Analysis of Supply Chain Models in a System of
Systems Context
Widad El Mrabet1
1
Mohammed V University in
Rabat EMI
SIWEB Team
Rabat, Morocco
widad.elmrabet@gmail.com
Nissrine Souissi1,2
2
Computer sciences Department
MINES-RABAT School
Rabat, Morocco
souissi@enim.ac.ma
Abstract— In order to remain competitive in a globalized
environment and to always offer products and services more
adapted to the customer’s expectations, the excellence of the
supply chain is mandatory. Changes and pressures in the
economic environment force supply chain models to change.
This paper examines the different supply chain models in the
literature, particularly those that integrate the complexity and
the paradigm of System of Systems. These models were studied
according to four main approaches: objects approach, agents
approach, hierarchical approach and network approach. This
paper also shows a new perspective of the SCOR (Supply Chain
Operations Reference) model that includes the following six key
processes: Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return and Enable.
This new perspective emphasizes the System of Systems aspect
of each of the SCOR model processes; an analogy with the Zara
model has highlighted this prospect. From this study, we
identify our supply chain model consisting of the following six
subsystems: Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return and Enable.
Keywords—supply chain model; system of systems; SOS;
SCOR model; Zara supply chain model; global supply chain
I.
Kawtar Tikito1,2
Introduction
In order to respond to globalization and an increased
competitive pressure, companies are cooperating more with
their suppliers and customers. These relational
transformations have given rise to the emergence of networks
of companies, organizations in which the supply chains are
registered. Providing a competitive advantage based on value
creation and the integration of companies within supply
chains enables them to reduce costs, increase asset
productivity, maximize profits and highlight new capacities
of flexibility and responsiveness. The supply chains thus
represent a competitive advantage that companies seek to
perpetuate. With a view to continuously adjusting their
structures and operations, it is essential for decision-makers
to be able to study their organizations. It is also necessary to
use appropriate models and methods to facilitate the study
and analysis of supply chains.
A model is a simplified representation of a real system,
allowing it to be analyzed, controlled and piloted. In the
literature, several authors have been interested in the
modeling of supply chains and in the simulation of the
generated models. We are interested here in supply chain
models seen as a system of systems. Indeed, after a review of
the literature on supply chain definitions in [1], we have
chosen the definition which considers the supply chain as
system of systems by referring to five main criteria: (i) the
2
Computer sciences Department
MINES-RABAT School
Rabat, Morocco
tikito@enim.ac.ma
managerial independence of the elements, (ii) the operational
independence of the elements, (iii) evolutionary
development, (iv) emergence, (v) geographic distribution,
and from now on, we view the supply chain as a system of
systems whose elements are evolving, governed by complex
interactions and which are independent both managerial and
operational. The aim of this article is to establish a state of
the art of scientific work that deals with the modeling of
supply chains seen as systems of systems. This paper is
organized into six sections, the first one is a general
introduction, the second section deals with the research
method, the third section presents the SoS vision of the
SCOR model with an example of motivation, the fourth
section respectively analyze the objects, agents, hierarchical
and network approaches, the fifth section presents an analysis
of the results found, and the last section is a general
conclusion.
II.
Research Methodology
In order to propose a model of a supply chain, a review of
the literature on supply chain modeling seen as a system of
systems is needed. For this purpose, we have carried out a
search for the models of supply chains proposed over time,
starting from the year 2003. The choice of this date was
imposed by the results of the article 'Definitions of Supply
Chain-Evolution towards System of Systems' in which, from
that date, the supply chain is considered as a system of
systems.
The scientific databases used are: Science Direct, IEEE
Xplore, HAL Archives Ouvertes, Google Scholar. These data
sources mainly cover journals and newspapers, proceedings
of conferences such as European Engineering Management,
Journal of Operational Research, Omega, IEEE Engineering
Management and Management Science. The deployed
keywords are: Supply chain, Model, Modeling, Complex,
State of the art, SLR, Literature Review, System, System of
systems, SoS.
These keywords have been used through several
combinations, namely: Supply Chain Modeling, modeling
complexity supply chain, State of the art supply chain
models. As a first step, we identify the studied references
considering the supply chain as a complex system. It should
be noted that among the 28 contributions studied in this
direction, 19 authors proposed in their work a model of the
supply chain.
The authors [2]–[10] don’t provide a model for their supply
chain, therefore, our study will focus solely on contributions
to supply chain modeling. In the current economic context,
models allow companies to assess the agility of their
organizations and anticipate their responsiveness to perpetual
changes in the environment (competition, innovations, etc.).
This evaluation is part of an approach to understanding and
improving their value creation processes. In this framework,
multiple modeling approaches are used to describe and
analyze the organization.
In this sense, and in order to identify all modeling
paradigms, we turned to the work of Olivier (Olivier
Labarthe 2006) and Fairouz [12] who reviewed the different
models and they proposed the taxonomy which is composed
of 3 classes of models: organizational models, analytical
models and simulation models.
First of all, we examined the works cited by the two authors
in the different approaches, then we applied the two filters
used previously; we kept only the papers from 2003and the
one that attribute the complexity aspect to the supply chain.
Works that meets these two criteria uses objects, agents and
hierarchical approaches. And actually, we have added another
paradigm of modeling adopted by the authors to describe the
supply chain, which is the network approach. Thus, we find
ourselves with a classification of the models according to 4
main classes: the objects approach, the agents approach, the
hierarchical approach and the network approach. The new
taxonomy is presented in Fig. 1.
A. SCOR model
The SCOR (Supply Chain Operations Reference) model
developed by the Supply Chain Council is a tool for
stakeholders in global logistics processes [13]. It allows the
dialogue between each part thanks to a standardized
language. The SCOR model was developed in 1996 by the
Supply Chain Council (SCC) and is now part of the
American Production and Inventory Control Society
(APICS).The SCOR model is currently used as a reference
for multiple industrial and service sectors in the world.
Moreover, due to its complete structure, this model has
become a de facto standard on the market. SCOR is a
modeling tool. It defines a methodology, processes,
indicators and best practices of the moment to represent,
evaluate and diagnose the supply chain. The model itself has
several sections and relies essentially on six management
processes, as shown in Fig. 2: Plan, Supply, Make, Deliver,
Return and Enable. By describing supply chains using these
process blocks, this model can be used to illustrate simple or
complex supply chains using a common set of definitions.
The model could successfully describe the supply chain and
provide a path for improvement for both global and specific
projects. These processes are presented in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. The SCOR model organized around 6 processes.
This version of the SCOR model is the version 12.0 since
its introduction in 1996. Model’s revisions are made in order
to facilitate practical use.
Fig. 1. Supply chain modeling approaches.
Through the literature, many models have been proposed
under different approaches presented in detail in the forth
section. In the next section, we present the SOS vision of the
SCOR model in order to propose afterward a correspondence
between the elements of the SCOR paradigm and the
constituents of the supply chain according to each author.
III.
SCOR model: System of
Systems vision
In this section, we are interested in the SCOR model, which
is a standard diagnostic tool for the supply chain. We present
a consistent definition of the model, then we study the Zara
model as an example of motivation and finally we
demonstrate that the SCOR model represents the
characteristics of a SoS.
B. Motivation example: Zara
Zara is a fashion franchise and chain of fashion stores
established in 1975 by the Spanish group Inditex whose
founder former chairman is Amancio Ortega. Besides Zara,
the group also owns the brands Bershka, Massimo Dutti, Pull
and Bear, Stradivarius, Oysho, Zara Home and Uterque.
Over the past two decades, Zara has tripled its profits and
stores, and today, the brand is ranked third among the largest
retailers in the world [14]. Zara has a staff of 3000 in-house
designers located in its headquarters in the region of Coruña,
Spain, which designs more than 40,000 items per year, of
which only 10,000 are selected for production [15]. Unlike
its competitors, more than 50% of its production is based in
Europe and not in Asia or South America [16].
In September 2010, the Inditex Group has more than 7,000
stores in 91 countries around the world. Indeed, the credit
goes to Zara who has become a pioneer in the agile supply
chain and most researchers attribute its success to its
efficiency[14], [17]–[19]. Zhang [14] suggests that "the
entire supply chain process in Zara could be divided into four
parts: the organization and design of the product; purchase
and production; product distribution, sales and return
management". In recent decades, the brand has introduced
the agile supply chain in the fashion industry and Zara has
managed to stand out thanks to its client/designer
communication strategy and its ability to deliver the desired
items within an average of one week. Using a fast and
relevant response to customer expectations, Zara aims to
reduce both the surplus stock in the supply chain and the risk
associated with the forecast because the product
specifications are not finalized until the date of delivery is
close [16]. In the next section, we will refer to the Zara
model to illustrate the SoS aspect of the SCOR model
processes.
C. System of Systems vision of the SCOR model
In this section, we detail each SCOR model process and
demonstrate the characteristics of a SoS in the set of
processes in order to build our supply chain model.
Plan is a process for the organization of other processes in
the supply chain. This process aims to achieve a balance
between supply and demand, from primary suppliers to end
customers, in order to provide superior goods and services
through supply chain optimization. Supply chain agility is
essential for the rapid introduction of new products in
response to evolving customer needs and responding
effectively to changes in quantity and time delivery
requirements [20]. As an example, Zara's highly responsive
supply chain enables the company to produce and offer new
models from week to week and make them available to its
stores around the world in just 15 days [21].
Source is defined through the activities necessary to recover
raw material in order to manufacture the product. This
process involves the acquisition of goods to meet the
demand. It includes identifying, selecting and measuring the
performance of sources of supply, and the delivery and
receipt of materials [22]. The globalization of supply chains
has encouraged firms to seek low-cost supplies by pursuing
more control by seeking to manage multiple supply levels
and split purchases of spending across multiple sources to
stimulate competition [23]. Zara manufactures its clothing
using a combination of flexible and fast sources in Europe
and inexpensive sources in Asia [21].
Make represents all the activities necessary to produce the
product, manufacture it and store it. It is mainly based on
product design and production and service management [22].
A supply chain consists of definable supply chain echelons,
where each supply chain echelon can include several
dispersed production sites throughout the world that perform
the same or at least homogeneous processes. The supply
chain partners are legally and economically independent
[24]. Zara has a large part of its production capacity in
Portugal and Spain despite a higher cost. Local capacity
enables the company to respond quickly to the changing
trends of fashion in Europe. Her responsiveness to changing
fashion trends has enabled Zara to become one of the most
dynamic clothing retailers in the world [21].
Deliver encompasses all activities that support customer
orders and delivery. It includes order management (order
entry and processing), transport management and delivery to
customers [22]. Zara has centralized all its European
distribution and part of its worldwide distribution in a single
distribution center in Spain. Other smaller satellite
distribution centers are located in the countries of Latin
America. Shipments from distribution centers to stores are
made twice a week. This allows stock inventories to align
closely with customer demand [21].
Return a recent process in the model taking into account all
the activities necessary to manage the return of the product
by the customer or by another link of the network. This is the
reverse logistics process for the returned product or
equipment, including repair, maintenance and overhaul [22].
Enable is a process that aims to support the other five
processes with best practices to assist these steps. This sixth
process manages all existing interactions between processes.
These processes include business rule management,
performance management, data management, resource
management, facility management, contract management,
supply chain network management, regulatory compliance
management and management of the risks [25].
As a result, we consider that each process of the SCOR
model is a system and the set of these processes constitutes a
System of Systems (SoS), therefore, we adopt the SCOR
paradigm to establish our supply chain model. In the
following section, we will establish a correlation matrix
between SCOR’s systems and the components of the supply
chain according to each author.
IV.
Supply Chain Modeling
Approaches
A. Objects approach
The object paradigm is used to model concepts and
physical entities. Each object has an internal structure and a
behavior. In this section, the authors propose an objectoriented simulation architecture for model creation, storage
and execution via an information exchange language based
on UML (Unified Modeling Language) or SysML (Systems
Modeling Language) [26]. The final model proposed by the
five authors [27]–[31] under this category is composed of a
number of objects, and organized into classes to establish a
hierarchy of objects. These objects interact via messages and
events. To ensure efficient modeling and structure, the basic
classes implemented via UML and the activity and block
diagrams via SysML represent the elements of the supply
chain, whether entities or processes.
Ogier [29] presents his UML model and considers that the
supply chain is divided into sub-chains that correspond to
portions of the supply chain within which the actors have a
greater proximity and share a common objective. Table I
shows the correspondence between the elements of the
supply chain defined by the authors under this category and
the 6 typical processes of the SCOR model.
Sprock & McGinnis [30] use the SysML language to model
the supply chain. They state that the object-oriented
modeling paradigm is a natural way to model a complex
The authors [32][11][33][34][35][22][36][37] rely on multiagent systems to model the supply chain. This consists of a
set of agents operating in an environment. These agents are
autonomous entities that can control their actions and their
internal state. They have a social capacity since they can
interact with other agents using a communication language.
They are reactive in their way of perceiving the environment
and reacting to the changes that are occurring. They not only
act in response to their environment, they can also take
initiatives and be pro-active. Dominguez[37] adopts this
paradigm and in his model there are nine agents and three
Swarms. The agents are the basic elements of the simulation
model. They represent the main functions of the company
(functional agents in the framework).Table III shows the
correspondence between the elements of the supply chain
defined by the authors under this category and the 6 typical
processes of the SCOR model.
system because it relies on the ability of the domain expert to
display a system as collections of related objects, including
attributes of those objects, subcomponents of these objects,
and groupings of similar objects. The SysML language is a
very expressive language for the modeling of specific
problems and the capture of reusable knowledge on a
domain. Table II shows the correspondence between the
elements of the supply chain defined by the authors under
this category and the 6 typical processes of the SCOR model.
B. Agents approach
The agent-oriented modeling approach makes it possible to
represent the system through the identification and the
specification of the behavior of the individuals in interactions
that compose it. It is interested in the representation of the
behaviors of the entities of the system and their interactions.
The agents encapsulate the behaviors of each individual in
order to build a system. Agent-oriented modeling is
particularly suited for the representation of organizations that
have modular structures where the decision making is
distributed and the environment is highly dynamic.
C. Hierarchical approch
It is a hierarchical decomposition to represent the functions
of the company in interactions composing the supply chain.
TABLE I. Objects approach / UML vs SCOR
SCOR
Model
Plan
Source
Make
Deliver
Return
Enable
1
S. Biswas et
Y. Narahari (2004)
Order, Order management
policy,
Supply planning policy,
Demand planning policy
Inventory
policy,
Supplier
Plant,
Manufacturing
policy
Warehouse, Vehicle,
Retailer,
Distributor,Inventory
policy, Distribution policy
_
_
2
DingHongwei
(2004)
_
Suppliers
Factories
Distribution centers,
Transport links
Information
links
Firm
3
MaximeOgier
(2013)
Planning
_
_
_
_
Environment, Monitoring
System, MonitoringActor
TABLE II. Objects approach / SysML vs SCOR
SCOR
Model
4
5
L. McGinnis et
G.Thiers (2011)
L. McGinnis et
T. Sprock (2014)
Plan
Source
Make
Deliver
Return
Enable
Market/Plan
Source, Move/Store
Engineer, Make
Deliver
Sustain
_
Plan
Source
Make
Deliver
Return
Enable
TABLE III. Agents approach vs SCOR
SCOR
6
7
8
Model
Plan
Source
Make
Deliver
Return
Enable
S. Bruenckner et al.
(2005)
Olivier Labarthe
(2006)
K Mustapha et al.
(2010)
PPIC agent: Production
Planning and Inventory Control
Boundary
supplier
Intermediate firm
Shipping agent
_
_
_
_
Distributor, Distribution,
Retailer, Sale, Packaging
_
Firm
_
Supplier
Production, Groupage,
Assembly,Finish
Production manager,
Machine
Transporter, Truck, Stock
_
_
_
_
_
9
Dong Xia Zheng
(2010)
_
Supplier, Agent
Group
Manufacturer Agent
Group
Distributor Agent Group,
Transportation Agent
Group
10
Yan-Ling Wang
(2010)
_
Supplier agents,
Third-party logistics
provider agent
Manufacturer agents
Distributor agents,
Retailer agents
_
Planning
Procurement
Production
Distribution
Return
management
_
Suppliers
Production centers
Retailer, Wholesalers,
Distributors
_
_
Demand Fulfilment, MRP,
Demand Forecast, Master
Planning, Production Planning
Source Agent
Make Agent
Deliver Agent
Deliver Agent
_
11
12
13
Tounsi
Jihène(2011)
M. Boufaida et S.
Boudouda (2012)
Roberto
Domínguez (2015)
on the three systems cited previously, adding another
subsystem which is the environment subsystem. Table IV
shows the correspondence between the elements of the
supply chain defined by the authors under this category and
the 6 typical processes of the SCOR model.
This approach can be divided into two approaches:
Cartesian approach: this approach is based on a functional
and hierarchical analysis of the systems. To do this, it
advocates the decomposition of a system into functional subsystems; however, this approach takes little account of the
interactions between the subsystems. It is based on the
techniques of the descending decomposition of a function in
sub-functions, until reaching a level of granularity
sufficiently fine to understand the complexity of a system. As
an example, Herrmann et al [38] propose their supply chain
design using the Cartesian approach: the first level is the
simulation model, the second level contains sub-models
corresponding to the participants in the supply chain
(consumers, producers and traders). The third level includes
sub-models that correspond to the process elements (for all
process categories) that each participant performs.
D. Network approach
The most common representation of graphs or networks is
the node-link representation. This representation has the
advantage of being familiar to the majority of researchers. In
fact, the four authors [40][41][42][43] under this category
consider this paradigm useful for modeling a supply chain.
This type of modeling relies on a network which is
"essentially all that can be represented by a graph: a set of
points (also called generic nodes or vertices), linked by links
(edges, links) representing a certain relation [41].Yongxia
[43] perceives that the supply chain is a complex system and
that the core company, upstream suppliers, sub-suppliers,
suppliers of raw materials, distributors and retailers of these
suppliers together form a network. Table V shows the
correspondence between the elements of the supply chain
defined by the authors under this category and the 6 typical
processes of the SCOR model.
Systemic approach: unlike the Cartesian approach which
dissociates and decomposes, the systemic approach
associates and brings together in order to take into account
the global vision of a problem. According to this approach,
the dynamic representation of a system is composed of three
subsystems that would be operating system, information
system and decision system. In this respect, Eulalia [39]
adopts this vision and proposes its supply chain model based
TABLE IV. Hierarchical approach vs SCOR
SCOR
Deliver
Model
Plan
Source
Make
Return
Enable
14
Herrmann et al. (2003)
_
Producer
Manufacturer
Warehouse, Retailer
_
_
15
Eulalia Luis Antonio De
Santa (2009)
_
Supplier
Manufacturer
Warehouse, Wholesaler, Retailer
_
_
TABLE V. Network approach vs SCOR
SCOR
Model
16
G. Ghiani et al. (2004)
_
Suppliers
Manufacturing centers,
Assembly plant
17
A.Surana et al (2005)
A. Bensmaine et al.
(2010)
_
Suppliers
Manufacturers
Deliver
Centralized distribution centers,
Regional distribution centers, Retail
outlets, Transport links
Distributors, Retailers
_
_
Factories
Distribution centers, Transport links
_
_
Li Yongxia (2014)
_
Secondary & Primary suppliers
Critical entreprises
Distributors, Retailers
_
_
18
19
V.
Plan
Source
Make
Research Analysis
The SCOR model is transversal and allows defining a
standard guide for companies, which defines a methodology,
processes, indicators and best practices of the moment to
represent, evaluate and diagnose supply chains. Its objective
is to support companies in the field of supply chain
management through the dissemination of good practices.
The SCOR model resulting from this determination is now in
its 13th revision. It identifies six key processes: Plan, Source,
Make, Deliver, Return and Enable. In addition, the 19 models
studied in this research report were classified according to
Return
Enable
_
_
_
_
four main approaches of supply chain modeling: objects
approach, agents approach, hierarchical approach and
network approach. We found it judicious to analyze the
different constituents of the supply chain according to each
author and to extract the analogy with the SCOR model; in
other words, we found the equivalence between the elements
of the supply chain according to each model and the six
processes of the SCOR model. We then regrouped the results
obtained to get the graph of Fig. 4.
On the basis of this graph, we note that the first system of
the SCOR model ‘Plan’ is mentioned by only 7 authors. This
system is a key element in supply chain management because
it balances aggregate demand and supply to develop an
action plan that takes best account of supply, production and
deliveries. In this sense, [44] states that planning, whether in
the context of chain control or in its definition (location of
production and / or distribution sites), appears to be one of
the essential elements of good management for it is capable
to coordinate each entity. Moreover, the two systems Return
and Enable are mentioned by only 4 out of 19 authors;
however, this does not affect the importance of these two
elements in the management of the global supply chain. In
fact, we are now talking about a logistics return; the
traditional linear model of the supply chain is gradually
giving way to a circular model through which the recovered
products are re-injected into the traditional supply chain. In
other words, this is the system that takes place when the
product is transferred and ownership of an end-of-service or
end-of-life product from the customer to the manufacturer or
supplier. It is a system that encompasses the "traditional"
supply chain activities such as planning, flow management
and inventory management in order to upgrade or dispose of
the product in the best way[45]. As for the Enable system, it
is of major importance because it represents the activities
supporting the management of the supply chain, the various
tasks and information useful for the realization of the
"operational" processes. Our supply chain model is therefore
composed of the six key processes of the SCOR model. In
fact, as we have demonstrated in the previous section, each
process constitutes a subsystem of the global supply chain
system.
approaches: objects approach, agents approach, hierarchical
approach and network approach. We then demonstrated that
each key process of the SCOR model represents the
characteristics of a system of systems. In addition, it seemed
interesting to draw an analogy between the elements of the
supply chains proposed by the authors and the elements of
the SCOR model. From this study, we identify our supply
chain model consisting of the following six subsystems:
Plan, Source, Make, Deliver, Return and Enable.
This modeling introduces a clear illustration of the supply
chain and will then allow to focus on each link and to
identify it. It would then be wise to choose an adequate
modeling language that will be able to understand the
complexity of each subsystem while explaining the content
of the subsystem, the flows involved, the requirements and
the constraints. The proposed modeling framework should in
fact enable better detection of malfunctions that may arise in
a supply chain and should also serve as a basis for the
construction of a conflict management referential.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
SCOR's
Systems
[4]
Plan
Source
[5]
Make
[6]
Deliver
Return
Enable
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Models
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
[7]
Fig. 4. Equivalence between Models & SCOR's Systems.
VI.
Conclusion
In this new dynamic and uncertain universe, building a
high-performance supply chain requires the implementation
of certain priority actions. Companies that succeed in
achieving a sustainable culture of operational excellence
along their supply chain clearly have a major competitive
advantage. Supply chain modeling is therefore a competitive
advantage from the fact that it allows the diagnosis of the
logistics network and the understanding of the coordination
problems dealt with empirically in companies today. It also
enables to find more efficient solutions, taking into account
supply chain constraints. This paper presents an overview of
existing supply chain models in the literature. A study of
these models allowed a classification according to four main
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
Widad El Mrabet, Nissrine Souissi, Kawtar Tikito, « Definitions of
Supply Chain : Evolution toward System of Systems », présenté à
LOGISTIQUA 2017, Rabat, Maroc, 2017.
Filiz Isik, « An Entropy-Based Approach for Measuring Complexity
in Supply Chains », Journal International Journal of Production
Research, p. 3681‑3696, 2010.
Tarik SAIKOUK, Iskander ZOUAGHI, et Alain SPALANZANI,
« The Bullwhip Effect: Concretization of Entropic Information
Dissipation in SC Systems », Journal of Systemics Cybernetics and
Informatics, p. 75‑79, 2012.
Kristina Rimiene et Dalia Bernatonyte, « Supply chain
Mangagement trends in the context of change », Economics and
Management, p. 596‑606, 2013.
Cécile Gaumand, « Système de gestion des connaissances dédié à la
chaîne logistique : une recherche intervention au sein de l’entreprise
Bonfiglioli Transmissions », Ecole Centrale Paris, 2014.
Supun S. Perera, Michael G. H. Bell, et Michiel C.J. Bliemer,
« Modelling Supply Chains as Complex Networks for Investigating
Resilience: An Improved Methodological Framework », présenté à
Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), Sydney, Australia,
2015.
Imane Bouhaddou et Abdellatif Benabdelhafid, « PLM (Product
Lifecycle Management): a key to manage supply chain complexity »,
présenté à CS-DC’15 World e-conference, Tempe, United States,
2015.
Ziyang Ren, Atour Taghipour, et Béatrice Canel-Depitre,
« Information sharing in supply chain under uncertainty », présenté à
Information Communication and Management (ICICM), Hatfield,
UK, 2016.
Shen W, Hao Q, Yoon HJ, et Norrie DH, « Applications of agentbased systems in intelligent manufacturing: An updated review »,
Advanced Engineering Informatics, p. 415‑431, 2006.
Larissa Statsenko, Vernon Ireland, et Alex Gorod, « Self-organising
supply networks: A case study of the SA mining industry », présenté
à System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), Kongsberg,
Norway, 2016.
Oivier Labarthe, « Multi-agent modelling for simulation of
customer-centric Supply Chain », International Journal of
Simulation and Process Modelling, p. 150‑163, 2006.
Fairouz Gouiza, « Modélisation et évaluation des performances de la
chaine de transport intermodal de porte à porte, le cas du corridor de
la Vallée de Seine », 2016.
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
L.A. Santa Eulalia, A.D. Munson, L. LeBel, et E.N. Ntabe, « A
systematic literature review of the supply chain Operations reference
(SCOR) model application with special attention to environmental
issues », International Journal of Production Economics, p.
310‑332, 2015.
Zhang Qinghua, « Analysis on the Successful Case of Efficient
Supply Chain in ZARA », 2008.
Cai-feng LI, « Agile Supply Chain », Management Science and
Engineering, p. 32‑35, 2009.
Lucy Daly et Margaret Bruce, « Buyer behaviour for fast fashion »,
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International
Journal, p. 329‑344, 2006.
Tiplady Rachel, « Zara: Taking the Lead in Fast Fashion », 2006.
Stefano Turconi et Donald Sull, « Fast fashion lessons », Business
Strategy Review, p. 4‑11, 2008.
Dutta Devangshu, « Retail @ the speed of fashion », 2002.
Sufian Qrunfleh et Monideepa Tarafdar, « 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, p. 925‑938,
2016.
Peter Meindl et Sunil Chopra, Supply Chain Management. Strategy,
Planning & Operations, 6th Edition. 2011.
Tounsi Jihène, « Modélisation pour la simulation de la chaîne
logistique globale dans un environnement de production PME
mécatroniques », Université de Savoie, 2009.
Graham C. Stevens et Mark Johnson, « Integrating the Supply
Chain… 25 years on », International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management, p. 19‑42, 2016.
Steinrucke, Martin, « An Approach to Integrate ProductionTransportation Planning and Scheduling in an Aluminium Supply
Chain Network », International Journal of Production Research, p.
6559‑6583, 2011.
Supply Chain Council, « SCOR: Supply Chain Operations Reference
Model Revision 11.0 », 2012.
Omgsysml, « Omgsysml website », 17-juin-2017. [En ligne].
Disponible sur: www.omgsysml.org.
S. Biswas et Y. Narahari, « Object oriented modeling and decision
support for supply chains », European Journal of Operational
Research, p. 704‑726, 2004.
DING Hongwei, « Une approche dooptimisation basée sur la
simulation pour la conception des chaînes logistiques: Applications
dans les industries automobile et textile », 2004.
Ogier Maxime, « Contributions à la chaine logistique numérique :
conception de circuits courts et planification décentralisée », 2013.
Leon McGinnis et Timothy Sprock, « Simulation model generation
of discrete event logistics systems (dels) using software design
patterns », Proceedings of the 2014 Winter Simulation Conference,
Savannah, Georgia, p. 2714‑2725, 2014.
Leon McGinnis et George Thiers, « Logistics systems modeling and
simulation », présenté à Simulation Conference (WSC), Proceedings
of the 2011 Winter, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 2011.
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
S. Brueckner, H. Baumgaertel, V. Parunak, R. Vanderbok, et J.
Wilke, « Agent Models of Supply Network Dynamics: Analysis,
Design, and Operation », The Practice of Supply Chain
Management: Where Theory and Application Converge.
International Series in Operations Research & Management
Science, p. 315‑343, 2005.
K Mustapha, B Espinasse, Alain FERRARINI, et E Erwan
Tranvouez, « Agent-based supply chain simulation: Towards an
organization-oriented methodological framework », présenté à
International Conference of Modeling and Simulation, Hammamet Tunisia, 2010.
Dong Xia Zheng, « Research on Supply Chain Management System
Modeling Based on Multi-agent », présenté à International
Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software
Engineering, Wuhan, China, 2010.
Wang Yan-Ling, « Logistics Supply Chain Coordination Based on
Multi-agent System », présenté à Management of Innovation and
Technology (ICMIT), Singapore, 2010.
Mahmoud BOUFAIDA et Souheila BOUDOUDA, « A
methodological approach for modeling supply », présenté à
Communications and Information Technology (ICCIT), Hammamet,
Tunisia, 2012.
Roberto DOMÍNGUEZ, « SCOPE: A Multi-Agent System Tool for
Supply Chain Network Analysis », présenté à EUROCON 2015 International Conference on Computer as a Tool (EUROCON),
Salamanca, Spain, 2015.
Jeffrey W. Herrmann, Edward Lin, et Guruprasad Pundoor, « Supply
chain simulation modeling using the supply chain operations
reference model », présenté à International Design Engineering
Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in
Engineering Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2003, vol. 1, p.
461‑469.
Eulalia Luis Antonio De Santa, « Agent-based simulations for
advanced supply chain planning: A methodological framework for
requirements analysis and deployment », 2009.
G. Ghiani, G. Laporte, et R. Musmanno, « Introduction to Logistics
System Management », 2004.
Amit Surana, Soundar Kumara, Mark Greaves, et Usha Nandini
Raghavan, « Supply-chain networks: a complex adaptive systems
perspective », Journal International Journal of Production
Research, p. 4235‑4265, 2007.
A. Bensmaine, L. Benyoucef, et Z. Sari, « Simulation d’une chaîne
logistique à échelle réelle sous Arena », présenté à International
Conference On Industrial Engineering and Manufacturing
ICIEM’10, Batna, Algeria, 2010.
Li Yongxia, « Networked Analysis Approach of Supply Chain
Network », Journal of Networks, p. 777‑784, 2014.
François GALASSO, « Aide à la planification dans les chaînes
logistiques en présence de demande flexible », 2007.
Keh P., Rodhain F., Meissonier R., et LLORCA V., « Logistique
retour et Développement Durable - Logistique Retour : une
opportunité de développement industriellocal qui allie rentabilité
financière, respect environnemental et enjeu social ? - Le cas d’IBM
Montpellier », 2013.