CHAPTER ONE

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The manufacturing enterprise today is faced with constant challenges as a result of

modern technological developments; there is the need for it to function efficiently in an
integrated manner as well as the need to ensure that it is integrated with its business
“partners”, customers and suppliers outside the enterprise. Laudon (2004). New business
models such as e-business have improved the ways in which business transactions are
conducted today. Computers have tremendously increased business speed, flexibility and
altered the way business is being conducted Fensel (2001). Consequently the business
game has become so competitive that the less competitive ones stand the risk of being
eliminated. Rethinking and redesigning the business model is not an option but
imperative to surviving in the information era.
There are several trends that are shaping business recently and its value such as
Globalization and deregulation which are impacting on business of all sizes. Rapid
technological changes and the need to respond quickly to cost and quality-conscious
consumers have completely altered the dynamics of business transactions. These have
altered entry barriers and reshape the competitive landscape. The impact of this
dominating phenomenon is seen in the world wide integration of financial systems, trade
liberation, deregulation and new patterns of industrial development. Wajcman, (2005)
defined this concept as the process of increased integration of national economic systems
promoted mainly by certain organizations and trans- national bodies such as the WTO,
national state and multinational companies.

Also, customers now have a variety of choices and are becoming more sophisticated and

1
more demanding in terms of what they want from the suppliers and the methods in which
they choose to acquire these goods and services as well. Also important is the emerging
digital firm, which involves an extensive use of information technology. In other to
compete in the present global market, many companies need frequent reorganization of
their production facilities as a result of the introduction of new technologies and
continuous improvement. The digital firm is defined as one where most of the
organization’s significant business relationships with customers, suppliers, and employers
are digitally enabled and mediated Laudon (2004). The advantages of this form of
business are many but most importantly it is the ability of such a firm to respond rapidly
to its environment compared to the traditional firm. Digital firms differ from the
traditional firm in that they rely completely on a set of information technologies for
organization and management. There are four major systems that help to define the
digital firm (Ibid)
1. The supply chain management system, which deals with the relationship between the
supplier and the firm to optimize the planning, sourcing, manufacturing and delivery
of products and services.
2. The management of customer relationship systems: the basic idea here is to develop
a coherent and integrated view of all the relationships a firm has with its customers
3. Enterprise systems create an integrated enterprise-wide information system to
coordinate key internal processes of the firm, integrating data from manufacturing
and distribution.
4. Knowledge management systems, aimed to create, capture, store and disseminate
firm expertise and knowledge. All these changes have had an impact on the market in
the sense that markets have become increasingly fragmented. Mass customization has
become the path to serving discriminating customers.

There is therefore need for the continuous evolution of technology to support the changes
in the environment. Developments such as the World Wide Web have led to the
emergence of a network whereby customers, employers, suppliers and trading partners
are connected wherever they are. This has drastically improved decision making, created
better ways of knowing and serving customers as well as improving profitability in order

2
to gain competitive advantage.
The global economy is also becoming increasingly competitive and very unpredictable.
As a result companies are faced so often with the challenge of re-inventing, re-aligning
and re-engineering themselves in order to stay competitive. Many enterprises have
therefore seen the need to integrate processes within the enterprise and also out of the
enterprise in order to map out these processes.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The manufacturing enterprise today is more complex than it was before. Customers have
become more demanding and sophisticated in terms of what they want and how they
want it. This poses some challenges to the enterprise. In addition to this, there is also the
challenge for the enterprise to operate efficiently in an integrated manner, while also
ensuring also that it is integrated with its business partners, customers and suppliers
outside the enterprise. Many enterprises have therefore seen the need to integrate
processes within the enterprise and out of it in order to map out these processes. This is
essential in order for a business to remain competitive. Mass customization and global
competition have forced enterprises to adopt proper business models able to capture all
the opportunities arising from emerging competition rules Giovanni et al (2006). As a
result an increasing number of enterprises have distributed their production capacity
worldwide in order to achieve lower production costs and lower distribution cost as a
result of the closeness to customers. However some disadvantages have been associated
with this, such as the difficulty of coordinating the different production plants. Effective
operation management in such a case is the challenging task. Also, given the growing
importance of small and medium sized enterprises (SME), as stated in the European
Commission (2002a) “that the economic impact of micro-enterprises will increase, in the
future”. During the year 2003 alone, there were 18 million micro-enterprises, with up to
nine employees in 19 EU countries, that is 92% of European enterprises. In this regard
studies of this nature are quite useful as they are aimed at such organizations.
To resolve this problem, many frame works and methodologies have been developed.
However, they have been criticized either for being too academic or simply too complex

3
for application and lacking a practitioner’s point of view. This is a major problem that
needs to be addressed in order to ensure successful implementation of the integrated
enterprise in the manufacturing environment. Also, for an enterprise to stay competitive,
it has to do so through the development of new products and services as well as the
possession of new customers, an enterprise can use this frame work to understand how
companies can map their IT tools on their business. In addition, because the business
landscape is always changing and the impact on the markets is constant the “players” are
bound to change their marketing strategy and reposition themselves to new
opportunities and threats brought about by the fast technological developments. Porter
(980). Hence there is the need for new frame works to accommodate these changes.
This dissertation therefore proposes a theoretical frame work for the design and
management of an enterprise meant to help managers to make better strategic decisions
for the whole enterprise.

1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The goal of this project is to develop a framework that can explain the key operational
characteristics of an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) with respect to its suppliers
and customers, aimed at helping managers make better strategic decisions for the whole
enterprise. In achieving the goal of this project, the following objectives are identified.
1. Study existing technologies from literature that supports the key operational functions
of a typical manufacturing company such as the enterprise resource planning,
customer relation ship management software, supplier management software.
2. Understanding the relationship between the OEM and its customers and suppliers
3. To develop a set of systematic logic that will help managers understand the
operational transactions between the different parts of the enterprise.
4. To develop a framework for its applicability within an industrial setting.

4
To achieve the goal and objectives of this study, an extensive literature review will be
carried out to study the current state of research in the area, as well as the limitations. A
critical study of the company’s dossiers will also be undertaken. Chapter 1 presents the
introduction, statement of the problem and rational for the study. Chapter 2 presents the
state of the literature with respect to the enterprise, customer, supplier and existing
technologies. Chapter three presents the methodology, chapter 4 the case description
and analysis, and development of the frame work, Using Oakdale Lt, Chapter 5 is on
result and conclusion

5
Figure 1. Summary and plan of presentation

Chapter 1 Introduction and statement of the problem research objectives

Chapter 2
Literature review, on the enterprise, customer and supplier.
Software tools used for the management of the enterprise

Chapter 3
Development of Methodology and Case study,

Chapter 4
Case description and Analysis using case study

Chapter 5 Results and conclusion

6
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the current state of research in the area of existing technologies,
the relationship between the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and its customers
and suppliers, and its operational functions. The literature review is carried out under
three major areas towards the research objective namely; supply chain management,
customer relationship management, enterprise, market places and soft ware tools used to
support the OEM (enterprise), its suppliers and customers.

2.2 THE ENTERPRISE

The European commission (2003) defined an enterprise as an “entity regardless of its
legal form, including partnership or associations regularly engaged in economic
activities”. Typically the terminology refers to a single integrated form. A typical
enterprise is made up of different departments such as marketing, engineering,
manufacturing, logistics, sales, services, purchasing. The definition of an enterprise has
been evolved over time as different interpretations have emerged about what the
components should include. Initially the enterprise was narrowly defined to be a single
integrated company (Binder et al 2006). However, research indicates that different parts
of a company could also be classified as an enterprise. Therefore the definition is not
limited only to a “whole” enterprise. Different authors have expressed different views
with regard to the definition and what constitutes the structure of an enterprise.
However, some studies have come up with a different dimension of this terminology.
Such studies have deviated from the traditional definition of an enterprise as a “single
entity,” the rational for this school of thought being that environmental changes such as
globalization and outsourcing have altered the definition of an enterprise. As a result
more and more companies are involved in activities which are considered to be out of the

7
boundaries of the traditional firm Binder & Cliff (2006). Such relationships are said to be
promoted by collaborations and joint ventures. The definition of an enterprise in this
perspective could also include parts of different companies.
A growing number of studies have recognized an enterprise to be inter-organizational in
nature inclusive of the traditional operations and their supply chains. Such studies
advocate for alliances, partnership and joint ventures. Proponents include Hamel and
Prahalad (1994) and Bremer et al, (2001) who have recommended a virtual enterprise.
Byrne and Brandt (1993) defined a virtual enterprise as a temporary network of
independent companies linked by information to share skills, costs and access to one
another’s markets. They have an evolving corporate mode that will be flexible enough to
exploit a strategic opportunity”. While Boardman & Clegg (2001) advocate for an
extended enterprise, Davies and Spekman (2003) define the extended enterprise as “The
entire set of collaborating companies both upstream and downstream, from raw material
to end-use consumption, that works together to bring value to the market place, members
view that their destinies are interdependent”. This serves to separate the extended from
the confederations of buyers and suppliers. Another dimension in the literature of
enterprises is on mergers and acquisitions which have led to the development of large
scale enterprises. In this sense an increasing amount of attention has been paid to
“collaborative business networks.” All these developments have got implications in
terms of management.
Some of these authors have suggested that a collaborative relationship could be between
whole or just part of companies and that in such cases there is usually a member that can
be considered dominant strategically, this development is important strategically as it
can help in the reconstruction of a given enterprise structure. In relation to this
perspective, the supply management literature has been found inadequate for addressing
this issue. To address this issue, a prevailing perspective that has emerged has
recommended a balanced view. In this light De Toni & Tonchia (2003) have stressed the
need to blend both the outside-in view and inside-out view of a firm. Others have
recommended a complimentary use of exogenous i.e. competitive rivalry Porter (1980);
transaction-cost economies Williamson (1975; 1990) according to this group, firms have
to consistently change their structures based on the market competition. The limitation of

8
this view is that they has failed to establish a link in cases where suppliers are partners
in a joint strategic relationship Binder &Clegg (2006) and endogenous theories such as
competence theory Prahalad & Hamel (1990; 1994) or resource based view Teece et al
(1997) which holds the view that the competence of a firm can be enhanced by its
resources. This view is crucial in understanding how firms can attain competitive
advantage but it is also limited in this context in the sense that it conceptualizes the firm
as a bundle of resources Wernefelt, (1984). This has led to the development of what has
been referred to as a dynamic dimension to the resource based view of the firm
Teece et al (1997). What is important here is the fact that despite these developments, a
connection still needs to be established with enterprise management or the management
of the enterprise.

9
 Table 1: Different terminologies used by authors to define an enterprise.
( Source: Copied from Binder et al 2006)

Terms Authors

(a) Terms used for describing the new forms of an

enterprise

Quasi firm Eccles (1981)

Luke et al. (1989)
Strategic network Gulati et al. (2000)
Dynamic network Jarillo, 1988 and Jarillo, 1994
Project network Miles and Snow (1986)
Windeler and Sydow (2001)
Virtual Corporation Byrne and Brandt (1993)
Davidow and Malone (1992)
Nagel (1993)
Virtual organisation Ahuja and Carley (1999)
Chesbrough and Teece (1996)
Schönsleben (2000)
Walters (2004)
(Virtual) Supply network Choi et al. (2001)
Cousins and Crone (2003)
Lamming et al. (2000)
Mills et al. (2004)
Virtual enterprise Browne and Zhang (1999)
Jagdev and Thoben (2001)
Martinez et al. (2001)
Extended enterprise Boardman and Clegg (2001)
Browne and Zhang (1999)
Davis and Spekman (2003)
Extraprise Karlsson (2003)
Networked enterprise Chung et al. (2004)

10
(b) Terms used to identify the most strategically
influential member
Hub firm Dyer and Hatch (2004)
Focal firm Gulati et al. (2000)
Core firm Harland and Knight (2001)
Mills et al. (2004)
Nassimbeni (1998)
Seuring (2003)
Systems architect Boardman and Clegg (2001)
Systems designer Clegg (2003)
Systems integrator Mills et al. (2003)
Walters (2004)
Network manager Harland and Knight (2001)
Project manager Martinez et al. (2001)
Orchestrator Brown et al. (2002)
(Enterprise) broker Bremer et al. (2001)
Miles and Snow (1986)
Schönsleben (2000)
Snow et al. (1992)
Navigator Karlsson (2003)

Another growing set of literature have focused on the strategic importance of certain
members within these structures. These groups have taken a different perspective all
together with regards to the enterprise. To them, what ever form it may take, there is
usually a dominant member as a result of the collaboration. This group is also of the
opinion that the peripheral activities of one company could be the core competency of
another member-company. Thus for the enterprise to be successful on the basis of
collaboration, they need to intermediate their internal core competencies into other
member companies (Lai et al, 1995)

11
Some authors instead have centered their study on the need for manufacturers to focus
their efforts towards a narrow range of products or segments of the entire market. This
gives a strategic dimension to the focus criteria as it implies choices being made. The
argument in the literature is that focusing yields better opportunities to exploit any
market, Lee, (1992). However the literature is still limited in the domain of definitional
works. The prevailing view is that an organization should be focused in only one area,
i.e. products, process, or manufacturing task. But little has been done to guide in the
selection of a focus area or what constitutes the focus criterion. Hallgren et al (2006)
have proposed a framework that differentiates focus with regards to the different parts in
manufacturing value chain. The area in which focus was differentiated is in the customer
order decoupling point. As concerns development on enterprises there are two extreme
cases, there are the proponents of mergers and acquisitions (development of large scale
enterprises) and increasing growth of newly emerging enterprises which concentrate on
micro-enterprises exclusively on their core competencies Muller et al (2006).

2.3 EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES

The enterprise requires tools to coordinate the activities within it Hammami et al (2003).
Some studies have identified the fact that information structures are invariably linked to
the operation of the enterprise and can be used for the selection of candidate software
applications Toh et al (1999). Some of the reasons advanced to support the adoption of
computer-based information systems include some of the advantages that it yields such as
the reduction in processing time, physical storage and handling of paperwork and easy
access to information.
Over the years, organizations have used different tools such as business process modeling
used to manage organizational change, process plan and schedule used to plan the process
and schedule in manufacturing, which have not been considered successful because they
are designed to function best in static environments where the assumption is that there is
readily available resources which of course is not always the case. Unforeseen
circumstances such as the breakdown of machines, change in order arrival or even a

12
cancellation of order may arise. This will render the process plan ineffective (Wong et al,
2006). In this light the integrated process planning scheduling (IPPS) is considered more
appropriate in that it increases the production feasibility and optimality by combining the
process planning and scheduling problems (Ibid). In this light, the use of advanced
manufacturing technology (AMT) has been found to be more appropriate. Shoal et al
(2006) Defined it as “A family of manufacturing process technologies whose common
element is the use of computers to store and manipulate data” The main attributes of the
AMT are that it manages data associated with the manufacturing process by the use of
computer applications. The adoption of AMT has been found to be more efficient
because it is associated with the production of elaborately transformed manufactures.
Typical examples include computer-aided design/manufacture (CAD/CAM), computer
integrated manufacturing (CIM), manufacturing and enterprise resource planning systems
(MRP 11 and ERP). The AMT however has been criticized for providing fragmented
explanations as well as a lack of parsimony Shoal et al, (2006).

A lot of research has been conducted over the past twenty years with the aim of
integrating designs such as computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided
manufacturing (CAM). It became obvious that to achieve this, it was essential to part
models that contain more information than geometric and topology. One of the
recognized merits of feature based modeling over conventional geometric modeling is its
ability to form features, tolerances, material properties and information which may be
used during the planning process as well as its ability to associate geometric and
topological information Amaitik (2004). In spite of the common use of CAD in
industries to design parts, it was realized that the level of part model data was too low. As
a result Feature based modeling was thought be an essential tool for integrating systems
such as the CAD/CAPP.
However, enterprise resource planning (ERP) has been found to be the most effective
computer application in modern manufacturing industry. Basically the function is to
exchange data with a central database that contains all information concerning the
enterprise. The system is designed in such a way as to manage all the activities of the
enterprise by using software modules. In this light emphasis is placed not only on the

13
quality of the products and services but also on the efficiency of the internal processes
(what they do and how it is done). The ERP system presents an excellent capability in
planning and scheduling that yields benefits in productivity and a great increase in
customer services. The ERP system innovation also makes possible the use of relational
database management systems (RDBMS) as well as a graphical user interface (GUI),
open systems and client services. The ERP have altered the design field of information
systems, designers and management solution. They are also known to be very effective
as management systems. Quiscent et al (2006) discusses the success of the ERP
implementation project and were linked to a number of factors such as the previous
information systems before the ERP was launched, organizational culture as well as
future business practice of the enterprise. As a result of changes in the external
requirements or market it may be necessary to redesign the business process enterprise to
adapt to these changes and not the other way round. Business processes are said to
include all the activities needed to handle all business processes, as in the case of an
enterprise that is process oriented intrinsically. A partition into stages follows these steps
(Ibid)
• Assessing the organizational structure
• Modeling of business processes
• Analyzing weaknesses
• Modeling of advanced business processes (re-engineering)
• Monitoring (control of business processes.
• Implementation stage for the enterprise
• Management and performance monitoring

2.3.1 USES AND ADVANTAGES OF ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING

The use of ERP has been mostly in the domain of larger organizations. This is due to the
fact that the features and business process flows have been designed based on practices in
larger organizations. However, there has been an increased use of ERP by small and
mid-sized companies. The success rate in small and medium- sized organizations is said
to be minimal. Some of the reasons advanced for this failure include the fact that the

14
business process alignment is affected by various environmental aspects such as the
existing information systems before the ERP and also the capabilities of small
manufacturers vary to those of large and medium size manufacturers, a poor
implementation process, the lack of alignment with business needs and the lack of
alignment of implementation practices with the firm’s competitive strategy Davenport
(1998). As a solution to this problem a number of research studies are focusing on
developing implementation frameworks.

Another important tool thought to be necessary for the management of the enterprise in
the literature was the enterprise matrix tool whose function is to identify and map a
suitable enterprise. Binder& Clegg (2006) have proposed a conceptual frame work on
this. The model was built in such a way that it connects enterprise module parts of a
company with enterprise modules owned by a different company. This is intended to
create a structure that meets the needs of a fast changing industrial environment and still
operating within reasonable cost limits. This required a tool such as the enterprise matrix
to coordinate the enterprise Hammami et al, (2003).

2.3.2 MATERIAL RESOURCE PLANNING

[The long term profitability of a company is determined some how by the way the
company begins its manufacturing processes. The process prior to customer order and
the way the company sets out its promises to deliver quantities and times for customer
order use the material requirement planning (MRP) and or recorder point system. In
order to meet customer demands, the manufacturing process must have begun before the
arrival of customer’s order. MRP implies that for every end item, a master production
schedule (MPS) is created which specifies delivery times, quantities ordered based on
demand forecast Segerstedt (2006). It is an important tool for the company selling
manufacturing goods as it determines the times of delivery and customer incoming
orders. The performance of these techniques and how the company uses these techniques
will decide the level of customer service; capital to be invested in work process;
efficiency and cost to be created and what financial gains the company is expected to

15
achieve Johnson & Bru (2000). However, the effectiveness of managing material
planning process has been found to be limited in function with regards to managing
engineering change situations (shorter time period required for product development,
changes in products, quality of product and time constrain). The consequences of a
poorly managed engineering change situation could mean a loss of market opportunities,
obsolete inventories, material shortages and manufacturing inefficiencies such as missed
deliveries, poor quality lost and loss of configuration and control Clement et al (1992).
To address these problems, Wanstromet al (2006) have proposed a procedure that creates
a model to differentiate between items, in order to facilitate change situations.
According to this study, there are many different engineering situations that may occur in
the material planning process ranging from administrative to change to a completely new
product. Even though the material planner can be affected by many items the material
planner can only devote attention to a small percentage due to limited material planning
resources (Ibid). This therefore calls for the need for the material planning resources to
be allocated but to particular items. A common tool that is being used for the
differentiation of items is the ABC classification typically used to describe items needing
special attention in order to reduce the risk of overstocking and unnecessary investment
in inventory. Other authors have found out that this classification is often not right as the
classification is said to be more useful for spare items with distinctive characteristics
besides price and demand Anandarajan (2002).

2.4 CUSTOMER

The term “customer relationship management” came as a result of the information

technology. There is the lack of an appropriate definition of the concept, and this is said
to be a contributory factor to the failure of CRM projects based on the limited view point
that organization organizations take with respect to usage Payne et al (2005). It is often
used to label technology-based customer solutions such as sales, force automation and
customer centric. However, CRM is often incorrectly limited to CRM technology this is
said to be a key reason for CRM failure Kale (2004). Payne et al 2005 reviewed this
definition and came up with three perspectives; a particular technology solution, wide

16
 ranging technology.
However, some authors have made some attempts on definitional issues such as
Rygielski et al (2002) defined customer relationship management by four elements of a
simple frame work:
KNOW (A firm is expected to know and understand its customers as well as the market)
TARGET (which products to sell to which customer and through which channel)
SELL (Firms use campaign management to increase the effectiveness of the marketing
department)
SERVICE (CRM seeks to retain its customers through services such as call centers and
help desk)
Xu et al (2002) defined it as a term for methodologies, software and usually internet
capabilities that can help an enterprise manage customer relationship in an organized
way. It has also be defined as an all-embracing approach, which seamlessly integrates
sale, customer service, marketing, field support and other functions that concern the
customer. Ibid

Table : 2 .The characteristics of CRM (Source: Xu 2002)

Characteristics Impact

Sales force automation Greatly empowered sales professionals

Customer service and support Customer problems can be solved efficiently through
proactive customer support

Field service Remote staff can get help from customer service
personnel to meet customers’ individual expectation

Marketing automation Companies can learn clients’ likes and dislikes to

better understand customer need consequently these
companies can capture a market before their
competitors

17
The World Wide Web has afforded companies the opportunity to build a better and
lasting relationship with their customer than was the case before the information
technology. A wide range of CRM products have therefore been developed by companies
such as Siebel, Oracle, Broad vision. Some of which are made in such a way that they
can track customer behavior on the web to predicting their future moves. It is essential for
a company to understand the behavior of its customer as this can yield long term profits
Russell (2001) stated that there is a change in the way this concept is now perceived.
There has been a shift in emphasis from customer acquisition to customer retention this
has therefore altered the dynamics,
There has been a growing interest in the area of customer relationship management. In
spite of the increasing number of published materials on this, most of which are said to be
practitioner oriented, there literature on CRM has been criticized for the lack of
agreement about definitional issues and strategic development Payne et al (2005)..There
are different definitions and description of what CRM constitutes by different authors,
this poses a problem because it affects the way an organization accepts and practices
CRM
Since the late 1990’s Customer relationship management (CRM) has become very
relevant in the competitive business environment. New Technologies such as data ware
housing; data mining and campaign management software have opened a new
dimension/perspective to customer relationship management to an area where firms can
gain competitive advantage and is at the core of every customer-focused business.
Rygielski et al (2002) defined CRM as an information industry term denoting
methodologies, software and internet capabilities that help to manage its relationship with
its customers in an organized manner. Choy et al (2002) reiterated the aspect of the
importance of customer retention in the view that. It is all about finding, getting and
retaining customers. Its main function is to increase customer value and as a consequent
share holder value. It is therefore necessary for manufacturers to strengthen their own
competitive edges by focusing their resources on their core competencies. Choy et al
2002 stated that as result of customer sophistication and the expectation of higher quality
service, brought about by the increasing global competition has led to a decrease in profit
per unit .CRM solutions therefore provide quick and efficient transactions to help

18
enterprises to acquire, serve and retain the fast growing number of customers. It can assist
the organization to improve telesales, account and sale management by optimizing
information systems and contact centre implementations that allow the customer to
communicate through any communication channel Shaw (1999) The main objective of
CRM is to long lasting relationship with chosen customers, get closer to those customers
at every point of contact and to maximizing as well as identifying the most the profitable
customers and providing them with the best services (Ibid)
A recent trend in the literature is that companies are trying to connect CRM activities
and customer insight information with upstream operations in supply chain by so doing
, the supply chain’s will generate demand activities which can be seamlessly linked to
fulfill demand activities. Xu et al (2002)

A problem that most organizations face with respect to the adoption of CRM is that it
means different things to different people. For some it is mass customization or
developing products that suit individual customer needs for others it is used in the context
of technology solution Russell (2001) develop a basic model to guide managers regarding
what they should know about their customers and how this information could be used to
develop a complete CRM perspective.

19
Figure 2. Customer relationship management model (Source: Russell, 2001)

Of customer activity
Create a Data base

Of the data base

Analysis

Customer selection Which customers to target

customers

Customer targeting Tools for targeting selected

customers

Relationship marketing with

targeted customers Building relationship

Privacy issues
Confidentiality of customers

Metrics For measuring the success of the

CRM

The literature on CRM has been found limited in the area of implementation of CRM
practices. There is there fore the need for an improvement in technologies and
methodologies to implement the above steps
The literature on customer has concentrated on the impact of order entry points on
manufacturing and logistics thus undervaluing the effects on the engineering process as
such, companies are still left with the challenge of how to organize their processes
Dekkers ( 2006)According to some authors, a lot of emphasis is placed to the
consequences of order processing, stock control, replenishment and performance
improvement at the detriment of the modular design and its link to the engineering
management

20
Table 3 The CRM continuum (Source : Payne et al, 2005)

CRM is CRM is about implementation

narrowly of a specific technology
defined and tact
fully
Moderately CRM is the implementation of
defined an integrated series of
customer-oriented technology
solution
Broadly defined as a holistic approach to
managing customer relationships to create share
holder value

2.5 SUPPLIER
The structure of the supply chain and the way it is managed differs from that of the
customer. It is complicated because it involves a variety of independent, decentralized
and self-interested enterprises. However what they share in common is their business
processes such as production transportation and storage Huang et al (2005)The
effectiveness of the supply chain depends on a number of factors such as how the
enterprise effectively schedules processes to optimize the resource allocation and
operational cost in the case where individual enterprises are contracted to partake in a
supply chain venture, The reaction of the enterprise to unforeseen circumstances such as
machine breakdown, transportation delays, new or unexpected customer order. Ibid
Concerning rescheduling, most of the work has concentrated on centralized rescheduling
problem in which a single scheduler makes entire decision for all the entities in a single
production facility. Due to the structure of the supply chain (made up of many
autonomous enterprises,) the centralized approaches of rescheduling have been found to
be unsuitable for supply chain rather a distributed mechanism is recommended to
coordinate the scheduling decision of each enterprise in order to obtain a fairly optimal
scheduling.

21
As firm search intensely for sources of competitive advantage the attention is drifting
towards the supply chain management as a means of achieving differentiation in a firm
strategic position. This has there for led to different dimensions in which the concept is
perceived. Some researchers are focusing on the improved delivery performance and
customer service Robertson et al (2002) However our understanding of these areas has
not improved in spite of the growing interest and effort in studying SCM. Although
some studies have reported a positive correlation between SCM practices and the
performance of the firm, there is still the issue of inconsistency with regards to the basic
definition hence the meaning of SCM is still a matter of debate and content of the SCM
construct among such studies, as a result there is neither agreement on its measurement.
This poses a problem of integration as well as making comparisons difficult. Added to
this is the fact that the SCM literature has been criticized for the inadequate attention and
effort put into theorizing. According to Ho et al ( 2002) defining the SCM activities
should not be limited only to the firm’s involvement in managing its supplier but also to
the firm’s interaction with its trading partners as well in addition to supplier in order to
attain supply chain integration as well as including the other components of the supply
chain such as customers. In this light some authors such as Cooper et al have argued that
viewing SCM from a restrictive point of view will only provide a partial understanding
of the concept and may provide a wrong interpretation of a particular function over the
other (i.e. that of superiority).
The global supply chain forum defined SCM as “the integration of key business
processes, from end user through original supplies that provide s products, services and
information that that add value for customers and other stake holders (cited in Lambert et
al 1998)
Other scholar have adopted a broader perception on SCM, in this case stressing the
importance of management and integration of major linkages between a firms upstream
and downstream trading partners as well. Others have viewed supply chain integration as
a set of activities that manufacturers that is used to integrate the operations between the
manufacturer and its suppliers and customers. Frohlich et al( 2001) in the same token,
Narasimhan et al (1998) have perceived this concept from the decision oriented frame
work of supply chain management

22
Concerning rescheduling, most of the work has concentrated on centralized rescheduling
problem in which a single scheduler makes entire decision for all the entities in a single
production facility. The importance of the supply chain in improving performance is
presently drawing much attention from researchers and practitioners. (SRM) defined in
Choy et al (2003) as a new set of supply chain applications that contribute to the
supplier selection and by so doing increases the competitive advantage of the
manufacturer through the following means; support of improved business processes
across the supply chain, creating a next generation architecture that can handle a multi-
enterprise process as well as facilitating rapid product cycles and the introduction of new
product(Ibid) Due to The impact of global competition (SRM) manufacturers are forced
to coordinate respond quickly to the industry supply chain, from suppliers to customers.
This has led to a situation where customer supplier relationship is becoming or
considered very important. Selection of the supplier is one of the important functions in
the supplies relationship
The new paradigm in organizing business lines into a supply chain seem to be
integration as producers, distributors and vendors are forced to integrate their
operational activities into large -scale networks of different services for managing
materials, products, information and capital into a supply chain villa (2002). The
integration of customer/supplier relationship management is a growing are of interest in
the supply chain management area, meant to facilitate the selection of suppliers by the
use of a help desk approach to validate the searching result done by the Case base
reasoning technique (CBR) technology .Choy et al (2003) have recommended a similar
approach i.e. integration based on an intelligent supplier relationship management
system. (ISRMS) integrating a company’s customer relationship management system,
supply rating system and product coding system by the case based reasoning technique
to select preferred suppliers during the product process
In spite of the growing interest in supply chain management our understanding of the area
is still limited by the fact that adequate attention has not been placed to theory building
researchers such as Ho et al (2002) have responded by addressing this issue in relation to
the narrow perspective in which the SCM construct has been perceived, the validity of
the construct, the practices achieve an advancement in theory development, and have

23
recommended a process -based view of SCM to relationship,

2.6 MARKET PLACES

The role of market in today’s economy cannot be over emphasized. Electronic markets or
otherwise have completely altered the way marketing is carried out in modern times.
They have become increasingly popular alternatives to traditional forms of commerce.
Defined as an inter-organizational informational system, that allows participating buyer
and sellers to exchange information about prices and product offering Bakos (1991). It is
believed that there is an increasing number of such systems that cross the organizational
boundaries of the enterprise in this respect it is similar to the definitional expansion of an
enterprise which is also said to be undergoing a change in terms of what constitutes an
enterprise or out of the traditional definition of an enterprise. Some of the advantages
that this form of marketing offers include the reduction of the search cost that buyers
have to incur to acquire information about sellers prices and product offering in the
market place, which is usually substantial, this process enables buyers to locate suppliers
that match their needs. Matching of buyers and sellers /demand and supply, facilitating
information exchange on goods, service and payments associated with market
transactions. Economic theories suggest that the reduction in the search cost plays a
crucial role in determining the efficiencies and competitive behavior ( Ibid) they also
provide an institutional infrastructure, which specifies the rules of the game, issues such
as contract law, dispute resolution, and intelligent property protection are covered by this
structure.. Bakos (1998) discusses the great impact of internet on internet –based markets
such as product offering, which involves increased personalization and customization of
products through the use of such techniques as rule-based system (broad vision) which
allows for the practice of one to one marketing and the lower price of goods.
Business to business on the internet as well is generating a lot of interest this is due to the
great appeal of the internet on business. This form of business offers a large number of
buyers and sellers the opportunity of automating transactions. These markets offer
advantages such as expanding the choice available to buyers and sellers, providing
seller’s access to new customers, and reducing transaction costs for all the “actors.
Kaplan et al (2000).

24
One of the most noted impact of the internet infrastructure has been its the reduction in
marginal cost involved in the reproduction and distribution of goods to consumers as
well as businesses (Ibid)
Despite the advantages associated with electronic market places, there are some pertinent
issues that need attention such as the fact that, such market may raise anti trust issues and
also, there are potentially demand –side economies of scale in payment mechanisms and
software Ibid, There is also the fear that as a result of the significant reduction in the
search cost for prices and product information, competition may be greatly be affected.
The business to business electronic commerce ,in order to be efficient must deal with
challenges such as extracting information from rough sources ,classifying information to
facilitate product data maintenance and accessibility, reclassifying product data,
personalizing information and creating mapping between different information
presentations Fensel et al (2001) However the debate about this aspect is that with
electronic markets lowering the cost of transaction, the role of the middle man will be
reduced as it will become easier to match buyers and sellers. Lee (1998)

2.7 INTRODUCTION TO THE BUINESS LANDSCAPE MODEL

The business landscape model is defined as a tool or framework that enhances our
understanding of the vital role of information technology. In this context it defines the
relationship between the business units of an organization and its information systems.
According to this framework, a typical business setting consists of an extended
enterprise, which is made up of
• An enterprise
• Suppliers (Strategic and opportunistic)
• Customers (Strategic and opportunistic)
According to this concept an organization must be considered in relation to its suppliers
or extended enterprise. Every extended enterprise consists of customers and suppliers.
Customers are individuals or companies who purchase items from the enterprise.
Suppliers on the other hand are individuals or companies selling products to the extended
enterprise. These two are therefore considered as an integral part of the enterprise.
Generally there are two types of suppliers and customers: strategic and opportunistic as

25
shown below. The extended enterprise can therefore be divided into five main sections
as shown below.
The extended enterprise (Zone 1)
It is made up of different departments among which are engineering, manufacturing,
logistics, purchasing service and sales. Information systems can be adopted that support
the major business activities in this zone or to coordinate internal processes of the
enterprise such as Computer Aided Design (CAD), Auto desk, Computer Aided machine
Strategic customer (Zone 2)
The major objective of the enterprise here is to develop customer collaboration. The
enterprise focuses on market driven innovation to coordinate the activities in this zone.
Customers and clients are recognized as the main source for innovation. New products
are designed based on collaboration between the manager and this group of customers.
Opportunistic customers (zone 3)
This zone is composed of ‘potentially unknown’ customers. The main objective of the
enterprise here is to develop customer tailored products. Software solutions designed to
support the activities in this zone include customer relationship management solutions
such as SAGE, E-CRM.
Strategic supplier (zone 4)
Strategic suppliers are companies that supply key parts or services to an enterprise. It is
therefore essential to develop a good working relationship with its strategic suppliers for
any enterprise to survive. Software solutions developed to support this zone include
supply chain management solutions such as J.D Edwards, SCM and IBM, I series
solution.
Opportunistic supplier
The main goal of the enterprise here is to trade on internet market agility. Enterprises or
firms are now part of market places and therefore use it to identify sources (products,
parts, resources and services) to reduce cost. The main aim of the enterprise concerning
this zone is to develop supplier collaboration by capitalizing on supplier competency and
capacity.

26
An enterprise is made up of different departments such as marketing, engineering,
manufacturing, logistics, sales, services, purchases.

Figure 3: Business landscape framework

27
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

The methodology for this study was adopted from Binder et al 2006, acknowledging the
strategic importance of certain members within the Business landscape model and also
the idea that what ever form a collaborative relationship may adopt either (whole or
partial) there is often a dominant partner
The method for this study could be divided into four main parts.
1 An extensive use of existing literature.

2 Data collection was based on the following

• Data files for customers and suppliers.
• Product data Files
3 Data Analysis through the use of an expert
4 development of the business Landscape model for the enterprise of interest
The study is predominantly quantitative, with Oakdale Ltd serving as the OEM of interest
with its customers and suppliers. The data was for a period of one year, as indicated in
the company dossiers.
In order to develop the methodology, a detail study of the customers and suppliers will be
carried out. This study will involve the development of a frame work based on the
business landscape model. Derived from the literature to show how enterprise structures
emerge, depending on the prevailing type of core competencies (A conceptual frame
work for the design and management of an enterprise based on contingency planning of
an enterprise Binder et al (2006).The limitation for the applicability of this frame work is
that there is a lack of guidance on this.
The business landscape model is explored by adopting the matrix in Binder et al (2006)
The selection of the OEM was based on a trend in the literature review, that supports
autonomous, elementary business units Lanbader et al 1997; Salmons &Babitsky (2001)
and visualizes them as the form of enterprise for the future.
The data related to the enterprise, customer and supplier were stored in separate data

28
files, so that while building the frame work reference was made directly to the variable in
question. The following data is used as input in executing the framework
1 List of customers, including the dates of purchases, quantity, frequency and cost
2 List of the suppliers, including transactions, dates, quantity and frequency
3 methods of payment and amount
4 descriptions of good purchased/quantity.
Data collected was based on documents such as data files for customers and suppliers,
product data which was then coded.
Some questions were developed based on the data collected. The customers and suppliers
were classified as strategic based on the “dominance” of the unit of analysis. Dominance
in this study was equated to fulfilling the above mentioned criteria’s of being strategic.
And the conditions for qualifying as strategic were based on the relative importance of
the applicability of a particular question to the enterprise, which were then applied to
each of the customers and suppliers.
In other words:
Dominance=strategic
Strategic=importance of question to the enterprise
There were two main areas of interest for customers to qualify as strategic these were;
contribution of a certain percentage to the OEM total revenue (Customers who made a
contribution of 20% income to the OEM ) were selected as strategic where as those
who did not were considered as opportunistic. Also the demand pattern of the customers
was considered an important criterion to qualify as strategic. This was realized by simply
working out how many times a customer or supplier purchased or supplied goods to
Oakdale in the year (i.e. the number of business transactions undertaken in a year
between the OEM and the customer). A different method was used for suppliers.
In the case of suppliers, the three most relevant criterion were
1 Oakdale’s dependency on the supplier
2 Joint involvements in the development of products with Oakdale
3 supplying bespoke products to Oakdale
Any customer or supplier who made a demand or supply more than ones was considered
strategic where as just once were considered opportunistic as there was no reason to

29
indicate that they would return in the future hence it could have been on the bases of
‘chance’or cost/price as the case may be.
The business landscape model for Oakdale was then developed based on this rational.
The above questions were applied to the customers and suppliers as relevant. To be
classified as strategic, a customer or supplier has to fulfill at least one or more of the
above criteria. Any customer or supplier which did not meet at least one of the criteria
was considered opportunistic.
3.1 CASE ANALYSIS
The analysis was done based on certain questions that were developed based on the
literature as well as the company. Empirical data was collected from an original
equipment manufacturer (Oakdale Lt) Different questions were administered to the
customer and the supplier the rational being that they were taken to serve different
purposes in the Case. The table below gives a list of the customers and suppliers coded
by simply using the first letter or first two letters in cases were the variables were similar.
Based on the questions developed, they were applied to all the customers and suppliers.
The propositions were assessed on two dimensions
Yes = 1 to indicate relevance/applicability
No = 0 to indicate absence
In cases where the proposition
In the case where the question was applicable, the variable was considered strategic
The customers and suppliers were classified as strategic based on the relative importance
of the applicability of a particular question to the enterprise. In the case of customers this
two questions were logically considered most important in the context of Oakdale
1 contributing 20 % of Oakdale’s income
2 Having a regular pattern of demand with Oakdale
In the case of supplies, the three most relevant criteria were
1 Oakdale’s dependency on the supplier
2 Joint involvements in the development of products with Oakdale
3 supplying bespoke products to Oakdale
Based on the above mentioned criteria a customer or supplier was classified as strategic
or opportunistic, as the case may be. The frame work was then developed based on this

30
 CHAPTER FOUR

CASE STUDY

CASE BACKGROUND

In this chapter, the developed framework is utilized using the Oakdale Ltd as the
enterprise of interest with its customers and suppliers, rather than demonstrating with an
unknown example
The case study presented in this chapter is taken from Oakdale Ltd, Garrison, United
Kingdom. It is a small manufacturing company with a good turn over. The company
produces hard landscaping products using computer aided production methods. The
nature of production and the scale of business at Oakdale suits the requirements of the
proposed framework, it was then decided to apply this framework to an existing
enterprise, where the analysis can be used to demonstrate a real case of how this
proposed frame work can be utilized. To demonstrate this framework, the data on
customer purchases as well as suppliers from the supplies are used for the case study

4.1 CASE DESCIPTION

The case was carried out in a small original equipment manufacturing company at an
(OEM) that deals with hard landscaping products and manufactures decorative paving,
walling and hard landscaping products by using high quality natural ingredients and
computer aided production methods, to replicate a wide variety of surface patterns from
traditional worn flagstones to contemporary timber decking. The company is involved in
the following activities; paving, rotunda/octunda, winding, path, stepping stones, walling
edging, accessories. The company is also considering some form of diversification in the
future. The selection of the company was based on the review of the literature, which
indicates the growing importance of small and medium enterprises in the 21st century,
The Company is a single business entity with the case examining it The company

31
operates in a very competitive business environment, where the power dynamics are
complex, meaning that the company is not in a very powerful position in relation to its
competitors. This makes it essential for the company to have a good understanding of its
customers and suppliers in the terms of their relationship. Most of the suppliers have high
delivery reliability. The purchasing orders are based on delivery agreements and forecasts
are sent to all suppliers and items ordered in the same way. The main technological tool
in use is the CRM which is used for the management of customer relationship
4.2 Theoretical model for analyzing and developing a structure for the case study.
The case analysis was based on the theoretical model generated from the following;
OEM (Oakdale Ltd) =OEM
Unit of analysis (UOA) = company or individual
LIST OF CUSTOMERS
STRATEGIC CUSTOMERS
1 Is the UOA you are analyzing one of the key customers to the OEM (ie a UOA that
contributes 20% of the OEM income?
2 Is the UOA developing products jointly with the OEM?
3 Is there some form of customized relationship that can be observed between the UOA
and the OEM?
4 Does the OEM vision or any quality document specifically mention about working with
the OEM?
5 Does the UOA have a regular pattern of demand (ie more than two times in a year) with
the OEM?
OPPORTUNISTIC CUSTOMER
6 Is the unit of analyzing just one of the customers to the OEM (ie gives ad-hoc business
projects/contracts to the OEM?
7 Is the UOA you are analyzing one of the customers to the OEM but gives the company
a steady (but not significant) source of income?
8 Is the some form of relationship that exists between the UOA and the OEM? (This
could be a simple memorandum of understanding or even some form of legal contract)
9 Is the UOA in some form involved with providing (or demand) the OEM additional
capabilities to perform its business?

32
10 Does the OEM help or contribute to making the relationship between the OEM and
the UOA modular in nature.
STRATEGIC SUPPLIER
11 Is the UOA you are analyzing” one of the major suppliers of the OEM to)
12 Is the OEM developing products jointly with the OEM?
13 Is the some form of customized relationship that can be observed between the UOA
and OEM?
14 Is the OEM highly dependent on the UOA in terms of supply of a product/Is it non
substitutable?
15 Does the UOA supply bespoke product to the OEM?
OPPORTUNISTIC SUPPLIER
16 Is the UOA you are analyzing “just one of the suppliers to the OEM (ie gives ad-hoc
business projects/contracts to the OEM)
17 Is the UOA you are analyzing one of the in some form supplying products jointly with
the OEM (i.e. increasing the value chain)
18 Is there some form of relationship that exists between the UOA and the OEM?(this
could be a simple memorandum of understanding or even some form of legal contract0
19 Is the UOA in some form involved with providing (or demanding) the OEM additional
capabilities to perform its business?
20 Does the UOA help or contribute to making the relationship between the OEM and the
UOA modular in nature?
List of customers and suppliers /applicability of questions

33
Table 4, Analysis of customers and suppliers
Customers Suppliers
MKM .B. S 1,5
UM Lu St Co N. E T RCDS
5 11,12 16
A T & C ltd 5,7 AN BK HLG LTD 13, 16, 20 TYRT LTD 16
KLK LTD 2,3,5,10 CTLE CMT LTD 14 YKSHIR IN B. SS 16
FSW LTD 5,7 CRS U LTD FL SS 16 FWD SK DEV 16
SPS LTD 5,7 CEM U ORTNS LTD 14, 16 UMR MC PLC 16
GBS 5,7 D. G. EPTS 00 HWTH T( R) 16
PHW 5,7 REM GH & CO 00 BMER 16
JB LTD 5,7 DAM U 16 Dg Bo & Ss (Sht)Ltd 16
DSL 5,7 BAR& WHS C 0 HK FTRS LTD 16
MKM B.S. (ED, LTD) 5,7 R F LDPE PDTS 16 WRD B (MTON) LTD/PA 16
FEM 5 CON PDTS (KKDY) LTD 16 ARS LTD 16
J H (CTS) 5,7 W.HD TST 16 SCM PLC 16
KIC 5 JM TPN TSPT 16 FGST. SSLTD 16
MJ M & LTD 5 MED S CO 16 LAFG RD A LTD 16
MKM A 5,7 HA N AGTS 16 A. RK SE LTD 16
DE-PA 5,7 KU EXTS 16 NHBC 16
MKM B.S.(SCA) LTD 5,7 T UN OF YK 16 UPX (YKS) LTD 16
C B S LTD 5 CATE LTD 16 KC B. HLTH LTD 16
BR SE 5,7 XI D ST CO. LTD 16 TYN G CB LTD 16
MG (UK) Ltd 5 Thn Wlhm 16 TNER FAB 16
B B.S. &HC. 5 Eu EpT 16 T C HRN JCB 16
MA CO 5 EC .F LTD 14,16 PLtC D TQ LTD 16
MKM RCLTD 5,7 CIVL & MNE LTD 14, 16 WMN EQMT LTD 16
WA RO & BU 5 LKD PV 16 HL'S AT 16
JYK Ltd 5 SN EL PLC 16 BSS LK 16
HE BU SP 5 BIP SK IN BR LTD 16 ALS CA (U) LTD 16
PA B ME 5 Den Fdg 16 CTY EL F 16
MKM B.S.(DFD) 5,7 SGL CN GP 16 MER LAB LTD 16
PER HO 5,7 MT WT AS 16 BRC 16
PAR RO 5 BP O K L TD 16 BDTN TRS FTBL C 16
MKM ALY 5,7 RJL EPT 16 Ai CH LTD 16
NO BU 5 LCO SLS LTD 16 WLSELY UK LTD 16
CL JO LDPS 5 UM ST ITNAL 16 IMECHE 16
MKM WBY 5 TTL BTR 16 NVF PTS LTD 16
EL H.BM 5 (BBS) 16 HPM STM LTD 16
S G ST LTD 5 Rat St Ept 16 FIT RPSE TRN 16
J & A M KE 5 STKS BR LTD 16 Pat Sci R 16
MKM HXM 5 SHF MTLS H LTD 16 VKG DT 16
J.M & S LTD 5 SM ECL LTD 16 NUMD (UK) LTD 16
MKM SKGS 5,7 FST PS HL LIMITED 14, 15 ,16 Zen w& s 16
MKM MRH 5,7 Ms Ida 16 JOS P (MD) LTD 16
MKM BWK 5,7 Pthe U Ltd 16 CHIP PT H 16
JOS P (MB) LTD 5,7 YKSHE WTR 16 Wels Wc Ltd 16
MKM BUSUP 5,7 CDSTP LTD 16 EBY 16
BOR AGGS 5 Matn Sls Ltd 16 GRTHM CAS 16
P WOHSE & S 5 SDGD RC 16 Ma (Ma Ad S) 16
MID FO LTD 5 WLS SCT 16 Technocopy 16
PUR TRE 5,7 EDN HP BDG MT 16 TES I.C 16
ROD OF RMD LTD 5 D-T LTD 16 ABR INS LTD 16
MKM KDY 5,7 ES PRJTS LTD 16 ST PRCTS LTD 16
ANT ST 5,7 SPE LTD 16 W T BD LTD 16
JAM WT LTD 5 J S FWDG 16 PESN PR 16
GRE & SN LTD 5 GB LBRTS LTD 16 NWSQT (N E) LTD 16
SWI NSR 5 SM TNR & SN LTD 16 D. Pat & W 16
CHA GDN C 5 MC PT HR LTD 16 BIF W S. LTD 16
W G LTD 5 Pvc (Pm Co.) 16 TMOVC PL LTD 16
T.A.S BSP & 5 Pck Br 16 SOD SFT 16
PAT B.S. LTD 5 EV ASTEl 16 AL WDKLTD 16
MKM WTNA 5,7 Pltats 16 PR ENG 16
YO INDT 5 LRCO U LTD 16 B LTD 16

34
MKM SFD STH 5,7 R S CMPTS LTD 16 BBUR A 16
MKM RPN 5,7 WTWD TBR & F 16 WT TA GGE LTD 16
W T BN LTD 5,7 JVH LTD 16 BGHSE ENG LTD 16
J T DVE LTD 5,7 THOE LTD 16 BTISH TLCM Plc 16
C & C SPS 5 SG . U LTD 16 G SNBL & SN LTD 16
PER HMES (TSD) 5,7 TBMRE 16 RMDE E. C 16
SA TRN & SN LTD 5,7 PRS & LMD 16 Thpsn & sns 16
BTA t/a MS 5 Prcs Pv $TLtd. 16 OR PYT PR 16
WD & NYR LTD 5 R&J Bgs 16 TTL P.Ltd 16
STLY GDN C 5,7 SNLHT SC GP 16 DYLD IND 16
FI PT HE 5 GRHM TD LTD 16 RHMDSH DTRT C 16
JEW 5,7 STYS: SP 16 MSD (DLGTN) LTD 16
H.H &SN 5 TMC LTD 16 ARCO 16
CH/CHQ C 5 BLDS M F 16 ORT IM LUB 16
VOL SVN LTD 5 Tsde s 16 J & L IND SS 16
BE ML GDN C 5 J.HLNSC .LTD 16 QTY MGMT S 16
CTR ST LTD 16 Wlmsns 16
A5 HLTD 16 LDEN GP 16
Mdlton F Ltd 16 T-MB (UK) LTD 16

The business landscape model for Oakdale was then developed based on this rational.
The above questions were applied to the customers and suppliers as relevant. To be
classified as strategic, a customer or supplier has to fulfill at least one or more of the
above criteria. Any customer or supplier which did not meet at least one of the criteria
was considered opportunistic.
In analyzing the case, it became obvious that different collaborative relationships existed
between Oakdale, its customers and suppliers.

35
THIS PAGE IS SAVED SEPERATELY AS PAGE 36
CHAPTER 4

36
 CHAPTER FIVE

RESULTS

The outcome of the analysis in chapter four indicate that there are different collaborative
relationships that have develop between Oakdale, the customers and its suppliers It was
out of the scope of this study to explore the reasons or dynamics of the differences in the
relationship. However, the researcher’s main interest was within the scope of how these
relationships developed and not on why. These relationships have implications on how
the enterprise is managed.(enterprise management).
Quadrant 1 (STRATEGIC CUSTOMERS)
The customers and suppliers were classified as strategic based on the relative importance
of the applicability of a particular question to the enterprise. In the case of customers this
two questions were logically considered most important in the context of Oakdale
1 contributing 20 % of Oakdale’s income
2 Having a regular pattern of demand with Oakdale

MKM.B.S was considered strategic on the grounds that (most strategic customer)
• Contributed more than 20% of Oakdale’s income (203,877.51) alone
• Had a regular demand pattern with the enterprise.
• Served the dual function of being a customer and a supplier
AT &CL Ltd
Qualified, as a strategic customer on the bases of having
• a regular demand pattern with Oakdale
• Contributing a steady and regular income above 10% to Oakdale.
KLK LTD
Qualified as a strategic customer on the following bases:
• Develops product jointly with Oakdale
• Have some form of customized relationship with Oakdale

37
 • Has a regular demand pattern with Oakdale
• Helps to make the relationship between Oakdale and KLK Ltd modular

Below is a group of customers who were classified also classified as strategic but not as
strategic as the ones above.
The customers listed below were classified as strategic customers on two main reasons.
• Have a regular demand pattern with Oakdale
• Gives a steady but not significant income to Oakdale

38
Table 5: List of strategic customers
STRATEGIC CUSTOMERS
FSW LTD MKM SKGS JOS P (MB) LTD
SPS LTD MKM MRH MKM BUSUP
GBS MKM BWK PUR TRE
PHW JOS P (MB) LTD MKM KDY
JB Ltd MKM BUSUP ANT ST
DSL PUR TRE MKM WTNA
MKM B.S. (ED, LTD) MKM KDY MKM SFD STH
J H (CTS) MKM A MKM RPN
MKM A DE-PA W T BN LTD
DE-PA MKM B.S.(SCA) LTD J T DVE LTD
MKM B.S.(SCA) LTD BR SE PER HMES (TSD
BR SE MKM RCLTD SA TRN & SN LTD
MKM RCLTD MKM B.S.(DFD STLY GDN C
MKM B.S.(DFD PER HO JEW
PER HO MKM ALY
MKM ALY MKM SKGS
ANT ST MKM MRH
MKM BWK

39
Table 6. List of opportunistic customers
OPPORTUNISTIC CUSTOMERS
UM EL H.BM W G LTD
KIC S G ST LTD T.A.S BSP &
MJ M & LTD J & A M KE PAT B.S. LTD
C B S LTD MKM HXM
YO INDT
MG (UK) Ltd J.M & S LTD
C & C SPS
B B.S. &HC. BOR AGGS
MA CO P WOHSE & S BTA t/a MS
WA RO & BU MID FO LTD
WD & NYR LTD
JYK Ltd OD OF RMD LTD
FI PT HE
HE BU SP JAM GRE & SN LTD
PA B ME SWI NSR H.H &SN
PAR RO CHA GDN C
CH/CHQ C
CL JO LDPS WT LTD
VOL SVN LTD
MKM WBY
BE ML GDN C

STRATEGIC SUPPLIER
In the case of supplier, the three most relevant criteria were
1 Oakdale’s dependency on the supplier
2 Joint involvements in the development of products with Oakdale
3 supplying bespoke products to Oakdale

Lu St Co
• Was considered as one of the major suppliers of Oakdale
• Is involved in developing products jointly with Oakdale

A BK HLG LTD

40
 • Some form of customized relationship exists between this supplier and Oakdale
• Considered as one of the suppliers that gives ad-hoc contracts/projects to Oakdale
• Contributes in making the relationship between Oakdale and the supplier modular
in nature.

The following suppliers qualified as strategic on the following bases

• Oakdale is highly dependent on this suppliers in terms of product

• Was considered amongst the suppliers who provided ad-hoc business contracts
/projects to Oakdale.

These suppliers are as follows;

CEM U ORTNS LTD
EC .F LTD
CIVL & MNE LTD
FST PS HL LIMITED
CTLE CMT LTD, the main reason why this supplier qualified as strategic to Oakdale
was because of the OEMs high dependency on this supplier.
• Strategic in term of Oakdale’s high dependency on the supplier

OPPORTUNITIC SUPPLIERS

These suppliers were thought to be opportunistic as they were considered as “just” one of
the suppliers to Oakdale. Meaning their products or services could be substituted. The
relationship with Oakdale is probably because they are supplying their goods/services at a
cost effective price or other reasons which are considered out of the scope of this study
Below is a list of those suppliers considered to be opportunistic

41
Table 7 : list of those suppliers considered to be opportunistic
CRS U LTD FL SS
D. G. EPTS J S FWDG TTL P.Ltd
REM GH & CO GB LBRTS LTD DYLD IND
DAM U SM TNR & SN LTD RHMDSH DTRT C
BAR& WHS C MC PT HR LTD MSD (DLGTN) LTD
R F LDPE PDTS Pvc (Pm Co.) ARCO
CON PDTS (KKDY) LTD Pck Br ORT IM LUB
W.HD TST EV ASTEl J & L IND SS
JM TPN TSPT Pltats QTY MGMT S
MED S CO LRCO U LTD Wlmsns
HA N AGTS R S CMPTS LTD LDEN GP
KU EXTS WTWD TBR & F T-MB (UK) LTD
T UN OF YK JVH LTD N. E T RCDS
CATE LTD THOE LTD TYRT LTD
XI D ST CO. LTD SG . U LTD YKSHIR IN B. SS
Thn Wlhm TBMRE FWD SK DEV
Eu EpT PRS & LMD UMR MC PLC
LKD PV Prcs Pv $TLtd. HWTH T( R)
SN EL PLC R&J Bgs BMER
BIP SK IN BR LTD SNLHT SC GP Dg Bo & Ss (Sht)Ltd
Den Fdg GRHM TD LTD HK FTRS LTD
SGL CN GP STYS: SP WRD B (MTON) LTD/PA
MT WT AS TMC LTD ARS LTD
BP O K L TD BLDS M F SCM PLC
LCO SLS LTD Tsde s FGST. SSLTD
UM ST ITNAL J.HLNSC .LTD LAFG RD A LTD
TTL BTR CTR ST LTD A. RK SE LTD
(BBS) A5 HLTD NHBC
Rat St Ept Mdlton F Ltd UPX (YKS) LTD
STKS BR LTD BIF W S. LTD KC B. HLTH LTD
SHF MTLS H LTD TMOVC PL LTD TYN G CB LTD
SM ECL LTD SOD SFT TNER FAB
Ms Ida AL WDKLTD T C HRN JCB
Pthe U Ltd PR ENG PLtC D TQ LTD
YKSHE WTR B LTD WMN EQMT LTD
CDSTP LTD BBUR A HL'S AT
Matn Sls Ltd WT TA GGE LTD BSS LK
SDGD RC BGHSE ENG LTD ALS CA (U) LTD

42
WLS SCT BTISH TLCM Plc CTY EL F
EDN HP BDG MT G SNBL & SN LTD MER LAB LTD
D-T LTD RMDE E. C BRC
ES PRJTS LTD Thpsn & sns BDTN TRS FTBL C
SPE LTD OR PYT PR Ai CH LTD
Wels Wc Ltd Pat Sci R WLSELY UK LTD
EBY VKG DT IMECHE
GRTHM CAS NUMD (UK) LTD NVF PTS LTD
Ma (Ma Ad S) Zen w& s HPM STM LTD
Technocopy JOS P (MD) LTD FIT RPSE TRN
TES I.C CHIP PT H D. Pat & W
ABR INS LTD PESN PR NWSQT (N E) LTD
ST PRCTS LTD W T BD LTD

The findings suggest that there were some customers who on the bases of the above
classification qualified neither as strategic nor opportunistic customers. They were sort of
in-between) In this respect the researcher used her discretion to classify them as least
strategic while those who met the requirements were classified as the most strategic
customers.
The classification as applicable to Oakdale was in the categories of most strategic,
strategic and opportunistic customers.
In the case of suppliers, the analysis took a different trend. There were some suppliers
who fulfilled the conditions to qualify as strategic and there was a case where the
supplier was qualified as strategic not necessarily because it fulfilled the conditions but
simply because of Oakdale’s high dependence on the supplier which could be as result of
supplying goods at a cost effective price or simply because of other reasons which are out
of the scope of this study

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that there exist different forms of relationships between
Oakdale and its customers and suppliers, and these relationships may have some
implications on the management and design of the enterprise. Some of the relationships
were found to be strategic, whilst others were opportunistic. The strategic relationships,
either from the supplier or customers are more important to the enterprise managements
than the opportunistic once, even though all of the customer/supplies trading with

43
Oakdale are considered significant to the managements.
From the analysis Oakdale positions in competition with other company of the same
trading interest is not the best because of the small number of strategic customers that the
enterprise can rely on. In the case of suppliers, there was high a high dependency of
Oakdale to certain suppliers because of their unique products supplied to Oakdale,
example of such suppliers include: CTLE and CMT.
The current exploration of the enterprise, supplier and customer relationships is probably
the first of such study for Oakdale and it is preliminary. It is not conclusive with respect
to how the changes in management strategies and overall effect on the enterprise will be
perceived. The future viability of enterprise will depend upon careful management
research, including the policy management options.
Despite its preliminary status, the present study can be used as a framework for framing
future proposition which could be used for better management approach.
Recommendations from the present study include recognition of all the suppliers and
customers, but it will be relatively good, to step up additional efforts to increase strategic
customers, hence preventing jittering of the enterprise during innate uncertainties which
do exist in today’s present business world.
Recommendations for further research
It would be useful to investigate in detail the reasons and ways of developing more
collaborative relationship with potential /existing customers.

44
 REFERNCES

Amaitik, S, and Kilic, S. M.. 2005. International journal of production research.Step –

based feature modeller for computer-aided process planning, Vol 43 No15.

Bakos, Y. 1991. A strategic analysis of electronic market places. MIS quarterly, Vol 15,
No 3 .

Bakos ,Y. and Brynjolfson ,E. 2000. Bundling and competition on the internet:
aggregation strategies for information goods. Marketing Science 19: 63-82

Bremer, C. F, and Michillini, F.S. 2001. An example of a Brazilian virtual organization.

Journal of International Manufacture 12: 213-221.

Binder, M., and Clegg, B. T. 2006. A conceptual framework for enterprise management.
Internal Journal of production Research, Vol, 44. No 18-19

Byrne, J. A and Brandt, R. 1993.The virtual corporation Business week, 8 February,

1993, 36-41.

Choy, K. L., Lee W, B, and Lo, V. 2002. Expert system s with Applications.
Development of a case based intelligent customer-supplier relationship management Vol
23, No3 .

Davies, E W and Spekman, R.E., 2003. The extended enterprise; Gaining competitive
advantage through collaborative supply chains, .Financial Times, Prentice -Hall: London.

Fensel, D., Ying, D., and Omelayenko, B. 2001. Intelligent E-Business. Product data
integration in B2B market places. WWW. computer .org/intelligent.

Hammami, A ., Burlat, P., and Campagne, J.P. 2003. Evaluating orders allocation
within networks of firms. International journal of production economics 86.233-249.

Hamel,G., and Prahalad., C, K. 1994. Competing for the future. Harvard Business
school press, Boston.

Kale, S. H. 2004. Marketing Management. CRM failure and the seven deadly sins 13
Sept ,42-46

45
Kenneth, C. Laudon and J, P. Laudon. 2004. Management Information Systems.
Managing .The Digital Firm.. Pearson.

Payne, A, and Frow, P. 2005. A strategic framework for customer relationship

management. Journal of Marketing 69, 167-176.

Porter, M. E., 1980. Competitive strategies: Techniques for analyzing industries and
competitors. Free Press. New York.

Quiescent, M., Bruccoleri, M., Commare, U., Notola, S. D, and Perrone, G. 2006.
Business process-oriented design of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems for small
and medium enterprises, International journal of production Research 44: 3797-3811.

Robertson, T, S, and Gatignon, H .1998. Strategic management journal .Technology

development mode: A transaction cost concepualistion.19: 515-531

Russel ,S. W. 2001. Carlifornia management review .A framework for customer

relationship management, Vol 43 ,No 4

Segerstedt, A. 2006. Master production scheduling and comparisons of material

requirements planning and over-time planning.

Sohal, A S ., Sarros, J ., Schroder ,R., and O’neill, P. 2006. Adoption of advanced

manufacturing technologies. International journal of production research, Vol. 44, No
24.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic
management. Journal of Strategic Management 18: 509-533.

Toni, D., and Tonchia, S. 2003. Strategic planning and competencies: Traditional
approaches and new perspectives. International Journal of Operational and Production
Management 23: 947-976.

Wajcman, J, and Edwards, P. 2005. The politics of working life. How is globalization
affecting work. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Williamson, O. E. 1990. The firm as a nexus of treaties: An introduction .In the firm as a
nexus of treaties, (edited by M. Aoki, B., Gustafson & William, O.).7-8 pp .Sage:London.

Williamson, O. E. 1979. Transaction cost economics: The governance of contractual

relations. Journal of law and economics 12, 233-250

46