An Integrated Framework for Research and Education Supply Chain for the
Universities
Md. Mamun Habib1, Chamnong Jungthirapanich1
1
Graduate School of Information Technology, Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand
e-mail:mamunhabib@gmail.com, chamnongj@gmail.com
Abstract - The exploratory study addresses the education
supply chain, the research supply chain as major
constituents in integrated educational supply chain
management for the universities. As different parties are
involved in the universities, this paper depicts the singlelevel, multi-tier, bi-directional supply chain for producing
graduates with desirable quality and significant research
outcomes for the end customer, i.e. the society. This
framework provides two main contributions to the society,
including human resource contribution and research
contribution. The proposed conceptual framework for the
universities provides a novel approach for decision makers
of each supply chain components to review and appraise
their performance toward fulfillment of ultimate goals, i.e.
producing high-caliber graduates and high-impact research
outcomes for the betterment of the society.
Keywords - Education, graduates, integrated, research,
SCM, supply chain
The researchers identify all types of supplied inputs,
namely students and internal or external projects.
Supplied outputs include both intermediate customers, i.e.
graduates and research outcomes and the end customer,
i.e. the society. The process covers both education and
research activities in the universities. Proper development
and assessment planning of both activities helps assure
the successful management of the educational supply
chain. The integrated supply chain consists of an
education supply chain and a research supply chain. The
integrated supply chain management model for the
universities is proposed to ensure production of quality
graduates and research outcomes to fulfill expectations of
all stakeholders, e.g. students and their families, research
funding organizations, universities, employers, and the
ultimate customer, i.e. the society.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
I. INTRODUCTION
The goal of supply chain management (SCM) is to
integrate and optimize activities within and across
organizations for all stakeholders’ satisfaction. Typically,
supply chains may consist of manufacturers or service
providers receiving inputs from tiers of suppliers,
processing these inputs, and delivering them to layers of
customers. SCM in academia, which is called Educational
SCM, aims at uplifting the societal values by producing
quality graduates and research findings. In the academia,
one of the primary suppliers of process inputs is
customers themselves. They provide their bodies and
souls, minds, belongings, or information as inputs to the
service processes. The concept of customers being
suppliers is referred to as “customer-supplier duality [1].”
It is a surprising fact that researchers developed
SCM models focusing mostly on improving business
operations. Few, particularly academic researchers, do not
realize that the research on academic supply chain
management may also be conducted for their own
educational institutions. This paper attempts to fulfill the
following objectives:
 To depict a holistic view, comprising inputs,
the process, and outputs of the educational
supply chain
 To design a single-level and multi-tier
educational supply chain for the universities
 To develop an integrated supply chain
management model for the universities
Evolution of Supply Chain Management
SCM had been adopted from the logistics concept
[21], [38]; consequently, it has been applied successfully
in different industries to obtain all stakeholders
satisfaction through the supply chain. Most research
studies on SCM are for manufacturing industries [27],
[28], [29], [30], [31]. Few researchers, however, directed
their works toward the service industries [2], [3], [4].
Moreover, very few articles attempted to develop
appropriate models for educational SCM. Reference [6]
proposed an educational supply chain as a tool for
strategic planning in tertiary education. The study was
based on a survey among employers and students. Survey
findings revealed that integration and coordination among
students and employers should have been promoted.
Reference [7] performed an in-depth case study
approach to developing an educational supply chain
management for the City University of Hong Kong. The
research, which used a case study approach to examine a
university, affects the research generalization.
1980
Intiate the SCM Concept
1950
Intiate Logistic Concept
1970
Mature Logistic Concept
1950 - 1970
1970 - 1980
Logistic in SCM
1995
Intiate SCM in Service Industry
1980 - 1990
SCM in Manufacturing Industry
1985
Fig.1. An evolutionary timeline of SCM research.
1990 - 2008
Educational SCM
2007
An investigation of SCM research, since its
inception in 1980 shows drastic evolution [8], [9], [10],
[11]. Similar to logistics, its precursor SCM research at
the early stage focused mainly in the manufacturing sector
[12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [40], [41]. Not until 1995 that
the first research on service SCM emerged [2]. The
historical perspective of SCM research may be depicted in
Fig. 1 [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12],
[13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [22], [23],
[39].
III. A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Fig. 2. A holistic view of an educational supply chain.
significant components of an educational supply chain.
Main inputs, including students as well as internal and
external projects, are regarded as raw materials. Primary
outputs, viz. graduates and project deliverables, are
finished products. Some graduates may choose to work as
faculty or staff members.
Some may want to pursue higher education. This
output supplying inputs are indicative of output-input
duality. They represent the raw materials to the tertiary
education process, who provide knowledge, skills, and
experience to educate students and manage projects, i.e.
raw materials for processing the other raw materials. The
tertiary education process brings in main and supportive
inputs, transforms them to primary and secondary outputs.
Whether the primary outputs will meet all stakeholders’
expectations or not depends largely on how these five
interrelated components are planned and operated. The
aforementioned holistic view of an educational supply
chain may be elaborated through a more detailed
illustration in Fig. 3.
larsh
ip
Orga from Pri
vate
nizatio
ns
&
Students
Se
l
f
F
Pr u n d
oje ing
cts
Kn o w
Man ledge
agem
ent
Fa
m
ily
h
arc
se ts
Re ojec ing s
Pr
on
nd
Fu izati
n
ga
Or
Re
s
Ce earch
nte
R
r
e
Ou sear
tco ch
me
s
E
s
s
er
Students
Society
ilitie
oy
Se
lf
Stu Fund
de ing
nts
Dif
Fa feren
cu
ltie t
s
c
Fa
Graduates with
Desirable Quality
pl
rch
TQM
y
ult
m
fro ns
ip
sh izatio
lar
ho gan
Sc t. Or
v
Go
c
Fa
ea
es
lR
rna nds
xte Fu
Education
Supply Chain
Scho
Family
ls
oo
ch s
h S ege
Hig Coll
Em
Internal & External
Projects
f
try o
Minis tion
a
Ed u c
Pri
Orga vate
nizati
ons
Based on findings from literature review, the
researcher found a large number of papers and articles in
supply chain management. Most of them investigated
supply chain management in the manufacturing sector
[27], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]. Only a few
addressed issues in supply chain management for the
service industry [5], [24], [25], [26]. Very few focused on
educational supply chain management. Just two papers
[6], [7] were found to be relevant to educational supply
chain management.
Reference [6] reported the results from a survey
conducted among students and employers. There was no
research model in that paper. That research examined the
concept of adapting industry models to higher education,
with specific reference to the idea of an educational
supply chain. That study focused on empirical research
conducted by University of Strathclyde, wherein
reviewing the undergraduate degree, present students and
employers of graduates were integrated into the decisionmaking process. Reference [7] also investigated an
educational supply chain in different aspects. Based on
the case study conducted at the City University of Hong
Kong, the author suggested the development of two
separate supply chains, namely a “student” supply chain
and the “research” supply chain. The case study was weak
to generalize through a single case approach and failed to
obtain objective instruments of the supply chain
performance in the university [7].
Education, being part of the service industry, is
characterized differently from the manufacturing industry
as its product, i.e. knowledge, is intangible. Effective
education relies much on its personnel’s knowledge,
experience, and ethics. The researchers develop a
conceptual framework of an integrated supply chain
management for the universities. An integrated supply
chain involves co-ordination and information sharing up
and down the process among all relevant parties. The
model of integrated supply chain management for the
universities is better able to meet the quality expectations
of both intermediate customers, i.e. graduates and
research outcomes and the end customer, i.e. the society.
This exploratory study also defines main and supportive
inputs, primary and secondary outputs. The holistic view
of educational supply chain is illustrated in Fig. 2.
Main and supportive inputs, primary and secondary
outputs, and the tertiary education process represent five
Research
Supply Chain
Suppliers
Supplied Input
University
Customers
Consumer
Fig. 3. An integrated supply chain management for the universities.
Suppliers
Suppliers
(Multi -Tier)








Students (Self Funding)
Family (Source of Fund)
Govt. & Private Organizations
(Scholarship)
Student Suppliers (High School/
College)
Faculty Suppliers (Other
Universities)
Assets or Equipment Suppliers
Educational Materials Suppliers
Internal & External Research
Projects Suppliers
Service Provider
(University)
Supplied
Inputs



Different Programs
Faculty
TQM
Customers
(Multi - Tier)
Customer
Supplying I/P



Facilities
Research Projects
Research Center




Raw
 Knowledge
Materials
Management (KM)
Customer
Consuming
O/P

Graduate with
Desirable Quality
Family
Employers
Funding
Organizations of
Research Projects
Research Outcomes
Supplied
Outputs
Consumer
Finished
Products
 Society
Human
Suppliers
Funding
Suppliers
Non-Human Entities
Suppliers
Fig. 5. Multi-tier suppliers in the universities.
Fig. 4. Single-level, multi-tier, bi-directional supply chain management
for the universities.
In this framework, single-level, multi-tier, bidirectional supply chain has been formulated for the
universities, as shown in Fig. 4. In the higher educational
institutions, since a single party is not able to do anything,
the researcher involves different parties to achieve final
outcomes. Though, it is very difficult to determine the
supplier and customer of the intangible product in the
service industry, multi-tier suppliers, multi-tier customers,
the service provider, and the consumer has been identified
in this research.
This exploratory study also defines supplied inputs,
customer consuming outputs (O/P), customer supplying
inputs (I/O) and finally supplied outputs. Integration of
upstream suppliers and downstream customers is
extremely important to achieve supply chain
effectiveness. Fig. 3 illustrates an education supply chain
and a research supply chain, which together form the
integrated supply chain for the universities. The
researchers represent two entities, which are students and
research projects in this conceptual model. Both entities
eventually become graduates and research findings in the
integrated educational supply chain. The final outcomes
of this integrated supply chain, graduates with desirable
quality and research outcomes will be delivered to the end
customer, i.e. the society by the education supply chain
and research supply chain respectively.
A. Multi-tier Suppliers
In the universities, multi-tier suppliers are available in
the supply side. In this research, the researchers
categorized suppliers into three groups, as illustrated in
Fig. 5.
(1) Suppliers of Human:
a) Suppliers of the Student (High Schools/
Colleges)
b) Suppliers of the Faculty (Other Universities)
(2) Suppliers of Funding:
a) Self Funding Students
b) Source of Fund – Family (Parents, Siblings,
Relatives, etc.)
c) Government and Private Organizations
(Scholarship)
(3) Suppliers of Non-Human Entities:
a) Suppliers of Assets or Equipment (Furniture,
Computer, Networking Equipment, etc.)
b) Suppliers of Educational Materials (Stationery,
Instruction Materials, etc.)
c) Suppliers of Internal Research Projects
(University Self Funding) and External
Research Projects (External Research Funds,
Ministry of Education, Private Organizations,
etc.)
B. A Service Provider
A university is regarded as a service provider in this
research. The researchers identified several factors in the
university. They are as follows:
a) Different Accredited Programs
b) Faculty
c) Facilities
d) Knowledge Management (KM)
e) Total Quality Management (TQM)
f) Research Projects (Internal and External)
g) Research Center
In the universities, there are two significant roles
including education and research. Development and
assessment will be occurred concurrently for both
education and research. Assessment assures stakeholders
satisfaction in this integrated supply chain for the
universities. Four aspects, including curriculum,
university culture, faculty capabilities, and facilities are
considered for development and assessment in the
education part. On the other hand, only three aspects,
namely university culture, faculty capabilities, and
facilities are relevant for development and assessment in
the research part.
The final outcomes from the university, including
graduates with desirable quality and research outcomes
are delivered to the society. The strategies, plans and
operations for producing graduates with desirable quality
and research outcomes are formulated for the
development and assessment in both education and
research. The development and assessment will be
occurred concurrently in the universities. The procedure is
illustrated in Fig. 6.
Education
Curriculum,
University Culture,
Facilities
Faculty Capabilities
Academic
Development
Graduates with
Desirable Quality
Effectiveness
Education
Assessment
Academic
Assessment
Efficiency
University
Universities
Research
University Culture,
Facilities,
Faculty Capabilities
Performance
Assessment
Effectiveness
Research
Research
Development
Assessment
Research
Outcomes
Fig. 6. Education and research in the universities.
(a) Curriculum
 Text Books
 Accredited Course Contents
 Lecture Documents
 Information System
 Seminar
 Project
(b) Faculty Capabilities
 Qualification
 Training
 Research
(c) Facilities
 Classroom
 Internet
 Laboratory
 Information & Communication Technology
(ICT)
 Library (ICT in Library)
 Online Database and International Journal
 E-learning and Distance Learning
(d) University Culture
 University Council
 Accreditation
 Rules & Regulation, Discipline
 Ethics
 Supporting Unit (Administrative, Financial,
Intramural Activities, etc.)
 Coordination with other Universities and
Industries
 Alumni
 Research Projects
 Research Center
Assessment
The measure of the supply chain performance would be
occurred in terms of efficiency and effectiveness.
Therefore, in this study, the performance indicators
consist of key indicators of effectiveness and efficiency.
Fig. 7 illustrates key indicators for education and
research in the universities. Effectiveness measures the
extent to which outcomes have been achieved and
Efficiency
Fig.7. Performance indicators in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.
efficiency measures the resources used to attain a certain
level of output. The performance of the university
depends on the quality graduates and quality research
outcomes. The performance of the integrated educational
supply chain also depends on the performance of the
university. To achieve the better performance in the
educational supply chain, we must ensure the better
performance in the university by the all stakeholders’
satisfaction. The overall performance will be assessed by
the system performance measurement, academic and
research performance indicators and survey of employers
and employees.
C. Multi-tier Customers
In the universities, multi-tier customers are available
at the customer side. In this research, the researchers
categorized customers into two groups, shown in Fig. 8
below:
(1) Consuming Output (O/P) Customers: In this paper,
the researchers identify the following multiple parties
as consuming output customers:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Graduates with Desirable Quality
Family (Parents, Siblings, Relatives, etc.)
Employers of Government and Private
Organizations
Funding Organizations of Research Projects
Research Outcomes (Researchers, Research
Publications, Findings etc.)
Customers
Consuming Output (O/P)
Customers
Graduates
Family
Employers
Funding
Organizations
Supplying Input (I/P)
Customer
Research
Outcomes
Fig.8. Multi-tier customers in the universities.
Others
Graduates
f) Others (Research Professional Organizations IEEE, INFORMS, ACM, Society of
Manufacturing Engineers etc. and Trade
Associations - American Trade Association,
Grocery Manufacturers Association etc.)
(2) Supplying Input (I/P) Customers: Some of the
graduates would be added in the service provider as
the supplied input. On the other hand, some graduates
would be acted as the supplied output to the end
customer. Therefore, the researchers also identified
graduates with desirable quality as the supplying
input customer in this integrated supply chain
management.
Graduates with Desirable Quality: Benchmarking and
value enhancement determinants are identified and
incorporated in the process of the university to produce
graduates with desirable quality.
(a) Graduates Benchmarking
 Knowledge (Tacit or Explicit)
 Skills
 Competencies
 Capabilities
 Ethics
 Career Development Programs
(b) Graduates Value Enhancement
 Source of Fund (Self Funding,
Scholarship, etc.)
 Wisdom
 Faculty Capabilities
 Facilities
 Information
and
Communication
Technology (ICT)
 Research Involvements
Research Outcomes: Research outcomes may include
problem solution, pure theory, thesis findings, internal
and external projects applications, researchers, research
publications, or research findings, etc.
D. The Consumer
The researchers identify the society as the end
customer or the consumer in this integrated supply chain.
As universities are part of the society, the final outcomes
of this supply chain, including graduates with desirable
quality and research outcomes are delivered to the society.
This conceptual framework depicts two types of
contributions to the society, which are human resource
contribution, i.e. quality graduates and research
contribution, i.e. research findings.
IV. CONCLUSION
The researchers investigate numerous literatures on
supply chain management to shed lights on education and
research supply chain components and how they may be
operated and coordinated to achieve the goals. The
desirable goals may be quality graduates and research
outcomes. The ultimate goal of a successful educational
supply chain is, however, the improved well-being of the
society. From a managerial perspective, this paper
provides a novel approach to developing and assessing
supply chain management application in the academia.
This study represents an empirical research. The model is
obtained through the gathering and analysis of a vast
amount of primary and secondary data. Model evaluation
by actual implementation is suggested for prospective
investors or current university administrators.
REFERENCES
[1] Sampson, Scott E., “Customer-supplier duality and
bidirectional supply chains in service organization”,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.
11 No. 4, 2000, pp.348-364
[2] Fernie, John and Clive Rees, “Supply chain management in
the national health service”, The International Journal of
Logistics Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, 1995, pp. 83-92
[3] Stevenson, W.J., Operations Management, 7th ed.,
McGraw-Hill/Irwin, NY, 2002
[4] Kathawala, Yunnus and Khaled Abdou, “Supply chain
evaluation in the service industry: a framework
development compared to manufacturing”, Managerial
Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, 2003, pp.140-149
[5] Cigolini, R., M. Cozzi and M. Perona, “A new framework
for supply chain management”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24, No. 1,
2004, pp. 7-41
[6] O’Brien, Elaine M. and Kenneth R., “Educational supply
chain: a tool for strategic planning in tertiary education?”
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 14 No. 2, 1996,
pp.33-40
[7] Lau, Antonio K.W, “Educational supply chain
management: a case study”, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited, ISSN 1074-8121, Vol. 15 No.1, 2007, pp.15-27
[8] Oliver, R.K. and Webber, M.D., “Supply-chain
management: logistics catches up with strategy”, in
Christopher, M. (Ed.), Logistics: The Strategic Issues,
Chapman & Hall, London, 1992
[9] La Londe, Bernard J., “Supply Chain Management: Myth
or Reality?” Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 1,
spring, 1997, pp. 6-7
[10] Ballou, Ronald H., “The evaluation and future of logistics
and supply chain management”, European Business
Review, Vol.19 No.4, 2007, pp. 332-348
[11] Lummus, Rhonda and Robert, J. Vokurka, “Defining
supply chain management: a historical perspective and
practical guidelines”, Industrial Management & Data
Systems”, Vol.99 No.1, 1999, pp.11-17
[12] Heskett, J., Ivie, R. and Glaskowsky, N., Business
Logistics, Management of Physical Supply and
Distribution, the Ronald Press Company, New York, NY,
1964
[13] Heskett, J.L., Glaskowsky, N.A. Jr and Ivie, R.M., Business
Logistics, 2nd ed., The Ronald Press, New York, NY, 1973,
pp. 14-21
[14] Ballou, R., Basic Business Logistics, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1978
[15] Gripsrud, Geir, “Supply chain management-back to the
future?” International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 36 No. 8, 2006, pp. 643-659
[16] Tan, Keah Choon, Steven B. Lyman and Joel D. Wisner,
“Supply chain management: a strategic perspective”,
International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol.22 No.6, 2002, pp. 614-631
[17] Berry, D.R. Towill and N. Wadsley, “Supply Chain
Management the Electronics Products Industry”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 24 No. 10, 1994, pp. 20-32
[18] Burt, D.N. and Soukup, W.R., “Purchasing’s role in new
product development’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 64
No.5, 1985, pp. 90-7
[19] Heskett,J.L., Glaskowsky,N.A. Jr and Ivie, R.M., “Business
Logistics”, 2nd ed., The Ronald Press, New York, NY, 1973,
PP.14-21
[20] Ballou,R.H., Gilbert, S. and Mukerjee, A., “New
managerial challenges from supply chain opportunities”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29 No.1, pp. 7-18
[21] Ballou, R., Basic Business Logistics, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1978
[22] Tan, K.C., Handfield, R.B. and Krause, D.R., “Enhancing
firm’s performance through quality and supply base
management: an empirical study”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 36 No. 10, 1998, pp.2813-37
[23] La Londe, Bernard J. and James M. Masters, “Emerging
Logistics Strategies: Blueprints for the Next Century,”
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics
Management, Vol. 24, No. 7, 1994, pp. 35-47
[24] Holmstrom, Jan, “Product range management: a case study
of supply chain operations in the European grocery
industry”, Supply Chain Management, Vol.2, No.3, 1997,
pp.107-115
[25]Spens, Karen M. and Bask, Anu H., “Developing a
framework for supply chain management”, The
International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 13,
No. 1, 2002
[26] Cigolini, R., M. Cozzi and M. Perona, “A new framework
for supply chain management”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24, No. 1,
2004, pp. 7-41
[27] Houlihan, John B., “International Supply Chains: A New
Approach,” Management Decision, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1988,
pp. 13-19
[28] Jones, C., “Supply chain management – the key issues”,
BPICS Control, October-November, 1989, pp. 23-7
[29] Jones, Thomas and Daniel W. Riley, “Using Inventory for
Competitive
Advantage
through
Supply
Chain
Management,” International Journal of Physical
Distribution and Materials Management, Vol. 15, No. 5,
1985, pp. 16-26
[30] Zailani, Suhaiza and Premkumar Rajagopal, “Supply chain
integration and performance: US versus East Asian
companies”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 10 No. 5, 2005, pp. 379-393
[31] Wisner, J.D. and Tan, K.C., “Supply chain management
and its impact on purchasing”, Journal of Supply Chain
Management, Vol.36 No.4, 2000, pp. 33-42
[32] Tummala, V.M. Rao, Cheryl L.M. Phillips and Melanie
Johnson, “Assessing supply chain management success
factors: a case study”, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, 2006, pp. 179-192
[33] Stevens, G.C., “Integrating supply chain”, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 19 No. 8, 1989, pp. 19-23
[34] Sila, Ismail, Maling Ebrahimpour and Christiane Birkholz,
“Quality in supply chains: an empirical analysis”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No.
6 2006, pp. 491-502
[35] Spens, Karen M. and Bask, Anu H., “Developing a
framework for supply chain management”, The
International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 13,
No. 1, 2002
[36] Samaranayake, Premaratne, “A conceptual framework for
supply chain management: a structural integration”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No.
1 2005, pp. 47-59
[37] Power, Damien, “Supply chain management integration and
implementation: a literature review”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4,
2006, pp. 491-502
[38] Oliver, R.K. and Webber, M.D., “Supply-chain
management: logistics catches up with strategy”, in
Christopher, M. (Ed.), Logistics: The Strategic Issues,
Chapman & Hall, London, 1992
[39] Gripsrud, Geir, “Suuply chain management – back to the
future?” International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 36 No. 8, 2006, pp.643-659
[40] Chopra, S. and Meindl, P., Supply Chain Management,
Prentice Hall, NJ, 2001
[41] Christopher, M., Logistics and Supply Chain Management,
Pitman Publishing, New York, NY, 1994
Biography of Mamun Habib
Mamun Habib accomplished his B.Sc. degree at EEE
from Bangladesh University of Engineering &
Technology. He pursued M.S degree at Computer &
Engineering Management (CEM) in Assumption
University (AU), Thailand. He is Ph.D. Candidate in
CEM at AU, Thailand. His current research interests
include supply chain management, higher education
system and knowledge management.
He achieved President and Vice-President Award for his
outstanding performance in Master Degree. He is the
Founder & President of Engineering Education & Career
Program (EECP). This international organization
(www.eecp-edu.org), the platform of Undergraduate and
graduate level students, is working for the young
generations’ career development.