Items 19 - 24 - Two of the other ANZSIC Code categories also require special attention. ..... media recorded little or no usage, and Food Retailing showed the highest ..... were also significant differences found on many of these variables ... relationship between the distance along the supply chain (ie from the customer) and.
“A STUDY OF THE FACTORS INFLUENCING THE ADOPTION OF BARCODING AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE IN AUSTRALIA”
EAN AUSTRALIA RESEARCH PROJECT
FINAL REPORT
PREPARED BY: THE AUSTRALIAN CONSORTIUM FOR EFFECTIVE ORGANISATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT MONASH UNIVERSITY
REPORT PREPARED BY: DAMIEN POWER PROFESSOR AMRIK SOHAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................. 7 LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................. 11 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 12 2 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 13 3 SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS ............................................................................................ 15 3.1.1 General / Demographics.................................................................................................. 15 3.1.2 Levels of Understanding ................................................................................................. 15 3.1.3 Techniques in Use ........................................................................................................... 16 3.1.4 Member Services / Products Used .................................................................................. 18 3.1.5 Rating of EAN Customer Service ................................................................................... 18 3.1.6 The Role of EAN Australia ............................................................................................. 18 3.1.7 Expectations of the EAN System .................................................................................... 19 3.1.7.1 Business Performance ................................................................................................. 19 3.1.7.2 Cost Benefit................................................................................................................. 19 3.1.8 Planning for Implementation .......................................................................................... 20 3.1.9 Business Outcomes of Implementation........................................................................... 20 3.1.9.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................. 20 3.1.9.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ............................................................................................... 21 4 THE REACTIVE, TACTICAL OR STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION MODEL ..................... 22 5 DEMOGRAPHICS ......................................................................................................................... 24 5.1 Primary Business Activity (Industry Type) ............................................................................ 24 5.2 Number of People Employed in Australia .............................................................................. 24 5.3 ANZSIC Code ......................................................................................................................... 26 5.4 Principal Ownership of the Business ...................................................................................... 28 5.5 Number of People Employed Worldwide ............................................................................... 28 5.6 Approximate Gross Revenue in 1998 – 1999 ......................................................................... 28 5.7 Number of Years of EAN Membership .................................................................................. 29 5.8 Location of Sites and Offices .................................................................................................. 29 5.9 Position in the Organisation of the Respondent ...................................................................... 30 5.10 Demographics by Extent of Implementation .......................................................................... 31 5.10.1 Primary Business Activity (Industry Type) .................................................................... 31 5.10.2 Number of People Employed .......................................................................................... 32 5.10.3 Years of Membership ...................................................................................................... 32 5.10.4 Position of Respondent in the Organisation .................................................................... 33 5.10.5 ANZSIC Code ................................................................................................................. 34 6 KNOWLEDGE OF THE EAN SYSTEM AND INTEGRATED SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................................... 36 6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 36 6.2 Level of Understanding for the Full Data Set ......................................................................... 36 6.3 Level of Understanding by Industry Sector ............................................................................ 36 6.4 Level of Understanding by Company Size ............................................................................. 37 6.5 Level of Understanding by Number of Years of Membership ............................................... 37 6.6 Level of Understanding by Position of Respondent in the Organisation ................................ 38 6.7 Level of Understanding by ANZSIC Code ............................................................................. 38 6.8 Level of Understanding for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implementation Categories ..... 39 6.9 Description of the EAN System for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implementation Categories............................................................................................................................................ 40 6.10 Potential Benefits for the Full Data Set .................................................................................. 40 6.11 Potential Benefits by Industry Sector...................................................................................... 41 6.12 Potential Benefits by Company Size ....................................................................................... 41 6.13 Potential Benefits by Number of Years of Membership ......................................................... 42 6.14 Potential Benefits by Position in the Organisation of the Respondent ................................... 42 6.15 Potential Benefits by ANZSIC Code ...................................................................................... 43 6.16 Potential Benefits by Extent of Implementation ..................................................................... 44 6.17 Description of a Full Implementation for the Full Data Set ................................................... 44 6.18 Description of a Full Implementation by Extent of Implementation ...................................... 45
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7
INTEGRATED SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES IN USE ............................ 46 7.1 EAN Product Numbering and Barcodes ................................................................................. 46 7.1.1 Outward Goods ............................................................................................................... 46 7.1.2 Work in Progress ............................................................................................................. 46 7.1.3 Incoming Goods .............................................................................................................. 47 7.2 EAN ID Numbers.................................................................................................................... 48 7.2.1 Identifying Retail Items .................................................................................................. 48 7.2.2 Non-Retail Items ............................................................................................................. 49 7.2.3 Locations ......................................................................................................................... 49 7.2.4 Internal Items .................................................................................................................. 50 7.3 Scanning of Barcodes.............................................................................................................. 50 7.3.1 Internal Scanning ............................................................................................................ 50 7.3.2 Plans to Scan Internally................................................................................................... 51 7.4 Application Identifiers ............................................................................................................ 52 7.5 Serial Shipper Container Codes (SSCC) ................................................................................. 52 7.5.1 On Trade Units ................................................................................................................ 52 7.5.2 On Pallets ........................................................................................................................ 53 7.6 EAN Logistics Labels ............................................................................................................. 54 7.7 EAN Location and Electronic Commerce Numbers ............................................................... 54 7.7.1 Legal Entities .................................................................................................................. 54 7.7.2 Functional Entities .......................................................................................................... 54 7.7.3 Physical Entities .............................................................................................................. 55 7.8 Use of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) .............................................................................. 56 7.8.1 Receiving of Incoming Orders via EDI .......................................................................... 56 7.8.2 Advance Shipment Notices ............................................................................................. 56 7.8.3 Remittance Advice .......................................................................................................... 56 7.8.4 Invoices ........................................................................................................................... 57 7.8.5 Evaluated Receipts Settlement ........................................................................................ 57 7.8.6 Sales / Stock on Hand / Stock on Order Data ................................................................. 58 7.8.7 Purchase Orders .............................................................................................................. 58 7.8.8 Comparative Use of EDI by ANZSIC Code ................................................................... 58 7.9 Other ISCM Techniques ......................................................................................................... 59 7.9.1 Cooperative Partnership Arrangements with Suppliers .................................................. 59 7.9.2 Deliver Merchandise in “Floor Ready” Form ................................................................. 60 7.9.3 Scan Pack Finished Goods by Store ............................................................................... 61 7.9.4 Cooperative Partnership Arrangements with Customers ................................................ 62 7.10 Comparative Usage ................................................................................................................. 63 7.10.1 EAN Product Numbering and Barcodes ......................................................................... 63 7.10.2 EAN ID Numbers............................................................................................................ 63 7.10.3 EAN Location and Electronic Commerce Numbers ....................................................... 64 7.10.4 Other Barcode Applications ............................................................................................ 64 7.10.5 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) ................................................................................. 65 8 MEMBER SERVICES / PRODUCTS USED ................................................................................ 66 8.1 Full Data Set............................................................................................................................ 66 8.2 Industry Type .......................................................................................................................... 66 8.2.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 66 8.2.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 67 8.2.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 67 8.2.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 68 8.3 Company Size ......................................................................................................................... 68 8.3.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 68 8.3.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 69 8.3.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 69 8.3.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 70 8.4 Years of Membership .............................................................................................................. 70 8.4.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 70 8.4.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 71 8.4.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 71 8.4.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 72 8.5 Position in Organisation of the Respondent ............................................................................ 72
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
8.5.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 72 8.5.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 73 8.5.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 73 8.5.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 74 8.6 ANZSIC Code ......................................................................................................................... 74 8.6.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 74 8.6.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 75 8.6.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 76 8.6.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 76 8.7 Extent of Implementation........................................................................................................ 77 8.7.1 Extent of Use ................................................................................................................... 77 8.7.2 Level of Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 78 8.7.3 Extent of Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 78 8.7.4 Extent of Opportunity ..................................................................................................... 79 9 CUSTOMER SERVICE RATING ................................................................................................. 80 9.1 Full Data Set............................................................................................................................ 80 9.2 Industry Type .......................................................................................................................... 80 9.3 Company Size ......................................................................................................................... 80 9.4 Years of Membership .............................................................................................................. 81 9.5 Position in Organisation of the Respondent ............................................................................ 81 9.6 ANZSIC Code ......................................................................................................................... 82 9.7 Extent of Implementation........................................................................................................ 82 10 THE ROLE OF EAN AUSTRALIA .......................................................................................... 84 10.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 84 10.2 The Full Data Set .................................................................................................................... 84 10.2.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 84 10.2.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 84 10.3 Industry Type .......................................................................................................................... 85 10.3.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 85 10.3.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 85 10.4 Company Size ......................................................................................................................... 86 10.4.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 86 10.4.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 86 10.5 Number of Years of Membership ........................................................................................... 87 10.5.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 87 10.5.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 87 10.6 Position in Organisation of the Respondent ............................................................................ 88 10.6.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 88 10.6.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 88 10.7 ANZSIC Code ......................................................................................................................... 89 10.7.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 89 10.7.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 89 10.8 Extent of Implementation........................................................................................................ 90 10.8.1 Extended Services ........................................................................................................... 90 10.8.2 Current Services .............................................................................................................. 90 11 EXPECTATIONS OF THE EAN SYSTEM .............................................................................. 92 11.1 Business Performance ............................................................................................................. 92 11.1.1 The Full Data Set ............................................................................................................ 92 11.1.2 Industry Type .................................................................................................................. 92 11.1.3 Company Size ................................................................................................................. 92 11.1.4 Number of Years of Membership ................................................................................... 93 11.1.5 Position in Organisation of the Respondent .................................................................... 93 11.1.6 ANZSIC Code ................................................................................................................. 94 11.1.7 Extent of Implementation................................................................................................ 94 11.2 Cost/Benefit ............................................................................................................................ 95 11.2.1 The Full Data Set ............................................................................................................ 95 11.2.2 Industry Type .................................................................................................................. 95 11.2.3 Company Size ................................................................................................................. 96 11.2.4 Number of Years of Membership ................................................................................... 96 11.2.5 Position of the Respondent in the Organisation .............................................................. 97
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
11.2.6 ANZSIC Code ................................................................................................................. 97 11.2.7 Extent of Implementation................................................................................................ 98 12 PLANNING FOR IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................... 99 12.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 99 12.2 Full Data Set............................................................................................................................ 99 12.3 Industry Sector ........................................................................................................................ 99 12.3.1 Reactive Planning ........................................................................................................... 99 12.3.2 Proactive Planning ........................................................................................................ 100 12.4 Company Size ....................................................................................................................... 100 12.4.1 Reactive Planning ......................................................................................................... 100 12.4.2 Proactive Planning ........................................................................................................ 101 12.5 Number of Years of Membership ......................................................................................... 101 12.5.1 Reactive Planning ......................................................................................................... 101 12.5.2 Proactive Planning ........................................................................................................ 102 12.6 ANZSIC Code ....................................................................................................................... 102 12.6.1 Reactive Planning ......................................................................................................... 102 12.6.2 Proactive Planning ........................................................................................................ 103 12.7 Extent of Implementation...................................................................................................... 103 12.7.1 Reactive Planning ......................................................................................................... 103 12.7.2 Proactive Planning ........................................................................................................ 104 13 BUSINESS OUTCOMES OF IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................. 105 13.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 105 13.2 The Full Data Set .................................................................................................................. 105 13.2.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 105 13.2.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 105 13.3 Industry Sector ...................................................................................................................... 106 13.3.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 106 13.3.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 106 13.4 Company Size ....................................................................................................................... 107 13.4.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 107 13.4.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 108 13.5 Number of Years of Membership ......................................................................................... 109 13.5.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 109 13.5.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 109 13.6 Position of the Respondent in the Organisation .................................................................... 110 13.6.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 110 13.6.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 110 13.7 ANZSIC Code ....................................................................................................................... 111 13.7.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 111 13.7.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 111 13.8 Extent of Implementation...................................................................................................... 112 13.8.1 Operational Outcomes................................................................................................... 112 13.8.2 Bottom Line Outcomes ................................................................................................. 112 APPENDIX 1 ........................................................................................................................................ 114 Factor Analysis – Extent of Implementation .................................................................................... 114 APPENDIX 2 ........................................................................................................................................ 115 Logic for Categorisation of Respondent Organisations .................................................................... 115 APPENDIX 3 ........................................................................................................................................ 116 Chi-Square – Industry Sector ............................................................................................................ 116 Chi-Square – Number of People Employed ...................................................................................... 116 Breakdown of Industry Category – “Other” ..................................................................................... 116 Breakdown of ANZSIC Code Category – “Other” ........................................................................... 117 APPENDIX 4 ........................................................................................................................................ 118 Chi-Square – Industry Type .............................................................................................................. 118 Anova / Correlation – Company Size ............................................................................................... 118 Annova / Correlation – Years Of Membership ................................................................................. 119 Chi-Square – Position In Organisation Of The Respondent ............................................................. 119 Chi-Square – Anzsic Code ................................................................................................................ 119 APPENDIX 5 ........................................................................................................................................ 120 Factor Analysis – Level Of Understanding....................................................................................... 120
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Reliability Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 121 APPENDIX 6 ........................................................................................................................................ 122 Factor Analysis – Potential Benefits Of Implementation ................................................................. 122 Reliability Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 122 APPENDIX 7 ........................................................................................................................................ 124 Factor Analysis – Understanding Of A Full Implementation ........................................................... 124 Reliability Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 125 APPENDIX 8 ........................................................................................................................................ 126 Correlation – Company Size with Level of Understanding .............................................................. 126 Correlation – Level of Understanding with Extent of implementation ............................................ 126 Correlation – Years of Membership with Level of Understanding .................................................. 126 Correlation – Years of Membership with Extent of Implementation ............................................... 127 APPENDIX 9 ........................................................................................................................................ 128 CORRELATION – Perception of Benefits with Company Size ...................................................... 128 CORRELATION – Perception of Benefits with Extent of Implementation .................................... 128 APPENDIX 10 ...................................................................................................................................... 129 Correlation Matrices – Extent of Use / Satisfaction / Knowledge / Opportunity to Use for Each Member Product / Service................................................................................................................. 129 Correlation Matrix – Company Size with Extent of Use for Each of the Member Products / Services ........................................................................................................................................................... 132 Correlation Matrix – Company Size with Opportunity to Use for Each of the Member Products / Services ............................................................................................................................................. 132 APPENDIX 11 ...................................................................................................................................... 133 Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Use of Member Products/Services 133 Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Knowledge of Member Products/Services .............................................................................................................................. 133 Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Opportunity to Use Member Products/Services .............................................................................................................................. 134 APPENDIX 12 ...................................................................................................................................... 135 Factor Analysis – The Role of EAN Australia ................................................................................. 135 APPENDIX 13 ...................................................................................................................................... 136 Factor Analysis – Extent of Planning ............................................................................................... 136 Reliability Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 136 APPENDIX 14 ...................................................................................................................................... 138 Factor Analysis – Business Outcomes .............................................................................................. 138 Reliability Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 139 APPENDIX 15 ...................................................................................................................................... 141 Examples of Valuable Conferences Attended .................................................................................. 141 APPENDIX 16 ...................................................................................................................................... 142 Examples of Valuable Exhibitions Attended .................................................................................... 142 APPENDIX 17 ...................................................................................................................................... 143 Examples of Media Found to be Highly Valuable ............................................................................ 143
6
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Distribution of respondent organisations by implementation approach .................................. 23 Figure 2: Breakdown of respondent organisations by primary activity .................................................. 24 Figure 3: Breakdown of number of people employed in Australia for the respondent organisations .... 24 Figure 4: Breakdown of number of people employed in Australia for the non-respondent organisations ......................................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 5: Breakdown of numbers by principal ownership of respondent organisations ........................ 28 Figure 6: Number of people employed worldwide ................................................................................. 28 Figure 7: Distribution by approximate gross revenue in 1998 – 1999.................................................... 28 Figure 8: Breakdown of respondents by number of years of EAN membership .................................... 29 Figure 9: Estimated change in average per annum membership rates since 1990 .................................. 29 Figure 10: Location of Head Offices ...................................................................................................... 29 Figure 11: Location of Other Offices ...................................................................................................... 30 Figure 12: Location(s) of Manufacturing Sites ....................................................................................... 30 Figure 13: Location(s) of Warehouses .................................................................................................... 30 Figure 14: Position in the organisation of respondents ........................................................................... 31 Figure 15: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by industry distribution ....... 31 Figure 16: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by company size.................. 32 Figure 17: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 18: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by position in the organisation of the respondent ............................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 19: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by ANZSIC Code................ 35 Figure 20: Levels of understanding for the full data set ......................................................................... 36 Figure 21: Comparative levels of understanding by industry sector ...................................................... 37 Figure 22: Comparative levels of understanding by company size ........................................................ 37 Figure 23: Comparative levels of understanding by years of membership............................................. 38 Figure 24: Comparative levels of understanding by position of respondent .......................................... 38 Figure 25: Comparative levels of understanding by ANZSIC Code ...................................................... 39 Figure 26: Comparative levels of understanding for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic implementers .... 40 Figure 27: Comparative levels of agreement with descriptions of the EAN system for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic implementers ............................................................................................................. 40 Figure 28: Perceptions of potential benefits for the full data set ............................................................ 41 Figure 29: Perceptions of potential benefits by industry sector .............................................................. 41 Figure 30: Perceptions of potential benefits by company size................................................................ 42 Figure 31: Perceptions of potential benefits by number of years of membership .................................. 42 Figure 32: Perceptions of potential benefits by position in the organisation of the respondent ............. 43 Figure 33: Perceptions of potential benefits by ANZSIC Code.............................................................. 43 Figure 34: Perceptions of potential benefits by extent of implementation ............................................. 44 Figure 35: Perceptions of a full implementation for the full data set ..................................................... 44 Figure 36: Perceptions of a full implementation by extent of implementation ...................................... 45 Figure 37: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to: Outward Goods ............................. 46 Figure 38: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to Outward Goods by ANZSIC Code 46 Figure 39: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to: WIP ............................................... 47 Figure 40: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to Work in Progress by ANZSIC Code ......................................................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 41: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to: Incoming Goods ............................ 48 Figure 42: Application of EAN product numbers and barcodes to Incoming Goods by ANZSIC Code 48 Figure 43: Application of EAN ID numbers to: Retail Items ................................................................. 48 Figure 44: Application of EAN ID numbers to Retail Items by ANZSIC Code .................................... 49 Figure 45: Application of EAN ID numbers to: Non-Retail Items ......................................................... 49 Figure 46: Application of EAN ID numbers to: Locations ..................................................................... 50 Figure 47: Application of EAN ID numbers to: Internal Items .............................................................. 50 Figure 49: Proportion of companies scanning barcodes internally by ANZSIC Code ........................... 51 Figure 50: Timeframes for introduction of internal scanning ................................................................. 51 Figure 51: Timeframes for introduction of internal scanning by ANZSIC Code ................................... 52 Figure 52: Use of Application Identifiers ............................................................................................... 52 Figure 53: Use of SSCC’s on trade units ................................................................................................ 53 Figure 54: Use of SSCC’s on trade units by ANZSIC Code .................................................................. 53
7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 55: Use of SSCC’s on pallets ...................................................................................................... 53 Figure 56: Use of EAN Logistics Labels ................................................................................................ 54 Figure 57: Use of EAN Location and Electronic Commerce Numbers – Legal Entities ....................... 54 Figure 58: Use of EAN Location and Electronic Commerce Numbers – Functional Entities ............... 55 Figure 59: Use of EAN location and Electronic Commerce Numbers – Physical Entities .................... 55 Figure 60: Use of EAN Location and Electronic Commerce Numbers – Physical Entities by ANZSIC Code ................................................................................................................................................ 55 Figure 61: Use of EDI for receipt of incoming orders ............................................................................ 56 Figure 62: Use of EDI for Advanced Shipment Notices ........................................................................ 56 Figure 63: Use of EDI for Remittance Advice ....................................................................................... 57 Figure 64: Use of EDI for Invoices ......................................................................................................... 57 Figure 65: Use of EDI for Evaluated Receipts Settlement ..................................................................... 57 Figure 66: Use of EDI for Point of Sale Data ......................................................................................... 58 Figure 67: Use of EDI for Purchase Orders ............................................................................................ 58 Figure 68: Comparison of usage of EDI techniques by ANZSIC Code ................................................. 59 Figure 69: Cooperative Partnership with Suppliers ................................................................................ 59 Figure 70: Cooperative Partnership with Suppliers by ANZSIC Code .................................................. 60 Figure 71: Prepare and deliver merchandise in “Floor Ready” form ..................................................... 60 Figure 72: Deliveries in “Floor Ready” Form by ANZSIC Code........................................................... 61 Figure 73: Scan packing of finished goods by store ............................................................................... 61 Figure 74: Scan Packing by ANZSIC Code............................................................................................ 62 Figure 75: Cooperative partnership arrangements with customers ......................................................... 62 Figure 76: Customer Agreements by ANZSIC Code ............................................................................. 63 Figure 77: Percentage of members applying EAN product numbers and barcodes ............................... 63 Figure 78: Percentage of members applying EAN ID numbers ............................................................. 64 Figure 79: Percentage of members using EAN location and electronic commerce numbers ................. 64 Figure 80: Percentage of members using other barcode applications ..................................................... 64 Figure 81: Percentage of members using EDI ........................................................................................ 65 Figure 82: Profile of usage of EAN products / services – Full Data Set ................................................ 66 Figure 83: Profile of usage of EAN products / services by Industry Type ............................................. 67 Figure 84: Profile of levels of satisfaction with EAN products / services by Industry Type ................. 67 Figure 85: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by Industry Type ..................... 68 Figure 86: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by Industry Type .............. 68 Figure 87: Profile of extent of use of EAN products / services by Company Size ................................. 69 Figure 88: Profile of levels of satisfaction with EAN products / services by Company Size ................ 69 Figure 89: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by Company Size .................... 70 Figure 90: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by Company Size ............. 70 Figure 91: Profile of extent of use of EAN products / services by number of years of membership ..... 71 Figure 92: Profile of levels of satisfaction with EAN products / services by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................................... 71 Figure 93: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 94: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 95: Profile of extent of use of EAN products / services by position in the organisation of the respondent ....................................................................................................................................... 73 Figure 96: Profile of levels of satisfaction with EAN products / services by position in the organisation of the respondent ............................................................................................................................. 73 Figure 97: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by position in the organisation of the respondent ................................................................................................................................. 74 Figure 98: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by position in the organisation of the respondent ........................................................................................................ 74 Figure 99: Profile of extent of use of EAN products / services by ANZSIC Code ................................ 75 Figure 100: Profile of extent of satisfaction with EAN products / services by ANZSIC Code.............. 75 Figure 101: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by ANZSIC Code .................. 76 Figure 102: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by ANZSIC Code ........... 77 Figure 103: Profile of extent of use of EAN products / services by extent of implementation .............. 78 Figure 104: Profile of extent of satisfaction with EAN products / services by extent of implementation ......................................................................................................................................................... 78 Figure 105: Profile of extent of knowledge of EAN products / services by extent of implementation .. 79
8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 106: Profile of extent of opportunity to use EAN products / services by extent of implementation................................................................................................................................ 79 Figure 107: Rating of the level of customer service being provided – Full Data Set ............................. 80 Figure 108: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by Industry Type ......................... 80 Figure 109: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by Industry Type ......................... 81 Figure 110: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by Number of Years of Membership ......................................................................................................................................................... 81 Figure 111: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by Position in the Organisation of the Respondent ................................................................................................................................ 82 Figure 112: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by ANZSIC Code ........................ 82 Figure 113: Rating of the level of customer service being provided by Extent of implementation ....... 83 Figure 114: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services ............................... 84 Figure 115: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services .................................. 85 Figure 116: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by Industry ............ 85 Figure 117: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by Industry .............. 86 Figure 118: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by Company Size . 86 Figure 119: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by Company Size .... 87 Figure 120: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by Number of Years of Membership ................................................................................................................................ 87 Figure 121: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by Number of Years of Membership .................................................................................................................................... 88 Figure 122: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by Position in the Organisation of the Respondent ...................................................................................................... 88 Figure 123: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by Position in the Organisation of the Respondent ...................................................................................................... 89 Figure 123: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by ANZSIC Code . 89 Figure 124: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by ANZSIC Code .... 90 Figure 125: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Extended Services by Extent of Implementation ............................................................................................................................... 90 Figure 126: Rating of the appropriate role of EAN Australia – Current Services by Extent of Implementation ............................................................................................................................... 91 Figure 127: Expectations for business performance for the Full Data Set ............................................. 92 Figure 127: Expectations for business performance by Industry sector ................................................. 92 Figure 128: Expectations for business performance by Company Size.................................................. 93 Figure 129: Expectations for business performance by Number of Years of Membership .................... 93 Figure 130: Expectations for business performance by position of the Respondent in the Organisation ......................................................................................................................................................... 94 Figure 131: Expectations for business performance by ANZSIC Code ................................................. 94 Figure 132: Expectations for business performance by Extent of Implementation ................................ 95 Figure 133: Assessment of Cost / Benefit for the Full Data Set ............................................................. 95 Figure 134: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by Industry type ................................................................... 96 Figure 135: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by Company Size ................................................................. 96 Figure 136: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by Number of Years of Membership ................................... 97 Figure 137: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by Position of the Respondent in the Organisation .............. 97 Figure 138: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by ANZSIC Code ................................................................. 98 Figure 139: Assessment of Cost / Benefit by ANZSIC Code ................................................................. 98 Figure 140: Comparison between extent of Proactive and Reactive Planning for the Full Data Set ..... 99 Figure 141: Extent of Reactive Planning by Industry Sector................................................................ 100 Figure 142: Extent of Proactive Planning by Industry Sector .............................................................. 100 Figure 143: Extent of Reactive Planning by Company Size ................................................................. 101 Figure 144: Extent of Proactive Planning by Company Size................................................................ 101 Figure 145: Extent of Reactive Planning by Number of Years of Membership ................................... 102 Figure 146: Extent of Proactive Planning by Number of Years of Membership .................................. 102 Figure 147: Extent of Reactive Planning by ANZSIC Code ................................................................ 103 Figure 148: Extent of Proactive Planning by ANZSIC Code ............................................................... 103 Figure 148: Extent of Reactive Planning by Extent of Implementation ............................................... 104 Figure 149: Extent of Proactive Planning by Extent of Implementation .............................................. 104 Figure 150: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes for the full data set .................................................................................................................................................. 105
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 151: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes for the full data set........................................................................................................................................... 106 Figure 152: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by Industry sector ............................................................................................................................................. 106 Figure 153: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by Industry sector ............................................................................................................................................. 107 Figure 154: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by Company Size ................................................................................................................................................ 108 Figure 155: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by Company Size ................................................................................................................................................ 108 Figure 156: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................... 109 Figure 157: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by number of years of membership ..................................................................................................................... 109 Figure 158: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by position of the respondent in the organisation ................................................................................................ 110 Figure 159: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by position of the respondent in the organisation ................................................................................................ 110 Figure 160: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by ANZSIC Code .............................................................................................................................................. 111 Figure 161: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by ANZSIC Code .............................................................................................................................................. 111 Figure 162: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes by extent of implementation.............................................................................................................................. 112 Figure 163: Assessment of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes by extent of implementation.............................................................................................................................. 113
10
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Comparison of respondent organisations by primary business activity with non-respondent organisations ................................................................................................................................... 24 Table 2: Comparison of breakdown of EAN membership with National Estimates for companies employing less than 200 employees (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) ............................................................................................................. 25 Table 3: Comparison of breakdown of EAN membership with National Estimates by Industry (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997)......................... 25 Table 4: Comparison of number of people employed in Australia for the respondent and nonrespondent organisations ................................................................................................................. 26 Table 5: Breakdown of surveyed members by ANZSIC Code ............................................................... 26 Table 6: Comparison between EAN membership and national estimates of proportions of companies in each ANZSIC Code (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) ............................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 7: Comparison between EAN membership and national estimates of proportions of companies in each ANZSIC Code within the Manufacturing sector (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) .............................................................................................. 27 Table 8: Compressed ANZSIC Codes for analysis ................................................................................. 34 Table 9: Compressed ANZSIC Code – “Other” – composition for further analysis .............................. 35 Table 10: Correlations – Operational Outcomes with Company Size .................................................. 107 Table 10: Correlations – Bottom Line Outcomes with Company Size ................................................. 108 Table 11: Correlations – Operational Outcomes with Extent of Implementation ................................ 112 Table 12: Correlations – Bottom Line Outcomes with Extent of Implementation ............................... 112
11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This survey of 553 EAN Australia members found that the majority of the membership could be classified as “Reactive” implementers (estimated at 64%) based on the extent of implementation along the supply chain. Of the balance, 25% are estimated to be “Tactical” and 11% “Strategic” implementers. The results clearly indicate that the “Tactical” and “Strategic” groups derive significantly greater business benefit from the use of the EAN system, are more knowledgeable of the techniques and implications of use, and perceive implementation to deliver significantly greater benefits over time relative to the cost of implementation. Between the “Strategic” and “Tactical” groups, there is also a clear indication that the “Strategic” group perceive all of these outcomes to be central to the effective operations of their organisations. By contrast, the “Reactive” group can be characterised as at best ambivalent, and at worst extremely negative about the EAN system, the techniques and methodologies, and the contribution of the system to potential and/or real business outcomes. Further to this, it is evident that there is little relationship between the length of time an organisation has been a member of EAN Australia, and the extent of implementation, knowledge of the system, member services used, expectations of the system, the extent of planning employed or specific business outcomes. This indicates that organisations join EAN Australia with either a “Reactive”, “Tactical” or “Strategic” mindset, and that the likelihood is that this does not change over time. There is a significant relationship recorded between both company size, industry sector and the extent of implementation. This means that “Strategic” implementers are more likely to be larger organisations in the Retail or Wholesale Distribution Sectors. There are clear indications that the further back along the supply chain a company is (ie distance from the end consumer) and the smaller the company, the more likely they are to take a “Reactive” approach to implementation. It is also evident that there are a large proportion of Senior Managers (around 53%) in the sample that have responsibility for the EAN system, and that in general this group are significantly more negative about the system than (say) Marketing and Operations Managers. To summarise the mindset of the “Reactive” implementer, they see the EAN system as being driven by the Retail Sector for the benefit of the Retail Sector alone. As such, they see it to be irrelevant to the ongoing improvement of business operations. Use of the various techniques (across the full sample) was found to be high in terms of application of barcodes and/or product numbers to outgoing goods, and low for all other applications. Usage of EDI is limited to around 20% - 25% of members (ie on average across the range of options), with larger companies found to be more active in their use. Knowledge and usage of the range of member products/services is generally very low, although levels of satisfaction are good with those that use these services. The results indicate that if the knowledge of products and services on offer can be increased within the membership, then usage will increase. There is also clear evidence that the extent of use is correlated to levels of satisfaction, indicating that higher levels of usage will lead to higher levels of satisfaction. Overall, satisfaction with levels of customer service were found to be medium to medium high across the full sample. In summary, extended implementations yield significant benefits to those organisations that pursue this path. Balanced against this is the fact that there is no apparent process of organisational learning moving member companies from being “Reactive” through to being “Tactical” or ”Strategic” implementers over time. It is apparent, however, that if knowledge of the EAN system can be increased within this “Reactive” group, there can be some progress toward moving them at least into the “Tactical” category, and over time into the “Strategic” group. The recommendations that follow propose various strategies for promoting this process.
12
RECOMMENDATIONS
2 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
RECOMMENDATIONS Alternative methods need to be found to deliver the message other than the Newsletter. These could include: • Personal correspondence to each EAN coordinator detailing the positive nature of some of the results found from the survey (eg links between extent of implementation and business outcomes). It is recommended that the EAN Website is listed along with contact phone numbers / e-mail details for further information. • Follow up calls to organisations in selected target groups (eg based on ANZSIC code etc) to further reinforce this message and create leads for services etc. • Series of half / full day seminars to be held in each state where the results of the survey can be disseminated and discussed. This could be promoted via personal invitation and could include presentations from key product/service providers (ie internal to EAN and also third parties such as scanning hardware suppliers). • Publication of the key results through various media such as BRW, Financial Review etc. This may best be handled not as an EAN press release but rather as the results of a Monash University survey. There is a need to target Senior Managers specifically as this group need to be convinced of the potential benefits of further implementation. This group is particularly dominant in small companies. A message needs to be developed for this group that should be written in non-technical terms and expressed in terms of quantifiable bottom line results. It is suggested that Senior Managers from the Strategic group be enlisted to help formulate this approach. Particular ANZSIC Code categories display significantly lower levels of understanding of the EAN system than others. Groups such as Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media, Wood & Paper Products and Agriculture have need to be approached with different information / education programs , than do some of the better informed groups such as Food Retailing. Programs need to be developed at a basic level for these members. It is recommended that they focus on simplified models and be developed so as to address issues particular to those industries (eg high volume / low value, bulky items, bulk supply of raw materials etc). Two of the other ANZSIC Code categories also require special attention. The Textiles, Clothing & Footwear sector record significantly higher levels of usage of most of the techniques, yet they do not record high levels of contribution to either operational or bottom line business outcomes. As this group makes up approximately 8% of total members (as well as a significant proportion of overall users of the total system), the reasons for this require further investigation. The Food, Beverage & Tobacco group make up almost 23% of total membership, and yet they record both low levels of usage of the techniques, and low levels of contribution to business outcomes. As this sector is the example used in the EANWORKS simulation it is recommended that the reasons for these low levels be investigated and further understood. This group also indicated the need for EAN Australia to provide an extended range of services such as consulting and operational advice. The EAN Way should be actively promoted in Manufacturing sectors such as Machinery and Equipment and Metal Products as the current levels of representation are far below national averages. Even though these sectors have been using proprietary systems and “local” standards in some cases, the under representation in these sectors could represent significant lost opportunities. It should be investigated whether the same situation applies to Petroleum, Coal, Chemical & Associated Products or Non-Metallic Mineral Products. A high percentage of organisations not currently scanning barcodes internally indicate the intention to do so in the near future. These organisations should be targeted by (say) ANZSIC Code with (initially) packages of information specifically designed to facilitate this process. There should also be a follow up process over a 6 to 12 month period to ensure this issue is kept in the forefront of their thinking. There is also an opportunity to further extend the implementation of the EAN Way in the Retail Sector. Compared with national figures, this sector is currently under represented.
13
RECOMMENDATIONS
•
•
•
Given that the results of the survey show a significant proportion of “Strategic“ implementers to be from this sector, and that this group report high levels of benefits and understanding of the system generally, further penetration in this sector would be recommended. The focus for this drive would be Personal & Household Goods Retailing. The dissemination of Point of Sale Data backwards along the supply chain needs to be further promoted within the Retail Sector. Although many of the larger retailers have offered this facility for some time, the proactive diffusion of this data (even without EDI etc) is a very good way of shortening the distance from the end consumer, and thus of promoting one of the most significant potential benefits – access to real time demand data. This could be particularly effective in the manufacturing sector where this distance is often greatest. Development of a computer based simulation package that can be delivered via a range of means (eg CD, disk, the Web etc) that can be adapted to the individual requirements of member companies. This could then be used to test the potential benefits of further implementation under different scenarios using the actual products and processes of particular companies. This could be developed as part of a joint venture (say) between an educational institution and EAN Australia with a view to providing a more accessible and cost effective means of exhibiting potential benefits of further implementation. Develop a strategic alliance with a government or semi-government organisation (eg DISR, State Development) willing to promote further use of the EAN system. These organisations have been running programs (eg quick response in the TCF sector) for some years, and continue to run them. They have significant resources and a vested interest in being seen to be effective. What they often lack is the ability to follow through at an ongoing operational level. EAN could perhaps provide that link.
14
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
3
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
3.1.1 General / Demographics 1. It is apparent from this sample that the majority of respondent organisations can be characterised as Reactive in their approach to implementation of the EAN system and Integrated Supply Chain management generally. It was found that the distribution of organisations according to extent of implementation was as follows: Reactive: 64% Tactical: 25% Strategic: 11% (Refer Section 4) 2. Comparison of the results from both the member survey and the non-respondent survey indicated that the 553 respondent members were representative of the total membership base. The two variables used for comparison were Primary Business Activity (or Industry) and the number of people employed by the organisation. The Chi-square and T-tests used indicated that there were no significant differences between the two groups on these two variables. Confidence in the generalisability of the results is further supported by the number of responses (553), which is in excess of the number required from a sample of 11,000 (375). (Refer Sections 5.1 – 5.2) 3. The EAN Australia membership is made up of higher proportions of organisations employing between 5 and 199 people than is expected nationally. At the same time there are significantly less in the 4 employees or less category. This is in part explained by the higher proportion of Manufacturers and Wholesale Distributors in the member base, as these organisations tend to employ larger numbers of people than some other industries. There is also a smaller than expected proportion of member organisations from the Retail sector. This shortfall is found largely in the Personal & Household Retailing group. (Refer Sections 5.2 – 5.3) 4. The membership is represented by a far higher proportion of manufacturing companies in the following ANZSIC sub-divisions than is found nationally: Food, Beverage & Tobacco / Textiles, Clothing & Footwear / Other Manufacturing. These three groups account for 73% of the membership whilst they represent only around 30% of all Australian manufacturers. On the other hand, in the following sub-divisions the representation in the member base is far lower than that found in the national figures: Petroleum, Coal, Chemical & Associated Products / Non-Metallic Mineral Products / Machinery & Equipment / Metal Products. These four groups account for only 12% of the membership whilst they represent around 56% of all Australian manufacturers. (Refer Section 5.3) 5. Average per annum numbers of new members appear to have declined by more than 15% over the past 2 – 3 years, after a significant increase between 1995 and 1997. (Refer Section 5.7) 6. A high proportion (53%) of respondents to the survey were senior managers (either CEOs, Managing Directors or General Managers). This may indicate that supply chain management and EAN coordination is seen to be a strategic rather than operational issue for a large proportion of the membership, although it could also simply be a function of the large numbers of small member companies. (Refer Section 5.9) 7. There is a significant relationship recorded between both industry sector and company size and the extent of implementation. Strategic implementers are more likely to be larger companies, and a larger proportion of them will be Retailers and Wholesale Distributors than Manufacturers. There was no significant relationship found between number of years of membership and the extent of implementation. (Refer Sections 5.10.1 – 5.10.3) 8. The distribution of Reactive vs Tactical/Strategic implementers varies greatly across the various ANZSIC sub-divisions. The highest proportions of Reactive implementers are found in the Wood & Paper Products, Agriculture and Printing Publishing & Recorded Media sub-divisions. The lowest proportions are in Medical & Pharmaceutical Products, Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling, Food Retailing and the “Other” category. It is also evident that the Food Beverage & Tobacco and Metal Products groups also have high proportions in the Reactive category. (Refer Section 5.10.5)
3.1.2 Levels of Understanding 9. Levels of understanding of the EAN system and ISCM generally were found to be low across the full data set. There is a higher level of understanding in the Retail sector than in Wholesale Distribution and Manufacturing. There was also a strong positive
15
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
relationship found between company size and degree of understanding indicating a higher awareness in larger companies. There was no significant relationship found between years of membership and extent of understanding. (Refer Sections 6.2 – 6.6) Significant differences were found in levels of understanding between the different ANZSIC categories. Highest overall levels of understanding are apparent in the Food Retailing and Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling groups, and lowest levels are in Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media, Wood & Paper Products and Metal Products. (Refer Section 6.7) There is a distinct and significant difference between the extent of understanding between the Reactive, Tactical and Strategic implementation groups. This difference is consistent across all 10 questions with the Strategic implementers having a higher level of understanding than the Tactical group, who in turn are at a higher level than the Reactive sector. It is also evident that all three groups are weakest on item 5 (All relevant staff have participated in information sessions/training programs). (Refer Section 6.7) There is a moderate expectation across the full data set of the potential benefits from implementation. Retailers are again the sector that see most benefit followed by Wholesale Distributors and Manufacturers. Larger companies also see a clearer benefit than do smaller ones. There is again no relationship found between number of years of membership and perception of the potential benefits. Respondents from the Marketing function appear more positive about the potential benefits than Senior Managers and Financial Controllers. This is particularly so in the area of stock management. (Refer Sections 6.8 – 6.13) Significant differences between the ANZSIC Code groups were found based on their perceptions of potential benefits. The Agriculture and Wood & Paper Products groups have the lowest perception of potential benefits, whereas the Food Retailing and Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling sectors have the highest. The Metal Products group have a high relative view of the potential for the EAN system to improve stock management, but a relatively low perception of all other proposed benefits. (Refer Section 6.15) There is a major difference between the perceptions of the potential benefits of implementation between the Strategic, Tactical and Reactive implementers. The Strategic group are significantly more positive on all 5 items than the Tactical group, who are in turn more positive than the Reactive sector. (Refer Section 4.16) These three groups also differ substantially in their perception of what a full implementation of the EAN system is on the five questions relating to an extended implementation. Interestingly, they do not differ on the question relating to implementation focusing on meeting the requirements of retailers only. (Refer Sections 6.15 – 6.16)
3.1.3 Techniques in Use 16. 91% of surveyed members reported applying barcodes to outward goods, 27% to WIP and 29% to Incoming goods. There was a significant positive correlation found between company size and use of barcodes at all three levels indicating more use among larger companies. There was a correlation found between number of years of membership and application to WIP, but no correlation was evident with use on incoming or outgoing goods. The following results were recorded based on ANZSIC Code: Outward Goods: A significant difference was found, with Food Retailers being the largest users and Wood & Paper Products the lowest. Work in Progress: A significant difference was found, with Food Retailers being the highest users and Wood & Paper Products the lowest. Incoming Goods: A highly significant difference was found, with Food Retailers and Personal and Household Goods Wholesalers being the largest users and Agriculture the lowest. (Refer Sections 7.1.1 – 7.1.3, 7.10.1) 17. 83% of surveyed members reported using EAN ID numbers on retail items, 32% to nonretail items, 20% to locations and 18% to internal items. There was a significant positive correlation found between company size and use of barcodes on non-retail items, locations and internal items, indicating more use among larger companies. There was no correlation found between number of years of membership and use of EAN ID numbers at any level. For Retail Items a significant difference was recorded based on ANZSIC
16
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
18.
19.
20. 21.
22.
23.
24.
Code. Metal Products and Agriculture recorded the lowest usage and Personal & Household Goods Wholesalers and Food Retailers the highest. No significant variation by ANZSIC Code was found for Non-Retail Items, Internal Items or Locations. (Refer Sections 7.2.1 – 7.2.4, 7.10.2) 17% of surveyed companies are scanning barcodes internally, and 40% of the remainder indicated they have plans to begin scanning in the near future. There was a correlation found between internal scanning and both company size and number of years of membership. There also appeared to be a trend toward increased internal scanning in smaller companies, with a large proportion planning to do this in future. A highly significant difference was found between ANZSIC Code groupings based on whether they were scanning barcodes internally or not. The Textile, Clothing & Footwear group showed the highest proportion (approximately 40% saying “Yes”), while all the other groups showed generally low levels of usage. The Medical & Pharmaceutical Products and Personal & Household Goods Wholesalers are the most active in terms of planning to extend barcode scanning to internal functions. At the other end of the scale are Wood & Paper Products and Printing, Publishing and Recorded Media (Refer Sections 7.3.1 – 7.3.2) 21% of companies are using application identifiers, and usage is correlated with both company size and number of years of membership. 29% of member companies are using SSCC’s on trade units and 18% on pallets. The use of SSCC’s on trade units was found to be correlated with both company size and number of years of membership, while use on pallets was correlated with company size only. When compared on the basis of ANZSIC Code a significant difference was found between the groups (ie for use on trade units). Personal & Household Goods Wholesalers and Medical & Pharmaceutical Products report the greatest usage, while Printing, Publishing and Media show the least. (Refer Sections 7.4.1 – 7.5.2, 7.10.4) 20% of respondent companies indicated they are using EAN Logistics Labels. Use of these labels were correlated with both company size and number of years of membership. (Refer Sections 7.6, 7.10.4) 26% of member companies indicated they are using EAN Location and Electronic Commerce numbers to identify Legal Entities, 13% for Functional Entities and 15% for Physical Entities. Use of these numbers was found to be correlated with company size for all three types. There was no correlation with number of years of membership for any of these numbers. For Physical Entities compared on the basis of ANZSIC code a significant difference was found between the groups. Printing, Publishing & Recorded media recorded little or no usage, and Food Retailing showed the highest level (though still very low). (Refer Sections 7.7.1 – 7.7.3, 7.10.3) The following proportions of companies using EDI for various applications were recorded: Incoming Orders – 30%, ASN’s – 25%, Remittance Advice – 26%, Invoices 25%, Evaluated Receipts Settlement – 20%, POS Data 22% and Purchase Orders 19%. Company size was found to be correlated with use of all of these EDI applications. Number of years of membership was correlated with Incoming Orders, Remittance Advice and Purchase Orders. (Refer Sections 7.8.1 – 7.8.7, 7.10.5) Comparison of use of EDI techniques between groups based on ANZSIC code indicated a highly significant difference for 6 of the 7 techniques. The Textile, Clothing & Footwear and Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling groups recorded highest levels of usage. Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media and Wood & Paper Products recorded lowest levels of usage. (Refer Section 7.8.8) 45% of member companies indicated they have cooperative partnership arrangements with major suppliers, while 58% reported having cooperative partnership arrangements in place with customers. Company size was found to be correlated with both of these practices, while there was no correlation found with number of years of membership. There were significant differences recorded based on ANZSIC Code with Textiles, Clothing & Footwear being the group recording the highest levels of usage, and Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media the lowest. (Refer Sections 7.9.1, 7.9.4) 59% of member companies indicated they prepare and deliver merchandise in “Floor Ready” form, while 34% reported scan packing finished goods by store. A correlation was found between scan packing and company size, but no correlation was found with either practice and number of years of membership. Textiles, Clothing & Footwear were the ANZSIC group recording the highest levels of usage. (Refer Sections 7.9.2, 7.9.3)
17
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
3.1.4 Member Services / Products Used 25. Usage of the range of products / services is generally very low. For example, there are only two products / services that have been used by more than 50% of the membership, and for each of these the average level of usage is recorded as low. All 8 other products / services have been used by less than 31% of the membership and record very low levels of usage. Knowledge of and opportunity to use EAN products / services is also low. Satisfaction with these products / services is in the medium range. It is highest with Barcode Testing and lowest for EANnet and Other Literature (ie other than the regular newsletter). (Refer Section 8.1) 26. The results indicate that if the knowledge of products and services on offer can be increased within the membership then usage will increase. For 8 of these products/services it appears that higher levels of usage will lead to higher levels of satisfaction. For EANCOM and EANnet it is not clear whether an increase in use will lead to high levels of satisfaction. (Refer Section 8.1) 27. Differences according to Industry type were not generally high, although the Retail sector did report significantly higher levels of use, knowledge and opportunity to use EANnet. There were no significant differences found in levels of satisfaction. (Refer Section 8.2.1 – 8.2.4) 28. There were significant differences found for extent of use, knowledge and opportunity to use for most member products/services by company size. In fact, there were significant positive correlations found for the majority of relationships indicating a higher level of use, knowledge etc in larger organisations. There were no significant differences found in levels of satisfaction. (Refer Section 8.3.1 – 8.3.4) 29. Number of years of membership does not appear to affect usage, knowledge, opportunity or levels of satisfaction with member products/services in any highly significant way. (Refer Section 8.4.1 – 8.4.4) 30. The highest overall users of all the available services (ie on average) are the Food Retailers, while the lowest are the Wood & Paper Products groups. The Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media as well as the Metal Products group also recorded very low usage of services such as EANCOM, EANnet, EANWORKS, EAN Training and the Imaging Service. (Refer Section 8.6.1) 31. Significant differences were found in extent of knowledge of EANnet, EANWORKS, The Newsletter, Barcode Testing, the EAN Website and EAN Training. The Food Retail and Medical and Pharmaceutical Products groups exhibit the highest levels of understanding, while the Wood and Paper Products groups have the lowest. (Refer Section 8.6.3) 32. The Strategic and Tactical groups reported significantly higher levels of use, knowledge and opportunity to use member products and services than the Reactive group. There was no significant difference in levels of satisfaction between these groups. (Refer Section 8.7.1 – 8.7.4)
3.1.5 Rating of EAN Customer Service 33. Customer service satisfaction was found to be medium to medium high across the full data set. There was no difference in reported levels of customer satisfaction due to Industry Type, Company Size or Numbers of Years of Membership. There was some difference recorded based on the Position of the Respondent in the Organisation, with Marketing and Operations Managers reporting higher levels of satisfaction than Financial Controllers and Senior Managers. Wood & Paper Products, Agriculture and Textiles, Clothing & Footwear recorded the lowest levels of satisfaction, while Food Retailers and the Food, Beverage & Tobacco groups recorded the highest. Tactical and Strategic implementers rated customer service levels significantly higher than did the Reactive group. (Refer Section 9.1 – 9.7)
3.1.6 The Role of EAN Australia 34. Responses across the full data set indicated a moderate level of enthusiasm for the provision by EAN Australia of extended services. There was also a moderate level of satisfaction with the range of services currently offered, and a general level of disagreement with the statements that EAN Australia was too bureaucratic, or that it was not delivering value to members. (Refer Section 10.2.1 – 10.2.2)
18
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
35. A correlation was found between a need for services such as consulting, networking and the provision of a service/equipment provider rating system and company size. In short, this means that the larger the company the higher the likelihood that they see some value in (and therefore have some use for) these extended services. Operations Managers were also found to see more value in these services, especially the rating system. (Refer Section 10.4, 10.6) 36. The Food, Beverage & Tobacco group indicated a stronger desire than other ANZSIC code categories for extended services generally. They particularly indicated that they were more dependent on EAN Australia for operational advice. (Refer Section 10.7) 37. A strong and highly significant correlation was found between the need for extended services and the extent of implementation. The strongest of these was found between the perception of EAN Australia as a “value added” partner and extent of implementation. In other words, if you are a Strategic implementer you are more likely to want an extended set of services, and you are far more likely to see EAN Australia as an organisation adding value to your business. (Refer Section 10.8.1) 38. A significant (though weak) correlation was found between being a strategic implementer and the perception that EAN Australia is bureaucratic and inflexible in its’ dealings with members. Although this difference was only small, it is nonetheless significant, indicating that this group have different requirements and need more flexibility in the way services are delivered. (Refer Section 10.8.2)
3.1.7 Expectations of the EAN System 3.1.7.1 Business Performance 39. 57% of surveyed member organisations indicated that they expected business performance to improve as a result of implementation, while 42% felt there would be no change. This expectation was found to be linked to the size of the organisation, and was held more strongly by Marketing and “Other” Managers than by Senior Managers and Financial Controllers. (Refer Section 11.1.1, 11.1.3 and 11.1.5) 40. For the ANZSIC categories, the highest expectations were in Food Retailing, Metal Products, Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling and Medical & Pharmaceutical Products. The lowest expectation was (surprisingly) in the Textiles, Clothing and Footwear group. This finding is particularly interesting in light of the fact that TCF are the biggest users of many of the techniques (such as EDI). (Refer Section 11.1.6) 41. A strong, positive and highly significant correlation was found between extent of implementation and levels of expectation of improvement in business performance. In short, Strategic implementers have a far higher level of expectation than Tactical implementers, who in turn have a higher expectation than the Reactive group. (Refer Section 11.1.7)
3.1.7.2 Cost Benefit 42. There was, a highly significant difference in perception of benefits based on industry category. The Retail sector recorded the highest level of benefit, while the “Other” category and Manufacturing recorded the lowest. (Refer Section 11.2.2) 43. Company size is highly correlated with both perceptions of cost and benefits achieved. It is also apparent that for larger companies the gap between cost and benefit widens considerably, with benefit outweighing cost in direct relationship to the size of the company. (Refer Section 11.2.3) 44. There were differing perceptions of benefits based on position of the respondent in the organisation. The Marketing and “Other” managers had the highest assessment of overall benefits, whereas Senior Managers and Financial Controllers had the lowest. (Refer Section 11.2.5) 45. A significant difference was found in perceptions of cost between the ANZSIC code categories. Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media had the lowest perception of cost, while Agriculture, Wood & Paper Products and Personal & Household Goods Wholesaling had the highest. Analysis of the relationship between cost and benefit revealed that for some ANZSIC Code categories the perception was that as cost increased benefit would decrease, while for others the opposite was the case. (Refer Section 11.2.6)
19
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
46. Highly significant differences were found between the three implementation categories (ie Reactive, Tactical and Strategic) for both perceived Costs and Benefits as a result of implementation. The three groups see costs increasing as implementation is extended, but there is a significant divergence between cost and benefit as this process unfolds. This indicates a clear perception of benefit increasing significantly in relation to cost as implementation is extended along a company’s supply chain. (Refer Section 11.2.7)
3.1.8 Planning for Implementation 47. Levels of Proactive Planning were generally lower than Reactive Planning for the Full data Set. The single variable with the highest mean score was in the Reactive Planning group, and was: “Planning was minimal as the process was dictated by trading partners”. (Refer Section 12.2) 48. The Retail sector generally recorded significantly lower levels of reactive planning, while the Wholesale Distribution group were also significantly lower in terms of assigning a low priority to planning for implementation. The group of companies falling into the “Other” category scored significantly higher than the others in terms of assigning a low priority to planning. In terms of proactive planning, the Retail group showed significantly higher levels for the three variables relating to planning and costing, long term strategic planning and the development of a long term strategic plan of which implementation was a part. (Refer Section 12.3.1 – 12.3.2) 49. Levels of Proactive planning were found to be significantly different for larger companies than for smaller companies. The differences between the groups were more significant and pronounced for the companies employing more than 1000 employees, although the group employing between 200 and 999 people recorded the strongest emphasis on long term strategic planning. (Refer Section 12.4.2) 50. Reactive planning was found to be significantly negatively correlated to Extent of Implementation for all three variables. Strategic Implementers showed significantly less inclination to be reactive planners than did the Tactical group, who in turn were significantly less inclined to do this than the Reactive implementers. (Refer Section 12.7.1) 51. Proactive Planning practices were strongly and highly significantly correlated with extent of implementation for all 4 variables. In short, Strategic implementers are highly proactive planners, Tactical implementers are moderately proactive and the Reactive group are low level proactive planners. (Refer Section 12.7.2)
3.1.9 Business Outcomes of Implementation 3.1.9.1 Operational Outcomes These included: Reduced finished goods, WIP and raw materials inventory, improved product traceability, improved stock accuracy, reduction in time required for annual stocktakes, increased productivity, improved product quality, increased flexibility, reduced cycle times, improved cash flow, reductions in claims and reduced costs. 52. For the full data set the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes was seen to be moderately important. The two areas recording the greatest contributions were improved product traceability and stock accuracy, whereas reductions in WIP and component inventories were the areas least affected. (Refer Section 13.2.1) 53. Highly significant differences were found in perceptions of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes across the Industry groups. The Retail sector recorded significantly higher scores than the other three sectors on 11 of the 13 dimensions. There were also significant differences found on many of these variables between the other three groups. For the Retail group, improvements in stock accuracy, time required for stock taking and productivity scored particularly highly. (Refer Section 13.3.1) 54. Highly significant differences were found for all 11 variables between the different size companies, and this was further supported by moderately strong and highly significant correlations being found for all 11 variables and company size. The larger the company the greater is the perception of the importance of the EAN system in contributing to all of these operational outcomes. The outcomes to which the EAN system contributes most in
20
SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS
the larger companies were improvements in product traceability, stock accuracy, time to conduct stock takes and overall productivity. (Refer Section 13.4.1) 55. Senior Managers (and to some extent Financial Controllers) assign significantly less value to the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes than do Operations Management and/or Marketing (in particular) and the “Other” category. The Marketing and Operations Managers see a significantly higher contribution in the areas of cash flow, claims and cost reduction, flexibility and productivity, as well as improvements in stock accuracy and traceability. (Refer Section 13.6.1) 56. There were strong and highly significant correlations found between each of the operational outcomes and extent of implementation. Strategic implementers have a significantly stronger perception of the contribution of the EAN system to operational outcomes than do the Tactical group, who in turn have a significantly stronger view than the Reactive group. (Refer Section 13.8.1)
3.1.9.2 Bottom Line Outcomes These included: improved customer satisfaction, improved service quality, increased sales and increased net profit. 57. The EAN system was seen to contribute more to bottom line outcomes (eg increased sales, net profit etc) than the operational ones reported above. In particular, the contribution to improved customer satisfaction was seen to be highly important, reflecting the requirement placed on the supply chain by retailers to implement the system. (Refer Section 13.2.2) 58. Perceptions of the contribution of the EAN system to bottom line outcomes also followed a similar pattern to the operational group with the Retail sector reporting higher scores for 3 of the 4 variables. A pattern has also emerged whereby there is an apparent relationship between the distance along the supply chain (ie from the customer) and perceptions of benefits. It is also interesting to note that the point of greatest convergence is improved customer satisfaction. For the Retail group this was the variable that had least difference, and for the others it scored much higher than the other variables. This reflects the fact that the retailer (for most other organisations) is the customer, whereas the end user is the customer of the retailer. (Refer Section 13.3.2) 59. A similar relationship between company size and bottom line outcomes was found as for the operational group, with significant differences between the groups and moderate (though highly significant) correlations found between company size and three of the variables. There was most difference recorded for improvements in service quality and net profit, the latter perhaps reflecting economies of scale available to larger organisations. (Refer Section 13.4.2) 60. Similar patterns emerge for the contribution to bottom line outcomes as for the operational group. In particular, there are significant differences found for the two variables relating to service quality and net profit. Again, the difference is between the Senior Managers and the Operations/Marketing/”Other” Managers, with the Senior Managers assigning significantly less value to the contribution of the EAN system than the others. (Refer Section 13.6.2) 61. Strong and highly significant correlations were found between each of the bottom line outcomes and extent of implementation. As for the operational outcomes, the Strategic implementers see the EAN system to be extremely important to achieving these bottom line results. Their perception is significantly stronger than the Tactical group, whose perception is in turn significantly stronger than the Reactive implementers. (Refer Section 13.8.2)
21
REACTIVE, TACTICAL OR STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
4
THE REACTIVE, TACTICAL OR STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
The surveyed organisations were classified according to the extent to which implementation of the EAN system had been applied and promoted along the supply chain, as well as internally. This was done in order to provide a clearer picture of the extent to which the EAN membership have implemented the various elements of the EAN system and Integrated Supply Chain Management.. It also provided a means for comparing the results of the analysis between organisations at different levels of implementation. This classification was based on the EAN model of three types of implementation – Reactive, Tactical or Strategic – and defined below: Reactive: Purely satisfying a request from a trading partner. This is viewed as the lowest level of implementation and is generally restricted to applying barcodes to finished goods, with perhaps some EDI transactions included. Such implementations can be considered as just adding cost to the business. Tactical: This approach seeks to extend implementation to specific processes within the business to improve efficiencies in (say) production or inventory control. At this level adequate planning, costing and definition of the project are recommended, and real cost savings are achievable. Strategic: Implementations of this type seek to introduce integrated supply chain management techniques across the entire supply chain. The first step is usually the introduction of the elements of the EAN system within the initiators business. This leads eventually to the application of these elements both backward and forward along the supply chain as part of a longer term approach to streamlining management of the supply chain. The database was partitioned into three groups along the lines of these definitions using responses to Section 9 of the survey – Extent of Implementation. Factor analysis was applied to the responses to the 13 questions making up this section. As a result three separate factors were extracted. Two of these (accounting for 9 of the questions) reflected Tactical and/or Strategic approaches to implementation, while three of the remaining four reflected the Reactive approach. There was also one question relating to the involvement of customers that loaded almost equally on both the Strategic and Reactive factor (See Appendix 1). This was interesting as the involvement of customers is common for all three types of implementation as the initial motivation will often be customer generated. To avoid this ambiguity this variable was not included in the analysis. The two factors relating to Tactical and Strategic approaches were used to categorise respondent organisations as either Reactive, Tactical or Strategic based on the current extent of implementation. The mean scores for this group of variables were used in this process (See Appendix 2). For example, a mean score across the 7 questions making up the Tactical/Strategic factor of less than 2 meant an organisation was classified as Reactive. For an organisation to be classified as Strategic it needed to have a mean score >= 3 for these seven questions as well as the same mean score for the two questions making up the Strategic factor. The tactical group were those that did not fall into either of these categories. As a result the following database could be classified into the three categories as follows:
22
REACTIVE, TACTICAL OR STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
Distribution of Respondent Organisations using Extent of Implementation
Strategic 11%
Tactical 25%
Reactive Tactical Strategic
Reactive 64%
Figure 1: Distribution of respondent organisations by implementation approach The results of this categorisation indicate that the majority of member organisations are Reactive in their approach to implementation. During the analysis that follows this classification scheme is used to compare results between the three groups to provide insights into how they differ and what characteristics typify each type.
23
DEMOGRAPHICS
DEMOGRAPHICS
5 5.1
Primary Business Activity (Industry Type)
The breakdown of respondent organisations by their primary business activity was as follows. Primary Business Activity
Primary Business Activity
Missing Total
Manufacturing Wholesale Distribution Other Retail Health Care Services Government Hospitality Total Not answered
Frequency 305 175 41 23 5 2 1 552 1 553
Percent 55.2 31.6 7.4 4.2 .9 .4 .2 99.8 .2 100.0
Valid Percent 55.3 31.7 7.4 4.2 .9 .4 .2 100.0
Cumulative Percent 55.3 87.0 94.4 98.6 99.5 99.8 100.0
50
40
30
20
Percent
Valid
60
10
0 Manufacturing
Other
Wholesale Distribn.
Health Care Services Retail
Hospitality
Government
Figure 2: Breakdown of respondent organisations by primary activity When compared with the breakdown of the non-respondent group by primary activity these results indicate that the survey sample was an accurate reflection of the membership for this demographic variable. Primary Business Activity Manufacturing Wholesale Distribution Other Retail Health Care Services Government Hospitality
Member Survey (%) 55.25 31.70 7.43 4.17 0.91 0.36 0.18
Non-Respondents (%) 55.40 29.94 Not Available 3.03 0.55 0.30 Not Available
Table 1: Comparison of respondent organisations by primary business activity with nonrespondent organisations Chi-Square Tests were used to test for significant differences between the surveyed group and the total membership for this variable. It was found there was no significant difference (see Appendix 3) indicating that the surveyed group were representative of the total membership. Appendix 3 also contains a listing of the breakdown of the descriptions included in the “Other” category.
5.2
Number of People Employed in Australia
The breakdown of the respondent organisations by number of people employed in Australia was as follows. No. of people employed in Australia
No. of people employed in Australia
Missing Total
5-19 20-199 1-4 200-999 1000-4999 >10000 5000-9999 Total Not Answered
Frequency 191 182 130 30 6 5 2 546 7 553
Percent Valid Percent 34.5 35.0 32.9 33.3 23.5 23.8 5.4 5.5 1.1 1.1 .9 .9 .4 .4 98.7 100.0 1.3 100.0
Cumulative Percent 35.0 68.3 92.1 97.6 98.7 99.6 100.0
30
20
10
Percent
Valid
40
0 5-19
1-4 20-199
1000-4999 200-999
5000-9999 >10000
Figure 3: Breakdown of number of people employed in Australia for the respondent organisations
24
DEMOGRAPHICS
These results indicate that 68% of member organisations employ between 5 and 199 people, with a further 23.5% being “micro” organisations employing 4 people or less. When compared with national estimates of the distribution of companies by number of employees, the EAN Australia membership shows a distinct difference as indicated by the table below.
Companies with Less that 200 Employees No. of Employees EAN Membership (%) *National Estimates (%) 0-4 25.84 60.46 5-19 37.97 17.47 20-199 36.18 22.07 Table 2: Comparison of breakdown of EAN membership with National Estimates for companies employing less than 200 employees (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) From this table it can be seen that the EAN membership is made up of significantly less companies in the “micro” (4 or less employees) class, and a higher proportion in the 5 – 19 and 20 – 199 categories. This can in part be explained by the fact that the membership is made up of a higher proportion of manufacturers and wholesalers, industry groups tending to employ larger numbers of people. It is also notable that the proportion of members from the Retail sector is significantly less than recorded nationally, perhaps indicating the focus on implementation of the EAN system backwards along supply chains. This result is, however, surprising given that the EAN system has been driven by major players in the Retail sector. This is illustrated by Table 3 below that compares the percentage of members in the three main industry groups with the national estimates.
Comparison of Industry Breakdowns Industry EAN Membership (%) *National Estimates (%) Manufacturing 56.07 40.24 Wholesale 32.17 17.31 Retail 4.23 11.99 Other 7.54 30.47 Table 3: Comparison of breakdown of EAN membership with National Estimates by Industry (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) When compared with the breakdown of the non-respondent group by number of people employed in Australia these results also indicate that the survey sample was an accurate reflection of the membership for this demographic variable. No. of people employed in Australia
Approximately how many people does your organisation employ in Australia?
Missing
Total
Percent 34.5 28.9 21.9 4.8 1.2 .2 .1 91.6 8.3 .2 8.4 100.0
Valid Percent 37.7 31.6 23.9 5.2 1.3 .3 .1 100.0
Cumulative Percent 37.7 69.3 93.2 98.4 99.7 99.9 100.0
600
500
400
300
200
Frequency
Valid
Frequency 5-19 589 20-199 494 1-4 373 200-999 82 1000-4999 20 5000-9999 4 >10000 1 Total 1563 System 141 Not Answered 3 Total 144 1707
700
100 0 5-19
1-4 20-199
1000-4999 200-999
>10000
5000-9999
Figure 4: Breakdown of number of people employed in Australia for the non-respondent organisations
25
DEMOGRAPHICS
Employment Category 5-19 20-199 1-4 200-999 1000-4999 >10000 5000-9999
Member Survey (%) 35.00 33.30 23.80 5.50 1.10 0.90 0.40
Non-Respondents (%) 37.70 31.60 23.90 5.20 1.30 0.30 0.1
Table 4: Comparison of number of people employed in Australia for the respondent and nonrespondent organisations A Chi-Square test was used to test for significant differences between the surveyed group and the total membership for this variable. There was no significant difference found (see Appendix 3) further indicating that the surveyed group were representative of the total membership.
5.3
ANZSIC Code
Table 5 below shows the breakdown of the members surveyed by ANZSIC Code. ANZSIC code or industry sub-division Frequency Valid
Missing Total
Food, Beverage and Tobacco Other Manufacturing Other Agriculture Textiles, Clothing and Footwear Personal and Household Good Wholesaling Printing, Publishing and Recorded Media Medical and Pharmaceutical Products Wood and Paper Products Food Retailing Metal Products Personal and Household Good Retailing Machinery and Equipment Petroleum, Coal and Chemicals Basic Material Wholesaling Business Services Non-Metallic Mineral Products Machinery and Motor Vehicle Wholesaling Total Not answered
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
120
21.7
22.5
22.5
66 58 47
11.9 10.5 8.5
12.4 10.9 8.8
34.8 45.7 54.5
45
8.1
8.4
62.9
43
7.8
8.1
71.0
27
4.9
5.1
76.0
22
4.0
4.1
80.1
20
3.6
3.7
83.9
20 19
3.6 3.4
3.7 3.6
87.6 91.2
11
2.0
2.1
93.3
9
1.6
1.7
94.9
8
1.4
1.5
96.4
8
1.4
1.5
97.9
7
1.3
1.3
99.3
3
.5
.6
99.8
1
.2
.2
100.0
534 19 553
96.6 3.4 100.0
100.0
Table 5: Breakdown of surveyed members by ANZSIC Code When these results are compared to the national figures for the proportion of all businesses accounted for by each category, the emphasis on Manufacturing is again highlighted. It is also evident that the shortfall in membership in the Retail sector is more pronounced in the
26
DEMOGRAPHICS
Personal & Household Good group (rather than Food Retailing). Table 6 below illustrates this.
Comparison of ANZSIC Codes EAN *National ANZSIC Code Membership Estimates (%) (%) Food, Beverage & Tobacco 22.47 4.30 Other Manufacturing 12.36 3.77 Textiles, Clothing & Footwear 8.43 3.19 Personal & Household Good 8.05 5.56 Wholesaling Printing, Publishing & Recorded Media Wood & Paper Products Metal Products Food Retailing Personal & Household Good Retailing Other
5.06
3.04
3.75 3.56 3.56
2.22 5.03 3.32
2.06
4.14
30.71
65.43
Table 6: Comparison between EAN membership and national estimates of proportions of companies in each ANZSIC Code (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) When the two groups are compared within the Manufacturing sector, it is noticeable that there is a significant bias toward three of the sub-divisions( ie Food, Beverage & Tobacco / Textiles, Clothing & Footwear / Other Manufacturing). In these three cases there is a far higher proportion of members (73%) than are represented in Manufacturing at a national level (30%). On the other hand, in four of the other six groups (Petroleum, Coal, Chemical & Associated Products / Non-Metallic Mineral Products / Metal Products / Machinery & Equipment) the proportional representation is very low (12%) in comparison with the national figures (56%). Table 7 below illustrates this.
Comparison of ANZSIC Codes - Manufacturing EAN *National ANZSIC Code Membership Estimates (%) (%) Food, Beverage & Tobacco 37.85 11.49 Textiles, Clothing & Footwear 14.20 8.53 Wood & Paper Products 6.31 5.92 Printing, Publishing & Recorded 8.52 8.12 Media Petroleum / Coal / Chemical & 2.52 12.44 Associated Products Non-Metallic Mineral Products 0.95 5.51 Metal Products 5.99 13.45 Machinery & Equipment 2.84 24.47 Other Manufacturing 20.82 10.07 Table 7: Comparison between EAN membership and national estimates of proportions of companies in each ANZSIC Code within the Manufacturing sector (*Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics – Business Longitudinal Survey 1997) Appendix 3 also contains a listing of the breakdown of the descriptions included in the “Other” category.
27
DEMOGRAPHICS
5.4
Principal Ownership of the Business
93% of the respondents were Australian owned companies. 3% were USA owned and 2% European and Asian respectively. Principal ownership of the business 10 0
Principal ownership of the business
Missing Total
Australian USA European Asian Other Total Not answered
Percent 87.9 2.5 2.2 2.0 .4 94.9 5.1 100.0
Valid Percent 92.6 2.7 2.3 2.1 .4 100.0
Cumulative Percent 92.6 95.2 97.5 99.6 100.0
80
60
40
20
Percent
Valid
Frequency 486 14 12 11 2 525 28 553
0 Aust ra lian
USA
Europea n
Asian
Other
Figure 5: Breakdown of numbers by principal ownership of respondent organisations
5.5
Number of People Employed Worldwide
60 organisations (11% 0f respondents) recorded having operations outside of Australia. Figure 6 below illustrates how this group was distributed according to number of people employed. No. of people employed worldwide 50
No. of people employed worldwide
Missing
0-199 1000-9999 200-999 10000-49999 20000-49999 >50000 Total Not answered System Total
Total
Percent 4.7 2.0 1.8 1.4 .5 .4 10.8 88.8 .4 89.2 100.0
Valid Percent 43.3 18.3 16.7 13.3 5.0 3.3 100.0
Cumulative Percent 43.3 61.7 78.3 91.7 96.7 100.0
40
30
20
10
Percent
Valid
Frequency 26 11 10 8 3 2 60 491 2 493 553
0 0-199
200-999 1000-9999
20000-49999 10000-49999
>50000
Figure 6: Number of people employed worldwide
5.6
Approximate Gross Revenue in 1998 – 1999
The results for this category reflect the fact that 92% of the organisations surveyed employed less than 200 people. Approximate gross revenue for 1998-1999 100
Approximate gross revenue for 1998-1999
Missing Total
$0-$10m $10M-$50M $50M-$200M >$500M $200M-$500M Total Not Answered
Frequency 422 75 26 12 2 537 16 553
Percent 76.3 13.6 4.7 2.2 .4 97.1 2.9 100.0
Valid Percent 78.6 14.0 4.8 2.2 .4 100.0
60
40
20
Percent
Valid
80
Cumulative Percent 78.6 92.6 97.4 99.6 100.0
0 $0-$10m
$10M-$50M $50M-$200M
>$500M
$200M-$500M
Figure 7: Distribution by approximate gross revenue in 1998 – 1999
28
DEMOGRAPHICS
5.7
Number of Years of EAN Membership
The average (mean) number of years of membership recorded across the sample was 6 years. Number of years of membership of EAN 40
Number of years of membership of EAN
Missing Total
10 Years Total Not Answered
Frequency 77 143 150 95 465 88 553
Percent 13.9 25.9 27.1 17.2 84.1 15.9 100.0
Valid Percent 16.6 30.8 32.3 20.4 100.0
20
10
Percent
Valid
30
Cumulative Percent 16.6 47.3 79.6 100.0
0 10 Years
Mean Number of Years of Membership = 6 Years
Figure 8: Breakdown of respondents by number of years of EAN membership These figures also indicate that there was an increase in average (per annum) number of new memberships between 1995 and 1997 (estimated at 910). This represented an increase from an estimated average of 580 between 1990 and 1994. This has subsequently dropped in 1998 – 1999 to around 730 (these are estimates only based on this survey and may differ from actual recorded new memberships). Figure 9 below illustrates this change over time in new membership rates. Estimated Ave. No. of New Memberships (Per Annum) 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1990 - 1994
1995 - 1997
1998 - 1999
Figure 9: Estimated change in average per annum membership rates since 1990
5.8
Location of Sites and Offices
Figures 10 – 13 record the location of Head Offices, Other Offices / Sites, Manufacturing Plant(s) and Warehouse(s) for the survey sample. Location of head office Location of head office
Missing Total
VIC NSW QLD SA WA TAS Head Offices in Multiple States ACT NT Total Not Answered
Frequency 175 166 79 54 51 12
Percent 31.6 30.0 14.3 9.8 9.2 2.2
Valid Percent 32.3 30.6 14.6 10.0 9.4 2.2
Cumulative Percent 32.3 62.9 77.5 87.5 96.9 99.1
3
.5
.6
99.6
1 1 542 11 553
.2 .2 98.0 2.0 100.0
.2 .2 100.0
99.8 100.0
30
20
10
Percent
Valid
40
0 VIC
QLD NSW
WA SA
Mult Locns TAS
NT ACT
Figure 10: Location of Head Offices
29
DEMOGRAPHICS
Location(s) of other offices
Location(s) of other offices
Missing Total
Other Offices in Multiple States VIC NSW WA QLD SA TAS ACT NT Total Not Answered
Percent
Valid Percent
102
18.4
45.5
45.5
39 29 17 16 13 6 1 1 224 329 553
7.1 5.2 3.1 2.9 2.4 1.1 .2 .2 40.5 59.5 100.0
17.4 12.9 7.6 7.1 5.8 2.7 .4 .4 100.0
62.9 75.9 83.5 90.6 96.4 99.1 99.6 100.0
40
30
20
10
Percent
Frequency Valid
50
Cumulative Percent
0 Mult Locns
NSW VIC
QLD
TAS
WA
NT
SA
ACT
Figure 11: Location of Other Offices Location(s) of manufacturing sites 30
Location(s) of manufacturing sites
Missing
VIC NSW QLD SA Manufacturing Sites in Multiple States WA TAS NT Total Not Answered System Total
Total
Frequency 87 80 47 36
Percent 15.7 14.5 8.5 6.5
Valid Percent 27.3 25.1 14.7 11.3
Cumulative Percent 27.3 52.4 67.1 78.4
30
5.4
9.4
87.8
28 10 1 319 232 2 234 553
5.1 1.8 .2 57.7 42.0 .4 42.3 100.0
8.8 3.1 .3 100.0
96.6 99.7 100.0
20
10
Percent
Valid
0 VIC
NSW
QLD
SA Mult Locns WA
TAS
NT
Figure 12: Location(s) of Manufacturing Sites Location(s) of warehouses 30
Location(s) of warehouses
Missing
Total
VIC NSW Warehouses in Multiple States QLD SA WA TAS ACT NT Total Not Answered System Total
Frequency 103 94
Percent 18.6 17.0
Valid Percent 26.4 24.1
Cumulative Percent 26.4 50.5
81
14.6
20.8
71.3
40 31 30 8 2 1 390 162 1 163 553
7.2 5.6 5.4 1.4 .4 .2 70.5 29.3 .2 29.5 100.0
10.3 7.9 7.7 2.1 .5 .3 100.0
81.5 89.5 97.2 99.2 99.7 100.0
20
10
Percent
Valid
0 VIC
Mult Locns NSW
SA QLD
TAS WA
NT ACT
Figure 13: Location(s) of Warehouses
5.9
Position in the Organisation of the Respondent
The respondents to the survey included a high proportion of Senior Managers with 53% being either CEOs, Managing Directors or General Mangers. Given that the survey was directed to”….the most senior person responsible for supply chain management / logistics management / EAN coordination at the site”, this is an indication of these issues being seen (at least by those that responded to the survey) to be strategic rather than operational in nature. Managers from operations disciplines (Logistics, Production, Operations and Manufacturing etc) represented 17% of respondents, with Marketing and Financial managers accounting for 7% each. 15% were categorised as “Other”. This group was made up of positions such as IT Manager, Management Information Manager, Company Director, Supply Manager etc. Figure 14 below illustrates these results.
30
DEMOGRAPHICS
Primary position of responsibility in the organisation
Primary position of responsibility in the organisation Frequency 142 83 76 70 40 39 25 24 19
Percent 25.7 15.0 13.7 12.7 7.2 7.1 4.5 4.3 3.4
Valid Percent 25.9 15.1 13.9 12.8 7.3 7.1 4.6 4.4 3.5
13
2.4
2.4
96.9
8
1.4
1.5
98.4
6 3 548 5 553
1.1 .5 99.1 .9 100.0
1.1 .5 100.0
99.5 100.0
20
10
0
er ag an M g in er ag ag ce ck an an Pa M ur u f ss e an A rvi c er M ry g i e l a ua er S an Q M m r to on us io ag e C uct an r od M age s Pr i c an r e st gi g M ol l Lo tin ntr er ke o C ag ar l M ci a an n M s r na Fi tion ge na ra pe l Ma O a er en G r to ec EO i r C rg D ien tgh Oa an M
Missing Total
Managing Director Other CEO General Manager Operations Manager Financial Controller Marketing Manager Logistics Manager Production Manager Customer Service Manager Qualiry Assurance Manager Manufacturing Manager Packaging Manager Total Not Answered
30
Percent
Valid
Cumulative Percent 25.9 41.1 54.9 67.7 75.0 82.1 86.7 91.1 94.5
Figure 14: Position in the organisation of respondents
5.10 Demographics by Extent of Implementation 5.10.1 Primary Business Activity (Industry Type) Analysis of the three implementation approaches (ie Reactive, Tactical or Strategic) by primary business activity (or industry type) showed a higher proportion of Manufacturers in the Reactive group (Note: only the three major industry types – Manufacturing, Wholesale Distribution and Retail were used). The Strategic group by contrast showed a higher proportion of Wholesale Distributors and Retailers. Figure 15 below illustrates this. Comparitive Distributions by Major Industry Types for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implentations
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Retail
50%
Wholesale Distn
40%
Manufacturing
30% 20% 10% 0% Reactive
Tactical Implementation Approach
Strategic
Comparitive Distributions by Major Industry Types for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implentations
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Strategic 50%
Tactical Reactive
40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Manufacturing
Wholesale Distn Industry Type
Retail
Figure 15: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by industry distribution
31
DEMOGRAPHICS
The difference recorded between the Strategic and Reactive groups was found to be significant at the p < .05 level. This means that there is a low probability that the recorded difference is due to random variation. In other words the two groups are separated on these variables due to significant differences in their make up (See Appendix 4).
5.10.2 Number of People Employed Analysis of the three implementation approaches (ie Reactive, Tactical or Strategic) by number of employees (company size) showed a higher proportion smaller companies in the Reactive group. In fact there is a clear relationship apparent between company size and the three groups indicating a higher likelihood that Tactical and Strategic companies will be larger. Figure 16 below illustrates this. Comparative Distributions by Company Size for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implementations
100% 90% 80% 70% 60%
200-999 20-199 5-19 1-4
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Reactive
Tactical Implementation Type
Strategic
Comparative Distributions by Company Size for Reactive, Tactical and Strategic Implementations
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Strategic Tactical Reactive
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1-4
5-19
20-199
200-999
Company Size
Figure 16: Comparison between Reactive, Tactical and Strategic groups by company size These results were further confirmed by correlation analysis indicating a moderately strong (0.309) but highly significant (p10 Years 5 - 10 Years
50%
2 - 5 years 1000
2
1.5
Not At All
1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ITEM
Figure 22: Comparative levels of understanding by company size Another point of interest here is the comparatively low score for item five across all four groups. This question was worded: “All relevant staff have participated in information sessions/training programs”. It is interesting to note the low scores recorded for all four groups on this variable, as it provides some explanation for the low levels of understanding recorded across the surveyed membership generally.
6.5
Level of Understanding by Number of Years of Membership
There was no significant difference found in the level of understanding based on how long organisations have been members of EAN Australia. There was no significant correlation found between length of membership and either level of understanding or extent of implementation (See Appendix 8). Figure 23 below illustrates these findings.
37
ISCM TECHNIQUES IN USE
Comparison by Number of Years of Membership - Level of Understanding 5 To a Very Large Extent 4.5
4
MEAN SCORE
3.5
10 Years
2.5
2
1.5
Not At All
1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ITEM
Figure 23: Comparative levels of understanding by years of membership
6.6
Level of Understanding by Position of Respondent in the Organisation
There were some significant differences found between levels of understanding based on the position held by the organisation of the respondent to the survey. For three of the variables there was a difference recorded (significant at p < .05) indicating a significant difference in levels of understanding based on the respondents role. This was for items 5, 7 and 9 relating to training of staff and understanding of technical issues relevant to implementation. Figure 24 below illustrates the differences between the groups. Comparison by Position of Respondent in the Organisation - Level of Understading 5 To a Very Large Extent 4.5
4
MEAN SCORE
3.5
Senior Management Operations Management Financial Control Marketing Other
3
2.5
2
1.5
Not At All
1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ITEM
Figure 24: Comparative levels of understanding by position of respondent
6.7
Level of Understanding by ANZSIC Code
Significant differences were found in levels of understanding for items 1, 3, 4, (p= 2). VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'MEAN(extent2,extent3,extent4,extent6,extent7'+ ',extent11,extent12) >= 2 (FILTER)'. VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'. FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0). FILTER BY filter_$. EXECUTE . REACTIVE 1 USE ALL. COMPUTE filter_$=(MEAN(extent2,extent3,extent4,extent6,extent7,extent11 ,extent12) < 2). VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'MEAN(extent2,extent3,extent4,extent6,extent7'+ ',extent11,extent12) < 2 (FILTER)'. VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'. FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0). FILTER BY filter_$. EXECUTE . STRATEGIC 1 USE ALL. COMPUTE filter_$=(MEAN(extent2,extent3,extent4,extent6,extent7,extent11 ,extent12) >= 3 & MEAN(extent9,extent10) >= 3). VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'MEAN(extent2,extent3,extent4,extent6,extent7'+ ',extent11,extent12) >= 3 & MEAN(extent9,extent10) >= 3 (FILTER)'. VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'. FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0). FILTER BY filter_$. EXECUTE . TACTICAL 1 USE ALL. COMPUTE filter_$=(tacstrat = 1 & strategi = 0). VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'tacstrat = 1 & strategi = 0 (FILTER)'. VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'. FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0). FILTER BY filter_$. EXECUTE . FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=reactive strategi tactical /ORDER=ANALYSIS
.
115
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 3 Chi-Square – Industry Sector Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
Value 20.000a 16.094
16 16
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .220 .446
1
.046
df
3.996 5
a. 25 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20.
Chi-Square – Number of People Employed Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
Value 31.135a 31.842
35 35
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .655 .621
1
.759
df
.094 538
a. 34 cells (70.8%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .01.
Breakdown of Industry Category – “Other” INDUSTRY CATEGORY - OTHER Agriculture Classified / Commercial Advertising Communication Services Provider E-Commerce B2B Consultancy Education Egg Production Electrical Distributor Export (Juice) Farming Film Production Fitness Training Food Processing Food Production - Sale - Honey Grape Growing - Wine Production Grower / Packer of Fresh Produce Honey Production Horticultural Production and Value Adding Horticulture Horticulture (Nursery)
Frequency
INDUSTRY CATEGORY - OTHER
2 Import 1 Kangaroo Meat Processor 1 Licensed Products for Sale 1 Logistics Music Production 1 Nursery 1 Print Media - Newspaper 1 Produce 1 Publisher (Self with 1 Product) 2 Publisher and Wholesale Distribution 1 Self Publishing 1 Services - Business Advice 1 Software Distribution - Retail and Wholesale 1 Supplier of Promotional Products 1 Supported Employment Service Tourism 1 Unknown 1 Wholesale Grower of Plants 1 Wholesale Plants Nursery 1 Wine Producer and Exporter 1 Total
Frequency 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41
116
APPENDICES
Breakdown of ANZSIC Code Category – “Other” ANZSIC - OTHER Frequency 2531 1 2543 1 8667 1 9982 - Seafood 1 Auto Accessories 1 Automotive Accessories - Plastic 1 Blank Media ie Blank Audio/Video Tapes, CD-R's, disks etc 1 Book Wholesaling 1 Bowls Polish 1 Building Product Wholesaling 1 Computer Software 1 Concrete Additives 1 Cosmetic Distribution 2 Cosmetics Distribution 1 Craft Wholesaling 1 Distribution of Electrical Products 1 Electrical and Data Communications Components 1 Electronic Security Wholesale / Manufacture 1 Film Production 1 Fishing Industry Products Wholesaling 1 Fishing Tackle Importer and Wholesaler 1 Garden Decoration / Tools - Wholesale 1 Garden Stake Manufacturers 1 General Merchandise Retailing 1 Giftware / Decorware 1 Golf 1 Hardware 1 Hardware / Building Supplies Importer 1 Health and Beauty Products & Household Cleaning Detergents 1 Horticultural 1 Importing and Distribution 1 Jewellery 1 Leathergoods Wholesale 1 Leisure - Fishing and Camping (Hiking) 1 Manufacturing and Distribution of Stationery / Writing Instruments 1 Manufacturing Workshop - Lead Lights 1 Marine Equipment Wholsaling 1 Outdoor Furniture - Rehab Equipment - Trolleys 1 Pet Food and Supplies 1 Photo and Digital Industry 1 Plastic Door and Wall Moulding (Renovation Product) 1 Plastic Pet Bowls 1 Primrose Oil Extraction, Refining and Packaging 1 Provision of Disability Services and Associated Fundraising 1 Radio Control Hobbies 1 Software Industry 1 Sporting Goods 1 Stationery Manufacturing in P.V.C. 1 Stationery Products 1 Stationery, Storage Products in Polypropylene 1 Swimming Pool Covers & Heating - Wholesale and Retail 1 Toys 1 Transport and Distribution 1 TV Antennas and Associated Accessories Wholesaling 1 Video Distribution, Mail Order and Retail 1 Wholesaling and Growing Plants 1 Wood Manufacturing 1 Total 58
117
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 4 Chi-Square – Industry Type Chi-Square Tests Value 11.816a 9.714
Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
3.183
4 4
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .019 .046
1
.074
df
485
a. 1 cells (11.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.61.
Anova / Correlation – Company Size ANOVA
REACTIVE GROUP
STRATEGIC GROUP
TACTICAL GROUP
Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total
Sum of Squares 10.091 109.469 119.560 5.452 44.552 50.004 3.482 93.700 97.182
df 6 516 522 6 516 522 6 516 522
Mean Square 1.682 .212
F 7.928
Sig. .000
.909 8.634E-02
10.525
.000
.580 .182
3.196
.004
Correlations
No. of people employed in Australia Extent of Implementation
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
No. of people Extent of employed in Impleme Australia ntation 1.000 .309** . .000 546 523 .309** 1.000 .000 . 523 529
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
118
APPENDICES
Annova / Correlation – Years Of Membership ANOVA
MEAN(extent2,extent3,e Between Groups xtent4,extent6,extent7,ex Within Groups tent11,extent12) < 2 Total (FILTER)
Sum of Squares 1.156
df 3
Mean Square .385 .223
99.388
445
100.543
448
MEAN(extent2,extent3,e Between Groups xtent4,extent6,extent7,ex Within Groups tent11,extent12) >= 3 & MEAN(extent9,extent10) Total >= 3 (FILTER)
.520
3
.173
38.362
445
8.621E-02
38.882
448
tacstrat = 1 & strategi = 0 (FILTER)
.457 82.082
3 445
82.539
448
Between Groups Within Groups Total
F 1.725
Sig. .161
2.012
.112
.827
.480
.152 .184
Correlations
Extent of Implementation
Number of years of membership of EAN
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Extent of Impleme ntation 1.000 . 529 .082 .082 449
Number of years of membership of EAN .082 .082 449 1.000 . 465
Chi-Square – Position In Organisation Of The Respondent Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
Value 30.910a 29.361
8 8
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .000 .000
1
.001
df
10.701 525
a. 2 cells (13.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.91.
Chi-Square – Anzsic Code Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
Value 19.811a 20.893 7.340
10 10
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .031 .022
1
.007
df
511
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.99.
119
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 5 Factor Analysis – Level Of Understanding Component Matrixa Level of Understanding 1 ITEM 1: We have a good understand ing of the full implications of implementation for our business ITEM 2: Business to business e-commerce opportunities are understood in our organisation ITEM 3: We understand the potential benefits for our organisation from implementing Integrated Supply Chain Management Techniques ITEM 4: We understand the extent to which implementation affects the day to day running of our business ITEM 5: All relevant staff have participated in information sessions / training programs ITEM 6: The difference between a "Reactive", "Tactical" and "Strategic" implementation is understood in our organisation ITEM 7: We understand the technical issues relevant to implementing Integrated Supply Chain Management techniques ITEM 8: Our organisation has a good understanding of the full range of strategic options for implementation ITEM 9: Our organisation has a good understanding of the full range of technological options for implementation ITEM 10: Our organisation has a good understanding of why implementation is important for the business
.760
.764
.848
.845
.699
.757
.898
.899
.876
.884
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.
120
APPENDICES
Reliability Analysis R E L I A B I L I T Y
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
1. LEVUND1 We have a good understanding of the full implications of implementation for our business 2. LEVUND2 Business to business e-commerce opportunities are understood in our business 3. LEVUND3 We understand the potential benefits for our organisation from implementing Integrated Supply Chain Management Techniques 4. LEVUND4 We understand the extent to which implementation affects the day to day running of our business 5. LEVUND5 All relevant staff have participated in information sessions / training programs 6. LEVUND6 The difference between a "Reactive", "Tactical” and “Strategic” implementation is understood in our organisation 7. LEVUND7 We understand the technical issues relevant to implementing Integrated Supply Chain Management techniques 8. LEVUND8 Our organisation has a good understanding of the full range of strategic options for implementation 9. LEVUND9 Our organisation has a good understanding of the full range of technological options for implementation 10. LEVUND10 Our organisation has a good understanding of why implementation is important for the business Item-total Statistics
LEVUND1 LEVUND2 LEVUND3 LEVUND4 LEVUND5 LEVUND6 LEVUND7 LEVUND8 LEVUND9 LEVUND10
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
21.7959 22.0538 22.0538 22.0130 22.7941 22.4378 22.4805 22.6605 22.6011 22.1558
76.0809 75.4748 73.0064 72.5891 76.7438 74.6815 72.1571 73.5890 73.3517 71.7898
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation .7072 .7102 .8131 .8021 .6475 .6999 .8662 .8651 .8354 .8473
Alpha if Item Deleted .9449 .9448 .9403 .9408 .9475 .9455 .9379 .9383 .9394 .9387
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
539.0
N of Items = 10
.9474
121
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 6 Factor Analysis – Potential Benefits Of Implementation Component Matrixa Poetential Benefits 1 Use of the EAN system can lead to improved stock management Use of the EAN system can lead to improved customer service levels Use of the EAN system can lead to improved quality and timeliness of business information Use of the EAN system can lead to improved application, understanding and use of electronic commerce Use of the EAN system can lead to improved ability of the organisation to be flexible and adjust to rapid change
.803 .810
.866
.844
.801
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 1 components extracted.
Reliability Analysis R E L I A B I L I T Y
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
1. LEVUND14 Use of the EAN system can lead stock management 2. LEVUND15 Use of the EAN system can lead customer service levels 3. LEVUND16 Use of the EAN system can lead quality and timeliness of business information 4. LEVUND17 Use of the EAN system can lead application, understanding and use of electronic commerce 5. LEVUND18 Use of the EAN system can lead ability of your organisation to be flexible and adjust to change Item-total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted LEVUND14 LEVUND15 LEVUND16 LEVUND17 LEVUND18
13.4461 13.6862 13.6824 13.8733 14.0227
Scale Variance if Item Deleted 15.4332 15.7423 15.1452 15.3457 15.9465
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation .6916 .6995 .7775 .7405 .6832
(A L P H A) to improved to improved to improved to improved to improved rapid
Alpha if Item Deleted .8641 .8618 .8436 .8522 .8655
122
APPENDICES
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
529.0
N of Items =
5
.8827
123
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 7 Factor Analysis – Understanding Of A Full Implementation Rotated Component Matrixa Component Extended Reactive Implementation Implementation "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Applying product numbers and barcodes to outward goods only in order meet the requirements of customers "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Applying EAN product numbers and barcodes to all WIP and outward goods "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Scanning and capturing data using EAN numbers and barcodes for use in all functional areas of the business "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Applying EAN product numbers and barcodes to all incoming items, WIP and outward goods "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Outsourcing application of product numbers and barcodes to a third party "Full" implementation of the EAN system means: Pro-actively encouraging all suppliers to apply and scan EAN barcodes
.915
.645
.839
.878
.604
.857
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.
124
APPENDICES
Reliability Analysis R E L I A B I L I T Y
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
1. LEVUND20 "Full" implementation of the EAN system means applying EAN product numbers and barcodes to all wip and outward goods 2. LEVUND21 "Full" implementation of the EAN system means scanning and capturing data using EAN numbers and barcodes for use in all functional areas of the business 3. LEVUND22 "Full" implementation of the EAN system means applying EAN numbers and barcodes to all incoming items, WIP and outward goods 4. LEVUND23 "Full" implementation of the EAN system means outsourcing application of product numbers and barcodes to a third party 5. LEVUND24 "Full" implementation of the EAN system means pro-actively encouraging all suppliers to apply and scan EAN barcodes Item-total Statistics
LEVUND20 LEVUND21 LEVUND22 LEVUND23 LEVUND24
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
11.8688 11.4553 11.7714 12.4394 11.7575
20.2975 17.7585 16.8739 20.6691 17.0964
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation
Alpha if Item Deleted
.5362 .6795 .7497 .4823 .7302
.8265 .7880 .7663 .8398 .7724
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
503.0
N of Items =
5
.8343
125
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 8 Correlation – Company Size with Level of Understanding Correlations
Factor Variable - Level of Understanding Compressed Company Size
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Factor Variable Level of Understa Compressed nding Company Size 1.000 .195** . .000 539 533 .195** 1.000 .000 . 533 546
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlation – Level of Understanding with Extent of implementation Correlations
Factor Variable - Level of Understanding Factor Variable - Extent of Implementation
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Factor Factor Variable Variable Level of Extent of Understa Impleme nding ntation 1.000 .586** . .000 539 498 .586** 1.000 .000 . 498 505
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlation – Years of Membership with Level of Understanding Correlations
Factor Variable - Level of Understanding Number of years of membership of EAN
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Factor Variable Level of Understa nding 1.000 . 539 .067 .157 454
Number of years of membership of EAN .067 .157 454 1.000 . 465
126
APPENDICES
Correlation – Years of Membership with Extent of Implementation Correlations
Number of years of membership of EAN Factor Variable - Extent of Implementation
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Number of years of membership of EAN 1.000 . 465 .084 .082 429
Factor Variable Extent of Impleme ntation .084 .082 429 1.000 . 505
127
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 9 CORRELATION – Perception of Benefits with Company Size Correlations
Factor Variable Perception of Potential Benefits Compressed Company Size
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Factor Variable Perception of Potential Compressed Benefits Company Size 1.000 .176** . .000 529 522 .176** 1.000 .000 . 522 546
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
CORRELATION – Perception of Benefits with Extent of Implementation Correlations
Factor Variable Perception of Potential Benefits Extent of Implementation
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Factor Variable Perception Extent of of Potential Impleme Benefits ntation 1.000 .301** . .000 529 512 .301** 1.000 .000 . 512 529
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
128
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 10 Correlation Matrices – Extent of Use / Satisfaction / Knowledge / Opportunity to Use for Each Member Product / Service Correlations
Extent of use of EANCOM
Level of satisfaction with EANCOM Extent of knowledge of EANCOM
Extent of opportunity to use EANCOM
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of Extent of use satisfaction of EANCOM with EANCOM 1.000 .185 . .077 475 92 .185 1.000 .077 . 92 92 .610** .254* .000 .016 319
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
89
.571** .000 302
.219* .037 91
Extent of Extent of knowledge opportunity to of EANCOM use EANCOM .610** .571** .000 .000 319 302 .254* .219* .016 .037 89 91 1.000 .525** . .000 320 .525** .000 288
288 1.000 . 303
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of EANnet
Level of satisfaction with EANnet Extent of knowledge of EANnet
Extent of opportunity to use EANnet
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Extent of use of EANnet 1.000 . 475 .135 .156 112 .655** .000 325
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.589** .000 312
Level of satisfaction with EANnet .135 .156 112 1.000 . 112 .164 .088 109 .068 .484 109
Extent of knowledge of EANnet .655** .000 325 .164 .088 109 1.000 . 326 .573** .000 300
Extent of opportunity to use EANnet .589** .000 312 .068 .484 109 .573** .000 300 1.000 . 313
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of EANWORKS Level of satisfaction with EANWORKS Extent of knowledge of EANWORKS
Extent of opportunity to use EANWORKS
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Extent of use of EANWORKS 1.000 . 472 .401** .000 133 .676** .000
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
330 .677** .000 319
Level of satisfaction with EANWORKS .401** .000 133 1.000 . 135 .405** .000 127 .355** .000 128
Extent of knowledge of EANWORKS .676** .000 330 .405** .000 127 1.000 . 334 .616** .000 308
Extent of opportunity to use EANWORKS .677** .000 319 .355** .000 128 .616** .000 308 1.000 . 323
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
129
APPENDICES
Correlations
Extent of use of EAN Training Level of satisfaction with EAN Training Extent of knowledge of EAN Training
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Training
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Extent of use of EAN Training 1.000 . 481 .389** .000 133 .611** .000
Level of satisfaction with EAN Training .389** .000 133 1.000 . 134 .427** .000
331
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.599** .000 326
130 .303** .000 131
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Training .599** .000 326 .303** .000 131 .565** .000
Extent of knowledge of EAN Training .611** .000 331 .427** .000 130 1.000 . 334
316
.565** .000 316
1.000 . 328
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of the EAN Newsletter
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of satisfaction with the EAN Newsletter Extent of knowledge of the EAN Newsletter
Extent of opportunity to use the EAN Newsletter
Level of Extent of use satisfaction of the EAN with the EAN Newsletter Newsletter 1.000 .460** . .000 482 273 .460** 1.000 .000 . 273 274 .661** .481** .000 .000 358
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.591** .000 356
261 .402** .000 263
Extent of knowledge of the EAN Newsletter .661** .000 358 .481** .000 261 1.000 .
Extent of opportunity to use the EAN Newsletter .591** .000 356 .402** .000 263 .636** .000
360
343
.636** .000 343
1.000 . 357
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of EAN Barcode Testing
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of satisfaction with EAN Barcode Testing Extent of knowledge of EAN Barcode Testing
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Barcode Testing
Extent of use of EAN Barcode Testing 1.000 . 493 .271** .000 233 .668** .000 367
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.711** .000 358
Level of satisfaction with EAN Barcode Testing .271** .000 233 1.000 . 233 .398** .000 224 .260** .000 223
Extent of knowledge of EAN Barcode Testing .668** .000 367 .398** .000 224 1.000 . 368
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Barcode Testing .711** .000 358 .260** .000 223 .684** .000 349
.684** .000 349
1.000 . 359
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of the EAN Website Level of satisfaction with the EAN Website Extent of knowledge of the EAN Website
Extent of opportunity to use the EAN Website
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of Extent of use satisfaction of the EAN with the EAN Website Website 1.000 .207* . .020 484 125 .207* 1.000 .020 . 125 126 .675** .254** .000 .005
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
332 .584** .000 324
123 .095 .296 123
Extent of knowledge of the EAN Website .675** .000 332 .254** .005 123 1.000 . 334 .635** .000 315
Extent of opportunity to use the EAN Website .584** .000 324 .095 .296 123 .635** .000 315 1.000 . 326
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
130
APPENDICES
Correlations
Extent of use of EAN Imaging Service Level of satisfaction with EAN Imaging Service Extent of knowledge of EAN Imaging Service
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Imaging Service
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Extent of use of EAN Imaging Service 1.000 . 481 .508** .000 77 .679** .000 316
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.655** .000 304
Level of satisfaction with EAN Imaging Service .508** .000 77 1.000 . 78 .536** .000 76 .592** .000 77
Extent of knowledge of EAN Imaging Service .679** .000 316 .536** .000 76 1.000 . 317 .671** .000 293
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Imaging Service .655** .000 304 .592** .000 77 .671** .000 293 1.000 . 305
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of other EAN literature Level of satisfaction with other EAN literature Extent of knowledge of other EAN literature
Extent of opportunity to use other EAN literature
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of Extent of Extent of Extent of use satisfaction knowledge opportunity to of other EAN with other of other EAN use other EAN literature EAN literature literature literature 1.000 .321** .649** .551** . .001 .000 .000 478 101 315 302 .321** 1.000 .545** .484** .001 . .000 .000 101 104 101 102 .649** .545** 1.000 .606** .000 .000 . .000 315
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
.551** .000 302
101 .484** .000 102
318 .606** .000 294
294 1.000 . 305
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Extent of use of EAN Site Visits Level of satisfaction with EAN Site Visits Extent of knowledge of EAN Site Visits
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Site Visits
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
Level of Extent of satisfaction use of EAN with EAN Site Site Visits Visits 1.000 .237* . .032 480 82 .237* 1.000 .032 . 82 84 .604** .690** .000 .000
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N
317 .579** .000 309
80 .470** .000 82
Extent of knowledge of EAN Site Visits .604** .000 317 .690** .000 80 1.000 . 320 .632** .000 298
Extent of opportunity to use EAN Site Visits .579** .000 309 .470** .000 82 .632** .000 298 1.000 . 312
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
131
r
APPENDICES
Correlation Matrix – Company Size with Extent of Use for Each of the Member Products / Services e
l a
t
x x t t e e n n E e e x e e e n n t n x e n o t o t t t e n t f o f o o n t o E e o t n m n p t a e h h t o t t r o h r e a e e c o o f o f e g s o f E f E f E r W T E S A r t i w W a a e e t A e e N e n i s s r r n b N O a C y t l v V e i i s C P o e m 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 1 3 6 1 0 4 9 1 0 9 6 8 8 5 9 5 * 5 * 7 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i z S i g 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 . 0 0 0 8 1 2 4 0 N 4 4 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 7 8 6 7 9 7 9 7 6 7 6 7 8 9 6 3 5 E P x e t 2 1 2 0 3 4 3 0 3 6 1 0 9 4 0 4 6 1 1 5 9 9 5 * 7 5 * 7 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 4 6 4 7 4 7 4 6 4 6 6 6 9 6 5 6 0 6 7 6 7 8 8 9 7 4 6 E P x e t 3 1 5 4 4 0 3 1 3 2 8 8 0 8 6 4 0 7 4 2 1 3 2 * 3 * 5 9 * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 N 4 6 4 7 4 7 4 6 4 7 6 7 9 7 0 7 5 6 8 6 0 9 0 0 0 6 8 E P x e t 3 5 4 0 4 1 4 0 4 3 0 2 6 1 1 5 4 3 0 5 6 1 8 * 9 * 2 * 5 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
N 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 4 6 6 7 6 6 7 6 8 6 2 6 9 8 0 9 8 6 8 E P x e t 3 3 3 6 4 2 3 3 4 0 9 0 8 0 9 2 1 7 6 5 0 1 2 * 9 * 4 * 7 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * T r a S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 N 4 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 0 7 9 7 1 4 7 6 4 1 3 E P x e t 3 6 4 1 2 8 3 0 2 9 0 8 5 3 9 9 3 7 1 9 1 0 6 * 1 * 5 * 3 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * N e w S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 N 4 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 8 7 7 7 8 7 9 7 8 7 4 2 5 5 3 0 1 E P x e t 0 1 3 0 4 8 3 2 2 0 8 0 9 2 5 3 2 4 8 5 2 6 0 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * B a r S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0
N 4 8 4 6 4 7 4 7 4 7 7 9 8 8 8 7 0 7 0 7 7 5 3 1 8 5 8 E P x e t 3 4 0 4 4 8 4 1 3 0 3 2 5 0 7 2 3 4 9 9 9 1 4 * 0 * 3 * 1 * 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * W e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 4 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 7 7 8 9 8 9 7 0 7 9 7 6 5 1 4 9 7 9 E P x e t 4 1 4 4 0 4 5 5 3 2 9 3 5 2 5 0 5 5 2 9 4 5 3 * 3 * 0 * 1 * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * I m a S i g 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 4 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 7 7 7 6 7 7 8 0 7 8 7 4 3 8 9 1 5 7 E P x e t 3 9 4 1 5 7 0 3 4 7 7 4 7 4 7 5 9 0 5 6 7 3 2 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 4 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 7 7 3 7 4 7 6 7 6 7 1 0 5 7 5 8 6 E P x e t 2 8 3 5 3 2 4 5 0 5 9 5 1 9 2 9 3 6 4 0 2 1 6 * 7 * 5 * 2 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * V i s S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 4 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 7 7 5 7 6 7 8 7 8 8 3 1 8 9 7 6 0
r
* * . C o * . C
o
r
r
Correlation Matrix – Company Size with Opportunity to Use for Each of the Member Products / Services e
l a
t
E x x t t e e n n p E x E x x p x p t x t x t e o e t e o t e t n r e n e n r t n t t n u t n t u x o p p p o u t o u t r o e o p e r s t r s t r u n r o t n e u t e t u n t u r u t n n t E B o e u p m r a r u o s u t t t t r h u r u e h s t a s e c h e n e n e e g s o E e i i N S E e p W T S i r t w a E W i A a e e t e e e n i A s s N r n r O b y a t l v N V e i i C s n t n C P o e m a 1 0 1 3 1 5 1 2 2 5 1 9 0 4 2 5 6 7 6 2 2 3 3 6 * 1 * 1 * 6 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * S i z e S i g 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 1 0 6 7 3 0 7
N 3 4 3 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 5 6 5 9 2 9 0 9 0 5 0 4 6 3 2 2 9 E P x e t a e 4 3 3 0 4 5 5 3 5 3 4 4 2 2 0 8 2 5 0 2 5 7 4 * 2 7 * 0 * 3 * 8 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 2 9 2 0 2 9 2 9 2 9 2 9 9 9 3 9 2 8 3 8 1 9 1 2 0 7 6 0 E P x e t a e 5 5 5 5 6 0 5 4 5 7 4 3 6 2 2 9 0 4 6 9 1 7 3 * 0 * 9 1 * 6 * * 9 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 3 0 3 9 3 1 2 0 2 0 2 0 9 0 2 0 3 9 2 9 2 9 2 3 4 6 3 6
E P x e t a e 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 0 6 1 6 2 6 0 0 6 6 7 0 3 3 0 3 * 6 * 8 * 1 9 * * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0
N 3 1 3 9 3 0 2 2 2 1 3 1 9 0 3 0 2 9 3 9 1 0 1 7 2 4 5 2 E P x e t a e 5 5 4 3 5 7 5 1 5 0 5 6 2 8 5 5 1 7 3 8 0 5 0 * 5 * 2 * 5 * 0 * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
N 3 2 3 9 3 0 3 1 2 2 3 1 5 0 1 0 2 0 1 9 8 0 7 9 8 1 9 5 E P x e t a e 0 9 5 4 5 3 4 2 5 6 4 0 3 3 4 5 3 1 3 4 0 0 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 8 * * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 N 3 5 3 9 3 0 2 1 2 1 3 5 4 2 1 1 2 9 1 9 7 0 7 3 1 6 7 3 E P x e t a e 5 4 0 2 5 2 5 0 4 8 4 3 6 0 2 1 0 2 6 5 5 0 0 * 0 * 9 * 4 * 6 * * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 N 3 5 3 9 3 0 3 0 2 0 3 2 6 5 2 1 3 0 7 9 9 0 3 9 4 0 8 3 E P x e t a e 5 5 5 8 0 9 5 6 5 5 5 5 1 1 7 0 9 8 8 4 2 0 1 * 9 * 0 * 0 * 4 * * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0
N 3 2 3 9 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 3 1 0 2 4 0 2 0 8 0 1 4 6 1 0 3 E P x e t a e 4 7 5 5 5 4 0 7 6 7 5 1 1 2 0 8 1 0 1 7 5 5 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 2 * * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 2 0 3 8 3 9 3 9 2 0 3 9 2 0 7 0 6 0 4 9 1 0 6 0 1 5 8 0 E P x e t a e 5 2 4 2 5 9 6 3 0 8 7 4 6 5 3 4 6 7 9 0 0 1 8 * 6 * 4 * 2 * 0 * * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 2 0 2 8 3 9 2 9 3 9 3 9 2 9 6 0 3 9 5 0 9 0 7 8 0 8 5 1 E P x e t a e 4 3 4 7 5 7 5 0 7 5 0 0 6 0 8 0 9 5 1 1 3 0 6 * 1 * 0 * 3 * 5 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 3 0 3 9 3 9 3 0 3 0 3 0 9 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 5 1 3 3 3 0 1 2 * . C
o
* * . C o
132
r
r
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 11 Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Use of Member Products/Services e
l a
t
x x t t e e n n E e e e x t e e n e n t n x e n o t n o t t t e n t f o t f o o n t o o n m p n t a e h h t o t l t o h r e e a e o c f o o f e m g o f E E f f E r W T E S A r t i a w W a e t e A e e N e t i s s r i r n b N O o a C t l v V e i i s n E P x e t 2 1 2 4 2 7 3 3 1 2 0 9 5 9 8 7 2 7 4 3 3 7 * 8 * 6 * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 2 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 7 7 8 9 7 9 7 0 7 8 7 6 7 7 9 7 4 6 E P x e t 1 2 0 3 4 3 0 3 6 1 0 5 4 0 4 6 1 1 5 9 9 5 * 7 5 * 7 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 6 4 7 4 7 4 6 4 6 6 6 9 6 5 6 0 6 7 6 7 8 8 9 7 4 6 E P x e t 4 5 4 4 0 3 1 3 2 8 8 8 8 6 4 0 7 4 2 1 3 2 * 3 * 5 9 * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 N 7 4 7 4 7 4 6 4 7 6 7 0 7 0 7 5 6 8 6 0 9 0 0 0 6 8 E P x e t 7 4 0 4 1 4 0 4 3 0 2 2 1 1 5 4 3 0 5 6 1 8 * 9 * 2 * 5 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 N 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 4 6 6 7 8 6 7 6 8 6 2 6 9 8 0 9 8 6 8 E P x e t 3 3 6 4 2 3 3 4 0 9 0 4 0 9 2 1 7 6 5 0 1 2 * 9 * 4 * 7 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * T r a S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 N 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 0 7 9 7 1 4 7 6 4 1 3 E P x e t 1 4 1 2 8 3 0 2 9 0 8 3 3 9 9 3 7 1 9 1 0 6 * 1 * 5 * 3 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * N e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 N 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 8 7 7 7 8 7 9 7 8 7 4 2 5 5 3 0 1 E P x e t 2 3 0 4 8 3 2 2 0 8 0 3 2 5 3 2 4 8 5 2 6 0 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * B a r S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 N 8 4 6 4 7 4 7 4 7 7 9 7 8 8 7 0 7 0 7 7 5 3 1 8 5 8 E P x e t 9 0 4 4 8 4 1 3 0 3 2 7 0 7 2 3 4 9 9 9 1 4 * 0 * 3 * 1 * 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * W e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 7 7 8 9 8 9 7 0 7 9 7 6 5 1 4 9 7 9 E P x e t 9 4 4 0 4 5 5 3 2 9 3 8 2 5 0 5 5 2 9 4 5 3 * 3 * 0 * 1 * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * I m a S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 7 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 0 7 8 7 4 3 8 9 1 5 7 E P x e t 7 4 1 5 7 0 3 4 7 7 4 6 4 7 5 9 0 5 6 7 3 2 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 7 7 4 7 4 7 6 7 6 7 1 0 5 7 5 8 6 E P x e t 7 3 5 3 2 4 5 0 5 9 5 5 9 2 9 3 6 4 0 2 1 6 * 7 * 5 * 2 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * V i s S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 7 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 7 7 7 6 7 6 7 8 7 8 8 3 1 8 9 7 6 0
* * . C o
Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Knowledge of Member Products/Services
r e
l a t
E E x x x x x x t t t t e t e t e e e e n n n n n n t n x n x o t w t o t w t e o t e o e w e e w l n w l n w e n n e n l l t e t d l t e l t d t e e N w w o N p w t w h E h t l l l B e h e e l A I l e e e m d e a d m N d E d g E r r g W T E S A t a w W e e A V T e e N t s s r i r b r N O i o a C t l s v a e i s n t n n E P x e t a 1 0 3 8 3 9 3 9 3 2 4 9 0 0 5 3 2 7 1 8 6 8 7 9 * 1 * 7 * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 3 5 6 9 3 7 1 4 1 3 1 3 7 4 3 6 7 9 E P x e t a 2 8 4 0 4 6 5 6 5 0 9 9 5 1 0 1 7 0 7 1 6 9 1 * 9 9 * 0 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 3 1 3 2 3 1 3 0 3 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4 2 7 6 2 2 3 E P x e t a 4 9 6 6 5 0 5 8 4 0 0 7 2 3 7 5 0 2 8 9 2 3 4 * 4 * 8 9 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 N 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 1 3 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 6 0 7 0 4 9 5 7 9 8 8
E P x e t a 4 9 4 6 4 8 4 0 5 4 5 6 1 8 7 7 8 9 0 3 5 8 5 * 8 * 9 * 1 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 N 3 3 3 0 3 1 3 3 3 1 1 2 3 1 9 0 7 0 4 1 9 7 0 6 7 7 0 E P x e t a 5 2 5 0 5 0 5 4 4 0 1 7 6 0 6 4 2 1 5 9 0 2 9 * 6 * 8 * 7 * 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0
N 3 3 3 0 3 1 3 1 3 3 1 1 3 1 4 1 4 0 9 1 4 9 8 5 0 9 2 E P x e t a 6 4 5 9 4 0 4 5 3 1 0 0 8 0 9 0 3 4 8 9 2 0 1 * 6 * 6 * 7 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * t h e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 N 3 5 3 0 3 0 3 1 3 1 6 2 7 1 2 0 9 0 7 0 9 0 9 6 3 5 7 E P x e t a 0 9 5 9 5 7 3 6 3 7 0 0 7 2 1 0 4 9 5 6 9 1 0 * 9 * 0 * 4 * 4 * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 N 3 6 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 1 2 6 4 2 7 1 5 1 0 1 8 9 8 2 3 1 2 E P x e t a 5 0 0 1 5 3 5 8 4 0 0 2 9 0 9 8 4 1 8 2 6 6 9 * 0 * 7 * 8 * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * t h e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 3 3 3 0 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 2 3 3 6 1 7 1 6 1 5 6 2 4 4 4 4 E P x e t a 5 3 5 1 0 5 7 7 5 4 0 0 1 8 9 0 8 0 9 5 8 6 0 * 7 * 0 * 4 * 9 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 3 1 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 0 1 6 1 2 1 9 1 7 1 0 3 3 4 7 1 2 E P x e t a 3 7 5 0 7 2 0 9 6 1 4 9 7 1 0 0 9 0 1 2 7 7 4 * 8 * 4 * 0 * 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * o t h S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 3 1 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 7 1 2 1 8 1 7 1 9 5 1 4 1 8 2 E P x e t a 3 8 4 1 5 9 6 3 0 9 9 6 5 2 1 5 6 2 7 0 7 1 4 * 3 * 9 * 2 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E A N S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 3 1 3 0 3 0 3 1 3 1 0 1 9 1 3 1 8 1 0 2 2 7 2 4 2 2 0
* * . C o r
133
APPENDICES
Correlation Matrix – Extent of Implementation with Extent of Opportunity to Use Member Products/Services
r e
l a
t
E x x t t e e n n E E x x x p x p t x t x t e o e t e o t e t n e r n e n r t n t t n u t n t u o p p p o u t t o u t e r o e o p e r s t r s t n r u n r o t e n u t e t u t n u t r u t n n t E e u p m r a r u o s u t t t t l h u r e u e h s t s a c h e n m e n e e g o E e i i E W T S r a t w i E W A a e e t e e t e i A s s i N r n r b O o a t l v N V e i i C s n t n n E P x e t a 0 2 7 2 0 2 1 3 3 2 0 0 0 8 6 5 8 0 0 3 9 8 0 * 1 * 1 * 2 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 2 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 5 9 5 1 2 1 0 2 0 7 1 5 7 6 4 4 1 E P x e t a 7 3 0 4 5 5 3 5 3 4 4 8 2 0 8 2 5 0 2 5 7 4 * 2 7 * 0 * 3 * 8 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 0 2 0 2 9 2 9 2 9 2 9 1 9 3 9 2 8 3 8 1 9 1 2 0 7 6 0 E P x e t a 0 5 5 6 0 5 4 5 7 4 3 5 2 2 9 0 4 6 9 1 7 3 * 0 * 9 1 * 6 * 9 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 1 3 9 3 1 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 3 9 2 9 2 9 2 3 4 6 3 6
E P x e t a 1 5 3 5 4 5 0 6 1 6 2 0 0 0 6 6 7 0 3 3 0 3 * 6 * 8 * 1 9 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
N 2 3 9 3 0 2 2 2 1 3 1 2 0 3 0 2 9 3 9 1 0 1 7 2 4 5 2 E P x e t a 3 4 3 5 7 5 1 5 0 5 6 3 8 5 5 1 7 3 8 0 5 0 * 5 * 2 * 5 * 0 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
N 2 3 9 3 0 3 1 2 2 3 1 7 0 1 0 2 0 1 9 8 0 7 9 8 1 9 5 E P x e t a 0 5 4 5 3 4 2 5 6 4 0 8 3 4 5 3 1 3 4 0 0 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 8 * 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0
N 5 3 9 3 0 2 1 2 1 3 5 5 2 1 1 2 9 1 9 7 0 7 3 1 6 7 3 E P x e t a 0 0 2 5 2 5 0 4 8 4 3 0 0 2 1 0 2 6 5 5 0 0 * 0 * 9 * 4 * 6 * 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0
N 5 3 9 3 0 3 0 2 0 3 2 7 5 2 1 3 0 7 9 9 0 3 9 4 0 8 3 E P x e t a 6 5 8 0 9 5 6 5 5 5 5 1 1 7 0 9 8 8 4 2 0 1 * 9 * 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 2 3 9 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 6 1 0 2 4 0 2 0 8 0 1 4 6 1 0 3 E P x e t a 8 5 5 5 4 0 7 6 7 5 1 1 2 0 8 1 0 1 7 5 5 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 2 * 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . N 0 3 8 3 9 3 9 2 0 3 9 4 0 7 0 6 0 4 9 1 0 6 0 1 5 8 0 E P x e t a 0 4 2 5 9 6 3 0 8 7 4 2 5 3 4 6 7 9 0 0 1 8 * 6 * 4 * 2 * 0 * 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 0 2 8 3 9 2 9 3 9 3 9 4 9 6 0 3 9 5 0 9 0 7 8 0 8 5 1 E P x e t a 9 4 7 5 7 5 0 7 5 0 0 6 0 8 0 9 5 1 1 3 0 6 * 1 * 0 * 3 * 5 * 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * u s e S i g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
N 1 3 9 3 9 3 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 5 1 3 3 3 0 1 2 * * . C o
134
r
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 12 Factor Analysis – The Role of EAN Australia Rotated Component Matrixa Component "EXTENDED "CURRENT SERVICES" SERVICES The range of services currently offered are sufficient for implementation EAN Australia needs to provide a broader range of consulting services Our organisation is reliant on EAN Australia for advice on operational issues EAN Australia should provide more networking opportunities EAN Australia should provide a service/equipment provider rating system EAN Australia is a "value added" partner in our organisation EAN Australia is bureaucratic and inflexible in it's dealings with members EAN Australia does not deliver value to members
-.585
.733
.433
.681
.805
.809
.709
.765
.799
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.
135
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 13 Factor Analysis – Extent of Planning Rotated Component Matrixa Component STRATEGIC REACTIVE PLANNING PLANNING Implementation has been carefully planned and costed Implementation is part of a long term strategic plan Implementation has followed development of a detailed business case and project plan Our organisation has put as little time as possible into planning for implementation Implementation was a low priority for our organisation Implementation follwed a critical evaluation of our supply chain and processes Planning was minimal as the process was dictated by trading partners
.748 .807
.876
.850
.829
.793
.610
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.
Reliability Analysis R E L I A B I L I T Y
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
1. PLAN1 Implementation has been carefully planned and costed 2. PLAN2 Implementation is part of a long term strategic plan 3. PLAN3 Implementation has followed development of a detailed business case and project plan 4. PLAN6 Implementation followed a critical evaluation of our supply chain and processes Item-total Statistics Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation
Alpha if Item Deleted
136
APPENDICES
PLAN1 PLAN2 PLAN3 PLAN6
6.6111 6.3582 7.0421 6.9080
9.5164 8.7639 9.1921 9.8303
.6284 .6913 .7763 .5983
.8136 .7865 .7521 .8259
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
522.0
N of Items =
4
.8382
R E L I A B I L I T Y
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
1. PLAN4 Our organisation has put as little time as possible into planning for implementation 2. PLAN5 Implementation was a low priority for our organisation 3. PLAN7 Planning was minimal as the process was dictated by trading partners Item-total Statistics
PLAN4 PLAN5 PLAN7
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
5.7132 5.6597 5.0784
4.8908 4.7920 5.1950
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation
Alpha if Item Deleted
.5657 .5567 .3484
.4707 .4774 .7631
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
523.0
N of Items =
3
.6699
137
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 14 Factor Analysis – Business Outcomes Rotated Component Matrixa Component OPERATIONAL BOTTOM LINE OUTCOMES OUTCOMES Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved customer satisfaction Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced finished goods inventory Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced WIP inventory Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced raw materials / components inventory Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved product traceability Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved stock accuracy Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced time required for annual stock takes Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Increased productivity Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved service quality Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved product quality Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Increased flexibility Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Increased sales Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Increased net profit Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced cycle times Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Improved cash flow Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduction in claims Contribution of the EAN system and/or Integrated Supply Chain Management implementation to: Reduced costs
.797
.769
.874
.855
.694
.785
.835
.786
.626
.704
.731
.775
.671
.803
.682
.738
.780
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.
138
APPENDICES
Reliability Analysis R E L I A B I L I T Y 1. 2. 3. 4.
RESULT1 RESULT9 RESULT12 RESULT13
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
Improved customer satisfaction Improved service quality Increased sales Increased Net Profit
Item-total Statistics
RESULT1 RESULT9 RESULT12 RESULT13
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
7.9403 8.6317 8.6152 8.8498
16.4727 13.7218 13.3424 13.2743
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation
Alpha if Item Deleted
.5242 .7222 .7677 .7792
.8792 .8030 .7828 .7777
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
486.0
N of Items =
4
.8541
R E L I A B I L I T Y 1. RESULT2 2. RESULT3 3. RESULT4 inventory 4. RESULT5 5. RESULT6 6. RESULT7 takes 7. RESULT8 8. RESULT10 9. RESULT11 10. RESULT14 11. RESULT15 12. RESULT16 13. RESULT17
A N A L Y S I S
-
S C A L E
(A L P H A)
Reduced finished goods inventory Reduced WIP inventory Reduced raw materials / components Improved product traceability Improved stack accuracy Reduced time required for annual stock Increased productivity Improved product quality Increased flexibility Reduced cycle times Improved cash flow Reduction in claims Reduced costs
Item-total Statistics
RESULT2 RESULT3 RESULT4 RESULT5 RESULT6
Scale Mean if Item Deleted
Scale Variance if Item Deleted
26.4524 26.8225 26.8160 26.2208 26.2013
214.6561 218.7797 218.9617 215.4479 210.0266
Corrected ItemTotal Correlation .8097 .8113 .7766 .7438 .8309
Alpha if Item Deleted .9683 .9684 .9690 .9698 .9679
139
APPENDICES
RESULT7 RESULT8 RESULT10 RESULT11 RESULT14 RESULT15 RESULT16 RESULT17
26.4870 26.4372 26.4632 26.4610 26.5173 26.3636 26.4437 26.4177
210.1679 210.5112 214.8783 213.7328 211.5301 212.1018 211.4491 209.8533
.8684 .8827 .7915 .8427 .8932 .8371 .8485 .8903
.9669 .9666 .9687 .9675 .9664 .9677 .9674 .9664
Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = Alpha =
462.0
N of Items = 13
.9702
140
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 15 Examples of Valuable Conferences Attended Examples of valuable Conferences attended
Not Answered AGHA Fairs Auspack Coles Myer Information Seminars EAN Australia Seminar QLD EAN In-House Seminar EAN Introductory Workshop EAN Training - Barcodes EAN Works ECR Europe F.M.I. Sydney Fine Food Festival Sydney / Melbourne GE Conference HACCP Training Industry Annual Conference Institute of Business Management International Map Trade Association LMA Nursery Expo Oliver Wight Sessions PIAA Supply Chain 2000 Trade Shows Understanding Implementation at EAN VisyBoard Total
Frequency 529 1 1
Percent 95.7 .2 .2
Valid Percent 95.7 .2 .2
Cumulative Percent 95.7 95.8 96.0
1
.2
.2
96.2
1
.2
.2
96.4
1
.2
.2
96.6
1
.2
.2
96.7
1 1 1 1
.2 .2 .2 .2
.2 .2 .2 .2
96.9 97.1 97.3 97.5
1
.2
.2
97.6
1 1
.2 .2
.2 .2
97.8 98.0
1
.2
.2
98.2
1
.2
.2
98.4
1
.2
.2
98.6
1 1 1 1 1 1
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2
98.7 98.9 99.1 99.3 99.5 99.6
1
.2
.2
99.8
1 553
.2 100.0
.2 100.0
100.0
141
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 16 Examples of Valuable Exhibitions Attended Examples of valuable Exhibitions attended
Not Answered Auspack Aust. Horticulture, Greenworld Chicago Housewares Show CIBO 2000 - Parma Italy Computer Shows Davids Expo EAN EAN Mobile Works EAN Systems and Solutions EAN Works EANWORKS Frankfurt Fair 1999 Gift Fair Interbiz LMA Materials Handling Overseas Trade Shows - IBA Trade Fairs, Wood, Pharmacy, Agriculture Trade Shows Warehousing & Distribution Show Total
Frequency 532 1
Percent 96.2 .2
Valid Percent 96.2 .2
Cumulative Percent 96.2 96.4
1
.2
.2
96.6
1
.2
.2
96.7
1 1 1 1 1
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2
.2 .2 .2 .2 .2
96.9 97.1 97.3 97.5 97.6
1
.2
.2
97.8
2 1 1 1 1 1 1
.4 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2
.4 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2
98.2 98.4 98.6 98.7 98.9 99.1 99.3
1
.2
.2
99.5
1
.2
.2
99.6
1
.2
.2
99.8
1
.2
.2
100.0
553
100.0
100.0
142
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 17 Examples of Media Found to be Highly Valuable Examples of Media found to be highly valuable
Not Answered Age Newspaper Aust Booksellers Assoc Book Fair Daily Newspapers & "Net" Magazines EAN Monthly Newslettter EAN Newsletter EAN Publications EAN Web Site EANWORKS / WEB email ERM (from APICS) Fin. Review / BRW Financial Review Financial Times Information Technology Internet Opposition Journals Paper PC Show Smart99 / Trade Magazines Supply Chain Review / Logistics Trade Magazines Total
Frequency 528 1
Percent 95.5 .2
Valid Percent 95.5 .2
Cumulative Percent 95.5 95.7
1
.2
.2
95.8
1
.2
.2
96.0
1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
.2 .5 .2 .2 .2 .4 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .4 .2 .2 .2
.2 .5 .2 .2 .2 .4 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .4 .2 .2 .2
96.2 96.7 96.9 97.1 97.3 97.6 97.8 98.0 98.2 98.4 98.6 98.9 99.1 99.3 99.5
1
.2
.2
99.6
1
.2
.2
99.8
1 553
.2 100.0
.2 100.0
100.0
143
