How intermodal terminal operations can contribute to supply chain flexibility

(1)

How intermodal terminal operations can contribute

to supply chain flexibility

By

Shujun Zhang S3078299

s.zhang.22@student.rug.nl

University of Groningen Faculty of Business and Economics

Supply Chain Management Master Thesis Supervisor: Dr. ir. P. Buijs

Co-assessor: Dr. X. Zhu

(2)

Abstract

The role of intermodal terminals is changing from a simple transshipment stage to a crucial logistics nodes in supply chain. Hence, the influence of intermodal terminals on supply chain is increasing. This paper explores the influence of terminal operation on supply chain

flexibility (SCF) and unraveles the underlying mechanism of the relationship between terminal operation and SCF from two perspectives, which are terminal perspective and SC management perspective. A multiple case study was conducted to gather data from different views. Interviews were conducted with managers from terminals, manufacturing companies and freight forwarders. It is found that operational characteristics of intermodal terminal have direct or indirect relationship with SCF. Additionally, the operational characteristics of terminals influence each other as well. This research provides insights on how to operate terminals to facilitate supply chain flexibility.

Key words: role of intermodal terminal operational characteristics supply chain flexibility

Acknowledgement

The author feel grateful to the supervisor Dr.ir. Paul Buijs and co-assessor Dr. Xiang Zhu of this research. This study took more than 5 months, in which they gave a lot of suggestions and feedbacks to the author. Not only the author but also them put a lot of effort in this thesis. Therefore, the author would first thank them and expresses appreciation to their work in the thesis.

Furthermore, the author would also thank the terminals and companies who participated the research. Although managers are busy with their own work, they took time to do the

(4)

Introduction

In many supply chains, different transportation modes are commonly used, for instance, trains, trucks and ships. An intermodal terminal in a supply chain (SC) is a terminal that used to transship cargoes from one transportation mode to another. As distribution strategies are changing from a traditional “port-to-port” solution to a “door-to-door” solution (Paixao, & Bernard Marlow, 2003), the role of intermodal terminal is changing from a pure

transshipment stage to a more complex and important node in the supply chain. The aim of intermodal terminals has changed to facilitating supply chain network so that to improve performance of both individual terminals and entire supply chain.

Many researchers studied the role of intermodal terminals in the SC. Woo, et al., (2013) addressed the importance of terminal integration in the SC; Clott, & Hartman, (2016) claimed that the development of the terminal corridors helps the ports to integrate into the SC. With the terminal integration, the influence of terminal grows in the SC. For example, the

disruption of a terminal could harm the performance of the entire SC. As a result, Loh, & Thai, (2016) suggested more involvement of terminal stakeholders to build a flexible SC. They claimed that facilitating the terminal can result in a more flexible SC to manage the uncertainties in the SC.

Supply chain flexibility (SCF) is a crucial factor that both researchers and managers take into consideration in the SC development. There are numerous uncertainties in supply chain. Building SCF is a typical response to uncertainties, changes and competition (Prater, Biehl, & Smith, 2001; Manders, Caniëls, & Paul, 2016; Merschmann, & Thonemann, 2011). A flexible SC enables companies to quicker respond to the unexpected issues and mitigate losses. Now the supply chain requires participation of each node that is involved. Not only transport companies but also terminals try to facilitate the flexibility of supply chain. Terminal operations should be considered in the light of supply chain management (Caris, Macharis, & Janssens, 2013).Terminal operational characteristics have been extensively studied in the literature, for example, Stevens, & Vis, (2016) mentioned that value-added services provided by the terminal positively influence the integration of terminals into the SC. Other operational characteristics such as the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Panayides, & Song, 2008) and connectivity (Woo, Pettit, & Beresford, 2013) are also identified. However, no link between terminal operation and SCF is found in previous literature by the author. It is not yet known how terminal operations can help facilitate SCF. Following this, this research tries to investigate how does the intermodal terminal operations characteristics affect supply chain flexibility. By doing so, the paper answers the research question: How intermodal terminal operation can contribute to supply

chain flexibility?

(5)

characteristics on SCF. Interviews will be conducted with managers from both intermodal terminals and their partners in the SC, including both upstream and downstream companies. This research contributes to the scientific knowledge by investigating the role of intermodal terminal in a SC from flexibility perspective. It identifies the relationship between operational characteristics of the intermodal terminals and the flexibility of the SC, providing theoretical and managerial implications for both intermodal terminal operators and their cooperating companies in supply chain.

This thesis is structured as follows. After this, the theoretical background will provide so that a basic understanding and concept of intermodal and SCF. Following that is the conceptual modal which is the fundamental structure of research processes. Then the methodology will introduce how the case study is conducted, including how the case is selected and how the interviews are grounded. Afterward, the results and discussion will be presented. The last part of the research will give a conclusion, limitation and implication for future research.

Theoretical background

Intermodal terminal and its role in the SC

Macharis and Bontekoning (2004) refer multi- or intermodal transportation as the combination of successive and various modes of transport such as rail and water in a transport chain without changing the loading unit or directly handling the cargoes. An intermodal terminal is one of the key factors in intermodal transportation and increasingly influences the setting and operation of the supply chain (Rodrigue, & Notteboom, 2009). They are the nodes which connect multiple modes of transportations and the place where the cargoes are handled, stored and transferred (Ricci., 2016). Recently, the services that

intermodal terminals provide grow from purely modes transformation to sophisticated logistic processes such as loading and unloading, cross-docking, warehousing. This research implies that the function of intermodal terminal is becoming more sophisticated and the role of ports becomes more important in the SC.

(6)

to the SC but also put impact on the SC. Terminals are more than a logistic node in the SC but a member and a cooperator of focal companies in the SC.

Operational characteristics of intermodal terminal in perspective of SC

Both the seaports and the inland terminals are becoming active by confronting operational consideration through imposing berth windows, dwell time charges, truck slots (Rodrigue, & Notteboom, 2009). Those operational considerations aim to improve the performance of terminals to facilitate the SC ultimately. From a SC perspective, characteristics related to other members in the chain should be identified. Operational characteristics such as the handling function (Notteboom, & Rodrigue, 2009) are not investigated in this research since handling function focuses on the degree of automation inside the terminal. While those three characteristics concern the inbound and outbound operation at the terminal interface. In this research, how those operational characteristics influence the inbound and outbound partners and the performance of the chain regarding the flexibility will be focused.

In the study, we identified three important operational characteristics of intermodal terminal in perspective of SC. They are Information and Communication Technology (ICT), the value-added logistics services (VALS) and connectivity at the intermodal interface.

Panayides, & Song (2008) identified Information and Communication System, also referred as Information and Communication Technology (ICT), as an important factor for integrated terminals. ICT provides a platform where members in the SC can search, contact and

negotiate with others (Mirkovski, Lowry, & Feng, 2016). The information accuracy, updating speed, reliability, etc. are crucial in a supply chain. The information through the terminal influences the performance of both the terminal and the supply chain. It helps to reduce the opportunistic behavior and transaction costs in the SC (Mirkovski, et al., 2016). Besides, ICT has been proved to reduce the process time significantly, improve the transparency among SC members and provide easier access to cooperators (Aiello., 2016). At the intermodal terminal interface, using ICT enables terminals to integrate into the SC (Panayides, & Song, 2008; Woo, et al, 2013) and exert influence on SC performance. But it is not clear whether the deployment of ICT at terminal affects SCF and the underlying mechanism of the relationship. VALS is another important operational characteristic that is identified in this research. The scope of logistics extended to include activities such as packaging, labeling, cross-docking and quality control (Chen, & Notteboom, 2012). Logistics providers in the SC often provide such services to meet sophisticate requirements from customers. On the other hand,

(7)

Woo, et al (2013) claimed adequate connectivity at the intermodal interface as a crucial factor for an efficient intermodal transport system. Connectivity is defined as “an attribute of a network that indicates whether it is possible to reach all nodes from all other nodes” (De Langen, & Sharypova, 2013, p98). Two measures of intermodal connectivity (focus on the connection of sea port and inland terminals) are identified by De Langen, & Sharypova (2013). One is the indicator of specific port, which describes the barge and rail connection network of the certain port; another is a group of ports and reflects the joint barge and rail connection. A large network of terminal helps the terminal to facilitate the SC, but how it influences SCF needs to be studied.

Flexibility in the SC with intermodal terminal

Flexibility is defined as “the ability to change or react with little penalty in time, effort, cost or performance” (Upton, 1994, p73). SCF can be recognized as the ability of SC to react uncertainties or changes. It “encompasses those flexibilities that directly impact a firm’s customers (i.e., flexibilities that add value in the customer’s eyes) and are the shared responsibility of two or more functions along the supply chain, whether internal (e.g., marketing, manufacturing) or external (e.g., suppliers, channel members) to the firm” (Vickery et al., 1999, p16). SCF concerns the internal flexibility and the external flexibility which requires the integration of SC members. Fayezi et al., (2016, p2) further regard SCF as “an operational ability that assists organizations to change efficiently internally and/or across their key partners via effective integration of supply chain relationships." This also pointed SCF development needs good cooperation with partners. As an increasingly important logistics node and partner in supply chain, intermodal terminal may exert increasing impact on SCF.

It is hard to measure SCF because it encompasses many aspects. As a result, dimensions of SCF were extensively studied in previous study from1999 (Vickery et al., 1999). Based on that, Singh & Acharya (2013) grouped 22 dimensions of SCF to three categories: inbound flexibilities, focusing on supplier; in-house flexibilities, focusing on the company and outbound flexibilities, focusing on the logistics. The interpretation of SCF in this research is based on the research of Singh & Acharya (2013). Since the terminal is a logistic node which facilitates the SC and the outbound flexibility focuses on logistics (Singh & Acharya, 2013), this study will focus on outbound flexibility. Inbound flexibility is not investigated because it relies heavily on the suppliers instead of the logistics nodes.

(8)

(2016) claimed that variable delivery time results in opportunity cost and products flow changes in supply chain risk management. Delivery flexibility can be achieved by various methods (Bandaly, Satir, & Shanker, 2016). But the how operation of intermodal terminal can contribute to SC delivery flexibility is vague in previous studies.

Another outbound flexibility discussed is access flexibility. It is the ability to provide wide coverage of product distribution (Vickery et al., 1999). The reason why we investigate access flexibility is that when expanding the market, companies are faced with a lot of uncertainties and changes. The terminal gains a lot of professional knowledge from their experience in the supply network. For example, they have information about the shipping lines, local freight forwarders and carriers. Thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that terminals may provide convenience to their customer when the customer wants to expand their market. Following this, the underlying mechanism of how the operation of terminals contributes access flexibility becomes interesting.

This research also discusses postponement flexibility. This is the ability to keep semi-finished products as long as possible. This dimension was proposed by Martínez Sánchez, & Pérez Pérez (2005) and was identified as the in-house flexibility by Singh & Acharya (2013). There are some reasons for discussing this in-house dimension. Postponement strategy is

increasingly used in various SCs. With this strategy, companies are not necessarily complete the products at the upstream point. This allows a quick production and delivery (Tarafdar & Qrunfleh, 2016), which increase SCF. In addition, this research tries to investigate the influence of the terminal operation on not only the logistics parts but also the supply chain development strategy of co-working companies of terminals. When companies are

considering where to postpone activities, the terminal can also be one of the choices. For instance, they can repack their products at the terminal to save transportation money. Many intermodal terminals provide temporary storage or some VALS; this could potentially enable SCs to increase postponement flexibility.

Conceptual model

The research question of this paper is “How intermodal terminals can contribute to supply

chain flexibility." After reviewing literature, this research targeted three operational

(9)

Based on this conceptual modal, this research will discuss how the use of ICT at the terminal influences SCF, how the VALS provided by the terminal influences SCF and how the

connectivity of the terminal influences SCF. The research tries to unravel the underlying mechanism of how the operation of terminals affects SCF.

Abstract

Methodology

Research design

The unit of analysis of this research is the operation of intermodal terminals. Since the aim of the research is to investigate the role of intermodal terminal in the SCF, the unit of analysis includes the inbound and outbound logistics operations at the terminal.

In order to investigate the how inbound and outbound logistics operation of intermodal terminal can contribute to SCF, a case study was executed (Yin, 2004). This research aims to explore the relationship between operational characteristics of intermodal terminal and SCF. Case research is highly suitable for the theory developing or exploring (Voss et al., 2002; Boer et al., 2015). In addition, intermodal terminals are often involved in various supply chains and complex logistics network. A case study would fit the situation since it is capable of collecting rich data regarding to the complex operation context of intermodal terminals. Multiple cases were conducted in the study. The reasons are as follows. Intermodal terminals are facing complex and various environment. Multiple case study allows the author to

compare cases and leads to more generalized results, which ensures the external validity (Voss, 2009) of the research. In order to explore the inbound and outbound operation, companies who use intermodal in their supply chain were also investigated. Including those companies also enables the author to study SCF from different perspectives, namely the intermodal terminal perspective and the supply chain management perspective.

(10)

The data collection methods of this study include recording, email, semi-structured interviews. The main data source of the research was the interviewed managers from

different companies. However, other sources such as the Internet website, documentary were also used in the research so that the construct validity (Voss, 2009) is enhanced. As a result, the triangulation of the casa study is grounded.

Data collection

The data was collected from 24th April to 12th June. 7 interviews in total were conducted. Three terminal operation companies, three manufacturing companies and one freight forwarding company participated the research. The interviewees were familiar with

intermodal terminal operation or the supply chain management. Hence, operation managers from intermodal terminals and SC managers from manufacturing companies and freight forwarding companies were invited to participate the data collection.

The cases were selected based on literal replication logic where similar outcomes were expected. Thus, the terminals were set in the Netherlands to avoid significant differences among unit of analysis. Three inland terminals in total were selected. Terminal 1 was selected from a list of Dutch inland terminals. The list is published by Uitgeverij Logistiek who keeps publishing information around port of Rotterdam for forty years and is professional in

waterway information sharing. 30 inland terminal operation companies inside the Netherlands were included in the list. After emailing the contact person of those inland terminals, the author got one inland terminal who showed interest to the research. Two additional intermodal terminal operation companies (Terminal 2 and Terminal 3) were connected through the personal network of one of the researchers.

The three terminals are transferring transport mode between waterway and truck but they are still different from each other. Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 have been founded for years, while Terminal 3 has been opened for only 3 months. The volume that each terminal handles is also different. In 2016, Terminal 1 handled about 8000 containers, which are mainly go to China; Terminal 2 handled approximately 39000 containers to all over the world; Terminal 3 had very limited number of handled container for the latest 3 months since it is in the start-up stage. A notable piece of information is that unlike Terminal 1 and 2, Terminal 3 is a subsidiary of a large freight forwarding company who also concerns the entire supply chain performance in addition to the terminal performance.

Four companies who use intermodal in their supply chain were selected as additional data sources. Those companies were manufacturing companies and freight forwarding companies from Netherlands and China. Company 1 is a large food product company who use

(11)

deploy waterway-truck to transport goods. Both of the two companies locate near to the inland terminals that they are working with. Company 3 uses the intermodal terminal to transport aerospace structures to all over the world. Due to the high value, low volume of aerospace structure, Company 3 uses air-truck instead of waterway-truck to transport

products. A professional transport company arranges all the transport issues for Company 3. Company 4 is a Chinese freight forwarding company who work with intermodal terminals to help their customer in logistics.

Two groups of semi-structured questions were prepared before the interviews. The first group was the interviews with the intermodal terminal operators. The major aim of this group of interviews was to collect the information about the intermodal terminal operation

characteristics. At the same time, questions about SCF were also asked in order to collect information of SCF from terminal perspective. The second group was the interviews with the companies who work with intermodal terminals. The major aim of this group of interviews was to collect information about SCF. Analogically, questions about the intermodal terminals in their SC were also discussed. A case study protocol was presented in Appendix A to give details of how the data collection is prepared and realized.

Data analysis

In order to analyze the collected data, a coding tree was developed (Bryman, 2015). Excel was used to develop the coding tree and reduce data. The steps the author conducted were as follows. At first, the interviews were transcribed into 27 pages of transcripts in total. Then, each transcribed quote was put in Excel in different colors. Each color stands for each terminal or company. Some questions were also put in the file when the answer alone causes ambiguity. For example, when the answer is “Yes," the question is also included in the transcript. Afterward, every quote in the transcript was carefully read and coded. The first layer codes were descriptive codes, which described the most informational and important message of each quote. The second layer codes were the link to terminal operation. This is important because the unit of analysis of this paper was terminal operation. The third layer codes described the relation between the terminal operation and SCF. Patterns were matched through the third layer codes. The internal validity (Yin, 2009) of the research was grounded. Table 1 gives an example of the coding tree and shows how the quotes were coded iteratively in Excel. Quotes Descriptive codes Link to terminal operation Relation They might provide that service, but I don’t

think they have a real ERP system, they have their own system.

(12)

With our customer, our customers also have all that individual platform, if we work with

XXX, we log in their system.

customer portal unconnected ICT systems causes uncertainties and delays So, depending on the customer, we use

different systems.

different system with

different customers On the customer side, we use multiple

systems, on the supplier side, we are the leader. Our platform is the gate to our

supply chain.

different system on different sides

It’s often caused by personal reasons

errors often caused by people manual work between unconnected ICT is the reason for information delay You use so many communication method,

but you often receive delayed information. In your opinion, what is the reason?

Because of the different systems, everything is reactive because people are

involved

unconnected ICT require manual work

Because when you deliver something, this also means that the paperwork related to it

should also be correct.

correct paper work Table 1 Example of coding tree

Results

Influence of the use of ICT at intermodal terminal on SCF

The data of use of ICT was mainly from the operation managers of intermodal terminals and it was most discussed topic during the interviews. Within the Netherlands, the

communication methods at the terminals are similar. All the interviewed terminals use multiple communication methods such as phone call, email, and Electronic Data Interchange (EDI). EDI is an information communication system which is commonly used in logistics operations. Manufacturing companies, shipping lines, freight forwarding companies,

terminals which are connected to EDI system can plan, order, make invoices via EDI system. Apart from those methods, Terminal 2 also uses its own web portal to communicate with customers, carriers, shipping lines and so on. The portal acts as an information sharing platform which provides a large amount of professional information and knowledge to the connected companies.

(13)

companies. ICT deployment helps terminals to build relationship with SC partners and to facilitate the relational network of the terminal. Hence, the ICT deployment at the terminal helps terminal in building connectivity, which is another operational characteristic of intermodal terminals. In addition, the information and knowledge sharing also enable terminals to build relational connectivity. For instance, Terminal 2 provides professional knowledge through the web-portal to customers to help them in SC designing. Thus, companies tend to obtain long and strong relationship with Terminal 2 since the terminal is able to provide knowledge or suggestions to companies. As a crucial tool for information transferring, ICT exerts positive influence on information sharing since ICT reduces errors. So, the deployment of ICT at intermodal terminal helps the terminal itself to build broad network.

Apart from that, information and knowledge sharing also helps companies to control the delivery, for instance, some companies track and trace products by communicating with terminals. As an important tool for transferring information, ICT enable terminals and companies to receive proactive information, leading to a well-planned delivery so as to achieve on-time delivery.

The speed of information is another important factor in delivery. Terminal 3 was satisfied with the information update speed. This terminal agreed that with the help from its parent company, it received very up-to-date information. The terminal’s manager claimed that the terminal is very good at controlling deliveries because that due to its parent company, the terminal concerns the entire supply chain instead of the individual cost or performance at the terminal. However, delayed information still exists even if the ICT is deployed in SC. It causes rush delivery and errors which are not desired in SC management. Rush or delay delivery requires extra work or cost, resulting in waste in SC. Thanks to the proactive

information shared through ICT, on-time delivery is easier to achieve and waste in SC can be reduced.

The reason why the delayed information exists was addressed by terminal operation

managers and company supply chain managers. They believed that various ICT systems were used in one supply chain, manual work is needed to exchange information among

unconnected systems. The manual work between unconnected ICT systems adds difficulties and errors in the supply chain, which increases the uncertainties in the supply chain and causes both information and logistics delays. In addition, Terminal 2 claimed that manual work leads to the information delay also because of the overlapping and meaningless processes.

Influence of connectivity of intermodal terminal on SCF

(14)

All the interviewed terminals have relational connection with direct customers as well as the partners in relation to their customers. For example, a freight forwarding company put an order via EDI to the Terminal 1, asking the terminal to send containers to a distribution center. The terminal also communicated with the distribution center to discuss the unloading gate and the specific time. But the terminal always informs their direct customers on how things are going.

However, there are companies who often lose connection with other supply chain members. Some companies only operate in a part of the SC. For example, Company 2 only transports the products to the intermodal terminal and its customer will arrange the rest of the chain. Once the cargoes left the terminal, Company 2 had no update information of those cargoes any more. Therefore, it loses relational and informational connection with the downstream partners. Meantime, Company 2 claimed that it would be more in control if they had

information about the entire supply chain. Another example is that Terminal 1 and 2 claimed that sometimes they accept orders and receive goods from the freight forwarder, but they have no information about the supplier. Once the relational connection was lost, information was lost.

The manager of Terminal 2 believed that terminals who have large relational network were able to get information from various sources. The manager gave a simple example; the goods should have arrived at the port of Rotterdam according to the schedule. However, Terminal 2 lost the information connection with its customers and did not know whether the goods had arrived or not. But terminals who have strong relationship with Port of Rotterdam can also get information directly from the port. Therefore, with the arriving information from the port, the terminal can better arrange the transport, change the transport plan and can also act proactively in the SC. This adds flexibility to transport. In this scenario, the ICT could also help. Because of the shared information through the ICT, the terminals can better control the delivery time.

Another finding about the relation between connectivity and SCF was that broad relational connection of intermodal terminal could help companies to get access to larger market, which recognized as the supply chain access flexibility. When accessing to larger market,

(15)

In terms of geographical connectivity, the three terminals have similar geographical connectivity. Barges are mainly connected to the seaport terminals, for example, port of Rotterdam and Port of Antwerp. But the cargoes go to all over the world. The trucks of the 3 terminals were able to go any place within a radius of approximately 30 to 40 kilometers to the terminal. There are reasons why the three terminal has similar radius of inland services. The cost will increase significantly if terminals expand the radius. Hence, geographical close to terminals is important in SC.

Company 1 and Company 2 work with terminals which are geographically close to their factory. The location of the terminal is very important since companies prefer terminals which are geographically close to them. According to terminal managers, manufacturing companies and freight forwarders often change shipping lines or carriers but do not change terminals frequently. As a result, companies are likely to have long-relationship with terminals nearby. In addition, Company 2 also claimed that thanks to the fact that the company is close to the terminal, it felt flexible to make rush changes in planning.

Influence of VALS at intermodal terminals on SCF

Within the three terminals that participate the research, each provides value-added logistics services. The value-added services can be classified into two categories. The first is the services regarding to the containers such as temporary container stock; cleaning, simple repairing and painting of containers. These services are commonly provided by the terminals. The other type of value-added logistics services is regarding to the products. Terminals with a warehouse can provide this kind of services for their customers. For example, Terminal 2 does the stuffing and stripping of the products, Terminal 3 checks damage of the products. Terminal 3 also consolidates products for its customers. With a big warehouse, Terminal 3 does the picking, packing and the distribution within Belgium for certain customers.

Flexible warehousing, named by an interviewed terminal, facilitates the delivery flexibility to a large extent. Flexible warehousing means that terminals have the capacity to store

(16)

Service quality is another issued addressed in the interviews. No interviewed manufacturing company are using VALS provided by terminals at this moment. Terminals are willing to provide more VALS to customers while companies do not show much interest in postponing activities at terminal. This is because that companies worry about the quality of the VALS. First, companies would not postpone core activities at terminals because core processes concern not only the quality of products but also the confidential data. Second, companies implied that terminals should have decent equipment, skilled people and professional knowledge to deal with products. Take Company 1 as an example, this company only let highly trained workers to add value to their products since the food products should be 100% safe for customers.

Good quality of VALS enable companies to access to larger market. Company 2 claimed that when the company wanted to increase the volume, an important factor that was considered by the SC manager is the temporary accommodation ability of the terminal. The terminal should have enough space or capacity to temporarily store the increasing number of products. Thus, the quality of the VALS was also taken into account when companies wanted to access to larger market. Furthermore, Company 1 believed that high quality of services ensured the trust among members when structuring new chain. Partners can better work with each other when trust is ensured.

Discussion

Due to the fact that the intermodal terminals provide more sophisticated services and professional knowledge in supply chain, Rodrigue, & Notteboom (2009) claimed a

reassessment of the role of intermodal terminal in the SC is needed. This research reassessed the role of intermodal terminals in SCF. It is evident that the operational characteristics of intermodal terminals have a direct or indirect influence on SCF.

Influence of the use of ICT at the intermodal terminal on SCF

(17)

deployment at the intermodal terminal appears to have indirect relationship with SCF. Similar research results were found from other scientific domain. Mensah, Merkuryev, & Longo, (2015) claimed that when companies were deploying six sigma process to build a resilient supply chain, the ICT could be a highly useful tool. This also indicates that the ICT deployment has indirect relationship with SCF.

Influence of connectivity at the intermodal terminal on SCF

In 2013, De Langen, & Sharypova proposed connectivity as a crucial factor and defined it. The measures of connectivity in this research only considered the geographical connection of the terminal. However, from the interviews with the terminal manager, not only the

geographical connections but also the relational network was taken into account in terms of connectivity. The relational connectivity, is the number of relationships with other logistics nodes in the SC, such as a port company, a warehouse, a distribution center, a freight forwarder, a carrier. Terminals and their partners want to keep a long-term and good

relationship with each other to achieve efficiency and SCF. A strong relationship with other partners in the supply chain enables companies to help each other to meet unexpected changes or disruptions.

Influence of VALS at intermodal terminal on SCF

Prior literature proposed that the value-added logistics services help supply chain to flexibly respond to uncertainties because the services providers could be more knowledgeable and professional in logistics (Li, 2011). VALS is also commonly provided by the terminals. However, since different supply chains view SCF differently, customers expect different services which are suitable for their own SCF development from the terminals. For example, some companies expect the terminal have large capacity to meet the changing market

demand, while some other companies expect the terminal has more capability such as the permission to handle dangerous goods. VALS can also help manufacturing companies to postpone logistics activities so to reduce cost (Li, 2011). But whether to postpone activities at the terminal largely depends on the equipment and people sources of the terminal. Decent facilities, skilled people and professional operation could be attractive features of VALS. Therefore, the quality of VALS provided by the terminal is a crucial factor to attract companies to take the services and postpone logistics activities.

Conclusion, limitation and future research

This research aimed to investigate the role of intermodal terminals in SCF and tries to answer the research question: How could intermodal terminals contribute to the supply chain

flexibility. In order to answer this question, this research identifies three important operational

(18)

characteristics on SCF. To interpret SCF, three important dimensions of SCF are targeted in this research, which are delivery flexibility, postponement flexibility and access flexibility. Indirect relationship is found between ICT deployment and SCF. The use of ICT strongly helps the terminals to better communicate and share information with other logistics nodes in the SC, resulting in strong connections and good relationships with others. In other word, the use of ICT facilitates the connectivity of the terminal and the development of the connectivity heavily relies on the information and communication system. Large and strong connectivity of the terminal helps the supply chains to develop flexible delivery and to get access to new market. Besides that, suitable VALS provided by the terminals is appeal to supply chains. Different VALS have different impacts on the supply chain, some of which facilitate SCF. The results of this research have some theoretical implications. It unraveled the underlying mechanism of how the intermodal terminal operation affects SCF. The relationship between SCF and different terminals operation characteristics becomes clearer. In additions, by conducting interviews with operation mangers of terminal and supply chain managers, this research studied the role of intermodal terminal in SC from two perspectives.

On the other hand, it also provides managerial implications. It identified the relationship between two operational characteristics, which gives insights on how to build larger network and how to obtain strong connections with others. As a result of the network and

relationships, terminals can be more active in the supply chain and facilitate SCF as well. Furthermore, this research also gives managerial insights that terminals are able to use those connections to help their customers to meet diverse market changes or disruptions in the chain. Also, different VALS provided by the terminals help suppliers to build flexible supply chain in terms of different aspects. Thus, terminals could provide VALS according to

customer’s requirements.

There are some limitations of this research. The first is that although this research tries to investigate the postponement flexibility, no interviewed manufacturing companies use this strategy. One freight forwarder helps its customers to postpone but not at the terminal. The data was limited in terms of postponement flexibility. To get more data of postponement flexibility, companies who extensively use postponement strategy such as the automotive industry could be taken into consideration and interviewed. Another limitation is that some manufacturing companies that interviewed outsource the transport part. They use intermodal to transport products but they do not have many contacts with the terminal. Thus, they have limited knowledge of working with terminals. The last is that only three dimensions of SCF are investigated. During the interview, questions about other dimensions of SCF were not asked. However, only use the three dimensions to interpret SCF could bias the understanding of SCF. In order to better interpret SCF, other dimensions should also be investigated.

This research also provides some interesting and valuable points for future research. From the literature review (Zhang, van Donk, & van der Vaart, 2011), the use of ICT among SC

(19)

(20)

Reference

Aiello, L., Dulskaia, I., & Menshikova, M. (2016). Supply Chain Management and the Role of ICT: DART-SCM Perspective. In Information and Communication Technologies in

Organizations and Society (pp. 161-176). Springer International Publishing.

Bandaly, D., Satir, A., & Shanker, L. (2016). Impact of lead time variability in supply chain risk management. International Journal of Production Economics, 180, 88-100.

Boer, H., Holweg, M., Pagell. M., Schmenner, R. and Voss, C (2015). Making a meaningful contribution to theory. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 35(9), 1231-1252

Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. Oxford University press.

Carbone, V., & Martino, M. D. (2003). The changing role of ports in supply-chain management: an empirical analysis. Maritime Policy & Management, 30(4), 305-320.

Caris, A., Macharis, C., & Janssens, G. K. (2013). Decision support in intermodal transport: a new research agenda. Computers in industry, 64(2), 105-112

Chang, K. H., & Huang, H. F. (2012). Using influence strategies to advance supplier delivery flexibility: The moderating roles of trust and shared vision. Industrial Marketing

Management, 41(5), 849-860.

Chen, L., & Notteboom, T. (2012). Determinants for assigning value-added logistics services to logistics centers within a supply chain configuration. Journal of International Logistics

and Trade, 10(1), 3.

Clott, C., & Hartman, B. C. (2016). Supply chain integration, landside operations and port accessibility in metropolitan Chicago. Journal of Transport Geography, 51, 130-139. De Langen, P. W., & Sharypova, K. (2013). Intermodal connectivity as a port performance indicator. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 8, 97-102.

Dias, J. Q., Calado, J. M. F., & Mendonça, M. C. (2010). The role of European «ro-ro» port terminals in the automotive supply chain management. Journal of Transport

Geography, 18(1), 116-124.

Ekşioğlu, S., Li, S., Zhang, S., Sokhansanj, S., & Petrolia, D. (2010). Analyzing impact of intermodal facilities on design and management of biofuel supply chain. Transportation

(21)

Fayezi, S., Zutshi, A., & O'Loughlin, A. (2016). Understanding and development of supply chain agility and flexibility: a structured literature review. International Journal of

Management Reviews.

Li, L. (2011). Assessing the relational benefits of logistics services perceived by

manufacturers in supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 132(1), 58-67.

Loh, H. S., & Thai, V. V. (2016). Managing port-related supply chain disruptions (PSCDs): a management model and empirical evidence. Maritime Policy & Management, 43(4), 436-455.

Macharis, C., & Bontekoning, Y. M. (2004). Opportunities for OR in intermodal freight transport research: A review. European Journal of operational research, 153(2), 400-416. Manders, J. H., Caniëls, M. C., & Paul, W. T. (2016). Exploring supply chain flexibility in a FMCG food supply chain. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22(3), 181-195. Martikainen, A., Niemi, P., & Pekkanen, P. (2014). Developing a service offering for a logistical service provider—Case of local food supply chain. International Journal of

Production Economics, 157, 318-326.

Martínez Sánchez, A., & Pérez Pérez, M. (2005). Supply chain flexibility and firm performance: a conceptual model and empirical study in the automotive

industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(7), 681-700. Mensah, P., Merkuryev, Y., & Longo, F. (2015). Using ICT in developing a resilient supply chain strategy. Procedia Computer Science, 43, 101-108.

Merschmann, U., & Thonemann, U. W. (2011). Supply chain flexibility, uncertainty and firm performance: an empirical analysis of German manufacturing firms. International Journal of

Production Economics, 130(1), 43-53.

Mirkovski, K., Lowry, P. B., & Feng, B. (2016). Factors that influence interorganizational use of information and communications technology in relationship-based supply chains: evidence from the Macedonian and American wine industries. Supply Chain Management:

An International Journal, 21(3), 334-351.

Nair, P. R., & Anbuudayasankar, S. P. (2016). An Investigation on the benefits of ICT deployment in Supply Chain Management (SCM). Indian Journal of Science and

(22)

Notteboom, T., & Rodrigue, J. P. (2009). Inland terminals within North American and European supply chains. Transport and communications bulletin for Asia and the

Pacific, 78(1), 1-39.

Paixao, A. C., & Bernard Marlow, P. (2003). Fourth generation ports–a question of

agility? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 33(4), 355-376.

Panayides, P. M., & Song, D. W. (2008). Evaluating the integration of seaport container terminals in supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics

Management, 38(7), 562-584.

Prater, E., Biehl, M., & Smith, M. A. (2001). International supply chain agility -Tradeoffs between flexibility and uncertainty. International journal of operations & production

management, 21(5/6), 823-839.

Ricci, S., Capodilupo, L., Mueller, B., Karl, J., & Schneberger, J. (2016). Assessment Methods for Innovative Operational Measures and Technologies for Intermodal Freight Terminals. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 2840-2849.

Rodrigue, J. P., & Notteboom, T. (2009). The terminalization of supply chains: reassessing the role of terminals in port/hinterland logistical relationships. Maritime Policy &

Management, 36(2), 165-183.

Singh, R. K., & Acharya, P. (2013). Supply chain flexibility: a frame work of research dimensions. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 14(3), 157-166.

Stevens, L. C., & Vis, I. F. (2016). Port supply chain integration: analyzing biofuel supply chains. Maritime Policy & Management, 43(3), 261-279.

Stevenson, M., & Spring, M. (2007). Flexibility from a supply chain perspective: definition and review. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(7), 685-713. Tarafdar, M., & Qrunfleh, S. (2016). Agile supply chain strategy and supply chain

performance: complementary roles of supply chain practices and information systems capability for agility. International Journal of Production Research, 1-14.

Upton, D. M. (1994). The management of manufacturing flexibility. California management

review, 36(2), 72-89.

Vickery, S., Calantone, R., & Dröge, C. (1999). Supply chain flexibility: an empirical study. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 35(2), 16-24.

(23)

Voss, C. Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002), Case research: case research in operations management, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22(2), 195-219

Woo, S. H., Pettit, S. J., & Beresford, A. K. (2013). An assessment of the integration of seaports into supply chains using a structural equation model. Supply Chain Management: An

International Journal, 18(3), 235-252.

Yin, R.K., 2004. The case study anthology, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Zhang, X., Pieter van Donk, D., & van der Vaart, T. (2011). Does ICT influence supply chain management and performance? A review of survey-based research. International Journal of

(24)

Appendix A Protocol of case study

Introduction

This protocol describes the field procedures to be followed for the case study. Interview preparation

From 24th April, the author started searching terminal operation companies from the internet to participate the research. One website which shows a list of inland terminals within the Netherlands and their contacts was found. The link of the website is

https://rotterdamtransport.com/chapter/4b-inland-terminals-netherlands/. Emails were sent to

those terminals to give description of the research and invite them to join. Some terminals responded to the emails and one agreed to join. Thanks to the supervisor Dr. P. Buijs, another inland terminal was connected and agreed to participated the research. With the help of one of the study mate, Just Reinke, the author got through to the third inland terminal manager. Companies who use intermodal terminals were found through a social media called LinkedIn. LinkedIn is a global online platform where people share career information. The author searched “supply chain manager” on this website and connected some supply chain

managers. Then the research was introduced to those supply chain managers. Three supply chain managers from manufacturing companies that use intermodal to transport goods agreed to take the interview. One Chinese freight forwarding company was connected through the personal network of the author in China.

Interview

The interviews were conducted through different methods, including face to face, skype, Wechat call. Followed were the semi-structured questions that asked during the interview.

1. Questions to intermodal terminals

Start of the interview (aims to collect the basic information of the terminal)

What are the dominant types of loads that you are dealing with? What is the approximate volume?

What is the scope of the transport services (waterway, truck, rail, air) that your company provide? And, do you transfer all the transportation modes among waterway, rail, truck, air or just some of them? Do you have a main type of transshipment?

(25)

What is your view on supply chain flexibility? Does your key customer require/appreciates flexibility? In your opinion, do you think your company has the capability to facilitate the required supply chain flexibility?

How do help your customers to control their delivery lead time?

Do you provide opinions or suggestions to your customers when they are structuring or improving the supply chain?

What help do you think you can provide to your customers when they want to expand their market?

Use of ICT

Who do you exchange information with? Do you communicate or exchange information with other members in relation to your direct customers in the SC?

In what way, do you transfer information and communicate with your customers or other members in the SC? Email, phone or others?

Do you use information systems, for instance ERP and TMS to transfer information?

If you do, do you use a standardized system or do you use multiple systems to communicate with different customers?

If not, do you think an information system could help your company to better cooperate with your customers? If yes, do you plan to launch a system? How would that system look like? Do you receive information immediately after your customer receive that? Or do you receive delayed information? Do you think the delayed information disturb your business?

In your opinion, does this communication method helps your customer to some aspects or in other words, does this communication help you to attract customers? How does it help? Do you think the communication method that your company adopts helps your customers to control the delivery lead time in their SC?

Do you think this communication method helps your customers to better postpone logistics activities in their SC?

Do you think this communication method helps your customers to access larger market?

VALS

Do you provide some other logistics services besides transferring the transportation modes, such as repacking, warehousing, labeling, assembling, cross-docking and distribution? If you do, why do you provide this service? To what type of companies do you provide what services?

If not, why? Have you thought about providing VALS?

Currently, do you want to expand your services? If you do, what kind of services you would like to provide and why? If not, do you think there is no need to expand or you are not capable of expanding services?

(26)

Do you provide postponement activities at your terminal to your customers? For instance, labeling, assembling or some other logistics activities? Are your customers willing to postpone their logistics activities at your terminal?

Do you think you help you customers to reach larger market by providing VALS, if yes, what do you think they are and have you provided such services? If not, why do you think so? Do you think that reaching larger market is the business that the customers should conduct by themselves or do you think you cannot help with that?

Connectivity at the intermodal terminal

How many ports, rail stations, airports can you directly ship to (approximately)?

How many other logistics nodes, such as a warehouse, a distribution center can you directly ship to (approximately)?

Do you have a geographical or regional focus of the connectivity? For example, you have a denser connection with other logistics nodes in certain region? Why do you have such focus? Do you want to ship loads to more nodes in the logistics system? Why? Do you think you are capable of that?

What do you do if the customers change the destination and require you to ship the loads to another logistics nodes? Do you think you can quick respond to this?

Currently, have you received the feedback from your customers that they are easier to control the delivery time or the delivery time is more accurate in your focused region. If yes, what do you think about this feedback? If not, do you think you will receive such feedback or you potentially helped your customer in terms of the delivery control in your focused region? Do your customers who postpone their logistics activities at your terminal have similar destinations preference? If yes, do you think this is because you are more focus on this region?

Do you think that for your customers, it is easier to expand their market in your focused region?

2. Questions to companies who are using intermodal

Start of the interview

What do you company do?

What dominant type of loads do you transfer at the port? What about the volume? What matters your company when choosing an intermodal terminal?

What is the function of your company in the supply chain?

What do you think the supply chain flexibility (SCF) is? Do you think the intermodal terminal can help you to achieve flexible SC? What do you expect from them in terms of improving your SCF?

Delivery flexibility

(27)

Do you control your delivery lead time to your customers? How do you do that? In your opinion, do you think the intermodal terminal is important in terms of delivery management?

Do you use ICT with other members in your SC to control your delivery time? If yes, who are involved in it? Does the intermodal terminal involved? What do the

intermodal terminal do in this system if they are involved? Does the ICT provide real-time information among the entire SC? Or does your company provide delayed information to your customers maybe because of some formal approval?

If not, would you like to use one? Are you going to involve the intermodal terminal? What are they going to do in this system?

Do you think the use of ICT with the intermodal terminal helps (or will help) your company to better control the delivery time in your SC?

Does your company enjoy other value-added services from the intermodal terminal? What are those services? Do you use those services to control the delivery lead time? How do you do that? Do you expect other services from the intermodal terminal to control the delivery lead time?

The intermodal terminal has the capability to ship the loads to various place by different modes of transportation. Do you think a larger coverage of the terminal helps you to control the delivery time?

Postponement flexibility

Many companies use a postponement strategy to achieve mass customization, do you postpone your logistics activities in your SC?

Where and what do you usually postpone?

Do you postpone logistics activities at the terminal?

If yes, what is it? Why do you postpone this activity at the terminal? What can the terminal provide in terms of this postponed activity?

If not, why? Because you don’t have a postponement strategy or because you think the terminal is not suitable or capable of the activity? If not suitable or capable, what do you expect from the terminal to achieve postponement?

Do you think the current communication method is efficient in your postponement strategy? How does this method work? Does it need some improvement?

Since you postpone some logistics activities, you might enjoy some value-added services provided by the terminal? What is it? Do you satisfy with the service? Do you expect more value-added services from the terminal in postponement aspect?

If the terminal had a larger coverage of transport and had connection with more logistics nodes such as a port, a rail station, a warehouse, a distribution center, would you like to reconsider your postponement strategy? How would the restructured SC look like? What are the differences between the current one?

Access flexibility

(28)

What do you think is important when accessing to the new market? For example, the speed? How do you structure your SC when accessing to the new market? What factors do you consider in terms of the SC?

What else companies are normally involved when structuring the SC? What are the function of those companies?

Do you consider the capability of intermodal terminal when structuring the SC? What do you consider of the intermodal terminal, location, services, connectivity or others?

Do you consider the use of ICT of the intermodal terminal when your company wants to access to the new market? Do you think it is important?

Do you take the value-added services the terminal provides into consideration when

structuring the SC? If yes, what services do you consider? How would the services influence your SC?

How intermodal terminal operations can contribute to supply chain flexibility