
research objectives (Goodrick, 2014).
As shown in Table 1, the findings from each case literature review were referenced to its
respective research objective for analysis. For instance, Alkhatib’s (2015) study on the
impact of the market environment on supplier selection and evaluation process laid a
foundation for our understanding of the subject matter. Each article was critically reviewed

DMAIC steps

Define What is the problem? Does it exist?

Measure How is the process performing?
Analyse What are the most important causes of the problem?
Improve How do we remove the causes of the problem?
Control How can we maintain the improvements? Table 1.
DMAIC steps carried
Source: Authors out in the study
JGOSS to support the analysis of the research objectives and acts as a benchmark for our research.
Table 2 summarised the key insights that were identified based on a thematic analysis of
our cross-case and within-case analyses, taking each case paper as a stand-alone case.

3. Methodology
As this research aimed to provide a holistic understanding of the SSP of a health-care
company to identify potential areas for improvement, we conducted our field study using
action research over a period of 10 months. Action research is particularly suited as our aim
was to deeply examine the embedded challenges in the SSP of the studied case organisations
– HC to develop feasible improvement solutions. The action research approach recognises
the complexity of the case organisation’s dynamic socio-technical systems as the project
unfolds (Shani and Coghlan, 2019; Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002). It is designed to bridge the
gap between theory, research and practice (Eden and Ackermann, 2018).
The key characteristics of this action research include; the focus on solving practical
problems, the interaction between the researcher and practitioners who experience the
workplace from the inside, the formulation of improvement actions in the organisation and
the production of theoretical and practical knowledge (Pasmore and Friedlander, 1982;
Coughlan and Coghlan, 2002; Naslund et al., 2010). In contrast to a case study, action
research focusses on potential interventions to solve problems, while a case study method
provides a means for observing events, collecting and analyzing data and reporting on
results (Dubois and Araujo, 2007; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2014). In this study,
action research is selected as the most appropriate methodology because of the following
reasons: -
 Action research provides the researcher with direct access to the area of
investigation, namely, the freight and distribution (F&D) department that is the key
stakeholder in the supplier selection process of HC;
 Action research encourages participants to work directly with the researcher to
solve problems in the supplier selection process and also to implement and evaluate
the improvement actions; and
 Action research can directly improve the existing supplier selection process,
mitigate the risk of operating without formal contractual agreement with the
approved logistical services vendors and increase staff satisfaction because it can
bring about timely communication and greater transparency in the process.

The primary researcher is closely involved in the context of the study during the period of
this action research work. The background of the action research case that was studied is
presented in the next section.

3.1 Case study – background of health-care company

The context of this action research is a multinational health-care company, abbreviated as
“HC”, with the primary purpose of enhancing the health of people. The core mission of HC is
to ameliorate people’s well-being by extending its coverage to a spectrum of the health-care
system, which includes “prevention, diagnosis, treatment and home care”. Products
produced by HC include portable mesh nebuliser, sleep apnea masks and pain relief infrared
lamps. To date, the organisation has established itself globally with a presence in more than
75 countries.
HC outsources its logistics functions like warehouse and distribution by engaging
Logistics Service Providers (LSPs). The selection of LSPs is done through the procurement
RQ Author Paper title Key research results Value to our study

1 Alkhatib et al.
(2015)
Logistics service providers
(LSPs) evaluation and
selection: Literature review
and framework development
 Businesses are shifting focus to
their supplier base due to the
changing trends and market
environment
 Methods and evaluation criteria
are reassessed to determine if
they are outdated for the new
trend/priority
 Serves as a good foundation for understanding
the process of LSP evaluation and selection

Aids in our evaluation of HC’s current supplier
selection and evaluation process, in identifying
areas that are relevant or outdated for the
existing business priorities and market
environment

Ordoobadi A multiple perspectives  Multiple perspectives amongst  Recognising divergent perspectives of the
and Wang approach supplier selection stakeholders in the selection supplier selection process
(2011) process  Identifying possible factors that may hinder the
 Multiple models can be used to efficiency of HC’s supplier selection process
ensure comprehensive research

2 Furlotti A model of best practices for a  Designed a model that
(2014) sourcing process incorporates customers touch
so that feedbacks can be
gathered at specific activities
instead of throughout the
process
 Gained insight on how the process can be
streamlined
 Identified company that uses the same supplier
selection model
 Highlighted opportunity for further research for
the model

Secundo et al. Supporting decision-making in
(2016) service supplier selection
using a hybrid fuzzy extended
AHP approach
 Highlighted the limitation of a  Obtained insights on the importance of designing
single model a supplier selection process that reflects reality
 
Emphasised the need for a Open up possibilities of merging different models
model that accounts for to achieve the best fit for the HC
ambiguity prevalent in reality
(continued)

literature review
Summary of
Table 2.
process
supplier
selection
Logistics
 JGOSS

Table 2.
RQ Author Paper title Key research results Value to our study

 Combined AHP and Fuzzy

method for a comprehensive
supplier evaluation

Vasina (2014) Analyzing the process of
supplier selection. The
application of the AHP method
 Evaluated popular models from  Guides our study by identifying the fundamental
1970s till present in the supplier selection activities
 
Designed a model that includes Provides insights on how LSS effectively can be
fundamental activities of the applied to HC in our study
process

Haque et al. Six-sigma DMAIC Supplier  Success use of DMAIC for  Supports the usefulness and applicability of six
(2010) Selection Process evaluation of case organisation sigma tools in the process improvement initiative
 Reference on the possible best practices

Source: Authors
department as part of procurement operations before a logistics service contract can be Logistics
issued for service provision. To maximise the cost-savings from suppliers, the procurement supplier
team is accorded to minimise procurement spending, produce savings, encourage
continuous improvement initiatives, decide on whether a product should be made in-house
selection
or purchased to lower the total cost of ownership. process

3.2 Research design and data collection

This action research case study was conducted in two parts. Firstly, we thoroughly analyse
the supplier selection process to identify the root causes of the problem. Thereafter,
workable solutions to enhance the SSP were identified to minimise any potential disruptions
to contractual services due to lags in the existing SSP. This research aims to make use of
LSS methodology to guide the development of workable solutions that address the core
challenges that were identified in HC.
We collected both qualitative and quantitative data in the study. Primary data sources
include on-site interviews and surveys, primary researcher’s site observational notes and
focussed group discussions. Secondary data sources include archival records, SAP
Enterprise Resource Planning (SAP ERP) System records and relevant documents
pertaining to the existing SSP operational terms of references. Figure 2 shows the overview
of data collected in this study and the different key informants and information platforms
involved.
3.2.1 Quantitative data sources. For quantitative data analysis, data and records from the
SAP ERP system were collected and analysed to shed light on the core issues in the supplier
selection process of HC. We have chosen a longitudinal data analysis approach by analysing
the contractual records for the ten-year period from 2008 to 2019. The SAP records show a total
of 245 contract records were negotiated over the ten-year period from 2008 to 2019.
Our rationale for adopting a longitudinal data analysis across the ten-year period from
2008 to 2019 was to mitigate the data skewness due to the wide variations in spending
amount and contracting lead time that were accorded for differential product and customers’
needs. Substantial quantitative data volume over a ten-year period was collected to
minimise data skewness that might be more apparent in a shorter time horizon.
Furthermore, the ten-year time period from 2008 to 2019 also accounted for three important
transitions –sourcing and negotiation, contract drafting and alignment and contract

Figure 2.
Overview of data
collection
JGOSS implementation and expiry in the current SSP. These data include important details such as
supplier name, contract number, spending and important dates relevant to the SSP. The
focus of our data evaluation at this stage was to reveal embedded issues and the severity of
the process inefficiency, with an aim to identify specific activities that can be tackled to
improve the SSP.
3.2.2 Qualitative data sources. Besides quantitative data, qualitative data in the form of
semi-structured interviews and surveys were collected to shed light on matters relating to
human experience, informants’ instinct and opinions at the focal case company. This is
particularly useful in addressing research questions that seek to identify factors that were
affecting the processes, approaches or workarounds that were used to tackle issues and
challenges in HC. As the entire supplier selection process is largely facilitated by human
reasoning, qualitative data is needed for us to understand the real issues.
As the F&D department is the main facilitator of the entire SSP, semi-structured interviews
were conducted with 2 key parties to obtain more information to encourage discussion and
deeper conversations with the interviewee during the interviewing process. The Commodity
Manager oversees the entire project, directs the other stakeholders and makes decisions on
behalf of the company. The Commodity Manager is deemed a key informant in our interview
process as he is directly involved in the SSP from beginning till the end and is able to provide
specific knowledge and detailed information concerning the SSP.
The F&D executive is responsible for supporting the projects of the Commodity Manager.
In most cases, the executive is the most frequent contact point for all stakeholders as he plays
the role of a project leader while the commodity manager plays the role of a project advisor. As
the executive is the main facilitator of all activities of the project, valuable insights can be
obtained through an interview to understand his experience of working with all stakeholders
on the ground level. Furthermore, it allows the interviewer to clarify issues immediately when
in doubt. In all, two separate interviews were conducted with the key informants who were
experienced and knowledgeable about the end-to-end SSP.
Besides the F&D team, the other key stakeholder is the local business team of HC. A survey
was administered for two reasons. Firstly, considering that all business teams are located in
various cities across ASEAN and India, the geographical boundary is one of the reasons for a
survey instead of an interview. Secondly, although the business teams are the users of the
contracts negotiated, they do not have the full perspective of the entire SSP. Hence, a survey
was deemed as a more appropriate data collection instrument to gather their insights.
The survey was sent to a total of 17 potential informants who are directly involved in the
LSP selection process, out of which, a total of 11 responded. Although the sample frame may
seem small, the 17 key informants that were identified with the support of the management
were representative of the ASEAN business stakeholders directly involved in the LSP
selection process. Hence, the survey results were considered representative of the ASEAN
business team.

4. Findings
Our data analysis was carried out in two stages. The first stage included the use of multiple
data sources, our analyses of the semi-structured interviews and surveys were corroborated
with SAP data to understand the as-is state of HC’s supplier selection process. The second
stage involved a deeper evaluation of the preliminary findings from the first stage analysis
and application of relevant DMAIC tools to improve the supplier selection process.
Throughout these stages in the action research, the primary researcher is actively involved
in the coding, data analyses and verification of the findings and recommendations with the
relevant stakeholders in the SSP of HC.
4.1 Current state of health-care company’s supplier selection process Logistics
HC has seen growth in its global influence in the past few years. The supply chain networks supplier
of HC have expanded over the years with an increasing number of outsourced contracts to
LSPs worldwide. The company makes use of an SAP ERP system that is customised
selection
primarily for contract filing purposes. It allows authorised personnel to have access to all process
contracts and ongoing processes including expiring, expired and outdated contracts. Every
contract in HC’s SAP system requires a supplier selection process to be executed.
The supplier selection process (SSP) is typically triggered under three circumstances as
shown in Figure 3.
Firstly, the SSP is triggered when the alerts are sent to the F&D team of expiring the
logistics service contract. Secondly, F&D is alerted when the local business team requests a
change of supplier. This usually occurs when the incumbent LSP is underperforming or
requesting for an increase in rates. In such cases, F&D will be activated to facilitate the
sourcing of a new supplier. Thirdly, the process can also be triggered when HC’s business
team request a supplier for a new service scope. This arises when there are new products
that require additional storage space and distribution services.
Figure 4 shows HC’s current supplier selection process, the process is categorised into two
phases with the first eight activities in the sourcing phase and the last four in the contract
drafting phase. The SSP is considered completed when the contract is signed and implemented.
With the rising number of contracts, there had been increasing pressure on F&D to
complete each process efficiently. Although the most ideal scenario is for F&D to complete
each process within a short lead time to prevent a snowballing effect, this is not realised
most of the time in reality.
According to F&D Commodity Manager, HC encountered the issue of long lead time in
its SSP during the period of the year 2008 to 2019. The large supplier base together with the
shortage of manpower impedes the F&D from completing each SSP efficiently. According to
the HC’s SAP report (2008–2019), approximately 52.2% of contracts were signed after the
effective date of the contract. The difference in duration between the effective date and late
date of signature widely ranged at an alarming span of 3 days to 1.5 years. Of the 245
contracts that were signed during the period, 152 of them were late. Further analyses also
show that 52.6% (80 contracts) of the contracts have the contracting phase as the bulk of its
total lead time and 47.4% (72 contracts) have the sourcing phase as the biggest contributor
to its total lead time. These findings remain were relatively similar to the date when the
action field research was conducted.

4.2 Applying lean six sigma to examine health-care company’s supplier selection process
We applied several Lean Six Sigma tools in our analyses of HC’s SSP. The tools that were
used in the Define, Analyse, Improve and Control phases to address the research questions
are summarised in Table 3.

Figure 3.
Supplier selection
process
JGOSS

Figure 4.
HC’s current supplier
selection process

4.2.1 SIPOC diagram. From the onset, a review on all relevant components of HC’s SSP was
conducted using the SIPOC diagram. A SIPOC diagram is a Six Sigma tool that identifies all
aspects of a process to have a macro-level overview process. It follows the abbreviation of
the five categories in a process – suppliers, inputs, processes, output and customers and is
useful for defining complicated processes that are not well-scoped. Figure 5 shows a
systematic process flow of HC’s SSP from the identification of key stakeholders to end
beneficiaries of the final product.
4.2.2 Stakeholder analysis. At the define phase, an extensive review and analysis of the
stakeholders concerning the project were also carefully mapped to establish the specific roles and
responsibilities of the six key stakeholders that are involved in the process. Of the six stakeholders
stated, F&D, Business, Legal and LSP are the main players of the process with insurance and risk
management (IRMD) and quality assurance (QA) playing the supporting role. The roles,
responsibilities and key functions of the relevant stakeholders are summarised in Table 4.
 4.2.3 Analysing late contract challenges in a health-care company’s supplier selection Logistics
process. The SSP of HC as shown in Figure 4, is categorised into two phases with the first supplier
eight activities in the sourcing phase and the last four in the contract drafting phase. The selection
contract implementation is the last step of the entire SSP, the date on which the contract is
signed signifies the completion of the process. For HC, a contract is considered late if it is
process
signed and actualised after the effective date of its indicated contractual period.
In our analysis of the SAP records of 245 contracts negotiated from 2008 to 2019, close to
75% of the contracts was considered late. Of the late contracts, 52.6% of them had the
contracting phase as the bulk of its total lead time while the remaining 47.4% had
the sourcing phase as the greatest contributor of its total lead time. This suggests that the
contracting phase generally took a long time in comparison to the sourcing phase and
seemed to be a major contributor to the late contracts. As such, the focus of the remaining
analysis of the research objectives will be on the contracting phase
4.2.4 Factors contributing to the inefficient contracting phase of the supplier selection
process. To address the first research question, this section provides a descriptive discussion on
the current state of HC’s SSP by using the cause-and-effect diagram to examine the key issues
and the interrelationship diagram to shed light on the relationships of the potential causes and

Define: SIPOC map, stakeholder analysis and process map

Analyse: Bar charts, 5W2H, cause-and-effect diagram and inter-relationship diagram
Improve: Pilot checklist, brainstorming and 5S
Control: Team feedback session and communication plan Table 3.
Lean six sigma tools
Source: Authors used in the study

Figure 5.
SIPOC diagram of HC
 of HC
JGOSS

Table 4.
Roles and

involved in the SSP

six key stakeholders
responsibilities of the
Logistics service Insurance and risk
Stakeholders Procurement (F&D) Business Legal provider (LSP) management (IRMD) Quality assurance (QA)

Roles Leader/main Users of the Legal advisor of Users of the Risk advisor of contracts Quality advisor of
facilitator of the contract contracts contract suppliers
entire process
Responsibilities Responsible for Responsible for Responsible for the Responsible for Responsible for liabilities Responsible for the
sourcing and providing obligations and performing its coverage and protection quality of suppliers –
recommending LSP insights on the wordings in the obligations as of goods certification, audit,
market contract stated in the quality requirements
contract
Functions Most familiar with Most familiar Most familiar with Most familiar with Most familiar with
company with LSP legal requirements of warehouse and company insurance
requirements like performance and different cities trucking operation coverage, liabilities and
payment terms billing matters matters safety requirements
Represents the firm Primary decision Primary decision Primary decision maker
in negotiation for maker of maker of legal clauses of liabilities-related
rates/continuous operations- and final approval of clauses
improvements related matters the contract

Source: Authors
key issues in the process. The cause-and-effect diagram also known as the fishbone diagram is a Logistics
lean six sigma tool that focusses on identifying the potential causes of a problem. supplier
The authors and the key stakeholders led in the mapping of the cause-and-effect diagram
for the contracting phase. During the mapping, the team first brainstormed and identified
selection
the contributors to the inefficiency. Using the data obtained from HC’s SAP system, we process
identified that approximately 90% of the total contracting lead time was attributed to
excessive back-and-forth communication.
The potential causes indicated in Figure 6 were established through the quantitative and
qualitative data analyses and verified with the key informants in the study. A copy of the
semi-structured interview protocols and online survey questions that were administrated to
the key informants of this study can be found in the Appendices. The summary of the
potential causes and the verbatim sources are summarised in Table 5.
Although the cause-and-effect diagram is useful in organising the potential root causes of
the problem, limitations are undeniably present. Graphically, all possible root causes presented
in the diagram look equally important, thereby making it difficult for the users of the diagram
to rule out the actual root cause of the problem. To mitigate this shortcoming of the fishbone
diagram, we conducted extensive discussions with the key informants and multi-voting to
establish the relationships of the potential causes to establish the interrelationship diagram.
The interrelationship diagram illustrated in Figure 7 shows the relationships of the
potential root causes that were identified in the cause-and-effect diagram previously.
Through the analysis done in Figure 7, two effects and three root causes were identified. The
two resultant effects are – “Excessive back-and-fro communication” and “Inaccurate time
allocation”. The three key root causes are further discussed as follows: -
(1) Root Cause 1 – No proper system to ensure visibility amongst stakeholders:

Ordoobadi and Wang (2011) highlighted the importance of communication and knowledge-
sharing in a multi-perspective supplier selection environment. Unfortunately, HC lacks both
effective communication protocol and a knowledge-sharing system which hindered the

Figure 6.
Cause-and-effect
diagram
JGOSS Potential cause Verbatim source

Rigid structure Commodity manager and survey

Excessive back and forth communication F&D executive and survey
Unwillingness to make decisions, letting others sign off instead F&D executive and survey
High turnover rate Commodity manager
No proper system to ensure visibility amongst stakeholders Commodity manager and F&D
executive
Unclear communication lines Commodity manager and F&D
executive
Lack proper handover F&D executive
Top-down changes F&D executive and survey
Inaccurate time allocation Commodity manager
Not representative of the actual situation Commodity manager and survey
Existing contracts not up to date resulting in the need to backtrack and F&D executive
record changes
No proper transition from the physical filing of contracts to electronic F&D executive
Underutilised tools in SAP Commodity manager and survey
Tracking system insufficient to meet needs of the firm F&D executive
Messy storage from restructuring F&D executive
Varying LSP behaviour Commodity manager
Unresponsive LSPs Commodity manager and F&D
Table 5. executive
Summary of
potential causes Source: Authors

Figure 7.
Interrelationship
diagram
efficiency of the process. The absence of a proper communication and information exchange Logistics
platform prohibits stakeholders from sharing information and knowledge about the market supplier
environment and top-down requirements. This finding is further acknowledged by the F&D
executive who stated that the limited knowledge and understanding of the business
selection
processes hinders the supplier selection process as the relevant stakeholders are ill-prepared process
in dealing with the variant circumstantial and operational requirements of the different
contracts, which often resulted in a lengthy contracting lead time.
(1) Root Cause 2 – Top-down changes:

A survey was administered to the business team to understand the factors that influence the
efficiency of the SSP. Based on the survey responses, out of the 11 respondents, 9 indicated that top-
down changes was one of the factors that would influence the efficiency of the SSP as shown in
Figure 8. This result resonated strongly with the F&D Commodity Manager who further
highlighted the impact of top-down changes on the SSP. She supported her statement with a recent
incident, where HC’s global quality assurance team introduced a new contractual clause in all new
and existing contracts known as the “Quality Agreement” clause. It was made compulsory for all
new and existing suppliers’ contracts. The new clause requires all potential and existing suppliers
to fulfil additional quality assurance requisite before the official contract can be actualised. This
resulted in longer negotiations lead time before the contract can be officially closed.
(1) Root Cause 3 – Unclear communication lines:

Furlotti (2014) highlighted in his studies that miscommunication and lack of clarity often
delay the decision-making process, deterring parties from closing the projects efficiently. For
HC, F&D Commodity Manager expressed concerns about the complexity of communication
amongst stakeholders in the company. Almost all the survey respondents chose complex
internal communication as a key factor that hinders the efficiency of the SSP as shown in
Figure 8. The lack of clear communication lines as to who to approach for specific contractual
terms and clauses had often resulted in excessive back-and-forth communications and
repeated requests of confirmations amongst the stakeholders. Due to the lack of clear
communication lines, stakeholders tend to rely on the F&D employees for directions even
though the supplier selection process was intended as a team project in HC.

4.3 Applying lean six sigma to improve the supplier selection process
In response to the second research question, we identified areas where LSS can be applied
for improving the supplier selection process to drive process efficiency. To counteract the

Figure 8.
Factors that influence
the efficiency of the
supplier selection
process
JGOSS three aforementioned root causes, the LSS techniques that are implemented are 5S,
Stakeholder Analysis and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). This section details the
applications of these LSS techniques in counteracting the three root causes.
4.3.1 Establishing a proper system for visibility through 5S. To tackle the root cause
identified in this paper – no proper system for visibility, we apply 5S in the SSP. 5S is a
methodology commonly used to declutter a physical workplace. It is strategically designed to
construct an environment that encourages quality work and productivity through the
elimination of waste (ASQ, 2019). Although some may argue that the 5S methodology is
designed for a physical workspace, the concept and mindset behind the framework make it
adaptable in variant contexts for process improvements. As HC lack a proper platform to
promote visibility amongst the stakeholder, resulting in a long contracting lead time, 5S was
deployed as a guide to create an effective and value-creating system through the following steps:
Seiri (Sort) The first S represents Seiri (Sort), which focusses on distinguishing between
what is necessary and unnecessary in the process. Similar to the SIPOC diagram, we first
identify relevant departments that need to be kept updated in this SSP. In this case, these
key players will be the five stakeholders consisting of F&D, business, legal, IRMD and QA. Some
examples of information to be shared by the relevant stakeholders are indicated in Table 6.
Seiton (Straighten) The second S represents Seiton (Straighten) which emphasises
the need for all items to have their own designated storage. In other words, the information
that was identified earlier needs to be kept in a storage space in an orderly manner. One
electronic system that HC can leverage is Sharepoint which is already installed in the
laptops of all employees but are often underutilised. Sharepoint is a cloud-based
collaborative platform that integrates frequently-used applications such as Microsoft Office
and OneDrive. Apart from that, it has a Sharepoint Team virtual collaborative site
that is designed specifically for business purposes. The cloud-based collaborative platform
enabled online team collaboration and live communications, thus resulting in closer
teamwork amongst the different business units involved in the SSP. Seiton (Straighten)
concept can be incorporated onto the Sharepoint Team site easily in 3 steps. Firstly, create a
team site. Secondly, create tabs and document folders for each department involved in the
SSP. Finally, share the site with the stakeholders identified in Seiri (Sort).
Seiso (Shine) The third S represents Seiso (Shine) which encourages proactive efforts
to maintain the tidiness and order of the process. In this case, sustainable cleanliness in the
site can be obtained through responsible efforts by all stakeholders to file the documents in
their respective folders. Occasionally, the F&D executive can visit the site to conduct a quick
check on the tidiness of the site. The site will be considered in order if there are no irrelevant
documents uploaded and documents are labelled clearly.
Seiketsu (Standardise) The fourth S represents Seiketsu (Standardise) which refers to the
development of a set of standards for the process. This can be done by creating another tab, name it
“administrative” and place it at the front of all the other tabs. Then, create an SOP for the usage of

Stakeholders Information exchange

Freight and distribution Updates on change in company policies and requirements

Business Updates on market movements (e.g. inflation and increase in the minimum wage)
Legal Updates on changing legal requirements in the contract
Table 6. IRMD Updates/guides on company insurance and liabilities coverage
Information QA Updates on new requirements for suppliers (e.g. ISO certification)
exchange amongst
stakeholders Source: Authors
the site, covering the types of content and storage systems that should be adopted throughout. Logistics
Some suggestions for the content in the SOP include marking a document as important if it contains supplier
information that requires attention and indicating the date of the latest update. After which, the selection
SOP can be uploaded into the “administrative” tab.
Shitsuke (Sustain) Finally, the last S stands for Shitsuke (Sustain) which urges users to process
be disciplined in using the site. Stakeholders should be proactive enough to update the site
and team members on changes to keep the visibility within the team. Random checks are
non-restrictive and can be done by any members of the team during their free time.
Overall, 5S is able to address the lack of platform and visibility by establishing a virtual
worksite that encourages knowledge-sharing. As long as the stakeholders are committed,
this system that is implemented with 5S can be sustainable and beneficial for the contract
negotiation in the long run.
4.3.2 Establishing a communication guide using stakeholder analysis to address top-
down changes. To address the root cause of “top-down changes”, a stakeholder analysis is used to
identify the stakeholders according to their “levels of participation, power, interest and influence in
the project”. The stakeholder analysis model is shown in Figure 9, aids in categorising the
stakeholders according to their authority, involvement, interest and influence in the SSP. Of the 11
survey respondents, 2 suggested a better top-down decisions and communication to improve the
process. However, these suggestions are less feasible as it will be difficult for one to dissuade the
top-down decisions and pressure them for quicker announcements. Hence, a more attainable
approach is to manage the communication of top-down changes from F&D to the stakeholders
according to their position using the stakeholder analysis.
Stakeholders in the “manage closely” segment have significant power and interest in the
SSP. As they are highly involved in the process, communication on top-down changes to
these departments should be fast, detailed and comprehensive. On the flipside, stakeholders
who are in the “keep satisfied” category have high power but low interest. These are
advisors who have the authority to make decisions in the process but are only involved
when required. Therefore, top-down changes can be conveyed to them during audio or face-
to-face meetings. Finally, stakeholders who have low power and interest are placed in the
“monitor” group. Stakeholders will only be notified when there are changes within 6 months.
If no changes were made, no updates will be given.

Figure 9.
Stakeholder analysis
JGOSS 4.3.3 Establishing a standard operating procedure. Finally, to improve communication to
tackle unclear communication lines, we developed an SOP to resolve the root cause of the
unclear communication line. In this case, the inefficiency in the contracting phase was due to
the excessive back-and-forth which was directly caused by stakeholders’ uncertainty
towards who to seek advice. Therefore, to effectively deal with the issue, a simple one-page
SOP is implemented to guide stakeholders on the contact point for each category of contract
clauses. Besides being an individual solution addressing only the root cause, the SOPs can
be combined with the Sharepoint Team site to improve visibility across the organisation. An
example of the SOP is illustrated in Figure 10.

5. Key lessons learned, implications and limitations

5.1 Key lessons learned
In this section, we summarise the key learnings from the study and highlight the relevance
of our findings to the extant literature on procurement, more specifically, the supplier
selection process and lean six sigma. We have structured this section based on the findings
in accordance with the two research questions.
In RQ1, we seek to identify the fundamental issues and pertinent root causes that lead to a long
SSP. A cause-and-effect diagram was used to have an overview of the plausible bottlenecks
embedded in the current process of HC. The top three causes were identified at the end. An
interrelationship diagram was then used to connect the identified causes relating to the bottlenecks
of the current process. These tools helped to shed light on the three major root causes, which are:
(1) Lack of visibility where information is unorganised and not shared with relevant
stakeholders.
(2) Top-down changes which hinder the communication within the company itself.
(3) Unclear communication lines where the company is unsure of the main point of
contact and the main decision maker for each supplier.

These findings resonate with literature that calls for clear and more transparent
communication and information sharing (e.g. Wu et al., 2008; Monczka et al., 2009).

Figure 10.
Example of an SOP
In addressing RQ2, we suggested methods that can be used to tackle the three root causes Logistics
identified in RQ1. Firstly, the 5S method is proposed to tackle the root cause – lack of supplier
information visibility. It aims to organise the information exchange between stakeholders in a
shared drive so that information can be retrieved easily from a common platform. It also
selection
helps to keep all the stakeholders informed of the progress of the SSP, which will help to process
reduce the excessive time needed to clarify doubts during negotiation.
Secondly, for the root cause – top-down changes, stakeholder analysis can be applied.
This analysis identified those stakeholders who will be greatly affected by the changes so
that advanced notifications on changes to the procurement process can be better planned
and communicated. This helps to structure communication plans and to ensure the
appropriate information is communicated to the relevant stakeholders so that all parties are
duly informed ahead of the status of the progress of the SSPs.
Thirdly, for the root cause – unclear communication lines, an SOP can be implemented.
An SOP serves as a shared basis where every stakeholder is aware of the main point of
contact and proper communication channels. By having a common understanding amongst
all parties, the duration taken for the SSP to be completed will be shortened as information
can be exchanged swiftly and more accurately.

5.2 Research and managerial implications

In terms of research and managerial implications, the paper contributes to the extant
literature in the supplier selection process, procurement and lean six sigma by providing a
deepened understanding of how organisations can benefit from a structured problem-
solving approach, using the DMAIC methodology and applicable lean six sigma tools for
improving supplier selection process. For consultancies and learning institutions, this work
serves as a reference to drive streamlining in procurement, supplier selection processes and
drive operational efficiency in supply chains.

5.3 Limitations and future works

In terms of research limitation and future research, while this study provided a comprehensive
analysis and suggested improvements to reduce the total procurement lead time, the solutions relate
mainly to the contracting phase as we had focussed on the contracting phase as the main
contributor to the outcome of late contracts in HC. Future research could focus on examining the
sourcing phase to have a more comprehensive view of the service procurement process for third-
party logistics service providers. In addition, this research is limited to data from a single case
study, future studies could explore further contextual adaptations to ensure that the proposed
solutions are appropriate in addressing the dominant issues faced by other similar contexts.
Finally, the findings in this paper are based on a single action research case study. Also,
it is based on the supplier selection process in the F&D unit of a large health-care company.
Hence, there are limitations in extending these results to other types of industry segments.
Further studies need to be conducted in another type of industries including small- and
medium-sized industries to generalise these results.

6. Conclusion
While there has been extensive research on supplier selection and process efficiency, little
has been said on how best to manage the supplier selection process using continuous
improvement ideology such as Lean Six Sigma to support supplier selection and
procurement of logistics services. This study seeks to address this gap and identify
workable solutions that can alleviate bottlenecks in the supplier selection process.
JGOSS This action research study has taken to the well-established LSS as a synergetic approach
to investigate process-related problems by its structured problem-solving approach in the
SSP of the studied company – HC, a multinational health-care company that engages third-
party logistics service providers to manage its logistics activities on a global scale.
Two research questions were formulated to deeply examine the challenges faced by HC so
as to propose applicable solutions to improve the current supplier selection process. The first
research question aimed to understand the current state of the supplier selection process and
identify the key challenges faced by the procurement unit of the Freight and Distribution
Department of HC. This was established through the use of the cause-and-effect diagram and
an interrelationship diagram to determine the three dominant root causes. They are: – lack of
information visibility, top-down changes and unclear communication lines. The second
research question focussed on the application of the DMAIC approach and relevant lean six
sigma tools/techniques to address the three root causes to improve and control the SSP. To
counteract the three aforementioned root causes, the lean six sigma techniques that are
implemented are the 5S, Stakeholder Analysis and SOP were used to address the root causes.
This case study showcases how a systematic problem-solving methodology was used to
tackle a real-world problem – improving the supplier selection process of a large multi-
national health-care company, through the application of LSS. The case study highlights the
importance of having clear communication, information sharing and operating procedural
references in an organisation for improving process efficiencies. From this one successful
execution of simple projects in improving the supplier selection process, practitioners can be
encouraged to tackle tougher initiatives in the future.

References
Alkhatib, S.F., Darlington, R.I. and Nguyen, T.T. (2015), “Logistics service providers (LSPs) evaluation
and selection: literature review and framework development”, Strategic Outsourcing: An
International Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 102-134.
Antony, J., Ghadge, A., Ashby, S. and Cudney, E.A. (2018), “Lean six sigma journey in a UK higher education
institute: a case study”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 510-526.
ASQ (2019), “What are the five S’s (5s) of lean. [online]”, available at: https://asq.org/quality-resources/
lean/five-s-tutorial (accessed 3 November 2019).
Bendell, T. (2006), “A review and comparison of six sigma and the lean organisations”, The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 255-262.
Busi, M. and McIvor, R. (2008), “Setting the outsourcing research agenda: the top-10 most urgent outsourcing
area”, Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-197, doi: 10.1108/
17538290810915263.
Coughlan, P. and Coghlan, D. (2002), “Action research for operations management”, International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 220-240.
DeMast, J., Does, R.J.M.M. and De Koning, H. (2016), Lean Six Sigma for Service and Healthcare, 2nd ed.,
Beaumont Quality Publications, The Netherlands.
Dora, M. and Gellynck, X. (2015), “Lean six sigma implementation in a food processing SME: a case
study”, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 1151-1159.
Dubois, A. and Araujo, L. (2007), “Case research in purchasing and supply management: opportunities and
challenges”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 170-181, doi: 10.1016/j.
pursup.2007.09.002.
Eden, C. and Ackermann, F. (2018), “Theory into practice, practice to theory: action research in method
development”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 271 No. 3, pp. 1145-1155.
Eisenhardt, K. and Graebner, M. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Logistics
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32, doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160888.
supplier
Ellram, L. and Tate, W. (2015), “Redefining supply management’s contribution in services sourcing”,
Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 64-78.
selection
Fangqi, C., Huaiao, W. and Feifan, Y. (2009), “A multi-criteria interval optimization model for
process
manufacturing supplier selection using genetic algorithm”, proceedings of First International
Workshop on Education Technology and Computer Science, IEEE, pp. 757-761.
Furlotti, M. (2014), A Model of Best Practices for a Sourcing, Metropolia University of Applied Science, Helsinki.
George, M. (2003), Lean Six Sigma for Service, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Gijo, E.V. and Antony, J. (2014), “Reducing patient waiting time in outpatient department using lean six sigma
methodology”, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 1481-1491.
Gnanasekaran, S., Velappan, S. and M, P. (2006), “Application of analytical hierarchy process in supplier
selection: an automobile industry case study”, South Asian Journal of Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, p. 89.
Goldsby, T. and Martichenko, R. (2005), Lean Six Sigma Logistics: Strategic Development to Operational
Success, J. Ross, FL.
Goodrick, D. (2014), “Comparative case studies. [online]”, available at: www.unicef-irc.org/publications/
pdf/brief_9_comparativecasestudies_eng.pdf (accessed 19 October 2019).
Hahn, G.J., Hill, W.J., Hoerl, R.W. and Zinkgraf, S.A. (1999), “The impact of six sigma
improvement – a glimpse into the future of statistics”, The American Statistician,
Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 208-215.
Haque, M.R.U., Shaikh, A.N., Jaenglom, K. and Tariq, Z. (2010), Supplier Selection Process Improvement
through Six-Sigma DMAIC, Linnaeus Business School, Sweden.
Lewis, H.T. (1947), Industrial Purchasing: Principles and Practice, RD Irwin.
Monczka, R.M., Handfield, R.B., Giunipero, L.C. and Patterson, J.L. (2009), Purchasing and Supply Chain
Management, South-Western, Mason, OH.
Moschuris, S.J. (2007), “Triggering mechanisms in make-or-buy decisions: an empirical analysis”, The
Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 40-49.
Moschuris, S.J. (2008), “Organizational participants in the make-or-buy process”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 143-153.
Naslund, D., Kale, R. and Paulraj, A. (2010), “Action research in supply chain management-a framework
for relevant and rigorous research”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 331-355.
O’Byrne, R. (2019), “Logistics bureau. [online]”, available at: www.logisticsbureau.com/7-reasons-why-
the-supply-chain-matters-to-business-success/ (accessed 15 October 2019).
Ordoobadi, S.M. and Wang, S. (2011), “A multiple perspectives approach to supplier selection”,
Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 111 No. 4, pp. 629-648.
Pande, P.S., Neuman, R.P. and Cavanagh, R.R. (2000), The Six Sigma Way, McGraw-Hill.
Pasmore, W.A. and Friedlander, F. (1982), “An action research program for increasing employee
involvement in problem solving”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 343-362.
Pemer, F., Werr, A. and Bianchi, K. (2014), “Purchasing professional services: a transaction cost view of the
antecedents and consequences of purchasing formalization”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 43
No. 5, pp. 840-849.
Saen, R.F. (2009), “Supplier selection by the new AR-IDEA model”, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 139 Nos 11/12, pp. 1061-1071.
Sarkis, J. and Talluri, S. (2002), “A model for strategic supplier selection”, The Journal of Supply Chain
Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 18-29.
Secundo, G., Magarielli, D., Esposito, E. and Passiante, G. (2016), “Supporting decision-making in
service supplier selection using a hybrid fuzzy extended AHP approach”, BPMJ.
JGOSS Shani, A.B. (R.). and Coghlan, D. (2019), “Action research in business and management: a reflective
review”, Action Research, doi: 10.1177/1476750319852147.
Snee, R.D. (2010), “Lean six sigma–getting better all the time”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 9-29.
Vasina, E. (2014), Analyzing the Process of Supplier Selection. The Application of AHP Method, Centria
University of Applied Science, Finland.
Wade, S. (2007), “The critical role of supplier networks in successful supplier relationship management
strategies”, available at: www.ism.ws/files/secure/index.cfm?FileID=60592 (accessed 14 May 2010).
Ware, N., Sing, S. and Banwet, D. (2012), “Supplier selection problem: a state-of-the-art review”,
Management Science Letters, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 1465-1490.
Wu, J., Liu, G. and Xi, C. (2008), “The study on agile supply chain-based supplier selection and evaluation”,
proceedings of 2008 International Symposium on Information Science and Engineering, pp. 281-282.
Xiao Xia, L.X., Ma, B. and Lim, R. (2008), “Supplier performance measurement in a supply chain”,
proceedings of 2008 6th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, pp. 877-881.
Yin, R. (2014), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed., Sage publications, New York, NY.
Zeng, S., Cohen, M.A., Steele, B.J. and Sairamesh, J. (2008), “A supplier performance evaluation solution for
proactive supplier quality management”, proceedings of 2008 IEEE International Conference on e-
Business Engineering, pp. 367-373.

Further reading
Antony, J., Gijo, E.V. and Childe, S.J. (2012), “Case study in six sigma methodology: manufacturing quality
improvement and guidance for managers”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 624-640.
Antony, J., Vinodh, S. and Gijo, E.V. (2016), Lean Six Sigma for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises: A
Practical Guide, CRC Press, New York, NY.
Baker, T. and Jayaraman, V. (2012), “Managing information and supplies inventory operations in a
manufacturing environment, part 1: an action research study”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 1666-1681.
Coghlan, D. (2019), Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization, 5th ed., Sage, London.
George, M.L. (2002), Lean Six Sigma: combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Speed, McGraw-Hill, New York,
NY.
Shani, A.B. (R.). and Coghlan, D. (2014), “Collaborate with practitioners: an alternative perspective”,
Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 433-437.
Tiusanen, J. (2017), Improving the New Supplier Search and Selection in the Sourcing Process,
Metropolia University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki.
Wu, C. and Barnes, D. (2009), “A model for continuous improvement in supplier selection in agile
supply chains”, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 85-110.
Wyton, P. and Payne, R. (2014), “Exploring the development of competence in lean management
through action learning groups: a study of the introduction of lean to a facilities management
function”, Action Learning: Research and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 42-61.

Corresponding author
Huay Ling Tay can be contacted at: hltay@suss.edu.sg

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats