2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
MANAGEMENT MODEL FOR THE DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND
CONTROL OF PACKAGING IN THE SPANISH FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN
(002-0183)
Jesús García-Arca ([email protected])
José Carlos Prado-Prado ([email protected])
University of Vigo (Spain)
Departamento de Organización de Empresas y Marketing / ETSII de Vigo
Lagoas-Marcosende, nº. 9, 36200 Vigo (Spain)
Phone: + 34 986 81 22 20 / Fax: + 34 986 81 23 85
Abstract
Traditionally, packaging has been designed to protect products. However, consolidation of new
customer needs has favoured consideration of new requirements at the design and development
stage of packaging, namely, commercial and logistics requirements. Packaging should be seen as
a tool for communicating the product's differential advantages, for implementing cost reduction
policies, for tackling the problem of packaging waste (Directive 94/62) and for facilitating the
ECR implementation.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
In this context, the objective of this paper is to establish a management model for the design,
development and control of packaging in the Spanish food supply chain which covers the diverse
commercial, environmental and logistics factors mentioned previously. This model has been built
up around a bibliographical revision of the topic, case studies and conclusions from research
carried out by the authors in 307 companies in the Spanish food sector (209 food packers, 30
distributors and 68 packaging manufacturers).
Introduction
The main function that companie s have granted to packaging has been traditionally related to the
mission of protecting, satisfactorily, the different products from the centres of production to the
final consumer. However, nowadays this basic mission must be enlarged. Along these lines,
Saghir (2002) defines packaging as “a coordinated system of preparing goods for safe, efficient
and effective handling, transport, distribution, storage, retailing, consumption and recovery, reuse
or disposal combined with maximizing consumer value, sales and hence profit”. This last
definition suggests the need to develop the new requirements in the designing and development
phase of packaging, this means, commercial and logistic requirements.
Along these lines, with the two basic strategies of Porter (1982) in mind, it is pointed out that
packaging can play an important role in the strategies of differentiation and leadership in costs.
Therefore, an adequate selection of the packaging implies benefits, both in the reduction of costs
and in the increase of sales.
From a business point of view or of differentiation, the packing and, especially, the container
have become a variable to take into account when dealing with the design of the product, as it is
an added seller of the product and a link between the consumer and the manufacturer and it is
considered the fifth "P" ("packaging") of marketing-mix. Simultaneously to the adoption of
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
differentiation strategies, the companies must establish policies of cost reduction to maintain or,
desirably, improve their position in the markets in which they operate. Among these costs is
found the logistical ones, whose reduction has become an unavoidable tool of competitiveness,
given it can suppose in products of large consumption on average over 10% of the sales figures.
Packaging has much to contribute in the reduction of these logistical costs, both in a direct way
(cost of buying, manipulation, storage and transportation of the packaging and the costs of
package and packing), and in an indirect way (cost of manipula tion, storage and transportation of
unit loads towards the final customer) (Johansson et al., 1997; Paine, 1991).
In order to illustrate this importance, it can be stated that if the costs associated with packaging
are considered, we find that these suppose 8% of the logistical costs, reaching 15-20 % in
international logistics (Lancioni and Chandran, 1990). In this line, Saghir (2002) explains that the
selling packaging at the retailer can represent 10-15% of the sales price of the product.
Having arrived at this point, it is necessary to state that this logistical view should be interpreted
from a point of view of supply chain management (or SCM). Christopher (1994) defines the
supply chain as "... a network of organizations that are interconnected, through upstream and
downstream links, in the different business processes and activities that produce value in the
shape of products and services to clients. This approach by Christopher, coincides with that
pointed out subsequently by Mentzer et al., (2001) and Stock and Lambert (2001).
In this context, there still exists little unanimity in the definition of the relation between SCM and
logistics (Cooper et al., 1997 and Larson and Halldorsson (2004). Thus, a quite extended view is
that the term logistics be substituted by the term SCM without implying any conceptual change.
This view is shared by the authors of this paper.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
Nevertheless, the CLM (The Council of Logistics Management) defines logistics as “the part of
the supply chain which plans, implements and controls the effective, efficient forward and
reverse flow and storage of goods, services, and related information between the point of origin
and the point of consumption with the objective of adapting to the needs of the clients”. The
previous definition of logistics includes an express mention to reverse logistics the result of
increasing social sensitization toward the conservation of the environment, which has supposed
the development of new specific legislations in environmental matters.
In this context, the responsibility of the products that end their service life falls upon the
manufacturer or the producer, giving rise to the concept of Extended Responsibility of the
Producer (Lindhqvist, 2000). In like manner, enlarging this concept to the cons umer, to
suppliers, distributors and to any other participant of the supply chain, it would be possible to
achieve that all of the participants contribute to decreasing the impact of production and
consumption on the environment which could be named the Extended Responsibility of the supply
Chain (Bañegil et al., 2001). In relation to this last aspect, the European Union has developed the
Directive 94/62 that has been transposed, in Spain, in the Law 11/97 "Ley de envases y residuos
de envases”, which generates a new concept of the costs of packaging associated to the
management of its waste.
In like manner, in order to achieve a better functioning of the "supply chain", in line with the
continuous improvement approach or JIT approach, efforts have been initiated to improve the
collaboration among large distribution and the manufacturers within the initiative E.C.R.
(Efficient Consumer Response ), which can be defined as "a food and consumer products
industry strategy where distributors and suppliers work closely together to bring better value to
the consumer" (Kurt Salmon Institute, Inc., 1993). This initiative enlarges the area of action of
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
companies in the design of packaging, acting on aspects of "Efficient Product Introduction” and
"Efficient Replenishment".
On the other hand, enlarging the approach of collaboration "upstream" to the logistic flow
manufacturers of packaging could and should collaborate actively in the designing process of
them, given their capability to provide new alternatives regarding the materials of packaging and
equipment of packages and packing.
Given all of the problems commented on in the above paragraphs, it is possible to identify the
different functions that packaging must satisfy. Thus, Robertson (1990) indicates that the
packaging that must satisfy the packaging can be summed up in the packing in containing and
protecting the product, adapting the demand of the product to the consumer, grouping the product
in easy quantities to manipulate and transport it, give support to consumers' new socioeconomic
needs and be an element of communication of the attributes of the product. Other authors such as
Johansson et al., (1997) clarify these functions and speak of three basic functions of packaging
(the logistic function, the marketing function and the environmental function), this being the basis
of the model proposed in this paper.
Given the important relation between packaging and logistics, there has recently begun to
develop a new discipline known with the term "Packaging Logistics", which was defined by
Bjärnemo et al., (2000) as "... the interaction and relationship between the logistical system and
the packaging system that add value to the combined, overall, system-the enterprise". This
proposal presents the relationship and the existent hierarchy between the three large levels of
packaging (primary, secondary and tertiary) in the fulfilment of different assigned functions.
In order to satisfy the above-mentioned functions, the companies have multiple alternatives
(materials, formats, dimensions, ... ) to tackle the design of their packaging. The adoption of one
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
or the other alternative can mean important changes in the logistical costs mentioned above. In
accordance, for Johnsson (1998) these actions will be related to productive efficiency, the
manipulation of the product, the customer service and to the efficiency in distribution and in the
information. Obviously, the solutions adopted by companies do not usually present just one
action only, but rather, a combination of various actions.
In this area, in order to facilitate the implantation of packaging systems perfectly adapted to the
needs of the supply chain, initiatives exist that pursue standardizing the logistic processes through
the emission of recommendations that may be considered in the design of packaging. Along these
lines, it is important to point out the contributions of the "AECOC Recommendations for
Logistics” (AECOC, 1996) in Spain which indicates the restrictions that the distribution of
products in the marke t of large consumption must satisfy, especially, within the food sector.
These RAL's propose a series of “best practices”, relating to packaging, with the objective of
improving the efficiency of the supply chain.
Among these practices is found the palletization of the unit loads in pallet EUR 800 *1200 mm.
(according to standard UNE 49902 ), the dimensions of packaging multiples or submultiples of
the module 600 *400 mm. (according to standard ISO 3676), the definition of the height of unit
load (1.15 meters, 1.45 meters or 2 meters, including the pallet’s height ) and the maximum
weight of the unit load (1000 kilograms).
Description of the packaging management model
As it has been described up to now, the traditional point of view, does not express the packaging
multi- functional nature completely as it does not identify clearly its close relationship with the
product and with the greater part/majority of logistic activities. In this context, Porter (1984)
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
identified three generic competitive strategies: differentiation, leadership in costs and
concentration in a segment of the market. Thus, if the company chooses to improve its
competitive position with a differentiation strategy (more power in the marketing area) the
organization may accept a lesser logistic efficiency of the adopted solution that this supposes,
although, this measure should not mean that different alternatives are not approached for its'
analysis and study.
At the other end, if the company chooses a strategy based on leadership in costs, the selected
packaging will be closer to a standard format already existent and with a logistic efficiency made
suitable and tested (with lower costs) that can, however, oblige the sacrifice of some of the
possibilities of differentiation of the packaging . In any case, independently of the adopted
strategy, the levels of present-day competitiveness force companies to attempt to combine the
benefits of both strategies and, therefore, design and implement the ”perfect ” packaging
(differentiated and with low logistic costs ).
With this last approach, starting from its' strategies, the companies define its proceedings in
different fields, in particular, in the commercial field and in the logistic, being defined
respectively the chain of commercialization and the supply chain, the packaging design being a
common point in the achievement of its objectives. Nevertheless, the key factor to achieve
success in this process is to contemplate all of the requirements that the packaging must fulfil
together with the designing requirements of the product in such a way that the launching of a new
product is possible (or a modification of an existent one) on the market. In this context, the
position of the packaging strategy in relation to the company's other strategies will be directly
related to the importance that the packaging is given within the company.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
On the other hand, granted that company environment changes (clients, technology, legislation,
competition, ... ), it is necessary to approach the designing of the packaging from a dynamic
perspective and not from a static one (parallel to the life cycle of the product), which forces the
establishment of a control mechanism that permits securing the availability of the best alternative
of packaging at each moment based on indicators, such as comparison with the competition's
packaging, costs or tendencies.
The result of all these considerations is proposed in the management model for the design,
development and control of the packaging as indicated in figure 1.
Figure 1. The management model for the design, development and control of packaging
TECHNOLOGY
LEGISLATION
ECONOMY
...
CLIENTS
COMPETITION
SUPPLIERS
BUSINESSSTRATEGY
LOGISTICSAREA
COMMERCIAL/MARKETING
AREA
... ...
PACKAGING DESIGN
LOGISTIC SYSTEM (Direct + Inverse)
SWOT ANALYSIS +
MARKETING-MIX
DEVELOPMENT PACKAGING
CONTROLPACKAGING
... ...
PRODUCTDESIGN
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
As a previous step to the packaging designing process analysis, it is necessary to remember two
aspects: on the one hand, the hierarchy structure of packaging, and on the other hand, the
functions or requirements that they must satisfy.
Thus, in the first place three different categories are established: the primary packaging (the
product's protector and, in many instances, it is in contact with it; also known as consumer
package), the secondary packaging (which has the function of containing and grouping several
primary packaging) and the tertiary packaging (consisting of several primary or secondary
packaging grouped in a pallet or unit load).
In this way, when contemplating packaging as a whole the natural interaction among different
levels would become manifest, depicting the important dependence among them. In fact, the
adaptation of a set level of packaging should not be contemplated if the adaptation of the set of
all the levels of grouped form is not also considered.
Secondly, it is necessary to contemplate the diversity and complexity of functions that a correct
packaging must satisfy. Along these lines, the model proposed by Johansson et al., (1997) will be
used, which establishes three basic functions: the logistic function (to facilitate the manipulation
of goods, the identification and the protection of the product), the commercial function
(knowledge of consumer demand, attractive design and communication), and the environmental
function (facilitate the re-utilization, the recycling and the reduction of the consumption of
packaging materials. All these functions act as requirements of design in packaging.
From this division, the authors have established within the logistic function three large sub-
functions (protection, production and flow). In turn the sub-function of flow has been split into
three new requirements (purchase and supply, efficient flow and information), as can be observed
in figure 2. This figure shows, in like manner, the importance of contemplating existent
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
technologies of packaging at each moment as a source of alternatives, which allows achievement
of a better adjustment to the previous requirements.
Figure 2. The requirements of design in packaging
The detailed analysis of the previous functions brings to light that the packaging system is
characterized for being subject to different design requirements from different areas within the
company and the different companies within the supply chain. In this way, for example, the area
of marketing demands from packaging differentiation and size adapted to consumption (that of
the customer and of the channel); the area of production demands a packaging sufficie ntly
standardized which permits it to optimize the number of useful changes in manufacturing lines,
obtaining high velocities and performance of the same. On the other hand, the area of purchasing
requires a packaging that allows a reliable supply in agreement with needs and the cheapest
possible cost, while in the area of logistic it needs a packaging that makes good use of the volume
COMMER
CIAL
REQUIRE
MENTS
COMMER
CIAL
REQUIRE
MENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL
REQUIREMENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL
REQUIREMENTS
PRODUCTION
PRODUCTION
INFORMTION
INFORMTIONPR
OTECTION
PROTECTIO
NEFFICIENT FLOW
EFFICIENT FLOWPURCHASE AND SUPPLYPURCHASE AND SUPPLY
LOGISTIC REQUIREMENTS
PACKAGING TECHNOLOGIES
PACKAGING TECHNOLOGIES
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
and the available weight in the loading unit and in the logistic resources (storage, manipulation
and transportation).
Having reached this stage, it is necessary to itemize more deeply the previous requirements
contemplating the effect on all the companies of the supply chain, that is, packing companies,
distributors (platforms of distribution and retailers) and third party logistics, following Saghir's
proposals and authors´ experience. From the results of this analysis table 1 is obtained; thus
Saghir already sets out the different views that the packing companies, logistic platforms,
retailers and logistic operators (third party logistics) have. This view is complemented and
expanded by the authors of this paper with the implications of packaging manufacturers, as can
be observed in the table 1.
The table shows the different requirements (in agreement with the functions presented
previously) that companies, of a certain supply chain, grant to a suitable design of packaging.
With the previous table in mind, it would be possible to appraise the importance that each one of
the previous requirements has in the supply chain in terms of the strategic evaluation of each
factor (evaluation that companies grant to the strategic importance of the requirement) weighted
by the number of parts of the supply chain that find themselves affected by the aforementioned.
In like manner, the existent relationships among these requirements and the three hierarchic
levels within packaging are identified. Thus, packaging is intimately connected with the product
itself, at least the primary packaging, for which the choice of the aforementioned packaging
depends on the properties of the product and of the perception of the consumer of the same.
Independently of the price, the aspects of marketing and the packaging appearance is found
among the most important factors that affect the product positioning. In this way, the selection of
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
the primary packaging is often decisive (and at least it is intimately related) in the election of the
correspondent secondary packaging and, sometimes, even for the tertiary.
DIS
TR
IBU
TIO
N P
LA
TF
OR
M
RE
TA
IL O
UT
LE
T
Image and promotion of sales * * 1 1Sales * * 1 1 1Ergonomics for the user (facility of use) * * 1 1costs of design and development of packaging * * 1 1Costs of breakage and claims * * * 1 1 1 1Environmental impact of packaging * 1 1 1 1 1Cost of waste management (reverse logistics) * * * 1 1 1productive flexibility manufacture of packaging * * * 1Manufacturing costs of packaging * * * 1Package and packing costs * * * 1Flexibility of the packing and package process * * * 1Protection of products * * 1 1 1 1Abilility to pile * * 1 1 1 1stability * 1 1 1 1Weight of packaging * * 1 1 1 1Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture ofpackaging * * * 1
Costs of raw materials for packaging * * * 1Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture ofpackaging 1Cost of packaging * * * 1 1Cost of supply of packaging * * * 1logistic cost of finished product to client (manipulation,storage, transportation) * * 1 1 1 1Efficiency in picking * * * 1 1 1efficiency in manipulation to shelf * * 1Use of shelves´ retail outlet * * 1Height of unit loads * 1 1 1
INFORMATION Efficiente logistics identification & information * * * 1 1 1 1 1
TE
RT
IAR
Y P
AC
KA
GIN
G
PA
CK
ER
DISTRIBUTOR
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
LOGISTIC REQUIREMENTS
PRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS
FLOW REQUIREMENTS
PURCHASE AND SUPPLY
EFFICIENT FLOW
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF PACKAGING EFFECTS STAGE OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN
PA
CK
AG
ING
MA
NU
FA
CT
UR
ER
TH
IRD
PA
RT
Y L
OG
IST
ICS
PRIM
AR
Y P
AC
KA
GIN
G
SEC
ON
DA
RY
PA
CK
AG
ING
Table 1. The importance of the design requirements of packaging in the supply chain.
In addition, the previous decision also depends on which part of the supply chain has the most
influence in the decision of the primary packaging. The parameters that they can influence in the
aforementioned decision are two: On the one hand, the degree of power in the chain and, on the
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
other hand, the importance of the brand. If the distributing companies dominate the packing
companies, the importance of packaging can be in what the retailer considers priority. This
situation is far from the nearly utopian situation described in the previous epigraph concerning
the management of the supply chain where confidence and collaboration are essential (this being
the spirit, for example, of the initiative ECR).
It is pertinent to highlight that the secondary container is one of the elements with more potential
of influence in the carrying out of political logistics, since it represents the "frontier" between the
logistic system and the packaging system. Studies such as those belonging to Henriksson (1997),
Johnsson (1998) and Saghir (2002) expose the conflict between the legitimate interests of the
marketing area and those of the logistic area when having to make a choice among distinct
packaging alternatives. Once established the strategic evaluation of each of the designing
requirements of the packaging it is necessary to establish a suitable organizational structure and a
suitable methodology which permits the carrying out of this process successfully.
In relation to the organizational structure, it should be multi- functional and multi-company in
order to contemplate all of the logistic, commercial and environmental requirements that the
packaging is subjected to. Thus, the authors propose an organizational structure to accomplish the
design and rationalization of the packaging based on three different teams: the Design Team, the
Implementation Team and the Support Team (see figure 3).
The Design Team is the central nucleus which the project revolves around. The team in charge of
leading the study and making decisions of implementation of new packaging intimately related
with the design of new products. In this way, this team is responsible, not only of establishing
courses of action but, also, of carrying out the follow-up of the adaptation of agreed measures.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
All the areas related with the packaging design, such as logistics, production, marketing,
purchasing, quality, etc. should be represented in this Design Team.
The Implementation Team, however, has the role of carrying out the decisions agreed on by
Design Team, proposing and examining packaging alternatives that subsequently will be
presented for approval by the Project Team. In like manner, it is the team responsible of
coordinating all of the activities necessary for the carrying out of tests (selection and the hiring
of packing and package equipment, the request of samples from suppliers, measurements, etc.).
This team's composition can be, either permanent or non-permanent, depending on the
peculiarities of the packaging that is being analysed (for example, according to the kind of
market, the type of channel to which it is directed, productive technology, etc.)
Figure 3. Organizational Structure for the Design of Packaging
Finally, the Support Team has the role of serving as a consultative organ for the Design Team
and the Implementation Team, especially in technical matters, typically presented by
DESIGN TEAM ofPRODUCT/PACKAGING
IMPLEMENTATIONTEAM 1
DISTRIBUTORS
MANUFACTURERS OFPACKAGING
PRODUCTION LOGISTICS COMMERCIAL PURCHASE QUALITY ...
IMPLEMENTATION TEAM i
...
SUPPORTTEAM
COMPANY REMAINING SUPPLY CHAIN
DESIGN TEAM ofPRODUCT/PACKAGING
IMPLEMENTATIONTEAM 1
DISTRIBUTORS
MANUFACTURERS OFPACKAGING
PRODUCTION LOGISTICS COMMERCIAL PURCHASE QUALITY ...
IMPLEMENTATION TEAM i
...
SUPPORTTEAM
COMPANY REMAINING SUPPLY CHAIN
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
representatives of the suppliers of packaging and by the channel of commercialization. The result
of the coordinated work of these teams is the feasibility of the design and implantation of the
packaging, insuring that all the different requirements that were set out initially are looked at,
taking the four basic decisions associated to the packaging design, that is, the selection of
materials, the selection of graphic art, the selection of the packaging dimensions and the group's
selection (number of primary containers per secondary container).
In addition, from a methodological focus, the authors establish 7 stages for carrying out the
design and the implantation of the packaging: the definition of objectives and the range of the
study (products included in it), the design of the study (definition of organizational structure and
the methodology of work ), the present-day analysis of the situation and market trends, the
analysis and selection of alternatives of packaging, the carrying out of tests and validation of
alternatives, the implantation of new packages and the follow-up and improvement of implanted
solutions.
Having arrived at this point, it seems reasonable to establish a series of actions that could be used
as guide or reference to the companies in this designing process, based on the concept of "Best
Practices". Relative to the concept of "best practices" we suggest that "benchmarking" should be
considered as a "systematic procedure to identify the best practices and modify the present-day
knowledge to attain a superior performance" (Camp, 1989) or as a "method for the continuous
improvement that implies a progressive and systematic evaluation and the incorporation of
products, services and external processes known as representative of best practices" ( Macneil et
al., 1994). In practice, this concept supposes the adoption of the philosophy of "improve
performance without using methods of reinventing the wheel which are expensive, uncertain and
extensive in time" (Santhouse, 1999) and suggests that there is a number of variables that have a
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
significant impact in a company's success which competes in a given sector and that Leidecker et
al. (1984) had already defined as critical factors of success.
In this context, from a revision of the existent bibliography on the subject (among others: Paine
(1991), AECOC (1996), DULOG (1997), Henriksson (1997), Johansson et al. (1997), Johnsson
(1998), Cervera (1998), Twede (2000), Saghir (2002) and Torrado (2002)), the authors have
established a relation of best practices related to the design of packaging that are set out in table 2
and have been catalogued in two large groups: those of an organizational character and those
associated to the requirements of design (which have been classified according to the
classification of designing requirements, that is, commercial, logistic and environmental
requirements ).
Given that each of the above-mentioned best practices, not all are critically equal in its
application which will depend, basically, on the positive consequences that they will have on
each one of the designing requirements and of the actual strategic importance of each one of
these requirements. Thus, on the basis of previous bibliographic revision and the personal
interviews carried out by the authors in the study that will be presented later, we can combine
tables 1 and 2, identifying the relative importance of each practice in the context of the strategic
importance of the set of designing requirements (see table 3, at the end of the paper ).
This model is based on the technical QFD'S functioning (Quality Function Deployment), a
method developed in Japan at the end of the 60's by the investigators Shigeru Mizuno and Yoji
Asao, with the objective of developing a system of quality assurance that would permit
integrating the needs of clients in the design of products, before these are manufactured.
Deepening a little further in the utility of the proposed method, the relative importance obtained
in each practice can be contrasted with the levels of implantation or evaluation granted by each
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
one of the collectives of the supply chain studied with the objective of identifying "gaps" or
opportunities for improvement related with packaging.
DESCRIPTION OF BEST PRACTICES
COORDINATION BETWEEN BUSINESS AREAS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING
COLLABORATION WITH DISTRIBUTORS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING
COLLABORATION WITH MANUFACTURERS OF PACKAGING IN ITS DESIGN
DOCUMENTATION OF THE DESIGN PROCESS OF PACKAGING
USE OF COMPUTER TOOLS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING
CONTEMPLATE THE EFFECT OF PROMOTIONS ON THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING
PROOF OF COMMERCIAL ACCEPTANCE IN THE MARKET OF NEW PACKAGING
USE OF LCA TECHNIQUE IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING
PLAN FOR PREVENTION OF PACKAGING WASTE
"GREEN SPOT" IN PACKAGING
EXCHANGE OF PALLETS
REUSE OF PACKAGING
FLEXIBLE SYSTEMS OF PACKAGING
EFFICENT AND AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS OF PACKAGING
PROOF OF RESISTANCE IN THE MARKET OF NEW PACKAGING
NON-CROSSED PALLETIZATION
DEFINITION OF MAXIMUM WEIGHT OF UNIT LOAD
PROTECTION OF UNIT LOAD (CORNER BRACKETS, SEPARATING SHEETS,...)
KNOWLEDGE OF PRODUCTIVE PROBLEMS OF MANUFACTURERS OF PACKAGING AND PACKERS
DOCUMENTED SPECIFICATIONS OF THE QUALITY OF MATERIALS OF PACKAGING
STANDARDIZATION OF FORMATS AND QUALITY OF PACKAGING
PURCHASE OF PACKAGING THROUGH A BUYING OFFICE
KNOWLEDGE OF "AECOC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LOGISTICS"
PACKAGING DIMENSIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MODULE 600*400mm
USE OF EUR PALLET
DEFINITION OF MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF LOAD UNIT (ACCORDING TO RAL)
EFFICIENCY OF VOLUMEN AND/OR WEIGHT OF UNIT LOAD AND PACKAGING
USE OF COMPUTER TOOLS IN THE PROCESS OF PICKING
PALLETIZATION INSTRUCTIONS AVAILABLE IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN
IDENTIFICATION OF PACKING WITH INK INJECTORS OR LABELS
USE OF BAR CODES EAN 13 IN CONTAINERS
USE OF BAR CODES EAN 128 IN PACKING AND LOAD UNITS
USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE (EDI) WITH CLIENTS
USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE (EDI) WITH SUPPLIERS
GOOD ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES
TYPOLOGY
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
FLOW REQUIREMENTS
INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
PURCHASE AND SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
GOOD DESIGN
PRACTICES
LOGISTICAL REQUIREMENTS
PROTECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
PRODUCTIVE REQUIREMENTS
EFFICENT FLOW REQUIREMENTS
Table 2. The selection of Best Practices in the design of packaging
Application of the packaging management model to the Spanish food sector
Within the context commented in the previous epigraph, is presented the application of the
management model presented in a study carried out by a team of the University of Vigo (Spain)
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
amongst 307 companies of the Spanish food sector (food packers, packaging manufacturers and
distributors) set out below in Table 4.
In the application of the model proposed in the Spanish food sector, when identifying the
importance of each of the packaging design requirements it was decided to prorate the
evaluations of each of the collectives’ contempla ted (packers, distributors and packaging
manufacturers) and to use a scale of 1-5.
Universe: Spanish distributing
companies with over 6
million € turnover
Spanish packaging
manufacturing
companies with over 6
million € turnover
Spanish packing
companies of food
products with over 6
million € turnover
Method of
collection of
information
Personal and postal
techniques with the
support of a mixed
and structured
questionnaire
Personal and postal
techniques with the
support of a mixed and
structured questionnaire
Personal and postal
techniques with the
support of a mixed and
structured questionnaire
Size of universe: 166 companies 380 companies 1.499 companies
Valid
questionnaires
30 distributing
companies (rate of
answers 18 %)
68 manufactures of
packaging (rate of
answers 17.89%)
209 packing companies
(rate of answers
13.94%)
Interviewee’s
profile
Logistics managers Directors and
production managers
Logistics/production
managers
Table 4. The technical file of the study of packaging in the supply chain of the Spanish food sector
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
Thus, for packing companies the most important requirements are the protection of the product,
followed by commercial and productive aspects. This proposal is similar to that shown by
distributing companies, given that the protective requirements continue to be the most important
factor, followed by the commercial factor. Finally, the packaging manufacturing companies state
that the most important requirements are those of protection, followed by those of productive,
logistics, and commercial requirements. In like manner, there exists unanimity in three groups,
and the least important aspect is the environmental factor.
The mean values of each of the designing requirements have crossed with the same consequences
as those of the application of best practices, in accordance with the systematic commented in the
previous epigraph, obtaining the relative evaluations shown in table 3 (at the end of the paper).
The evaluation or level of implantation of each of the best practices presented in the theoretical
model reflects the answers of the companies of the study, be it the percentage of companies that
use the identified practice or the importance granted to that practice in a scale of evaluation 1-5 of
Likert ( where 1 is "poorly valued" or "not very important" and 5 "highly valued or very
important"). These aforementioned evaluations have been assimilated to a percentage (to
maximum mark of 5) in order to be able to carry out the comparison.
Examining in more detail the table of results, we obtain the result that the level of importance
and/or of implementation of best practice s of an organizational nature is below the strategic
importance that these companies have and in all the effected collectives, except collaboration
with packaging manufacturers. In addition, it is highlighted the strategic importance of all best
practices presented in the previous table.
In relation to best practices associated to the designing requirements, it is indicated that the most
important ones (see table 5), from a strategic point of view, are those of knowledge of the
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
recommendations of RAL of AECOC, the efficiency in volume and/or in the weight of load units,
and those of packaging, the re-utilization, the use of the pallet EUR and the standardization of
formats and packaging qualities. In all these practices, the level of importance and/or
implantation stated by companies is below strategic importance except in the use of the pallet
EUR (all the collectives studied) and in the standardization of formats and qualities (only
packaging companies).
DESCRIPTION OF BEST PRACTICES
RE
LA
TIV
E S
TR
AT
EG
IC
MP
OR
TA
NC
E O
F "
BE
ST
PRA
CT
ICE
"
PA
CK
ER
S
DIS
TR
IBU
TO
RS
MA
NU
FAC
TUR
ER
S O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
COORDINATION BETWEEN BUSINESS AREAS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING 100% 47.85%
COLLABORATION WITH DISTRIBUTORS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING 94% 48.20%
COLLABORATION WITH MANUFACTURERS OF PACKAGING IN ITS DESIGN 81% 91.18%
DOCUMENTATION OF THE DESIGN PROCESS OF PACKAGING 100% 33.97% 76.47%
USE OF COMPUTER TOOLS IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING 86% 31.58%
CONTEMPLATE THE EFFECT OF PROMOTIONS ON THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING 68% 76%
PROOF OF COMMERCIAL ACCEPTANCE IN THE MARKET OF NEW PACKAGING 26% 40.19%
USE OF LCA TECHNIQUE IN THE DESIGN OF PACKAGING 27% 12.92% 11.76%
PLAN FOR PREVENTION OF PACKAGING WASTE 23% 53.11% 30.00% 67.65%
"GREEN SPOT" IN PACKAGING 25% 93.78%
EXCHANGE OF PALLETS 23% 74.02% 84.62% 67.21%
REUSE OF PACKAGING 81% 20.10% 33.33% 50.00%
FLEXIBLE SYSTEMS OF PACKAGING 25% 74.40% 76.60%
EFFICENT AND AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS OF PACKAGING 25% 69.60% 71.80%
PROOF OF RESISTANCE IN THE MARKET OF NEW PACKAGING 49% 60.29% 82.35%
NON-CROSSED PALLETIZATION 39% 21.57%
DEFINITION OF MAXIMUM WEIGHT OF UNIT LOAD 48% 52.45% 64.60% 29.51%
PROTECTION OF UNIT LOAD (CORNER BRACKETS, SEPARATING SHEETS,...) 50% 60.60%
KNOWLEDGE OF PRODUCTIVE PROBLEMS OF MANUFACTURERS OF PACKAGING AND PACKERS 22% 61.40% 42.80% 56.80%
DOCUMENTED SPECIFICATIONS OF THE QUALITY OF MATERIALS OF PACKAGING 16% 77.99% 89.23%
STANDARDIZATION OF FORMATS AND QUALITY OF PACKAGING 63% 76.40% 51.60%
PURCHASE OF PACKAGING THROUGH A BUYING OFFICE 12% 23.33% 40.00%
KNOWLEDGE OF "AECOC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LOGISTICS" 100% 47.06% 63.33% 25.00%
PACKAGING DIMENSIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MODULE 600*400mm 58% 65.40%
USE OF EUR PALLET 70% 95.50% 92.6% 78.69%
DEFINITION OF MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF LOAD UNIT (ACCORDING TO RAL) 51% 66.67% 68.6% 75.4%
EFFICIENCY OF VOLUMEN AND/OR WEIGHT OF UNIT LOAD AND PACKAGING 91% 73.60% 68.6% 80.60%
USE OF COMPUTER TOOLS IN THE PROCESS OF PICKING 44% 11.76% 46.67%
PALLETIZATION INSTRUCTIONS AVAILABLE IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN 57% 72.55% 72% 77.05%
IDENTIFICATION OF PACKING WITH INK INJECTORS OR LABELS 31% 56.20%
USE OF BAR CODES EAN 13 IN CONTAINERS 25% 90.60%
USE OF BAR CODES EAN 128 IN PACKING AND LOAD UNITS 55% 53.59% 40.60% 35.38%
USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE (EDI) WITH CLIENTS 40% 36.36% 30.77%
USE OF ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE (EDI) WITH SUPPLIERS 29% 16.75% 47.40% 29.23%
EVALUATION/ APPLICATION OF
COMPANIES
GOOD ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES
TYPOLOGY
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
FLOW REQUIREMENTS
INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
PURCHASE AND SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
GOOD DESIGN
PRACTICES
LOGISTICAL REQUIREMENTS
PROTECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
PRODUCTIVE REQUIREMENTS
EFFICENT FLOW REQUIREMENTS
Table 5. The “Best Practices” in packaging design in the Spanish food supply chain
Other practices of less strategic importance, but whose level of importance for companies and or
level of implantation is lower, is the use of the technique LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) in the
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
packaging design, the use of non-crossed palletization, the use of computer tools that give
support to the process of picking in packing companies, the use of the bar code EAN 128 in the
load units and in packing and the use of electronic interchange of data with clients and suppliers
(in the latter case, only for packing companies).
Conclusions
The marked competitive surroundings in which companies develop their activities in, especially
those belonging to the food sector, make that they should carry out actions to improve the
standards of quality, service and cost that they have on offer in the market. This need has some
important implications in the design, development and implementation of packaging. In this, the
increase of complexity in the management of the supply chain and in the chain of
commercialization of products has not gone hand in hand with a change in the management of the
design of packaging.
Along these lines, the model proposed in this paper, presented from a comprehensive perspective
of the supply chain, permits us to connect strategic proposals and the operative activities in the
packaging designing process, identifying, at the same time, the opportunities for improvement in
companies that leads to an improvement of its competitiveness. This model fills an existing space
at an academic level in the analysis of the consequences that packaging has in the correct
functioning of the supply chain.
Thus, granted that it is very difficult that a sole business area or company contributes different
views points associated to the design, development and implantation of packaging (meaning the
protective, commercial, productive, logistic and environmental focus), it seems reasonable that a
formal systematic exists, so that in a consensual form, this process is tackled. In this process, not
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
only the internal company departments should participate but, packaging manufacturers should
also actively take part and the actual commercial distribution (clients) should take part in
consonance with the initiative JIT and ECR.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
PA
CK
ER
S
DIS
TRIB
UTO
RS
PA
CK
AG
ING
MA
NU
FA
CT
UR
ER
S
ME
AN
DIS
TR
IBU
TIO
N P
LA
TFO
RM
RE
TA
IL O
UT
LE
T
3.97 3.93 3,7 3,7 Image and promotion of sales1 1 7.4 (a)
3.97 3.93 3,7 3,7 Sales 1 1 1 11.13.97 3.93 3,7 3,7 Ergonomics for the user (facility of use)
1 1 7.43.97 3.93 3,7 3,7 costs of design and development of packaging 1 1 7.43.97 3.93 3,7 3,7 Costs of breakage and claims 1 1 1 1 15.33.25 3.04 3,56 3,56 Environmental impact of packaging 1 1 1 1 1 17.83.25 3.04 3,56 3,56 Cost of waste management (reverse logistics) 1 1 1 9.93.75 3,89 3,89 productive flexibility manufacture of packaging
1 3.893.75 3,89 3,89 Manufacturing costs of packaging 1 3.893.75 3,89 3,89 Package and packing costs 1 3.893.75 3,89 3,89 Flexibility of the packing and package process 1 3.894.3 4.03 4,27 4,27 Protection of products 1 1 1 1 17.14.3 4.03 4,27 4,27 Abilility to pile 1 1 1 1 17.14.3 4.03 4,27 4,27 stability 1 1 1 1 17.14.3 4.03 4,27 4,27 Weight of packging 1 1 1 1 17.1
3.55 3.62 3,89 3,89Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture ofpackaging 1 3.89
3.55 3.62 3,89 3,89 Costs of raw materials for packaging 1 3.893.55 3.62 3,89 3,89 Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture of
packaging 1 3.893.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Cost of packaging 1 1 7.783.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Cost of supply of packaging
1 3.893.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 logistic cost of finished product to client (manipulation,
storage, transportation) 1 1 1 1 15.63.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Efficiency in picking 1 1 1 11.73.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 efficiency in manipulation to shelf 1 3.893.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Use of shelves´ retail outlet
1 3.893.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Height of unit loads 1 1 1 11.7
INFORMATION 3.55 3.62 3.89 3,89 Efficiente logistics identification & information 1 1 1 1 1 19.5
"SER" = MEAN * (NUMBERS OF "1")
EFFECTS STAGE OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN
TH
IRD
PA
RT
Y L
OG
IST
ICS
DISTRIBUTOR
PAC
KE
R
PAC
KA
GIN
G M
AN
UFA
CT
UR
ER
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
LOGISTIC REQUIREMENTS PURCHASE AND SUPPLY
EFFICIENT FLOW
PRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS
STR
AT
EG
IC E
VA
LU
AT
ION
OF
RE
QU
IRE
ME
NT
(SE
R)
IMPORTANCE OF REQUIREMENTS OF DESIGN
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS
FLOW REQUIREMENTS
DESCRIPTION
Table 3. Improving opportunities in the design of packaging in the supply chain of the Spanish food sector (a)
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
Image and promotion of sales 7.4 (a) 1 (a) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Sales 11.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ergonomics for the user (facility of use) 7.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1costs of design and development of packaging 7.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Costs of breakage and claims 15.3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Environmental impact of packaging 17.8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Cost of waste management (reverse logistics) 9.9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1productive flexibility manufacture of packaging 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Manufacturing costs of packaging 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Package and packing costs 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Flexibility of the packing and package process 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Protection of products 17.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Abilility to pile 17.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1stability 17.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Weight of packging 17.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture ofpackaging 3.89
1 1 1 1 1 1 1Costs of raw materials for packaging 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Supply reliability of raw materials for manufacture ofpackaging 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Cost of packaging 7.78 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Cost of supply of packaging 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1logistic cost of finished product t o client (manipulation,storage, transportation)
15.6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Efficiency in picking 11.7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1efficiency in manipulation to shelf 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Use of shelves´ retail outlet 3.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Height of unit loads 11.7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Efficiente logistics identification & information 19.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
239,987 225,24 195,16 239,987 206,54 141,5 53,953333 56,84 49,1067 52,9733 48,3867 169,447 52,6 52,6 102 82,6667 101,1 104,787 45,1333 33,8067 131,107 26,0733 209,593 122,517 146,067 107,753 191,567 93,0067 119,8 64,1067 52,5133 115,24 83,4267 61,3067
100 94 81 100 86 68 26 27 23 25 23 81 25 25 49 39 48 50 22 16 63 12 100 58 70 51 91 44 57 31 25 55 40 29
ABSOLUTE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF THE BEST PRACTICE (SER (a)* BEST PRACTICE (a)+…)
RELATIVE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF THE BEST PRACTICE (% OF THE HIGHEST ABSOLUTE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF THE CATEGORY- ORGANIZATIONAL OR DESIGN)
US
E O
F E
LEC
TR
ON
IC D
AT
A IN
TE
RC
HA
NG
E
(ED
I) W
ITH
CLI
EN
TS
US
E O
F E
LEC
TR
ON
IC D
AT
A IN
TE
RC
HA
NG
E
(ED
I) W
ITH
SU
PP
LIE
RS
PROTECTIVE REQUIREMENTS PURCHASE AND SUPPLY REQUIREMENTS
EFFICENT FLOW REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
PA
LLE
TIZA
TIO
N I
NS
TRU
CTI
ON
S A
VA
ILA
BLE
IN
TH
E S
UP
PLY
CH
AIN
IDE
NT
IFIC
AT
ION
OF
PA
CK
ING
WIT
H IN
K
INJE
CTO
RS
OR
LA
BE
LS
US
E O
F B
AR
CO
DE
S E
AN
13
IN C
ON
TAIN
ER
S
US
E O
F B
AR
CO
DE
S E
AN
128
IN
PA
CK
ING
A
ND
LO
AD
UN
ITS
(A
CC
OD
ING
TO
RA
L)
DESCRIPTION
STR
AT
EG
IC E
VA
LU
AT
ION
OF
RE
QU
IRE
ME
NT
(SE
R)
GOOD ORGANIZATIONAL PRACTICES
GOOD DESIGN PRACTICES
DO
CU
ME
NTA
TIO
N O
F TH
E D
ES
IGN
PR
OC
ES
S
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
US
E O
F C
OM
PU
TE
R T
OO
LS IN
TH
E D
ES
IGN
O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
CO
OR
DIN
AT
ION
BE
TW
EE
N B
US
INE
SS
AR
EA
S
IN T
HE
DE
SIG
N O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
FLE
XIB
LE S
YS
TE
MS
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
CO
NTE
MP
LATE
TH
E E
FFE
CT
OF
PR
OM
OT
ION
S O
N T
HE
DE
SIG
N O
F
PA
CK
AG
ING
PR
OO
F O
F C
OM
ME
RC
IAL
AC
CE
PT
AN
CE
IN
TH
E M
AR
KE
T O
F N
EW
PA
CK
AG
ING
US
E O
F L
CA
TE
CH
NIQ
UE
IN T
HE
DE
SIG
N O
F
PA
CK
AG
ING
PLA
N F
OR
PR
EV
EN
TIO
N O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
WA
STE
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
PR
OT
EC
TIO
N O
F U
NIT
LO
AD
(C
OR
NE
R
BR
AC
KE
TS
, S
EP
AR
AT
ING
SH
EE
TS
,...)
KN
OW
LED
GE
OF
PR
OD
UC
TIV
E P
RO
BLE
MS
O
F M
AN
UF
AC
TU
RE
RS
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
AN
D
PA
CK
ER
S
DO
CU
ME
NT
ED
SP
EC
IFIC
AT
ION
S O
F T
HE
Q
UA
LITY
OF
MA
TER
IALS
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
EF
FIC
EN
T A
ND
AU
TO
MA
TIC
SY
ST
EM
S O
F
PA
CK
AG
ING
PR
OO
F O
F R
ES
IST
AN
CE
IN
TH
E M
AR
KE
T O
F
NE
W P
AC
KA
GIN
G
NO
N-C
RO
SS
ED
PA
LLE
TIZ
AT
ION
DE
FIN
ITIO
N O
F M
AX
IMU
M W
EIG
HT
OF
UN
IT
LOAD
"GR
EE
N S
PO
T" I
N P
AC
KA
GIN
G
EX
CH
AN
GE
OF
PA
LLE
TS
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
LOGISTIC REQUIREMENTS
PRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS
FLOW REQUIREMENTS
COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS PRODUCTIVE REQUIREMENTS
CO
LLA
BO
RA
TIO
N W
ITH
DIS
TR
IBU
TO
RS
IN
THE
DE
SIG
N O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
CO
LLA
BO
RA
TIO
N W
ITH
MA
NU
FA
CT
UR
ER
S
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
IN IT
S D
ES
IGN
DE
FIN
ITIO
N O
F M
AX
IMU
M H
EIG
HT
OF
LO
AD
U
NIT
EF
FIC
IEN
CY
OF
VO
LUM
EN
AN
D/O
R W
EIG
HT
O
F U
NIT
LO
AD
AN
D P
AC
KA
GIN
G
US
E O
F C
OM
PU
TE
R T
OO
LS IN
TH
E P
RO
CE
SS
O
F P
ICK
ING
US
E O
F E
UR
PA
LLE
T
PU
RC
HA
SE
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
TH
RO
UG
H A
B
UY
ING
OF
FIC
E
KN
OW
LED
GE
OF
"AE
CO
C
RE
CO
MM
EN
DA
TIO
NS
FO
R L
OG
IST
ICS
"
PA
CK
AG
ING
DIM
EN
SIO
NS
IN A
CC
OR
DA
NC
E
WIT
H M
OD
ULE
600
*400
mm
ST
AN
DA
RD
IZA
TIO
N O
F F
OR
MA
TS
AN
D
QU
ALI
TY
OF
PA
CK
AG
ING
RE
US
E O
F P
AC
KA
GIN
G
Table 3. Improving opportunities in the design of packaging in the supply chain of the Spanish food sector (b)
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
References
AECOC (Asociación Española de Codificación Comercial) (1996), “Recomendaciones
AECOC para la Logística”, AECOC, Barcelona.
Bañegil, T. M., Rubio, S. y Miranda, F. J. (2001): “El sistema de logística inversa en la
empresa”, Libro de ponencias del XI Congreso Nacional de ACEDE.
Bjärnemo, R., Jönson, G. and Jonhsson, M. (2000), “Packaging Logistics in product
development”, The 5 th. International Conference on Compueter Integrated Manufacturing
(ICCIM, 2000).
Camp, R.C. (1989): Benchmarking: the Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to
Superior Performance. Milwaukee: Quality Press.
Cervera, A.L. (1997), “Envase y Embalaje”, Ed. ESIC, Barcelona (Spain).
Cooper, M.C.; Lambert, D.M. y Pagh, J.D. (1997): “Supply Chain Management: more than a
New Name for Logistics”, Interna tional Journal of Logistics Management”, Vol.8 Nº1, pp. 1-
14.
Cristopher, M. (1994), “ Logística y aprovisionamientos”, Ed. Folio, Barcelona (Spain)
DULOG (1997), “Handling Costs in the Swedish Grocery Retail Industry”, DULOG,
Dagligvaruhandlarnas Utvecklings och Logis tikgrupp, Sweden.
Henriksson, L. (1998) “Packaging requirements in the Swedish retail trade”, Lund University,
pp. 11- 19.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
Johansson, K., Lorentzon, A., Olsmats C., Tiliander L. (1997) “Packaging Logistics”, Ed.
Packforsk (Sweden).
Jonhsson, M., (1998) “Packaging Logistics – a value added approach”, Lund University.
Kurt Salmon Associates, Inc. (1993), “Efficient Consumer Response: Enhancing consumer
value in the grocery industry”, Ed. Food Marketing Institute, Washington D.C.
Lancioni, R.A.; Chandran, R. (1990), “The role of packaging in International Logistics”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistic Management, nº. 8, pp. 41-43.
Larson, P. y Halldorsson, A. (2004): “Logistics Versus Supply Chain Management: An
International Survey”, International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 7,
No. 1.
Leidecker, J.K. and Bruno, A.V. (1984): “Identifying and Using Critical Success Factors”,
Long Range Planning, Vol.17 Nº1.
Lindhqvist T. (2000): “Extended producer responsibility in cleaner production: Policy
principle to promote environmental improvements of product systems”, Ph, Dissertation,
International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics.
Macneil, J.; Testi, J.; Cupples, J. y Rimmer, M. (1994): Benchmarking Australia. Australia:
Longman.
Mentzer, J., De Witt, W., Keebler, J., Min S., Nancy, W., Smith, C., zacharia, Z.(2001),
“Defining Supply Chain Management”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22, Issue 2, pp 1-
25
Paine, F.A., (1991) “The Packaging User’s Handbook”, Blackie Academic & Professional.
2nd World Conference on POM and 15th POM Conference Cancun, Mexico, April 30-May 3, 2004
Porter, M. (1982), “Competitive Advantage”, CECSA, México.
Roberston, G.L. (1990), “Good and bad packaging: Who decides?” International Journal of
Physical Distribution and Logistic Management, nº. 8, pp. 37-40
Saghir, M., (2002), “Packaging Logistics Evaluation in the Swedish retail supply Chain”,
Lund University.
Santhouse, D. (1999): “Benchmarking”, in WATERS, D. (Ed.): Global Logistics and
Distribution Planning. Strategies for Management, 3ª Ed. London: Kogan Page.
Stock, J.R. and Lambert, D.M. (2001) “Strategic Logistics Management”, 4a Ed, Boston,
Irwin/McGraw- Hill.
The Council of Logistics Management (2002); www.clm1.org
Torrado, J. (2003), “La importancia del Envase y el Embalaje en el Grupo Calvo”, X Curso
Superior de Logística, Universidad de Vigo (Spain).
Twede, D. (2000), “ Logistics Issues in returnable Packaging”, Packaging Logistics Review,
EDITA, Finland, pp 35-55.
(1994), “Directiva 94/62/CE del Parlamento y del Consejo sobre envases y residuos de
envases, Diario Oficial nº L365
(1997), “Ley 11/1997, de 24 de Abril , de Envases y Residuos de Envases”, Boletín Oficial
del Estado, nº. 99, pp. 13270-13277.
Top Related