Thematic Section - Production Engineering leading the Digital Transformation

A framework for logistics performance indicators selection and targets definition: a civil construction enterprise case

Liége Natálya Götz; Francielly Hedler Staudt; Jorge Luiz Gayotto de Borba; Marina Bouzon

Downloads: 0
Views: 26


Paper aims: This paper proposes a roadmap framework based on a literature review to choose the most proper indicators and targets for a given logistics process derived from the organization's strategic goals.

Originality: One of the many benefits from the introduction of technologies and the digitization of logistics processes is the acquisition of a great amount of data, which is a valuable asset for an efficient management. In order to transform this data into useful information, most companies rely on performance indicators. In this sense, this paper proposes a roadmap framework based on previous works to guide managers on how to choose a set of indicators that are linked to the company’s targets. To the best of our knowledge, no previous research has proposed a framework dealing with target definitions based on historical data and previous standards or benchmarking, as well as the logistics indicators choice based on the representation theory.

Research method: In order to elaborate the framework, a two-step structured literature review was carried out, combined with a case application. The literature review included steps based on the works of Govindan & Bouzon (2018) and Moher et al. (2009). The Scopus and the Web of Science databases were selected to gather material to base this study. The framework was applied in a Brazilian construction enterprise, located in Joinville city, Southern Brazil.

Main findings: The framework application showed that the methodology can facilitate the selection of indicators linked with the company’s strategic goals. Additionally, the indicators legitimation process with managers, a step from the framework, showed that managers' knowledge about the company’s processes is essential for a successful logistics performance system implementation. However, the managers can be resistant to changes for new indicators, and this situation should be avoided during the legitimation process. Future studies may expand the methodology application to other areas than logistics, and future applications of the framework in a Logistics 4.0 environment should provide more insights for the model.

Implications for theory and practice: From a theoretical perspective, a complete table of logistics performance indicators is provided, as well as the framework for indicators and target definition. From a practical panorama, the framework application shows that practitioners can use this study as a guide to develop more effective logistics performance measurement systems. Moreover, concluding remarks on the relationship between digital transformation and performance measurement systems are provided.


Logistics performance measurement, Indicators targets, Indicators properties, Digitalization, Literature review


Andrejić, M., Bojovic, N., & Kilibarda, M. (2013). Benchmarking distribution centres using principal component analysis and data envelopment analysis: a case study of Serbia. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3926-3933.

Bajec, P., & Tuljak-Suban, D. (2019). An integrated analytic hierarchy process slack based measure-data envelopment analysis model for evaluating the efficiency of logistics service providers considering undesirable performance criteria. Sustainability, 11(8), 2330.

Barbosa, D. H., & Musetti, M. A. (2010). The use of performance measurement system in logistics change process: proposal of a guide. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 4, 339-359.

Benvenuti, F., Diamantini, C., Potena, D., & Storti, E. (2017). An ontology-based framework to support performance monitoring in public transport systems. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 81, 188-208.

Bowersox, D. J., & Closs, D. J. (2011). Logistical management: the supply chain integration process (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Braz, R. G. F., Scavarda, L. F., & Martins, R. A. (2011). Reviewing and improving performance measurement systems: an action research. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 751-760.

Clivillé, V., Berrah, L., & Mauris, G. (2007). Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the Macbeth multicriteria method. International Journal of Production Economics, 105(1), 171-189.

Dev, N. K., Shankar, R., Gupta, R., & Dong, J. (2019). Multi-criteria evaluation of real-time key performance indicators of supply chain with consideration of big data architecture. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 128, 1076-1087.

Domingues, M. L., Reis, V., & Macário, R. (2015). A comprehensive framework for measuring performance in a third-party logistics provider. Transportation Research Procedia, 10, 662-672.

Dörnhöfer, M., Schröder, F., & Günthner, W. A. (2016). Logistics performance measurement system for the automotive industry. Logistics Research, 9(1), 11.

Fink, A. (2001). Conducting research literature reviews. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Folan, P., & Browne, J. (2005). A review of performance measurement: towards performance management. Computers in Industry, 56(7), 663-680.

Forslund, H., & Jonsson, P. (2010). Integrating the performance management process of on-time delivery with suppliers. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 13(3), 225-241.

Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2008). Properties of performance indicators in operations management. International Journal of Productivity, 57(2), 137-155.

Garcia, F. A., Marchetta, M. G., Camargo, M., Morel, L., & Forradellas, R. Q. (2012). A framework for measuring logistics performance in the wine industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(1), 284-298.

Giessner, S. R., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). “License to fail”: goal definition, leader group prototypicality, and perceptions of leadership effectiveness after leader failure. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105(1), 14-35.

Gong, K., & Yan, H. (2015). Performance measurement of logistics service supply chain using bijective soft set. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, 14(1), 23-40.

Govindan, K., & Bouzon, M. (2018). From a literature review to a multi-perspective framework for reverse logistics barriers and drivers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 318-337.

Gutierrez, D. M., Scavarda, L. F., Fiorencio, L., & Martins, R. A. (2015). Evolution of the performance measurement system in the logistics department of a broadcasting company: an action research. International Journal of Production Economics, 160, 1-12.

Helena, S. T., Camargo, V. R. S., Amaral, T. V. B., Szejka, A. L., Leite, A. F. C. S. M., & Canciglieri, M. B. (2022). Interoperable data extraction and information enrichment system to support smart manufacturing: an experimental application on CNC machining lines of a healthcare product. Production, 32, e20210058.

Irfani, D. P., Wibisono, D., & Basri, M. H. (2019). Logistics performance measurement framework for companies with multiple roles. Measuring Business Excellence, 23(2), 93-109.

Izhar, T. A. D., & Apduhan, B. (2020). Towards ontology based data extraction for organizational goals metrics indicator. Computational Science and its Applications, 12252, 261-276.

Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., Ghadge, A., & Raut, R. (2020). A performance measurement system for industry 4.0 enabled smart manufacturing system in SMMEs: a review and empirical investigation. International Journal of Production Economics, 229, 107853.

Keebler, J. S., & Plank, R. E. (2009). Logistics performance measurement in the supply chain: a benchmark. Benchmarking, 16(6), 785-798.

Kiisler, A., Solakivi, T., & Hilmola, O.-P. (2020). Estonian logistics market 2018 survey: analysis and findings. LogForum, 16(3), 409-420.

Kritchanchai, D., Hoeur, S., & Engelseth, P. (2018). Develop a strategy for improving healthcare logistics performance. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 19(1), 55-69.

Lai, K.-H., Ngai, E. W. T., & Cheng, T. C. E., & (2002). Measures for evaluating supply chain performance in transport logistics. Transportation Research, 38(6), 439-456.

Lewis, M., & Slack, N. (2015). Operations strategy. Harlow: Pearson.

Lohman, C., Fortuin, L., & Wouters, M. (2004). Designing a performance measurement system: a case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 267-286.

Lopes, M. A., & Martins, R. A. (2021). Mapping the impacts of industry 4.0 on performance measurement systems. IEEE Latin America Transactions, 19(11), 1912-1923.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. PMid:19621072.

Moons, K., Waeyenbergh, G., Pintelon, L., Timmermans, P., & Ridder, D. D. (2019). Performance indicator selection for operating room supply chains: an application of ANP. Operations Research for Health Care, 23, 100229.

Neely, A. (2005). The evolution of performance measurement research – developments in the last decade and a research agenda for the next. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(12), 1264-1277.

Olugu, E. U., Wong, K. Y., & Shaharoun, A. M. (2011). Development of key performance measures for the automobile green supply chain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(6), 567-579.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Johnson, R. B., & Collins, K. M., & (2009). A call for mixed analysis: a philosophical framework for combining qualitative and quantitative. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(2), 114-139.

Parmenter, D. (2007). Key performance indicators: developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs. Weinheim: Wiley.

Rafele, C. (2004). Logistic service measurement: a reference framework. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 15(3), 280-290.

Schmidt, M., Maier, J. T., & Härtel, L. (2019). Data based root cause analysis for improving logistic key performance indicators of a company’s internal supply chain. Procedia CIRP, 86, 276-281.

Schmitt, N. (2002). An introduction to applied linguistics. London: Routledge.

Shaik, M. N., & Abdul-Kader, W. (2014). Comprehensive performance measurement and causal-effect decision making model for reverse logistics enterprise. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 68, 87-103.

Staudt, F. H. (2015). Global warehouse management: a methodology to determine an integrated performance measurement (Doctoral dissertation). Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble. Retrieved in 25 January 2023, from

Staudt, F. H., Alpan, G., Mascolo, M., & Rodriguez, C. M. T. (2015). Warehouse performance measurement: a literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5524-5544.

Taschner, A. (2016). Management and cost accounting by Andreas Taschner. Weinheim: Wiley.

Teuteberg, F., Kluth, M., Ahlemann, F., & Smolnik, S. (2013). Semantic process benchmarking to improve process performance. Benchmarking, 20(4), 484-511.

Thunberg, M., & Persson, F. (2014). Using the SCOR model’s performance measurements to improve construction logistics. Production Planning and Control, 25(13-14), 1065-1078.

Wang, Y., Potter, A., Mason, R., & Naim, M. (2008). Aligning transport performance measures with customised retail logistics: a structured method and its application. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 11(6), 457-473.

Wu, Y., & Dong, M. (2008). Combining multi-class queueing networks and inventory models for performance analysis of multi-product manufacturing logistics chains. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 37(5-6), 564-575.

Wudhikarn, R., Chakpitak, N., & Neubert, G. (2018). A literature review on performance measures of logistics management: an intellectual capital perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 56(13), 4490-4520.

Ying, F., Tookey, J., & Seadon, J. (2018). Measuring the invisible: a key performance indicator for managing construction logistics performance. Benchmarking, 25(6), 1921-1934.

Submitted date:

Accepted date:

64086a98a95395305039fb65 production Articles
Links & Downloads


Share this page
Page Sections