Journal of Management and Marketing Research

Managing Value Chain Strategy

Peter H. Antoniou
California State University San Marcos

Catherine E. Levitt
California State University at Los Angeles

Cynthia Schreihans
California State University San Bernardino

ABSTRACT

The urgency and immediacy of the current financial crisis that burst into American
consciousness in the 4th quarter of 2008 has left companies around the world gasping for air. This
situation presents a need to review the meaning of sustainability in an increasingly turbulent
environment. Therefore, this article presents a review of the meaning of sustainability in an
increasingly turbulent environments, and it seeks to present a working model for evaluating the
impact of autonomous and non-autonomous elements of the value chain as they relate to,
outsourcing in accordance to corporate strategy. While there is much discussion, both academic
and practical, about the strategic advantage sought through outsourcing and, equal discussion
about the process of making the decision to outsource, little has been done to examine how best
to use the outsourcing value chain. Successful and poor outcomes of outsourced processes have
been reported. To date however, no model has been developed to improve the possibility of
surviving an economic crisis and replicating success with outsourcing. Both small and medium
sized enterprises that are engaged in outsourcing seek better utilization and better management of
the components of the value chain during turbulent economic conditions. Benefits from the
utilization of the presented model and the information contained in this document will better
assist in associated process development.

Keywords: Value Chain Model, Outsourcing, Financial Crisis, Corporate Sustainability

CONCEPT INTRODUCTION

The urgency and immediacy of the current financial crisis that burst into American
consciousness in the 4th quarter of 2008 has left companies around the world gasping for air.
The question of strategic success for large and small firms has shifted from one based on profit
growth to one of survival. This presents a need to review the meaning of sustainability in an
increasingly turbulent environment. This paper seeks to present a working model for evaluating
the impact of autonomous and non-autonomous elements of the value chain on the corporate
strategy of small and medium sized enterprises engaged in outsourcing. The model leans toward
better utilization and better management of the components of the value chain under turbulent
economic conditions. This model derives its theoretical basis in the juxtaposition of the literature
that supports Value Chain dynamics with that which finds value chain lacking essential
measurable standards
While there is much discussion, both academic and practical, about the strategic
advantage sought through outsourcing and, equal discussion about the process of making the
decision to outsource, little has been done to examine how best to manage the outsourced value
chain. Both successful and poor outcomes of these outsourced processes have been reported, but
no model has been developed to improve the possibility of surviving the crisis and replicating
success. This paper and model seeks to fill these voids.
With this model, the channels of information, communication, authority and factors
resource which structure of the value chain are examined. The differences in flows through each
component may be evaluated so that the relationships between components (and between the
components and the enterprise) are more clearly seen. The balance between competition and
collaboration within the chain is calibrated for external turbulence and internal aggressiveness
producing affects, which then are aligned with the strategic position of the enterprise. With this
alignment, the fragmentation of the applications of strategy is reduced, relationships between
components become more transparent and the possibility of replicating or innovating successful
practice is increased, even in the throes of this current crisis. Use of this model in the strategic
process should enable the small or medium-sized enterprise to answer the following questions:
• Are the participants in the value chain part of our strategy design and application?
• Are we participants in their value chain?
• Are we treating the value chain participants as SBU’s or SBA’s?
• Do our value chain participants affect our encounter with the external
environment?
• How do we affect theirs?
• Does participating in this value chain change our organizational structure and
decision making?
• How should the value chain be managed and by whom?
• Are we responsible for the value chain or dependent on it?

VALUE CHAIN

The value chain is a systematic approach to examining the development of competitive

advantage and was created by M. E. Porter in his books on Competitive Advantage (1980 and
1985). The chain consists of a series of activities that create and build value. They culminate in
the total value delivered by an organization. The ‘margin’ depicted in the diagram as indicated in

Managing the Value Chain, Page 2

Table 1 (Appendix A) is the same as value added. The organization is split into ‘primary
activities’ and ‘support activities’. Essentially, this was a way of examining the value added by
both direct and indirect departments or by both cost and profit centers.
Current texts for Strategic Management explain that 20 years after the conception of
value chain analysis, US firms faced increased competition at all levels (Fred [Link]; Dess,
Lumpkin nd Eisner, Hill and Jones, Hitt and Ireland, Peng, Thompson and Strickland). While in
the 80’s, no two companies were at the same level of competition. Where the original motive of
firms was increased production, by the change of millennium, the main motive had become
customer service. Products were increasingly differentiated closer and closer to customer. The
original reactive approach of industries was replaced by an active/proactive approach. These
approaches are depicted in the diagram as indicated in Table 2 (Appendix B): Expansion of the
Relevant Environment.
Customers, also, evolved during these 20 plus years. Where customers had had relatively
little market power and limited interest in product specifications, by the beginning of the 21st
century, customers had become increasingly sophisticated, increasingly interested in
specifications, and more powerful. This expanded understanding of companies and markets
through value chain analysis led to the increasing use of outsourcing in both the primary and
support and primary activities. All of this was intended to increase value for the increasingly
important and powerful customer while decreasing the costs to the organization. By 1999
Charles Leadbetter’s, ‘Living on Thin Air’ suggests that ideas rather than products were the sole
and central generation of value. At the same time, there was an increasing assumption that
products needed to be inexpensive to be valuable, but that idea generation (Human Capital ).
(Peng, 2009, Hitt and Ireland, 2009, and Thompson and Strickland, 2010).
“A recent survey of the main usages inputs…labor, entrepreneurship and knowledge)
should be highly rewarded.” Possible as long as development funding was readily available
through a combination of debt and equity financing. The relative ease of attracting financing and
the rewards for outsourcing again changed the weight that value chain analysis held and the way
it was done ( McNair,, Polutnik and Silvi 2001; Sanjiv (2002).
By 2005, Strategic Management texts were carrying a caveat that value chain analysis
was useful and accurate when applied to production based organization but less accurate and less
than effective in examining service producers and idea generating firms. The current financial
crisis and the failure of firms to recognize its advent, demands that a new look be taken at the
generation of value. Value chain analysis and evaluation offers a starting point of the term
“value” in economics, marketing, strategy and operations fields indicates that the notion of value
chain may be a misnomer, although a widely used one. According to this analysis, only
resources move along the chain of linkages between firms—supplies going one way and money
going the other……Therefore, value chains can be thought to operate in both directions, with
suppliers accruing value from financial resources, payment terms, stability and future order cover
that their customers provide, while customers derive value from delivered products and
services.” (Presutti and Mawhinney, (2003). In other words, the traditional value chain tends to
be seen as a synchronization of a demand chain with the supply chain, leaving unaddressed the
metaphysical sense of “value” associated with benefits that occur at various exchange points.
• Changes in the channels and flows of: Information, Authority/Power, Communication,
Resources (especially capital) have forced changes throughout the Value Chain matrix
since these have changed the exchange points:

Managing the Value Chain, Page 3

 • Information channels and flows have changed in terms of availability, access, openness
and transparency.
• Authority/Power channels and flows have changed in terms of decision and control as
well as input and output autonomy.
• Communication channels and flows have changed with the link of internal and external
networks, and the virtualization of production.
• Human and Financial Capital channels and flows have changed in both in sources and
uses.
It has long been recognized that Value Chain management requires rigorous management
of the outcomes with awareness of inputs, rigorous management of the channels and flows, and
rigorous management of the relationships: internal components/partner/customer. What has not
been examined is the responsibility/dependency/independence within and among the value chain
participants (Champion, 2000).
Traditionally, Value Chain participants have been evaluated on the following criteria:
Pricing, Capital Intensity, Talent Leverage, Structural Fit, Workflow and Specialization,
Customer Acquisition. All depicted in the diagram as indicated in Table 3 (Appendix C):
Evaluating Value Chain Components. It is important to note that these criteria all address
functional level activities with accepted measurement dimensions that provide for the appearance
of objectivity (Porter, 1985).
What has not been evaluated is Capital Sourcing, Talent Sourcing, Dependency on the
Value Chain, and Impact of External Economic Changes. It is important to note, that these
criteria; (1) do not lend themselves to objective measurement and (2) are not within, but among
participants in the value chain (Taninecz, 2000).
These criteria fall in the grayer area of decision-making and governance which addresses
the commonality of the perception and communication of value between and among participants
in the value chain. Value, thus, surrounds the movement of resources through the transaction
process. The Value Chain and Evaluation Models suggested in this paper intend to provide a
more comprehensive assessment of components and participants within the chain. It also address
the perceived value that surrounds the synchronized movements of resources and which should
accrue to all parties in the transaction (Webb and Gile (2001; Adewole, 2008, unpublished ).

The model is an extrapolation of the primary and support activities of any organization. It is
based on the work cited in any of the basic strategic management texts (Hitt and Ireland, 2009,
Thompson and Strickland, 2009). The contribution is in the addition of the shaded area in the
primary activity: Service. In this the attention is directed towards the activities needed to ensure
that the level of contribution of the SBU is commensurate to the contribution needed to be a
significant part of the value chain. If there is not value added then the contribution is minimal
and the SBU is basically removed from the Value Chain.

The concept is that there has to be a part which not only assesses what is needed, but also ensures
that it is worth the value added in the whole process. The services component is the one which
makes the contribution to be both efficient as well as effective and in addition monitors the
delivery of the value contributed. It is the mitigating factor which makes the value come true.

There is no other model dealing with the value chain contribution as part of the activities. This is
original work of the authors of this paper. The intention is to better illustrate how the activities

Managing the Value Chain, Page 4

in an organization come together to create value.

The new model is depicted in Table 4 (Appendix D): New Model. The attributes on the vertical
line illustrate the areas directly affecting the successful functionality of the value chain. The
attributes on the horizontal line are the ones needed to assess the strength of the value chain
processes. They facilitate a high degree of operation/funtionality of the value chain.
From this Model, these authors developed the rubric as depicted in Table 5 (Appendix E).
The rubric allows the assessment on each of the areas on the vertical axis as to the degree as to
how they are fulfilled on the ones on the horizontal ones.

Use of the rubric for Evaluation of the Value Chain Based on this new Model should
allow companies and strategic analysts to:
• Mitigate Risk
• Leverage Vision
• Allow for the Embrace of Complexity
• Create Commitment
• Facilitate Articulation
• Change Customers to Partners
• Increase the Global Footprint

REFERENCES

RELATED BOOKS

Antonette, Gerald, Giunipero, Larry C. and Sawchuk, Chris (2002). E-Purchasing Plus.
New York: JGC Enterprises, Inc. Ch. 9
Bovet, David and Martha, Joseph (2000). Value Nets. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Chapter 1
Hughes, Jon, Ralf, Mark, and Michels, Bill (1999). Transform Your Supply Chain. London:
International Thomson Business Press. Ch. 1-3
Plenert, Gerhard (2001). Value Chain Management in an E-Commerce World. Los Angeles,
CA: Blackhall Publishing. Chapter 3
Porter, Michael E. (1985). Competitive Advantage. New York. The Free Press (Chapter in
which Porter introduces the generic value chain concept).

Articles:
Andrews, Philip and Hahn, Jerome (1998). “Transforming Supply Chains into Value Webs” in
Strategy and Leadership, The Strategic Leadership Forum.
Champion, David (2000). “Mastering the Value Chain.” Harvard Business Review, Volume 79,
Issue 6.

Managing the Value Chain, Page 5

McNair, C. J., Polutnik, Lidija, and Silvi, Riccardo (2001). “Cost Management and Value
Creation: The Missing Link.” The European Accounting Review, 10: 1.

Sanjiv, Sidhu (2002). “From Supply Chain to Value Chain.” Purchasing, July 18.
Taninecz, George (2000). “Forging the Value Chain: Executives Identify Best Practices and
Barriers in Value Chain Initiatives.” Industry Week, May 15.
Webb, Jim and Gile, Charles (2001). “Reversing the Value Chain.” The Journal of Business
Strategy, April/May.
TECHNOLOGY ARTICLES

Anderson, Gordon (2000). “From Supply Chain to Collaborative Commerce Networks.”

Achieving Supply Chain Excellence Through Technology. San Francisco, CA: Montgomery
Research Inc.
Anderson, David and Lee, Han L. (2000). “The Internet-enabled Supply Chain: From the First
Click to the Last Mile.” Achieving Supply Chain Excellence Through Technology. San
Francisco, CA: Montgomery Research Inc.
Culotta, Ted (2000). “The Promise of Value Chain Optimization.” Achieving Supply Chain
Excellence Through Technology. San Francisco, CA: Montgomery Research Inc.
Lewis, William J. (2000). “Forging the Value Chain (Using Data Warehouses).”
Intelligent Enterprise, January 20.
Rayport, Jeffrey F. and Sviokla, John J. (1996). “Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain.”
The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1.
Presutti, William D. Jr. (2003). “Supply Management and E-Procurement: Creating Value-
Added in the Supply Chain.” Industrial Marketing Management, April 2003.

PERFORMANCE ARTICLES

Adewole, A (2008) Standards pf Rigor for Qualitative Research in Management: Implications

from a study in Supply Chain Management (unpublished )
Adewole, A (2008)The Application of Qualitative Methods for Researching Supply Chain
Management; International Journal of Quality and Standards(Paper being review)
Adewole, A (2008) Delivering Value through Efficient and Effective Supply Chain Management,
Seminar Paper, April 2008, Presentation to the Nigerian Institute of Management,
London Branch
Adewole, A (2005) Developing a Strategic Framework for Efficient and Effective Optimisation
of Information in the Supply Chains of the UK Clothing Manufacture Industry, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, pp357 - 366, Vol. 10 No 5, UK
Adewole, A (2004) Information Sharing and Supply Chain Relationships in Small and Medium
Sized Garment Manufacturing Firms in the UK, Doctoral Thesis University of the Arts,
London/Open University (Joint Award)
Adewole, A (2005) Integrated Supply Chains for the UK Clothing Industry, Seminar Paper,
Marketing and Purchasing Group Research Symposium, London Metropolitan University,
UK
Ellram, Lisa M. and Liu, Baohong (2002). “The Financial Impact of Supply Management.”
Supply Chain Management Review, Nov./Dec.

Managing the Value Chain, Page 6

Ti mme, Stephen G. and Timme, Christine (2001). “The Financial-SCM Connection.”

SUPPLY CHAIN REVIEW

Prober, L. M.(2000). “EVA: A Better Financial Reporting Tool.” Pa. CPA Journal, Fall.
Presutti, William D., Jr. and Mawhinney, John (2003). “Supply Chain Management’s Impact on
Corporate Performance.” Proceedings of the 14th Annual North American Research
Symposium on Purchasing and Supply Management, Tempe, Az., March 20-23.
Roberts, Julie S. (2002). “The Supply Chain of Dollars and Cents.” Inside Supply Management,
June.

Managing the Value Chain, Page 7

APPENDIX A

Table 1: The Value Chain, M.E. Porter (1980)

APPENDIX B
Table 2: Expansion of the Relevant Environment.

Expansion of the Relevant

Environment
Competitors
Competitors
Foreign
Government
Foreign
Labour

Government Foreign
Suppliers
competitors
Customers
Customers FIRM Foreign
customers

1900-1950 POST INDUSTRIAL ERA

New Social
• Single Industry Labour Values
• National Firm
Competitors
Competitors
Government

Customers
Customers FIRM
FIRM Environmentalist

TURBULENT
TURBULENT GROWTH GROWTH 1950-2020 Militant
•• Rapidity consumers
Rapidity ofof Demand
Demand • Multi-Industry Labour
•• Unpredictability
Unpredictability of of Events/Outcomes
Events/Outcomes • Many-Nation Firm
•• Novelty
Novelty ofof Challenges
Challenges New
Technologies
•• Discontinuity
Discontinuity of of Trends
Trends New Economic
Climate
•• Instability
Instability of
of Key
Key Success
Success Factors
Factors

Managing the Value Chain, Page 8

APPENDIX C
Table 3: Evaluating Value Chain Components

Evaluating Value Chain

Components
Pricing
Capital Intensity

Customer Acquisition Talent Leverage

Specialization Values and Structure

Workflow

APPENDIX D
Table 4: New Model Approach

New Model

Infrastructure
Human Resources
Technology
Margin
Procurement
Scalability

Price Performance

Q uality
Inbound Operations Outbound Marketing Service
Process M aturity

Turbulence

Managing the Value Chain, Page 9

APPENDIX E
Table 5: Rubric Analysis

Information Communication Capital Power Dependency

Scalability

Price
Performance

Quality

Process
Maturity

Turbulence

Vertical attributes -
- Scalability: It is the flexibility in increasing or decreasing the use of resources in a
relatively short period of time (3 months). In addition, it may also imply flexibility in
changing the directionality of the flows.
- Price Performance: It represents the weight price has in the value chain.
- Quality: It is the pressure of quality as it affects the value chain as a whole.
- Process Maturity: It is the level of entrenchment of current practice in each of the flows
to, from and within the value chain component.
Turbulence: It the magnitude and velocity of external changes and the significant impact they
have on the various flows.
Horizontal attributes - Necessary to facilitate a high degree of operation of the value chain.
- Information: The type and amount of information needed.
- Communication: The degree of communication; types, strength and depth.
- Capital: The amount needed and dependency of capital on the value chain.
- Power: Degree of power exerted by any one of the players of the value chain.
- Dependency: Of players on the value chain.

APPENDIX F.
Table 6: Rubric Analysis - Example

Information Communication Capital Power Dependency

Scalability 3 2 4 4 1

Price 2 3 2 2 1
Performance

Quality 2 2 3 2 1

Managing the Value Chain, Page 10

 Process 3 2 5 4 2
Maturity

Turbulence 1 2-3 1 2 3

The completed rubric above analyzes the Major Subcontracts component of Procurement in an
U.S. automotive electronics manufacturer during 2010.

Ranking Scale is from high to low with 1 being high and 5 being low.

Scalability is considered high if there is great flexibility in increasing or decreasing the flows of
information, communication, capital, power or dependency.

Price Performance is ranked on each of the flows as it contributes to the possibility of placing a
dollar value on that flow within that participating component of the value chain.

Quality is ranked on each of the flows based on the contribution of each flow to the non-
monetary assets of the value chain.

Process Maturity is ranked on the level of entrenchment of current practice is in each of the
flows to, from and within the value chain component.

Turbulence is considered high if the number, magnitude and velocity of external change has
significant impact on the various flows. It would be considered low if the flow is insulated
against external changes or if there are a small number if minor changes occurring at an expected
rate.

Managing the Value Chain, Page 11