A cross-functional curriculum for supply chain education at Michigan
State University
Closs, David J
A recent concern among logistics academics is the increasing irrelevance
of the traditional functional perspective used in business higher
education. Changing economic forces, well documented in research
publications, have mandated that industry abandon the vertical,
functional organizational structure characteristic of traditional
procurement, manufacturing, and physical distribution operations in
favor of a more horizontal, cross-functional structure that emphasizes
process management. Integration of these activities to achieve
coordinated planning, implementation, and control of goods, services, and
information flows through a firm is recognized today as logistics.
Extending logistical integration to include management of logistics
networks both within and across company boundaries to generate cost
savings and/or better customer service over the total chain of
organizations involved in supply, production, and delivery of final goods
for consumption is termed supply chain management (SCM).1 Clinton et al.
provide evidence of this shift when they report strong agreement (mean
of 4.4 on a 1 to 5 scale) with the following statement: "My firm has
increased its organizational commitment to a more comprehensive
integrated supply chain during the past two years." In a related question,
more than 34 percent of the sample firms reported that they now have an
executive position with the words "supply chain" in the title.
Supply chain organizations require individuals who can effectively
comprehend and manage integrated operations both within enterprises and
between supply chain partners. The World Class Logistics Study at Michigan
State University (MSU) reports that senior logistics managers cite access
to individuals trained in integrated SCM-the systematic coordination of
activities/processes that procure, produce, and deliver products and/or
services in a manner that maximizes value to end customers-as their major
concern for the next five years. A recent article in Traffic World more
bluntly states: "It's been very, very clear that demand has been chasing
a short supply of supply-chain people. It's one thing to understand one
mode. It's another to understand how those modes relate to each other."4
While the demand is apparent, most of academia still operates within the
constraints of "functional silos." Faculty in purchasing,
production/operations management, and logistics/ transportation operate
independently, often duplicating teaching, research, and outreach
efforts. These functional silos are influenced by a combination of
departmental structure and performance measures (student credit hours),
which in turn drive faculty lines. Furthermore, separate programs
prohibit students from understanding critical elements of SCM in favor
of in-depth knowledge in one area. At the same time, faculty who design
curriculum for majors complain that there are not enough credit hours to
permit investigation into current topics with sufficient detail. Finally,
faculty members are uncomfortable about teaching in areas beyond their
expertise, and classroom materials are not integration oriented. The
result is a strong impetus for curriculum to remain functionally focused,
even as industry is looking for individuals with a broad supply chain
perspective.
Purchasing, production/operations management, and
logistics/transportation faculty, with a history of close ties to
industry and a fundamental understanding of cross-functional business
activities, are uniquely positioned to lead the way in integrating SCM.
This paper describes the development of an integrated program in SCM at
MSU that focuses on horizontal line management processes. It was designed
to optimize teaching, research, and outreach efficiency and effectiveness
in purchasing, production, and logistics.
BACKGROUND
The concept of SCM has been developing for many years as companies and
industries have come to realize that focusing on the value-creation
process in isolation from suppliers and customers is not sufficient. Once
firms began to integrate internally, it became evident that the greatest
opportunity for cost and service improvements lay in the coordination of
activities and processes between supply chain firms. The demand for
professionals who can think in terms of integrated activities and
processes has grown as implementation of SCM has validated its ability
to reduce total costs, minimize supply risks, and enhance service levels
to customers. Currently, the supply of graduates with skills that allow
them to manage processes that cut across functional areas and create and
maintain partnerships with vendors, customers, and service providers is
limited.6
Academic programs capable of producing such individuals have been slow
to adapt. Arjay Miller, former dean of Stanford Business School has noted
that getting faculty to change is "like trying to move a cemetery."
Specific barriers include historical faculty lines, entrenched courses
and programs, limited availability of integrated teaching material, and
traditional performance measures related to credit hours taught. Supply
chain faculty is often split between marketing and operations, and there
is limited motivation for the two departments to work together. This is
particularly true when each is allocated faculty based on credit hours
taught. Discussions about joint teaching and course content often become
"battles" between administrators who are trying to keep existing
positions or justify new ones.
A review of the Proceedings of the Annual Transportation and Logistics
Educators Conference from this decade reveals an evolution of methods used
to teach the emerging concept of integrated SCM. The literature tracks
changes in logistics curricula that reflect the expanding role of
logistics professionals, including integration of course material in
marketing and logistics; in logistics, procurement, and production; and
in business operational processes and engineering.7 Yet, there are few
examples of consolidating course material from different disciplines into
an integrated SCM major.
Increasingly, industry and academia are calling for programs that educate
future cross-functional supply chain managers who are knowledgeable in
both the depth and breadth of the integrated discipline.8 For example,
multidisciplinary courses that integrate fundamental product and process
technologies (such as Total Quality Management, concurrent engineering,
and synchronous manufacturing) with the business aspects of logistics,
production, and purchasing/materials were a need identified by both
practitioners and educators at the 1996 Graduate Logistics Educators
Symposium hosted by the University of Arkansas. Panel members agreed that
future logistics curricula should be viewed from a total supply chain
perspective.9
The next section discusses the rationale for an integrated academic unit
that incorporates all aspects of the value chain - and specifically an
SCM curriculum-within that department, followed by a description of the
integrated curriculum.
AN INTEGRATED FOCUS ON VALUE CHAIN MANAGEMENT
MSU business faculty enjoy a rich history of cross-functional
collaboration. The first step toward integration was the creation in 1978
of a program in materials and logistics management that emphasized the
relationships among procurement, production, and logistics. The program
used common courses as the foundation for students majoring or
concentrating in these three areas. It was an improvement over a strictly
functional perspective, but still did not achieve a high level of
integration. There was topic overlap, and concepts were functionally
oriented. For example, the procurement view of the supply chain emphasized
suppliers, while the logistics view of the supply chain emphasized
customers.
One problem with a cross-departmental approach involves traditional
university measurement systems. Since teaching lines are often allocated
on the basis of credit-hour generation, there is strong incentive for a
department to teach introductory courses and neglect advanced courses.
In addition, assigning an introductory course to one department and
faculty member results in a somewhat limited view, depending on the
teacher's academic focus and experience. If the instructor is charismatic,
students tend to be drawn to the functional area of that faculty member,
which further affects credit-hour generation and faculty line allocation.
As in industry, traditional performance measures drive a functional
orientation.
After years of cross-departmental cooperation, both faculty and industry
advisors agreed that a formal integrated SCM organizational structure was
needed. Recruiters were voicing stronger interest in cross-functional
capabilities and were less interested in operational detail, which could
be learned on the job. In early 1997, the business school at MSU created
a single integrated department comprised of marketing, procurement,
production, and logistics disciplines. Named the Department of Marketing
and Supply Chain Management, it developed the "Earth to Earth philosophy,"
which encompasses the complex process of creating value by accessing and
deploying resourcestransforming, moving, assorting, and combining
them-as well as consuming and disposing of them, all in accordance with
the needs and wants of consumers and within societal requirements.
In addition to the operational components of new product development,
procurement, operations management, and logistics, the major components
of this philosophy are: ( 1 ) recognition of marketing segmentation,
targeting, and positioning as a guidance system for the value creation
process; (2) awareness of a global environment as information systems,
transportation, and political advances make political boundaries
increasingly obsolete in terms of markets, sourcing, and societal
requirements and make domestic competition vulnerable to global and
competitive forces; and (3) application of relationship marketing to
develop vertical coordination and integration between organizations and
operations. Figure 1 illustrates the components of the Earth to Earth
philosophy.
Four specific goals guide the activities of departmental faculty. First,
contribute to societal wellbeing through enhancing the economic value
creation process. Second, enhance the national and international standing
of the department by maintaining and expanding excellence in the core
areas as well as overall integration in business process management. Third,
pursue recognition in business and academic communities through a
commitment to integrated business process management, including
integrative research programs and curriculum development. Fourth,
develop and disseminate knowledge through research and learning
environments pertaining to integrated marketing and SCM.
THE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT CURRICULUM
The undergraduate program in SCM was designed to provide a breadth of
knowledge in strategies and operations as well as depth and experience
in key functional areas, including procurement, manufacturing planning
and operations, inventory planning, distribution operations, and
customer service. One choice involved which topic areas in traditional
functional areas to sacrifice in order to provide sufficient breadth
across integrated activities. Another challenge was to make room, within
the limitations on credit hours, for more detailed coverage of
state-of-the-art solutions and approaches as well as more experience in
problem solving.
A significant portion of the new time requirements was realized by
eliminating topic overlap in various courses. For example, it was
discovered that forecasting and inventory management and control were
taught in several disciplinary areas. Similar duplication was found for
customer service, quality, requirements planning, and performance
measurement. It also became clear that existing academic programs, which
were integrated in concept but still exhibited strong functional
characteristics, had to be substantially redesigned to emphasize supply
chain integration, reduce duplication, and allow for more coverage of key
topics, such as information technology applications.
A cross-functional team of faculty was assigned to design the integrated
curriculum. Initially, the group sought to subdivide the existing courses
into five or six major modules and then form the modules into coherent
classes. This would minimize changes in presentation material and
facilitate teaching, since each module could be assigned to an individual
faculty member. After numerous attempts at this approach proved
unsatisfactory, the team realized it had to design a truly integrative
sequence of courses.
The method chosen might be termed "decomposition," in that each existing
course was decomposed into individual topics. The definition of each topic
included the learning objectives, key points, functional perspective
(procurement, production, or logistics) and the depth of coverage
necessary. The functional perspective was included to identify the course
from which the topic had come as well as to indicate the focus of the
detailed content.
Prior to rearranging the material, a decision was made regarding the
overall philosophy of the supply chain major within the business
curriculum. The approach called for three levels of courses. The first,
required of all undergraduate business majors, developed a basic
awareness of supply chain objectives, processes, activities, and careers.
The purpose was to describe the role of supply chains in business and
everyday life. It was designed to meet the American Association of
Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) requirements for a production or
operations course.
The second level, required as the first major course of all SCM majors,
covered core knowledge regarding supply chain operations, dynamics, and
strategy. It was designed to answer questions regarding why and how as
well as provide a common base for further detailed investigations into
the functional areas of procurement, production, and logistics. This core
knowledge had to be of sufficient depth to allow students to obtain
internships and to support detailed work in application courses. The
challenge was to replace six credit hours (three each in
purchasing/production and logistics/transportation) with three or four
credits of SCM. (MSU is on a semester system.)
The third level provided detailed application of procurement, production,
and logistics. Students would be exposed to functional problem situations,
decision making, and solution approaches.
Building upon the Earth to Earth philosophy, topics were organized into
courses at the three levels: basic awareness, core knowledge, and detailed
application. The topical material was then sequenced to provide a
consumer-focused perspective of supply chain activities, operations, and
strategies. It was structured into the program depicted in Figure 2, which
was initiated in the spring semester 1998.
The introductory course (MSC 303) examines SCM in terms of firm
competitiveness and a broad understanding of the activities involved.
Topics include the role of supply chain processes in determining
competitive advantage with respect to quality, flexibility, lead-time,
and cost. In designing the course, the faculty used the analogy of building
a house; the idea is to introduce students to the tools, raw materials,
and subcomponents, not provide in-depth knowledge about how to put the
pieces together. Appendix A lists specific class sessions, topics, and
the number of lectures dedicated to each area.
The second course (MSC 305) provides the knowledge required as a
foundation for majors pursuing a career in the field. There is some
repetition in topic areas, but they are covered in greater depth and
specificity. Special emphasis is given to relating the activities to
functional management and decision making under a new paradigm of
integrated SCM. To continue the house building analogy, this course shows
students how the tools and components may be used together to build a house.
Underscoring all instruction is the notion that the primary strategic goal
of SCM is to provide the firm with an efficient and effective means of
creating value for customers and consumers.
New, integrative topic areas were designed to introduce the idea of value
development and position the structure of supply chain operations as part
of the basic fabric of firm strategy. Addressed are such issues as supply
chain information systems, relationship management, and performance
measurement. Appendix B lists specific class sessions, topics, and the
number of lectures dedicated to each area.
Three "drill down" courses (MSC 401, 402, and 442) develop application
and functional problem-solving experience in traditional supply chain
areas. The Procurement and Supply Management course provides an
understanding of the purchasing function's role in fulfilling the firm's
operations and competitive strategies, supplier evaluation and
development, relationships with suppliers, purchasing research,
negotiation, commodity planning, and cost, price, and value analysis. The
Manufacturing Planning and Control course deals with theory and practice
production planning, demand management, master scheduling, materials
requirements and capacity planning, shop floor control, computer
integrated manufacturing, and just-in-time systems. Finally, Logistics
and Transportation Management provides a microanalysis of customer
service, order management, distribution operations, facility design, and
purchasing and operation of transportation services. The final required
course (MSC 470) covers analysis and problem solving of SCM cases, using
knowledge obtained in previous courses. The class also requires student
teams to compete in a simulation that exhibits supply chain dynamics. The
emphasis is on job skills such as teamwork and communications.
The drill down courses focus on in-depth understanding of analytical tools
needed to make decisions in entry-level operational positions, including
decision frameworks, processes, and software. Whereas MSC 305 presented
a blueprint of how supply chain components fit together, these courses
provide a functional manager's view of the tools used to make and implement
decisions affecting the firm's ability to reach strategic goals and create
value for customers. The final integrative course gives students the
opportunity to apply this knowledge in a real-world, case-oriented
setting.
The progression of knowledge, combined with significant internship
opportunities, yields graduates who can excel in entry-level management
positions and who understand how functional roles integrate with other
activities, within and external to the firm. The overall goal is to produce
graduates who can think systematically about the supply chain.
BENEFITS AND ISSUES
The revised program was introduced during spring semester 1998. The
mid-year timing minimized the number of students who would have taken one
of the two core courses under the previous curriculum. A detailed review
of student records revealed that fewer than ten (out of 225 annual
graduates) were affected.
Benefits
Given the recent implementation, there is as yet no way to assess the
program's effectiveness. Nevertheless, several benefits already can be
identified.
First, the curriculum process increased faculty exposure to
cross-functional teaching and research. While faculty are never asked to
teach outside their area of expertise in advanced courses,
cross-functional teaching is sometimes used for the introductory course.
To avoid extensive "retooling" for the core knowledge courses,
joint-teaching is used, which itself promotes faculty understanding of
cross-functional issues, operations, and strategies.
Second, graduates will have a broader understanding of integrated supply
chain processes as well as sufficient functional depth to perform in any
supply chain position. Initial student comments have been positive
regarding the integrated curriculum.
Third, recruiter interest has increased. Their response has been even more
positive than expected. They believe the program provides a solid
foundation for their specific management development and training while
allowing substantial flexibility in both initial and future job
assignments.
Finally, the considerable reduction in duplicated effort has made class
time available for additional detail. Previously, there were student
complaints about redundancy; the revised program introduces the common
topic, discusses the basics, and contrasts the functional perspectives.
This minimizes student confusion, as it reduces the need for them to
differentiate between differences in concepts rather than terminology.
Students also appreciate more time to cover state-of-the-art
decision-making and tools for each functional area.
Challenges
An integrated SCM curriculum is not without challenges that must be
addressed and resolved. First among these is managing resistance to change
among faculty, students, and recruiters. A SCM major is a relatively new
idea, and some stakeholders are uncomfortable about no longer being able
to delineate expertise in purchasing, production, or logistics. There is
a fear that the program and students will be perceived as "jack of all
trades, master of none." The result can be difficulty in retaining and
recruiting faculty and students as well as in placing students.
Many administrative issues arose during implementing the new curriculum.
Developing integrated lesson plans requires considerable time and effort.
Faculty must be willing to do the work, which may include learning more
about other SCM areas. They also must be comfortable with team teaching
and flexible about variable teaching schedules.
Test design, grade administration, and student counseling on areas
outside a faculty member's expertise are other challenges. A significant
concern is consistent testing and grading across faculty, especially when
multiple faculty teach a single section. As the program moves into its
second year, new approaches to achieving grading consistency are being
evaluated.
CONCLUSION
Initial indications are that the new program is doing well. Students and
recruiters have responded positively. Faculty members have expressed a
new understanding of other functional areas and have identified areas for
integrative research and teaching. While the start-up costs of developing
new classes and courses are high, the prospective value gained by students,
recruiters, and faculty appears thus far to justify the effort.
NOTES
1Donald J. Bowersox and David J. Closs, Logistical Management: The
Integrated Supply Chain Process (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996).
2 Steven R. Clinton, David J. Closs, M. Bixby Cooper, and Thomas J. Goldsby,
"World Class Logistics: A Two-Year Review," Annual Conference Proceedings
of the Council of Logistics Management (Oak Brook, IL: The Council of
Logistics Management, 1997): pp. 191-202.
3The Global Logistics Team at Michigan State University, World Class
Logistics: The Challenge of Managing Continuous Change (Oak Brook, IL:
Council of Logistics Management, 1995). See also Yossi Sheffi and Peter
Klaus, "Logistics at Large: Jumping the Barriers of the Logistics
Function," in James M. Masters, ed., Removing the Barriers, Proceedings
of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Transportation and Logistics Educators
Conference, Chicago, IL, October 1997 (Oak Brook, IL: Council of Logistics
Management, 1998): pp. 1-28.
4 Ann Saccomano "Hard-Learned Lessons," Traffic World, February 9, 1998,
pp. 33-34.
5 Same reference as Note 3 to the Global Logistics Team.
6Same reference as Note 3 to Sheffi and Klaus.
7The review of the Annual Transportation and Logistics Educators
Conference covered the following: David J. Flanagan and others, "From
Logistics Management to Integrated Supply Chain Management," in James M.
Masters, ed., Logistics at the Crossroads of Commerce, 23rd annual
conference, Cincinnati, OH, October 1994, pp. 163-81; Lloyd M. Rinehart,
Robert A. Novack, Stanley E. Fawcett, and Gary L. Ragatz, "Logistics
Operations Processes: An Approach to Teaching the Integration of Concepts
Used in Manufacturing, Distribution, and Transportation Operations," in
James M. Masters, ed., Logistics Education for the 1990 's, 21 st annual
conference, San Antonio, TX, October 1992, pp. 136-63; Lloyd M. Rinehart
and Robert A. Novack, "Development of an Integrated Introductory
Logistics Course," in James M. Masters, ed., Towards the Integration of
the Logistics Pipeline, 20th annual conference, New Orleans, LA,
September 1991, pp. 1-19; and Lloyd M. Rinehart, Robert A. Novack, David
J. Closs, and John J. Coyle, "Rethinking Logistics for the 21st Century
and Its Impact on Logistics Curriculum Issues," in James M. Masters and
Cynthia L. Coykendale, eds., Logistics Management in the Year 2000, 19th
annual conference, Anaheim, CA, October 1990, pp. 1-22.
8 Same reference as Note 7 to Flanagan and others.
9Julie Gentry, Scott B. Keller, John Ozment, and Matthew A. Waller,
"Themes and Issues from the 1996 Graduate Logistics Educators Symposium,"
in James M. Masters, ed., Planning for Virtual Response, Proceedings of
the Twenty-Fifth Annual Transportation and Logistics Educators
Conference, Orlando, FL, October 1996, pp. 31-52.
David J. Closs
Michigan State University
and
Theodore P. Stank
Michigan State University
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
David J. Closs is Professor of Marketing and Logistics in the Eli Broad
College of Business at Michigan State University. He is co-author of
Logistical Management and World Class Logistics: The Challenge of
Managing Continuous Change and has published numerous articles in the
areas of logistics strategy, systems, modeling, inventory management, and
forecasting. Dr. Closs is the editor of the Journal of Business Logistics.
Theodore P. Stank is Assistant Professor of Logistics and Supply Chain
Management at Michigan State University (Ph.D. The University of Georgia).
He has published numerous articles in the areas of logistics strategy,
customer service, integration, benchmarking, information exchange, and
logistics outsourcing.
Copyright Council of Logistics Management 1999
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights
Reserved