The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm
IJPDLM
36,9
702
International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management
Vol. 36 No. 9, 2006
pp. 702-715
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0960-0035
DOI 10.1108/09600030610710863
A multi-objective 3PL allocation
problem for fish distribution
Manoj Kumar
Apeejay College of Engineering, Sohna, Gurgaon, India
Prem Vrat
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India, and
Ravi Shankar
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
New Delhi, India
Abstract
Purpose – The primary objective of this paper is to show how mathematical modeling can be used
for solving a third party logistics (3PL) allocation problem.
Design/methodology/approach – The solution approach consists of finding a compromise
solution for the six different strategies, defined in the paper by using lexicographic goal programming
involving three objectives under some realistic constraints related to capacities of the markets.
Findings – This study investigates the usefulness and efficacy of the proposed method for a 3PL
allocation problem for a case example of a typical fish supply network. The decision-makers can
evaluate the alternative solutions with respect to a set of decision criteria. The result indicates
substantial improvement by reducing the number of 3PL service providers and reallocating them to
the case fish markets.
Practical implications – The work provides a useful decision model for practicing managers,
policy makers and researchers of this area.
Originality/value – This model would help a decision maker to resolve the issues related to
selection of 3PL under a set of conflicting multi-objective criteria.
Keywords Mathematical modeling, Problem solving, Fisheries, Distribution management, India
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Third party logistics service provider (3PL_SP) involves the use of external companies
who manages, controls, and delivers logistics activities. They are also engaged by
companies in service-related activities such as inventory control and information-related
activities such as tracking and tracing. Value-added activities of secondary assembly of
products from points of origin to points of consumption are also being performed by
some 3PL_SPs. The role of 3PL_SP is becoming increasingly important as a
consequence of the wider spread of outsourcing requirements shown by global
customers, manufacturers and retailers. External trade growth has taken place in both
directions (exports and imports). External trade is significantly higher for the newly
industrializing countries like Singapore, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, etc. than
for developed countries like Australia and New Zealand (Bhatnagar et al., 1999).
The authors wish to thank the referees for their helpful and constructive comments to enhance
the quality of the paper.
The increase in external trade is generally instrumental in an increase in demand of 3PL allocation
logistics services. Involvement of 3PL_SP in supply chain management is a growing problem
phenomenon due to a need for high levels of customer satisfaction. The 3PL_SP could
work better and cheaper. It would help the company to concentrate on its main business.
Thus, there has been an increase in organizations outsourcing their logistics operations
to 3PL_SPs. The globalization of businesses and the competitive pressures have led to
the growing strategic importance of the logistics function within the organization. 703
Organizations are approaching 3PL_SP to manage their logistics activities to gain
competitive advantages. Many studies discussed the increase of recent trends in the use
of 3PL services in the various parts of the world (Gilmour et al., 1994; Gentry, 1996; Tate,
1996). The new offerings such as information technology (IT) application (for ex freight
billing) and transportation planning will further enhance the strategic choices between
core competence focus and outsourcing. Fuller et al. (1993) suggest that one important
reason for the growth of 3PL services is that companies compete in a number of
businesses that are logistically distinct due to varied customer needs. Richardson (1995)
finds that 3PL brought several benefits for the companies surveyed. The benefits
included distribution cost saving, greater control of businesses, better customer service
and satisfaction, etc. Other benefits include reduction in capital investment in facilities,
equipment, and IT (Richardson, 1992; Lacity et al., 1995; Fantasia, 1993), improved
customer service and delivery (Byrne, 1993) and reduction in the complexity of logistics
operations (Bradley, 1995). Ackerman et al. (1995) and Sink et al. (1996) typically
highlight the specific benefits that 3PL_SP can generate for their customers and what
such customers actually look for in their evaluation of the 3PL_SP. The usage of 3PL
services increases over time as the two parties become more comfortable in their
interactions with one another. The introduction of 3PL_SP for the short life-cycle items
such as fish, vegetables, etc. has further heightened the expectations of customers which
would further force the supply chain managers to focus more attention on the logistics.
3PL_SP in a typical fish supply chain network provides the infrastructure and
establishes the base from which operating economies are realized. Information sharing
about the available fishes, supplied fishes and in-transit fishes are required by its supply
chain members. The efficient movement of fishes and timely availability of service by
3PL_SP in a cost effective manner becomes a challenge. The 3PL_SP model such as the
one proposed in this paper provides a framework to meet this challenge. This paper
provides a multi-objective 3PL mathematical model for the fish distribution which is
also analyzed for its implementation in a real fish supply chain.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a survey of
current literature in the 3PL services and the identification of the related criteria for
3PL_SP evaluation. Section 3 provides a formal 3PL_SP problem and the methodology.
Section 4 describes a comprehensive decision model of three objectives with
constraints as capacities and varying number of fish markets served by the 3PL_SP in
a typical fish supply chain using lexicographic goal programming approach. Results of
the case study taken from a real fish supply chain of West Bengal State of Eastern
India are provided in Section 5. Finally, some conclusions are drawn in Section 6.

2. Literature review
A large portion of the existing logistics literature is descriptive and primarily focuses
on surveys and case studies. Some of these address the strategic issues in the logistics
IJPDLM area (Bardi et al., 1994; LaLonde and Masters, 1994; Richardson, 1995; Fawcett and
36,9 Clinton, 1996; Bowersox and Daugherty, 1995). On the other hand, there exist a body of
literature specifically focused on the growing importance of logistics. Logistics
outsourcing is an important option for companies that perceive the existence of gaps
between what they want to accomplish with their logistics operations, and what they
can achieve with their in-house expertise (Buxbaum, 1995; Troyer and Cooper, 1995).
704 Studies that directly address the logistics providers tend to adopt narrow scopes and
focus on specific areas such as IT (Cuthbertson, 1995), warehousing (Olson, 1996), and
benchmarking (Cooke, 1996; Stank et al., 1994). LaLonde and Masters (1994) highlight
that logistics strategies should be integrated with production, marketing and total
corporate strategy. Fawcett and Fawcett (1995) argue that there are tremendous
untapped synergies that exist amongst logistics, operations and purchasing. Sohail
and Sohail (2003) examine the usage of 3PL services in Malaysia and conclude that
most of the users are satisfied with the service providers and have largely seen positive
developments within the organization. Bhatnagar et al. (1999) presents an overview of
the use of 3PL services of a few companies from Singapore. He provides a substantial
review of related literature and identifies three factors that impact on the future use of
3PL services, namely: the extent of use of the external logistical services, the
decision-making process for the usage of external logistical services, and the effect of
the usage of external logistical services on the user firms. Lim (2000) develops a
game-theoretical model of how a contract may be established in order that 3PL are
encouraged to reveal their true capabilities. Tyan et al. (2003) develop a model to
compute the minimum total cost under different shipment consolidation policies for
global 3PL. Larsen (1999) discusses various definitions of third party logistics and the
theoretical background for the development of third party arrangements, including
both transaction cost theory and network theory. Krumwiede and Sheu (2002) propose
a reverse logistics decision-making model to guide the process of examining the
feasibility of implementing reverse logistics with third-party providers. Hum (2000)
extends the Hayes-Wheelwright framework for strategic manufacturing management
to the strategic management of 3PL-SP. Hertz and Alfredsson (2003) identify some
issues of importance when managing the continued 3PL business strategy. Shapiro
(1987) proposes four generic models of operation for logistics, which may be
interpreted as logistics strategies for the organization concerned. Roberts (1994)
reports that factors such as level of service provided, quality of the people, and cost are
the three most used evaluation criteria when choosing a qualified logistics contractor.
Minahan (1997) identifies on-time shipment, inventory accuracy, shipping errors,
customer complaints, number of dollar/unit shipped, backorders, total order cycle time,
fill rates, stock outs, warehouse cycle time as the common performance measures for
3PL services used in the USA. McMillan (1996) identifies inventory accuracy, on-time
shipments, customer complaints, backorders, warehouse cycle time, number of unit
shipped and number of dollars shipped as the common performance measures for 3PL
services used in Asia-pacific. Dapiran et al. (1996) and Lieb et al. (1993b) find that while
cost and service are the most important criteria, prior experience with the third party
firm, company reputation, total package offered information handling capability and
compatibility of information systems are other important factors. Sum and Teo (1999)
suggest that in amidst growing competition, the logistics providers must identify the
strategies thereby determining how they want to position their logistics services in
terms of cost, quality, features, and value-added to their customers. Ackerman et al. 3PL allocation
(1995) conducted a survey and the respondents were asked to evaluate six logistics problem
companies on several criteria such as the level of customer service, rates charges,
flexibility, ability to grow, on-time shipments/deliveries, error rate, level of innovation,
overall quality of facilities, quality of management and availability of top management
when needed.
The literature review on 3PL reveals that there are not many mathematical 705
frameworks available for the evaluation of logistics companies. There is generally a
gap in literature that deals directly with the strategies and operational characteristics
of 3PL_SP. This paper provides a mathematical model in this area.

3. The problem
This paper deals with the supply of sea-fishes from Haldia Port of Calcutta to different
districts of West Bengal in Eastern India. Each fish market of different district has its
own 3PL_SP. Since, the selling price per unit is virtually the same for the different
fishes under consideration, all fishes are aggregated into one single fish in the
mathematical model. It soon became clear that there were too many 3PL_SP and
management decided to close few 3PL_SP. It has fifteen remaining 3PL_SP at the
time of the study. Annual throughput of the 3PL_SP varied between 2,500 and
40,000 ton/year. The map of Figure 1 shows the location of the 15 remaining 3PL_SP at
the time of the study. The distribution and distance variations of the fish supply
network can be approximated from Figure 1. The map of Figure 2 shows the
distribution of annual sales volume, which also represents customer density. Demand
at each fish market of the fish supply network can be approximated from Figure 2.

3PL_SP

- Fish-supplier

Figure 1.
Number and locations of
3PL_SP at the time of the
study (the size of stars is
proportional to the annual
throughput)
IJPDLM
36,9

706

Figure 2.
Fish-sales distribution
(darker areas indicate
higher sales)

The average demand per buyer did not vary considerably. Management was convinced
that fifteen 3PL_SP were still too many for the selected area of study. The fish is
distributed in supplier-owned standardized buckets, which are returned to the fish
supplier. Loading a truck implies replacing empty buckets by fish filled buckets or
vice-versa. 3PL_SP in a typical fish supply chain provides the infrastructure for the
supply chain and establishes the base from which operating economies are realized.
Information sharing about the available fishes, shipped fishes, and in-transit fishes are
required by the supply chain members. The problem is to determine the number and
size of the 3PL_SP. It involves determining the nodal point in the fish transportation
network from where fish loaded vehicles is guided momentarily on its way to the end
consumers of different cities.
The first objective of this study is to determine how many 3PL_SP are really
needed. The second objective of this study is to review the allocation of fish-markets to
each 3PL_SP. For different geographical and commercial reasons present allocations
were far from optimal at the time of the study. To identify the potential competent
3PL_SP and their size, management aims to minimize the cost of service for serving
fish-markets, minimization of late deliveries by 3PL_SP and also minimization of
markets not being served by 3PL_SP.
3.1 The methodology 3PL allocation
In this paper, multiple objective programming model has been used for solving the 3PL problem
allocation problem for fish distribution. Multiple objective programming enables an
optimization problem to be analyzed in terms of the separate and often conflicting
objectives inherent in many real world decision problems. This approach permits the
decision maker(s) to explicitly consider the relative importance of different objectives.
Multiple objective methods can be used to generate more than one solution (alternative, 707
non-dominated or satisfying solutions). Next, we discuss the solution procedure for a
multiple objective programming with varying number of fish market served by
3PL_SP. A two-level 3PL_SP allocation problem is transformed into one-level
mathematical program to find the objective value. Lexicographic goal programming
has become one of the most widely used techniques within multiple objective
programming. The primary objective of this paper is to show how mathematical
modeling, especially lexicographic goal programming can be used for 3PL_SP
allocation problem.

4. The decision model

In this section we present a decision model for the 3PL_SP problem described in
Section 3. Following set of assumptions, index set, decision variable and parameters
are considered for the formulation of a multi-objective 3PL_SP problem.
Assumptions:
(1) Only one 3PL_SP is provided to one fish market.
(2) No shortage of the fish market is allowed for any of the 3PL_SP.

index: i for 3PL_SP, for all i ¼ 1, 2,. . . 15; decision variable: xi – number of fish markets
getting service by ith 3PL_SP.
Parameters:
.
ci – cost of service of fish markets by the ith 3PL_SP;
.
li – percentage of units delivered late by ith 3PL_SP;
.
pi – percentage value of fish markets not getting service by by ith 3PL_SP;
.
s – total fish markets served by the 3PL_SP; and
.
Ui – upper capacities of serving the fish markets by the by ith 3PL_SP.

The data collected for the study are provided in Table I.

4.1 Minimizing the cost of service

In this paper, net cost of service to the different fish markets by the 3PL_SP is
considered as the objective function in terms of the decision variables xi. If ci is the net
per unit cost of service by the ith 3PL_SP and the net cost of service by the ith 3PL_SP
is linear function xi, then equation (1) represents the first objective of this model.

4.2 Minimization of late deliveries

If li is the percentage of units delivered late by the ith 3PL_SP, and the late deliveries
provided by the ith 3PL_SP to fish markets are linear function of xi, then equation (2)
represents the second objective of this model.
IJPDLM
3PL_SP number ci ($) li (percent) pi (percent) Ui units
36,9
1 3 0.05 0.04 15
2 5 0.04 0.06 10
3 7 0.06 0.03 17
4 6 0.03 0.06 25
708 5 4 0.04 0.05 5
6 3 0.02 0.03 30
7 4 0.04 0.02 6
8 4 0.06 0.06 13
9 6 0.05 0.07 16
10 8 0.07 0.04 16
11 7 0.04 0.05 7
12 3 0.03 0.06 20
Table I. 13 4 0.06 0.06 15
3PL_SP source data of 14 5 0.05 0.04 10
the case illustration 15 6 0.03 0.07 20

4.3 Minimization of not getting service by 3PL_SP

After conducting a detailed survey of buyer’s opinion, it is possible to construct an
index of buyers who are not getting the service of the 3PL_SP. The 3PL_SP are not
able to fulfill the absolute buyers’ demand due to many reasons such as variations in
demands of different fish markets, availability of fishes at the supplier end, etc. The life
cycle of fishes is too short. Hence, the fish supplier always wants that fishes should be
consumed nearer to the supplier end. The timely deliveries of fishes at the fish markets
are major restrictions. Hence, some units of fishes are not supplied to the fish markets
by the 3PL_SP. Let pi denote the percentage of units not fulfilling the buyers’ demand
by the ith 3PL_SP. The pi for the fish markets not getting services by the ith 3PL_SP
are also assumed to be a linear function of xi.
The three conflicting objectives may be expressed as follows:
X
15
Minimize Z 1 ¼ ci x i ð1Þ
i¼1

X
15
Minimize Z 2 ¼ l i xi ð2Þ
i¼1

X
15
Minimize Z 3 ¼ pi xi ð3Þ
i¼1

Subject to the constraint:

X
15
xi # s; ð4Þ
i¼1

xi # U i ð5Þ
xi $ 0; ;i
Where constraint (4) incorporates total number of fish markets getting services 3PL allocation
3PL_SP and constraint (5) incorporates deterministic capacity constraint of the
ith 3PL_SP. Uncertainty in the 3PL_SP problem can arise from a variety of sources.
problem
The information may be incomplete or highly volatile. Some of the available
information may be contradictory or even unbelievable. Uncertainty may arise due to
variability related to suppliers, manufacturing or demand and supply process. Suppose
the values of total fish markets served s are uncertain and can be represented by s~ with 709
the lower and upper bounds ½S; S
;, respectively.
The 3PL_SP problem with uncertain value of service has the following
mathematical form:
X
15
Minimize Z 1 ¼ ci x i
i¼1

X
15
Minimize Z 2 ¼ l i xi
i¼1

X
15
Minimize Z 3 ¼ pi xi ð6Þ
i¼1

Subject to:
X
15
xi # s~;
i¼1
xi # U i
xi $ 0; ;i
Where s~ [ ½S; S
: Since, s~ is allowed to vary within the ranges of ½S; S
;, respectively.
Let G ¼ {ð~sÞ=S # s~ # S}and Z be the minimum value of Z ð~sÞ on G. They can be
expressed as:


Z ð~sÞ
Z ¼ Minimize [G ð7Þ
ð~sÞ
For the three objective function of 3PL_SP problem, we can obtain the equivalent
two-level mathematical program as follows:
X
15
Z 1 ¼ Minimize Minimize
x
ci xi
ð~sÞ[G i
i¼1

X
15
Z 2 ¼ Minimize Minimize
x
l i xi
ð~sÞ[G i
i¼1

X
15
Z 3 ¼ Minimize Minimize
x
pi xi ð8Þ
ð~sÞ[G i
i¼1
IJPDLM Subject to:
36,9 X
15
xi # s~;
i¼1

xi # U i
710 xi $ 0; ;i
Model (8) is aimed to find the minimum value against the best possible value on G.
Since, both levels 1 and 2 performs the same minimization operations, their constraints
can be combined together to get the conventional one-level mathematical program as
follows:
X
15
Z 1 ¼ Minimize
x
ci x i
i
i¼1

X
15
Z 2 ¼ Minimize
x
l i xi
i
i¼1

X
15
Z 3 ¼ Minimize
x
pi xi ð9Þ
i
i¼1

Subject to:
X
15
xi # s~;
i¼1

S # s~ # S
xi # U i
xi $ 0; ;i
Model (9) thus forms a multi-objective linear integer program. This program enables the
optimization problem to be analyzed in terms of the separate and often conflicting
objectives inherent in many real world decision problems. Lexicographic goal
programming provides satisfactory solution in the presence of conflicting goals. It also
provides a sense of reality by allowing for the generation of alternative solutions by
changing the goal priority structure (sensitivity analysis). Hence, we have used this
approach (Ignizio, 1976) to solve the identified problem. In this approach the goals are
grouped according to priorities. Lexicographic goal programming attaches pre-emptive
priorities to the different goals in order to minimize the unwanted deviation variables in
a lexicographic order. The goals at the highest priority level are considered to be
infinitely more important than goals at the second priority level, and the goals at
the second priority level are considered to be infinitely more important than goals at the
third priority level. Model (10) in the lexicographic form may be written as follows:
 
Lex min d þ þ þ
c ; dl ; dp
Subject to: 3PL allocation
X
15 problem
þ
ci x i þ d 2
c 2 dc ¼ C 0
i¼1

X
15
þ
l i ðxi Þ þ d 2
l 2 d l ¼ L0 711
i¼1

X
15
þ
pi ðxi Þ þ d 2
p 2 dp ¼ P 0 ð10Þ
i¼1

X
15
xi # s~;
i¼1

S # s~ # S

xi # U i

xi $ 0; ;i
Where C0, L0 and P0 is the target level of cost of service, late deliveries and markets not
getting service by the 3PL_SP. The deviational variables d2 2 2
c ; d l and d p are the under
utilizations and d þ
c ; d þ
l and d þ
p are the over utilization from the goal target level of the
three objectives, respectively.

5. Results
Mathematical programming software LINGO is used to solve the above mathematical
programs (Scharge, 1989). In the case illustration the goal aspiration levels considered
are C0 ¼ $500,000, L0 ¼ 2,500 units and P0 ¼ 3,000 units, respectively. The variations
in s~ are allowed between 150 and 180. We have tested six strategies. First two strategies
give top priority to balancing the cost charges. Third and fourth strategies reflect on the
opinions of those who lay greater emphasis on timely delivery of service to the fish
markets. The other two strategies give highest priority to fish markets not getting
service at all. The optimal solutions of all the six strategies are shown in Table II.

Objectives
rank Solutions
Strategies 1st 2nd 3rd x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 x8 x9 x10 x11 x12 x13 x14 x15

A Z1 Z2 Z3 15 10 2 25 5 30 6 13 16 0 4 20 14 10 0
B Z1 Z3 Z2 15 0 0 18 5 30 3 13 16 0 0 20 10 10 20
C Z2 Z1 Z3 15 0 0 25 0 30 0 9 15 0 0 20 15 10 20 Table II.
D Z2 Z3 Z1 0 10 3 19 0 30 6 12 16 0 0 20 15 10 20 Ranking of objectives and
E Z3 Z1 Z2 0 10 17 25 3 30 6 0 10 0 0 20 9 10 20 optimal solution under
F Z3 Z2 Z1 15 10 17 25 0 26 6 0 7 0 3 20 0 10 20 six strategies
IJPDLM Thus, under strategy A, first priority is given to minimizing the gap between cost of
36,9 services providing to different fish markets followed by minimization of late deliveries
provisions, and minimization of not getting service by 3PL_SP, respectively. For
strategy A the optimum solutions are obtained. The solutions indicate which 3PL_SP
is to be closed and gives the corresponding fish markets allocation to remaining
3PL_SP. Under strategy A, the optimum number of 3PL_SP is 13. Figure 3 shows the
712 optimum 3PL_SP for strategy A.
This decision shows a strong concentration of fish markets around the existing
3PL_SP, which is probably due to strong commercial activities of individual 3PL_SP.
It also shows that all that is needed is to eliminate a few inefficient 3PL_SP. Under
strategy A, 3PL_SP number 10 and 15 are to be closed. Whereas, 3PL_SP number 3, 11
and 13 received less allocations of fish markets then their original capacity. Under
strategy B first priority is same as strategy A, then it ensures to counter the situation of
not getting service by 3PL_SP, followed by reduction in deliveries. Under strategy B,
3PL_SP numbers 2, 3, 10 and 11 are to be closed. Whereas, 3PL_SP numbers 4, 7, and
13 would receive less allocations of fish markets then their original capacity. Under
strategy C, first priority is given to minimization of late deliveries followed by
minimizing the cost of service ranks and the minimization of not getting service by
3PL_SP, respectively. Under this strategy, 3PL_SP numbers 2, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 11 are to
be closed. Whereas, 3PL_SP numbers 8 and 9 would receive less allocations of fish
markets than their original capacities. Under strategy D first priority is same as in
strategy C, followed by the countering the situation of not getting service by 3PL_SP.
Lastly it tries to reduce the late deliveries provisions. Under strategy D, 3PL_SP
numbers 1, 5, 10 and 11 are to be closed. Whereas, 3PL_SP numbers 3, 4 and 8 receive
less allocations of fish markets than their original capacities. Under strategy E, first
priority is given to minimization of not getting service by 3PL_SP, minimizing the cost
of services provided to different fish markets ranks second, and minimization of late
deliveries provisions comes third. Under this strategy, 3PL_SP numbers 1, 8, 10 and 11

3PL_SP

- Fish-supplier

Figure 3.
Optimal 3PL_SP (the size
of stars is proportional to
the annual throughput)
are to be closed. Whereas, 3PL_SP numbers 5, 9 and 13 receive less allocations of fish 3PL allocation
markets than their original capacities. Similarly under strategy F, first priority is same problem
as referred in strategy E, then it ensures avoiding late deliveries by 3PL_SP, and then
minimizing cost of services. Under this strategy, 3PL_SP numbers 5, 8, 10 and 13 are to
be closed. 3PL_SP numbers 6, 9 and 11 receive fewer allocations of fish markets than
their original capacity.
Variations in the optimum solutions are observed due to priorities given to different 713
goals. In Table II the solutions associated with the different preference to the objectives
are presented. The decision-maker can a choice concerning the 3PL_SP that best
satisfies the criteria. Those solutions are also useful as they help to determine the
boundaries within which negotiation can take place.

6. Conclusions and future research

In this paper we have proposed a mathematical framework for the strategic
management of 3PL_SP. We have illustrated the relevance of the framework through
the vision and strategy of an Eastern-India-based case illustration. This study
investigates the usefulness and efficacy of a multi-objective decision method for
3PL_SP problem. Lexicographic goal programming has been used to decide alternative
3PL_SP strategies. The decision-makers can evaluate the alternative solutions with
respect to other possible decision criteria. The 3PL_SP study bring out that a prudent
reduction of the number of 3PL_SP from 15 to 13 for strategy A. Two of the existing
3PL_SP were not economical and it was suggested to close these 3PL_SP. The
suggestions with respect to the 3PL_SP were implemented. It has to be stressed that
the study was carried out based on the existing supply chain and the way it is used.
How should 3PL_SP be organized? During the study it became obvious that there was
a large variation in the way in which all the 3PL_SP are run. 3PL_SP should carefully
restructure the supply system, standardize operational policies and measure
performance in uniform manner.
Third party logistics (3PLs) related decisions in a typical supply chain involve
many subjective factors such as local laws, community attitudes, availability of
utilities, and proximity to transportation links. These subjective factors should also be
considered in the final decision. Inclusion of environmental concerns in the anlysis of
3PL problem may prove to be a fruitful area of future research.

References
Ackerman, K.B., McGinnis, M.A. and Kochunny, C.M. (1995), “Who provides competitive
advantage?”, Transportation & Distribution, January, pp. 66-8.
Bardi, E.J., Raghunathan, T.S. and Bagchi, P.K. (1994), “Logistics information systems: the
strategic role of top management”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 71-85.
Bhatnagar, R., Sohal, A.S. and Millen, R. (1999), “Third party logistics services: a Singapore
perspective”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 569-87.
Bowersox, D.J. and Daugherty, P.J. (1995), “Logistics paradigms: the impact of information
technology”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 65-80.
Bradley, P. (1995), “Third parties gain slow, cautious buyer support”, Purchasing, 18 May,
pp. 51-2.
IJPDLM Buxbaum, P.A. (1995), “Leveraging expertise: third parties will likely plan an increasing role in
future logistics employment”, Transportation & Distribution, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 80-2.
36,9
Byrne, P.M. (1993), “A new road map for contract logistics”, Transportation & Distribution,
April, pp. 58-62.
Cooke, J.A. (1996), “On the up and up (and up)!”, Traffic Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 49-51.
Cuthbertson, T. (1995), “Fill the technology gap”, Transportation & Distribution, Vol. 36 No. 11,
714 pp. 60-2.
Dapiran, P., Lieb, R., Millen, R. and Sohal, A. (1996), “Third party logistics services usage by
large Australian firms”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 26 No. 10, pp. 36-45.
Fantasia, J.J. (1993), “Are you a candidate for third party logistics?”, Transportation &
Distribution, January, p. 30.
Fawcett, S.E. and Clinton, S.R. (1996), “Enhancing logistics performance to improve the
competitiveness of manufacturing organizations”, Production and Inventory Management,
Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 40-6.
Fawcett, S.E. and Fawcett, S.A. (1995), “Integrating logistics, operations and purchasing”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 25 No. 5,
pp. 24-42.
Fuller, J.B., O’Conor, J. and Rawlinson, R. (1993), “Tailored logistics: the next advantage’”,
Harvard Business Review, May/June, pp. 87-97.
Gentry, J.J. (1996), “Carrier involvement in buyer-supplier strategic partnerships”, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 14-25.
Gilmour, P., Driva, H. and Hunt, R.A. (1994), “Future directions for logistics in Australia”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 24-32.
Hertz, S. and Alfredsson, M. (2003), “Strategic development of third party logistics providers”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 32, pp. 139-49.
Hum, S.H. (2000), “A Hayes-Wheelwright framework approach for strategic management of third
party logistics services”, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 132-7.
Ignizio, J.P. (1976), Goal Programming and Extensions, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Krumwiede, D.W. and Sheu, C. (2002), “A model for reverse logistics entry by third party
providers”, Omega: The International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 30, pp. 325-33.
Lacity, M.C., Wilcoks, L.P. and Feeny, D.F. (1995), “IT outsourcing: maximize flexibility and
control”, Harvard Business Review, May/June, pp. 86-7.
LaLonde, B.J. and Masters, J.M. (1994), “Emerging logistics strategies: blueprints for the next
century”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 24
No. 7, pp. 35-47.
Larsen, T.S. (1999), “Third party logistics from an interorganizational point of view”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 30 No. 2,
pp. 112-27.
Lieb, R.C., Millen, R.A. and Wassenhove, L.N.V. (1993b), “Third party logistics services: a
comparison of experienced American and European manufacturers”, International Journal
of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 35-44.
Lim, W.S. (2000), “A lemons market ? An incentive scheme to induce truth-selling in third party
logistics providers”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 125, pp. 519-25.
McMillan, A. (1996), “Supply chain management practices in Asia Pacific today”, International 3PL allocation
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 10, pp. 79-95.
Minahan, T. (1997), “Are buyers gumming up the supply chain?”, Purchasing, 16 January,
problem
pp. 79-80.
Olson, D.R. (1996), “Seven trends of highly effective warehouses”, IIE Solutions, Vol. 28 No. 2,
pp. 12-14.
Richardson, H.L. (1992), “Outsourcing: the power worksource”, Transportation & Distribution, 715
July, pp. 22-4.
Richardson, H.L. (1995), “Logistics help for the challenged”, Transportation & Distribution,
Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 60-4.
Roberts, K. (1994), “Choosing a quality contractor”, Logistics Supplement, September, pp. 4-5.
Scharge, L. (1989), User’s Manual for Linear Interger and Quadratic Programming with LINDO,
Scientific Press, New York, NY.
Shapiro, R.D. (1987), “Get leverage from logistics”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 62 No. 3,
pp. 119-26.
Sink, H.L., Langley, C.J. Jr and Gibson, B.J. (1996), “Buyer observations of the US third-party
logistics market”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 38-46.
Sohail, M.S. and Sohail, A.S. (2003), “The use of third party logistics services: a Malaysian
perspective”, Technovation, Vol. 23, pp. 401-8.
Stank, T.P., Rogers, D.S. and Daugherty, P.J. (1994), “Benchmarking: applications by third party
warehousing firms”, Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 55-72.
Sum, C.C. and Teo, C.B. (1999), “Strategic posture of logistics service providers in Singapore”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 29 No. 9,
pp. 588-605.
Tate, K. (1996), “The elements of a successful logistics partnership”, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 7-13.
Troyer, C. and Cooper, R. (1995), “Smart moves in supply chain integration”, Transportation &
Distribution, Vol. 36 No. 9, pp. 55-62.
Tyan, J.C., Wang, F.K. and Du, T.C. (2003), “An evaluation of freight consolidation policies in
global third party logistics”, Omega: The International Journal of Management Science,
Vol. 31, pp. 55-62.

Corresponding author
Ravi Shankar can be contacted at: ravi1@dms.iitd.ernet.in

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints