SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  23
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
                                                 www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm




BIJ
18,3                                   A comparative study of dates
                                     export supply chain performance:
                                       the case of Oman and Tunisia
386
                                                                                 Msafiri Mbaga
                                                        Natural Resource Economics Department,
                                          College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University,
                                                                     Muscat, Oman
                                                         Mohammed Suleiman Rashid Al-Shabibi
                                                            Ministry of Agriculture, Muscat, Oman, and
                                                    Houcine Boughanmi and Slim Mohamed Zekri
                                                        Natural Resource Economics Department,
                                          College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University,
                                                                     Muscat, Oman

                                     Abstract
                                     Purpose – The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach to the
                                     dates export supply chain (DESC) in Oman and Tunisia (taking Tunisia as a benchmark) to identify
                                     gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries. Second, is to
                                     utilize the information generated to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC.
                                     Design/methodology/approach – Four benchmarking dimensions are developed, each dimension
                                     with a number of key performance indicators (KPIs). The KPIs are then used in the benchmarking exercise.
                                     Findings – Results show that Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the four dimensions.
                                     Originality/value – The study enables the readers and the stakeholders to gain some valuable
                                     insights in the subject matter. A careful analysis of the findings should enable Oman policy makers
                                     and stakeholders to produce an industry action plan to correct the gaps and take the lead.
                                     Keywords Sultanate of Oman, Tunisia, Exports, Performance criteria, Benchmarking
                                     Paper type Research paper

                                     1. Introduction
                                     The date industry is an important component of the Oman economy and date is a leading
                                     cash crop. According to the 2005 census, there are an estimated 7.8 million date palm
                                     trees grown throughout the Sultanate, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area,
                                     employing a significant number of Omani people directly and indirectly. Statistics
                                     shows that in 2006 the Sultanate ranked ninth in the world in date production far behind
                                     its neighbors such as Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (Table I).
                                     Date production has been declining since 2001, the year date production reached its
                                     highest level in the Sultanate in recent years (FAO, 2008). Export disincentives which
Benchmarking: An International       include poor quality output, absence of a well-coordinated supply chain and lack of
Journal                              aggressive export promotion, together with the 2002-2004 drought, have been widely
Vol. 18 No. 3, 2011
pp. 386-408                          recognized as being the reasons behind the decline in date production.
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited       Based on Table I, we see that Oman and Tunisia have consistently ranked ninth and
1463-5771
DOI 10.1108/14635771111137778        tenth, respectively, among the ten leading date producers in the world. However, even
Dates export
                     1997      1998      1999     2000    2001      2002    2003      2004      2005      2006
                                                                                                                      supply chain
    World            4,966     5,447     5,624    6,172   6,503     6,724   6,653   7,092       6,682     6,704
 1. Egypt              741       840       906    1,007   1,102     1,090   1,100   1,166       1,170     1,170
 2. Iran               877       918       908      900     900       879     885     880         997       997
 3. Saudi Arabia       649       648       712      712     712       830     884     901         970       970
 4. Iraq               750       913       764      932     907       866     868     875         404       404                    387
 5. UAE                288       290       535      757     757       757     757     760         859       859
 6. Pakistan           537       722       580      613     630       625     630     622         497       507
 7. Algeria            303       387       428      366     370       418     492     470         516       491
 8. Sudan              180       200       240      332     330       330     330     330         328       328
 9. Oman               185       236       282      280     298       239     220     231         247       259
10. Tunisia             95       103       103      105     112       115     111     122         125       125
                                                                                                                                Table I.
Note: 1,000 tons                                                                                                           Main countries
Source: FAO Statistics                                                                                                    producing dates


though Tunisia ranked tenth in terms of date production, the country ranked fourth
(Table II) in terms of date export volume. Furthermore, Tunisia ranked first and third
with regard to date export value and date export unit value, respectively. In 2005, for
example (Table II), while Tunisia exported 50,180 metric tons (40 percent of its
production) at a price of US$2,008 per metric ton, Oman managed to export only 4,090
metric tons (1.65 percent of its production) at a price of US$290 per metric ton.
    It is therefore clear from that Tunisia is performing better than other countries in the
region in terms of export unit value and export value. In addition, even though Tunisia
accounts for only 2 percent of world dates production, its share of global exports in value
is around 30 percent (FAO and Table I).
    Given that an estimated 7.8 million date palm trees are grown throughout the
Sultanate of Oman, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area, one would have
expected Oman to be a leading date producer and exporter in the region. Statistics
presented above, however, show that Oman is lagging behind in terms of date export
volume and export value, while Tunisia is leading (Table II).

  Country          Volume (Mt)         Country      Value (6,000 US$)       Country          Unit value (US$)

 1. Iran             117,060           Tunisia            100,769           Israel                4,480
 2. Pakistan          84,060           Iran                68,495           USA                   3,188
 3. Saudia            51,450           Israel              40,836           Tunisia               2,008
 4. Tunisia           50,180           Saudia              32,456           Algeria               1,702
 5. UAE               23,880           Pakistan            29,775           Jordan                  942
 6. Algeria           10,860           Algeria             18,492           Saudia                  635
 7. Israel             9,120           USA                 13,723           Iran                    585
 8. Egypt              8,880           UAE                  8,830           Egypt                   551
 9. USA                4,300           Egypt                4,893           UAE                     370
10. Oman               4,090           Jordan               2,155           Pakistan                354                         Table II.
11. Jordan             2,290           Oman                 1,184           Oman                    290              Dates export volume,
                                                                                                                     value and unit value
Note: Volume multiplied by unit value may not be exactly equal to total export value because of                    for the main exporting
rounding                                                                                                          countries based on 2005
Source: FAO Statistics                                                                                                           statistics
BIJ                      Furthermore, for the last nine years (2001-2009) as indicated in Table III, the internal
18,3                     consumption (IC) of dates in Oman was only 49 percent of total dates production,
                         This leaves 51 percent of dates produced in Oman potentially available for export.
                         Therefore, there is a need for benchmarking so as to find ways to improve the dates
                         export supply chain (DESC) in Oman. Based on these facts, Tunisia is taken as a
                         benchmark or best practice among date-producing countries.
388                          The purpose of this study is therefore two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking
                         approach employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia (Tunisia as a
                         benchmark) so as to identify gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the
                         export supply chain in the two countries. Second, is to utilize the information generated
                         (regarding the gaps) to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. This paper
                         is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a description of the DESC in Oman and Tunisia.
                         Section 3 reviews the literature on benchmarking and supply chain. Section 4 presents the
                         methodology and includes the various key performance indicators (KPIs) used to identify
                         and quantify gaps in Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs. Section 5 presents the results
                         and discussion. Lastly, Section 6 presents the conclusions and policy recommendations.

                         2. A description of Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs
                         2.1 Oman DESC
                         For the purpose of this paper, dates supply chain (DSC) is defined as the various stages
                         through which dates are channelled starting from farm until it reaches the consumers.
                         Generally, the DSC includes three main stages:
                            (1) production and harvesting;
                            (2) initial processing at farm level, processing and packaging at factory level and
                                transport to the port; and
                            (3) handling of dates at the international markets by wholesalers, retailers and
                                consumers.

                         DESC, therefore, can be defined as steps through which dates undergoes, starting from
                         post-harvest until dates arrives at the port of the exporting country. Stage two in
                         the DSC is more or less the DESC itself. Activities in stages one and two of the DSC are
                         performed in the exporting country – in this case Oman and Tunisia. Stage three
                         activities are performed in the importing country.
                            The marketing channels are a set of interdependent organizations involved in the
                         process of making a product or service available for use or consumption. The DESC
                         in Oman is one of the marketing channels that include: initial processing at farm level,

                         Item                       2001   2002    2003   2004       2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   2010a

                         TP                          298    239    220     231       252    259    261    267    273    280
                         IC                          123    125    118     120       123    127    132    134    133    135
                         Export                       13      9      9       5         5      5      9      7      7      9
                         Excess                      162    105     93     106       124    127    120    126    133    136
Table III.               IC as a percentage of TP     41     52     54      52        49     49     51     50     49     48
Oman dates production,
consumption an export,   Note: aIndicate a forecast for 2010 based on a time trend
2001-2010                Source: Ministry of Agriculture (Statistics Department)
processing and packaging at factory level and transportation to the port. Generally,                 Dates export
it is how the dates are produced, sorted, graded, processed, packaged and transported                supply chain
that determines their final export market value. Furthermore, safety and quality
management of dates along the DESC plays a very important role in the determination of
their final market value. Currently, there are around four dates factories (exporters) in
Oman beside several small processing units mostly for local consumption.
                                                                                                            389
2.2 Tunisian DESC
Tunisia is the world-leading producer of Deglet-Nour date variety and most of the
dates-producing oases are concentrated in the Southern part of the country. Tunisia
possesses approximately 50 percent of the world’s Deglet-Nour palm trees. The official
production figure in 2006 was 125,000 tons for all varieties, of which about two-thirds
were Deglet-Nour. The dates export sector in Tunisia is ranked third at export level after
olive oil and seafood products. Dates production in Tunisia is characterised by five types
of date varieties: Deglet-Nour, Allig, Khouat Allig, Kenta and Farmla. But Deglet-Nour is
the most popularly produced variety and better appreciated as a noble variety because of
its quality and flavour. Significant investments in modern Deglet-Nour plantations and
an aggressive marketing strategy have led to a steady increase in exports. While exports
ranged between 15,000 and 20,000 tons in the first half of the 1990s, exports reached
25,000 and 50,180 tons in 2000 and 2005, respectively.
    Dates destined for the export market are treated in more than 30 processing factories
registered for exports. Dates export account for about 40 percent of total production (TP).
Although Tunisia accounts for only 2 percent of world date production, the country
ranks first in terms of export value and fourth in terms of export quantity (Table III). This
is mainly due to the high market value of the Deglet-Nour variety, a good quality product,
well appreciated in foreign markets, leading to higher market share. In general, Tunisia
is well positioned in high-value markets with high purchasing power. Compared to its
direct competitors, Tunisia represents 55 percent of EU imports in value. Tunisian dates
are mainly exported to European countries accounting for more than 81 percent of total
date imports and other Arab countries in second position with 15 percent of total date
imports. Around 70 percent of Tunisian dates exports are processed dates. Tunisia’s top
20 clients in the international markets during 2005 are as presented in Table IV.
    The DESC in Tunisia is organized into somewhat comprehensive and complex
marketing channels. All the agents are involved: producers, collectors, conditioners,
exporters, wholesalers, etc. As most of these market participants operate individually and
independently, it is difficult to monitor and control their actions. As a result, it is difficult to
provide an estimate of the exact volumes of dates handled by each one. Date marketing
takes place mostly in the last quarter of the year (October to December), and during the
holy month of Ramadan. Given the strong tradition of date consumption in Tunisia, a large
share of production is consumed within the country and especially in the producing areas.
Dates for the domestic market are often bought by wholesalers and semi-wholesalers from
the collectors (Laajimi, 2002). Decisions concerning the distribution of dates between
export markets and domestic markets seem to be taken by collectors. They are the main
marketing agent in the supply chain. They ensure the supply of dates to wholesalers,
exporters and conditioning and packaging industries. Exports operations are undertaken
                                              ´´
either by foreign trade enterprises (Societes de Commerce International) or by the
conditioning and packaging industries – dates factories (Laajimi, 2002).
BIJ
                           Country                                                               Export quantity (tons)
18,3
                            1. France                                                                    16,601
                            2. Morocco                                                                    9,405
                            3. Italy                                                                      6,179
                            4. Spain                                                                      4,794
390                         5. Germany                                                                    4,095
                            6. Belgium                                                                    1,765
                            7. UK                                                                         1,700
                            8. Russia                                                                     1,388
                            9. Switzerland                                                                  909
                           10. Turkey                                                                       855
                           11. Indonesia                                                                    588
                           12. Senegal                                                                      533
                           13. Canada                                                                       492
                           14. Holland                                                                      476
                           15. Mauritania                                                                   407
                           16. Hungary                                                                      355
                           17. UAE                                                                          346
                           18. Malaysia                                                                     291
Table IV.                  19. Greece                                                                       257
Tunisia’s clients in the   20. Bosnia and Herzegovina                                                       233
international markets
during 2005                Source: GidF (2005)


                           3. Literature review
                           Benchmarking also known as “best practice benchmarking” is an approach used in
                           management and particularly strategic management, in which organizations evaluate
                           various aspects of their processes in relation to best practice, usually within the same
                           sector – for example, in this case, Tunisia and Oman in relation to DESC. This then
                           allows organizations to develop plans to adopt such best practice, usually with the aim
                           of improving their performance even beyond that of the best practice. Benchmarking
                           may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which
                           organizations continually seek to challenge their practices. The benchmarking process
                           is, therefore, valuable to producers and or companies in opening up many different
                           ideas about processes, approaches and concerns (Allan, 1997).
                               The benchmarking approach was first developed in the USA during the late 1970s by
                           Xerox Corporation. It has since then been an effective way of improving productivity
                           and competitiveness, and in fact today benchmarking has become a widely practiced
                           and generally accepted method of assessing performance. The benchmarking approach
                           is very versatile; it has been applied in many areas, from assessing public policy, as in
                           Helgason (1997); in the food industry, as in the UK Food and Drink National Training
                           Organisation (2001, 1998); in dairy, as in Anon (2005); in strategic planning in
                           agriculture, as in Ronan and Taylor (2004); in food and beverage, as in Deloitte (2009); in
                           grain supply chain, as in Barnes (2007); in food and drinks, as in Luther and Abdel-Kader
                           (2006); international competitiveness in agriculture, as in Thelwell and Ritson (2006);
                           in analyzing information flow to farmers, as in Verissimo and Woodford (2005); in
                           agriculture performance indicators, as in Wilson et al. (2004); in analyzing good
                           agricultural practices, as in UNCTAD (2005); in analyzing fruits and vegetable supply
chain, as in UNCTAD/WTO (2007); in the area of quality management and productivity               Dates export
improvement, as in UNIDO (2002); in agriculture in relation to fresh produce quality             supply chain
and safety management, as in Garcia and Poole (2003); in locating and leveraging
manufacturing best practices, as in Brandt and Taninecz (2004); in assessing microfinance
institutions across countries, as in Stephens (2004); in agriculture in relation to greenhouse
gas emissions, as in CLAN (2006); in assessing government organizations, as in Howard
and Kilmartin (2006); in evaluating and comparing the performance of federal agencies, as               391
in USDA (2008); in evaluating the sustainability performance of food supply chains, as in
Yakovleva et al. (2009) and many more.
    The process of benchmarking is more than just a means of gathering data on how well
a company performs against others. It is also a method of identifying new ideas and new
ways of improving processes to better meet the expectations of customers. According to
Omachonu and Ross (1994), the ultimate objective of benchmarking is process
improvements to meet and whenever possible exceed customer expectations.
Benchmarking as a methodological tool has been gaining attention among academics
and practitioners as a means of strengthening the ability to compete (Yasin, 2002). The
benchmarking approach has an internal dimension whereby an organization critically
examines itself in search of the best practice, as well as an external dimension whereby the
organization analyses its industry and other domains in an attempt to identify external
and competitive practices, which may be implemented in its operating environment
(Yasin, 2002). In this study, both the internal and external dimensions are implemented.
    To date, there is no single benchmarking process that has been universally adopted.
The wide appeal and acceptance of benchmarking has led to the emergence of various
benchmarking methodologies. The most prominent methodology is the 12-stage
methodology by Camp (1989), which consists of the following:
   (1) selection of the subject in advance;
   (2) clear definition of the process;
   (3) identification of the potential partners;
   (4) identification of data sources;
   (5) data collection from selected partners;
   (6) gap analysis;
   (7) establish process differences;
   (8) target future performance;
   (9) communicate;
  (10) adjust goal;
  (11) implement; and
  (12) review/recalibrate.

A shorter version of the methodology as proposed by Camp (1989) includes six steps,
namely:
  (1) identify problem areas;
  (2) identify other industries that have similar processes;
  (3) identify organizations that are leaders in these areas;
BIJ       (4) survey companies for measures and practices;
18,3      (5) visit the “best practice” companies to identify leading edge practices; and
          (6) implement new and improved business practices.

       Broadly, this shorter version will be adopted in this study.
           This study seeks to analyze the DESC in Tunisia and Oman in order to identify
392    gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries.
       The information generated will then be used to put forward recommendations to
       improve Omani DESC. Generally, supply chain encompasses all the facilities, functions
       and activities performed in the process of producing and delivering a service or a
       product (in this case dates) from suppliers to the final customer (Russell and Taylor,
       1998; Sparling and van Duren, 2003). More specifically, the concept of supply chain
       management (SCM) can be defined as collaboration among actors in a supply system,
       from the primary producer to the final retailer, with the aim of satisfying the consumer
       at lower costs possible. SCM in relation to agricultural commodities therefore focuses
       on improving efficiency and effectiveness in the system in order to deliver a wide range
       of safe and desirable agricultural products in a cost-effective manner.
           The performance of firms and the industry particularly with respect to food safety
       and quality standards is strongly influenced by the structural characteristics of the
       food chains, the strategies of individual firms and the level of coordination of the food
       system (Poole et al., 2002). With recent concerns regarding food-borne diseases, now
       food supply chains must be efficient, transparent and “traceable” as consumers expect
       to be able to trace each food item back to its earliest production stage. Traceability
       helps to increase consumer confidence on the product and hence value. Supply chains
       that are less flexible and inefficient, where supply chain processes and procedures
       cannot be upgraded very quickly, and products are not traceable, become a major
       impediment to trade (Garcia Martinez and Poole, 2003).
           Implicit in the benchmarking framework is the notion of gap analysis, namely, the
       difference between the level of operations in a given organization and that within a best
       practice company. Comparisons made within benchmarking are often about
       understanding the gap. Making comparisons against best practice or stated aims
       allows companies to assess the nature of the improvement that they have to make in
       order to catch or surpass world-class competitors. Analysis of gaps from base (current
       performance) to benchmark (current performance level of the best companies) helps
       companies to prioritize resource allocation (Balm, 1996).
           Identification of critical performance measures (or KPIs) and their comparison with
       similar performance measures of “Best in Class” organizations is at the heart of
       benchmarking (Bhutta and Huq, 1999). Identification of the proper measures is a
       fundamental part of the study as they represent the yardsticks, which tell people how
       well they have done, and as such motivates them to achieve higher targets (Zairi, 1994).
       The information sought in benchmarking usually consists of the following two parts:
          (1) qualitative business process descriptions; and
          (2) quantitative performance data used to determine the differences in performance
               levels among the companies being compared (Andersen et al., 1999).

       The next section shows how key benchmarking principles from the literature reviewed
       above have been utilized in this study.
4. Benchmarking methodological framework                                                              Dates export
In businesses today, it is commonplace to benchmark practices and performance against                 supply chain
other companies, both at home and abroad. Typically, firms aspire to best practice as a
yardstick, wherever this is feasible. This study applies the benchmarking approach
employed by Garcia et al. (2003) to analyze the DESC in Oman and Tunisia. The aim is to
identify gaps in the DESC taking Tunisia as the benchmark or the best practice. This
study, however, adds to the body of literature in that it goes beyond the Garcia et al.                        393
(2003) by incorporating some additional simple quantitative indicators to enrich the
analysis.

4.1 Development of benchmark measures
The identification and development of proper benchmark measures is a fundamental
part of benchmarking. Benchmark measures focus on dimensions of performance that
reflects a firm’s capabilities to meet current export supply chain demands by
international customers. In this study, these critical dimensions have been broadly
grouped into qualitative and quantitative groups. The qualitative group has been
further sub-divided into three dimensions. The quantitative group, however, has only
one dimension. Each of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. The
KPIs for dimensions 1-3 were developed to reflect the characteristics which describe
internal and external business behaviour of the firms in the industry. When compared
with “the best practice”, the KPIs will lead to the identification of a performance gap.
These KPIs will therefore be used to identify and quantify the performance gap between
Tunisia and Oman. Dimension 1 investigates how the export SCM practices are
coordinated in Oman and Tunisia. Table V presents a summary of KPIs that form
dimension 1. There are altogether eight KPIs for dimension 1.
   Dimension 2 looks at safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain in
Oman and Tunisia. Safety and quality of exports are very important ingredients as far
as the export business is concerned. Table VI presents a summary of KPIs that
represents dimension 2. There are altogether six KPIs for dimension 2.

Areas analysed         Key performance indicators

Coordination of the    Exporter-producer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the
export SCM practices   relationship in terms of communication of requirements, specifications and
                       regulations
                       Exporter-importer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the
                       relationship in terms of communication of the requirements, specifications
                       and regulations
                       Market orientation. This reflects the ability of exporter to predict customer
                       requirements
                       Production flexibility. This reflects the abilities of the exporter to meet
                       changing customer requirements
                       Customer orientation. Involves visits by customers to check and advise on
                       safety and quality practices throughout the production and export system
                       Vertical integration. Reflects the involvement of exporters in upstream and
                       /or downstream processes in the supply chain
                       Vertical coordination. The degree of co-ordination of operations in the
                       supply chain                                                                          Table V.
                       Traceability systems. The existence of documented traceability systems         Dimension 1 KPIs
BIJ
                   Areas analysed                   Key performance indicators
18,3
                   Safety and quality orientation   Quality certification. The level of certification obtained by the firm,
                   of the export supply chain       e.g. ISO, HACCP, etc.
                                                    Quality control specialists. The availability of specialists with the
                                                    required skills
394                                                 Training and knowledge. The availability of training for workers
                                                    Social responsibility. The exporter’s policies with respect to worker
                                                    health, safety and welfare
                                                    Environmental management. The exporter environmental
                                                    management policies and practices
Table VI.                                           Safety and quality requirements. Safety and quality specifications as
Dimension 2 KPIs                                    part of exporter-importer contracts or agreements


                   Dimension 3 analyzes the export operational infrastructures under which Oman and
                   Tunisian firms operate. Operational infrastructure for the purpose of this benchmarking
                   exercise include: processing and packaging quality and technology used; labelling
                   flexibility in processing and packaging in response to customer needs; storage
                   technology and storage capacity; and transport quality and technology. A good export
                   operational infrastructure is very important for the success of the export business.
                   Table VII presents a summary of KPIs that represents dimension 3. There are altogether
                   seven KPIs for dimension 3.
                      Dimension 4 tracks the efficiency of the export supply chain in Oman and Tunisia.
                   For the purpose of this benchmarking exercise, the efficiency of the export supply
                   chain is measured by four KPIs which include: profit per ton (PPT) exported; profit
                   per employee ratio; cost per ton exported and export intensity. Table VIII presents a
                   summary of the four KPIs that represents dimension 4.

                   4.2 Questionnaire design and data collection
                   To implement the benchmarking methodological framework presented in Tables V-VIII, a
                   questionnaire was developed to collect the required data and other relevant information.

                   Areas analysed            Key performance indicators

                   Export operational        Processing and packaging technology. The technology used in processing
                   infrastructure            and packaging operations
                                             Processing and packaging quality. The quality of processing and packaging
                                             materials used and the extent of operational flexibility available to meet
                                             customer requirements
                                             Labelling flexibility in processing and packaging. Flexibility in meeting
                                             customer labelling requirements
                                             Storage technology. The level of technology or automation the firm uses in
                                             its storage facilities
                                             Storage capacity. The firm’s storage capacity
                                             Storage quality. The firm’s storage quality
                                             Transport technology. The level of technology or automation employed by
                                             the firm
Table VII.                                   Transport quality. The availability of transport of required quality and the
Dimension 3 KPIs                             extent to which problems are encountered en route to the customer
Each KPI in the benchmarking methodological framework was used to formulate questions                  Dates export
used as a discussion guide during firm visits and interviews with dates exporters. The                  supply chain
questionnaire was pre-tested for consistency and validity. Data were collected from seven
Tunisian and three Omani dates exporters during June-July 2007. Table IX presents
information on dates exporters in Oman and Tunisia where data were collected.
   The complexity and difficulties in benchmarking performance dimensions tends to
be in assigning quantitative measures to the selected indicators. For dimensions 1-3,                              395
a qualitative approach is used to compute each KPI as in other studies as follows
(Garcia et al., 2004; Food and Drink National Training Organisation, 2001):
    .
      Level 1. Firm shows little or no capacity in achieving “best practice”.
    .
      Level 2. Firm shows some capacity in achieving “best practice”.
    .
      Level 3. Firm shows “best practice” in this area (e.g. consistent performance,
      clear and demonstrable systems in place).

This method allows the identification of areas in which firms have room for
improvement (Gilmour, 1999). For dimension 4, descriptive statistics were computed
to measure the efficiency and the performance of the export supply chain.

5. Results and discussion
Results from the benchmarking exercise are presented below. For clear presentation and
comparison of results, the spider web or radar charts have been used (Mosley and Mayer,
1999). A spider web diagram shows at a glance multiple targets and gaps, and as a result,
capture tradeoffs that occur between goals and their achievements (Ahmed and Rafiq,
1998). As indicated earlier, in this study, Tunisian exporters are taken as “best practice”.
These are the practices which have often been assigned a “level 3” in the benchmarking
analysis.

Areas analysed           Key performance indicators

Efficiency of the export PPT exported. Measured in US dollars, this is the amount of profit generated
supply chain            per unit volume of business
                        Profits per employee ratio. The amount of profit in US dollars generated
                        per employee
                        Cost per ton exported ðin US$Þ ¼ Cost of Export=Export Volume                        Table VIII.
                        Export intensity ¼ Export revenue=Total revenue for the entire output            Dimension 4 KPIs



No.       Company name (Tunisian companies)           No.       Company name (Oman companies)

1         Vacpa (in Beni Khalled – Tunis)             1         Ibn Nasser Al-Siyabi Trading
2         Horchani (in Tozeur – Tunis)                2         United Dates Factory Company
3         Cap Bon Frigorifique                         3         Oman Dates International
4         Sages in Tunis
5         Jasmine Export                                                                                       Table IX.
6         Profruits                                                                                      Dates processing
7         Medi fruits                                                                                 companies in Tunisia
8         Les Agrumes Du Golse Flus                                                                             and Oman
BIJ                       5.1 Qualitative dimensions
18,3                      5.1.1 Dimension 1: coordination of the export SCM practices.
                             5.1.1.1 Exporter-producer information sharing. Exporter-producer information
                          sharing is a key to the success of the export supply chain. This is because, it is
                          through information-sharing process that feedbacks from consumers in the export
                          market reach producers in exporting country. Through this process, consumer needs and
396                       wants can very be incorporated in the production process at farm level in the producing
                          country. In many cases, exporters are less likely to have systems in place for providing
                          producers with information related to market intelligence, crop protection regulation,
                          quality standards, etc. With regard to exporter-producer information sharing, Oman
                          score is 51.8 percent or 1.55 in the KPI scale of 1-3 indicating a weak exporter-producer
                          relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 68.2 percent or 2.05 (Figure 1). This is largely
                          due to the lack of information sharing system in Oman. In Tunisia, some degree of vertical
                          integration and contacts with government agencies facilitates communication greatly.
                             5.1.1.2 Exporter-importer information sharing. In addition to exporter-producer
                          information sharing, information sharing between exporters and importers is very
                          important. Exporters need to know the importing countries requirements and
                          specifications. Importers also need to know safety and quality standards in the exporting
                          countries. Therefore, strong information sharing between exporters and importers leads
                          to high performance in the production and delivery of the products to importers and
                          ultimately to the consumers. With regard to exporter-importer information sharing,
                          Oman’s score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 in KPI scale indicating a relatively weak
                          relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 85.7 percent or 2.57 in KPI scale (Figure 1).
                          This is due to lack of a strong exporter organization in Oman and lack of a strong link
                          with importers. In Tunisia, such organizational relationships exist and are strong.
                             5.1.1.3 Market orientation. Market orientation is another area of export supply chain
                          coordination in which partners in different regions can share market intelligence.
                          Market orientation plays a role in choosing the varieties to be grown, and this can change
                          every year depending on market requirements and the type of agricultural commodity
                          whether it is an annual crop. For a perennial crop, such as date palm changes take time.
                          Exporters can develop their own information network through visiting trade fairs,
                          getting advice from international organizations and following market trends.

                                                              Exporter-producer information
                                                                         sharing
                                                                           3
                                                                                           Exporter-importer
                                                     Traceability          2              information sharing

                                                                             1

                                        Vertical coordination                0                   Market orientation



Figure 1.                                     Vertical integration                          Production flexibility
Benchmarking results on
the coordination of the
                                                   Oman              Customer orientation
export SCM practices
                                                   Tunisia
Omani dates export sector presents a medium degree of market orientation with a score       Dates export
of 77.8 percent or 2.33, as shown in the spider chart (Figure 1). The Omani exporters       supply chain
monitor demand trends in the international markets. They target mostly the developing
countries in Asia where firms are generally not very well organized in terms of market
research and they have inefficient promotion programs. All Omani firms supply three
varieties of dates which are Faradh, Khalas and Khasab. Most of the exports are of
Faradh variety which is in high demand in the traditional low-value Asian markets due              397
to its intact and non-sticky skins.
    On the other hand, Tunisian dates export sector with a score of (100 percent or 3,
Figure 1) presents a high degree of market orientation. Tunisia monitors very closely
demand trends in the European market and other international markets and firms
seem to be generally very well organized. Firms have good relationships with other
firms and organizations in the international markets, enabling them to work together
efficiently. In this arrangement, information regarding domestic and export markets
requirements flows efficiently along the export supply chain. This may be one of the
reasons why Tunisian export firms have managed to compete successfully for a larger
share of the EU market.
    5.1.1.4 Production flexibility. Production flexibility can be defined as the ability of
the exporter to meet changing customer requirements. Production flexibility can be
enhanced by the existence of strong communication infrastructure capable of reaching
and communicating with importers easily and efficiently. Omani firms score is
67 percent or 2.01 implying a limited flexibility in terms of changing varieties supplied
and responding to customer demands. On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is
85.7 percent or 2.57 implying that Tunisian firms tend to be more proactively involved
in changing their production processes to meet customer requirements. This is due to
better communication infrastructure that constantly monitors and forecast consumer
trends.
    5.1.1.5 Customer orientation. Customer orientation can be measured by the number
of visits from customers to audit, check and advice on safety, quality practices and all
matters of interest throughout the production and export supply chain. Customer
orientation is important as one of the coordination practices in the export supply chain.
For both Oman and Tunisia, visits to exporters by customers take place regularly
every season. However, their regularity and frequency depends on the customers.
Results from survey data show that customers have fewer direct involvement in Oman
(score 56 percent or 1.68) compared to Tunisia (score 90.5 percent or 2.72).
    5.1.1.6 Vertical integration. Vertical integration is the involvement of exporters in
upstream or downstream processes in the export supply chain. In vertical integration,
the exporter may be vertically integrated from production to exportation
and sometimes large and modern producers are directly involved in exportation.
Tunisia’s score is 76.1 percent or 2.28 which imply a high degree of vertical integration
in terms of production, processing and export. Oman’s score is 67 percent or 2.01 which
imply a less direct involvement of exporters in production.
    5.1.1.7 Vertical coordination. Vertical coordination includes operations such as
harvesting, processing, packing, storage and transportation organized and coordinated
in order to control product quality along the export supply chain. With regard to
vertical coordination, Oman score is 78 percent or 2.01 which implies that generally
there is some coordination of operations (harvesting, processing and export) but with
BIJ    no modern control systems, such as IT tracking systems. Tunisia score is 90.5 percent
18,3   or 2.72 implying that operations are generally highly coordinated in large and modern
       packinghouses equipped with IT tracking systems. This enables the system to monitor
       time closely and, as a result, making it possible to minimize time in storage and
       transportation.
           5.1.1.8 Traceability systems. Product-tracing systems are essential for food safety and
398    quality control. Most of the foreign markets especially in North America and Europe
       require traceability system. Traceability systems help firms to solve safety and quality
       problems quickly with minimal disruption by tracing back the origin of the products.
       A well-functioning traceability system uniquely codes each item or product to identify
       time of production, line of production, place of production and sequence. With such
       specific information, the processor can trace faulty products to the minute of production
       and determine whether other products from the same batch are also defective. With regard
       to traceability systems, Tunisia score is 92.1 percent or 2.76 which imply that generally
       there is a high level of traceability. Any packing box sold in the European market carries
       codes and references that allows tracing of the product to the packinghouse, so the
       treatment undergone by the product at the packinghouse can be verified easily. Oman
       score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 which implies that many dates exporters have no traceability
       system in place. This will likely make it difficult for Oman to penetrate the lucrative EU
       and North American markets that require traceability systems. A summary of the eight
       KPIs (5.1.1.1-5.1.1.8) is shown in the radar chart (Figure 1).
           Figure 1 is a spider web that presents a visual graphical summary of the eight KPIs
       of dimension 1. Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all eight KPIs. At the range
       of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators. On the other hand, Oman’s
       performance is not all that impressive. Its scores range from 1 to 2, achieving a score of
       above 2 in one indicator, namely market orientation.
           5.1.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain.
           5.1.2.1 Quality certification. As industries are widening their range of products,
       certification to national and international requirements has become necessary and
       crucial in winning consumer confidence. Varying levels of certification are seen in each
       country. Omani firms score reached 55.5 percent or 1.66 where some of them have
       ISO certificates and the majority are without certificates. On the other hand, Tunisian
       firms score reached 61.9 percent or 1.86, where some of them have several types of
       certificates (ISO 9001, ISO 22000, HACCP, BRC, IFS, ISO 14000), but just like in Oman,
       the majority are without certificates.
           5.1.2.2 Quality control specialists. Quality control specialists are the employees who
       devise ways to guarantee the quality of products. They study products at various
       stages of development to make sure that they are safe, will satisfy customers and meet
       the company’s and regulators’ standards. With regard to quality control specialists,
       they are a norm in Tunisia with score reaching 100 percent or 3.00 and less common in
       Oman with score reaching 77.8 percent or 2.33.
           5.1.2.3 Training and knowledge. Training is important because organizations need
       to upgrade the knowledge and skills of their professionals. In most cases, training is
       focused on achieving business goals leading to high-quality products and services. For
       this particular KPI, Oman score is 77.8 percent or 2.33 compared to Tunisia score of
       81.9 percent or 2.46. Implying that there is no significant difference between the two
       countries in as far as training and knowledge is concerned.
5.1.2.4 Social responsibility. It is the obligation of the management of the firm. Social   Dates export
responsibility involves making decisions and taking actions that will enhance the              supply chain
welfare and interests of employees. This is important in increasing employee
productivity. With regard to social responsibility, Omani firms score is 92.1 percent or
2.76 where workers are generally insured (social insurance) and labour regulations are
generally adhered to, with access to medical care and provisions for the workers welfare
(e.g. workers age, working hours, working conditions, legal and health requirements,                  399
salary and number of days for vacation). Tunisian firms score is 95.91 percent or 2.88,
where approximately all the non-seasonal workers are insured and labour regulations
are adhered to, with access to medical care and provision for the workers welfare.
    5.1.2.5 Environmental management. Lately, corporations have been confronted with
a number of global environmental challenges such as global warming, acid rain,
depletion of natural resources, waste management, green consumerism and pollution
prevention. Nowadays, there is a growing pressure for corporations to deliver products
and services which are GREEN or environmentally friendly. Various environmental
management practices (e.g. implementing aggressive pollution-prevention programs;
initiating environment-related performance measures; and developing green products
and process technologies) provide opportunities for firms to strengthen their
distinctive competence. With regard to environmental management, the score for
Omani firms is 33.3 percent or 1 implying that generally there are no demonstrable
environmental management policies or practices in many of the Omani firms.
On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is 47.6 percent or 1.43 implying that there is
generally very little verifiable efforts in place focused towards environmental
management.
    5.1.2.6 Safety and quality requirements. The competitiveness of food companies at
national and international markets depends upon their ability to adopt production
processes which meet food safety and quality requirements. Food safety and quality
assurance affect the cost of carrying out business transactions, and implicit therein is the
private incentive for adopting voluntary quality assurance systems. Quality assurance
systems have the potential to reduce transaction costs by serving as the seller’s
guarantee of safety or quality (Holleran et al., 1999). With regard to safety and quality
requirements, Tunisian score is 80.7 percent or 2.42. In Tunisia, the safety and quality
specifications are always put in the contract with the customers. In addition, because of
Tunisian Government assistance in improving dates quality control systems, the safety
and quality requirements are always met by the exporters. Omani score is 59.21 percent
or 1.78 where exporters place more emphasis on personal contacts and good
relationships with customers than on formal contracts. Moreover, because of low
government assistance, dates quality control systems in Oman are not efficient
sometimes hampering exporter’s ability to meet foreign customer specifications.
    Figure 2 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of the
six key qualitative performance indicators of dimension 2. As indicated, Tunisia is
performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative performance indicators. At the
range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators except for two, namely,
quality certification and environmental management. Moreover, Tunisia scores 3 or
100 percent in quality control specialist indicator implying that Tunisia takes the issue
of quality control very seriously by employing enough qualified quality control
specialists.
BIJ                                                                  Quality certification
                                                                            3
18,3
                                                                             2               Quality control
                                              Safety and quality
                                                requirements                                   specialist
                                                                             1

400                                                                          0

                                                Environmental                                 Training and
                                                 management                                    knowledge
Figure 2.
Result on the safety and                              Oman
                                                                     Social responsibility
quality orientation of the                            Tunisia
export supply chain
                                            Note: A summary of dimension 2


                             On the other hand, Oman’s performance is not all that impressive – for three
                             indicators, Oman scores range from 1 to 2. For quality control specialist, training and
                             knowledge, and social responsibility indicators, Oman achieved scores above 2.
                                5.1.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure.
                                5.1.3.1 Processing and packing technology. Advances in packaging technology
                             provide a potential for improved quality and extended shelf life of agricultural products.
                             With regard to processing and packing technology, Oman is 77.73 percent or 2.33 and
                             Tunisia 84.1 percent or 2.52. Both countries have some degree of automation in sorting
                             and grading lines, varying in the age of equipments and states of the technology used.
                                5.1.3.2 Processing and packing quality. It depends on customer requirements and
                             specifications. For instance, some customers require sterile foods with aseptic
                             processing and packaging in a manner that leaves the food free of microorganisms. Such
                             a requirement has public health significance, because it helps to prevent the growth of
                             any microorganism under normal non-refrigerated storage condition and distribution.
                             Some of the foods we buy from grocery stores go through non-refrigerated storage
                             conditions; as a result, processing and packing quality are of paramount importance.
                             With respect to processing and packing quality, Tunisian firms score is 100 percent or
                             3.00 indicating there are high-quality processing and packing operations in virtually all
                             firms – with packaging materials readily available. In Tunisia, packaging requirements
                             are pre-agreed with customers. Omani firms score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 indicating
                             some level of processing and packing quality.
                                5.1.3.3 Labelling flexibility. Flexibility in dealing with customer labelling
                             requirements varies across firms in the two countries. Some firms use excellent
                             labelling systems which include bar coding whereas for others labelling is entirely
                             manual. With regard to labelling flexibility, Omani firms score is 72.2 percent or
                             2.17 where labelling is carried out by hand in a few of the Omani firms. However, as long
                             as customer requirements can be met by this method, there are no problems. There are
                             also many traceability labelling requirements which not all Omani firms are able to
                             meet. Tunisian firms score is 90.46 percent or 2.71 indicating that excellent labelling
                             systems are used which include bar coding and use of coded reference. As a result, firms
                             have no problem meeting customer labelling requirements. In Tunisia, firms’ use of
                             advanced IT systems in labelling facilitates labelling flexibility.
5.1.3.4 Storage technology. High level of technology used in storage has to include       Dates export
temperature and humidity equipments control. With regard to storage technology,               supply chain
Oman score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 and Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79 indicating
some level of investment and use of storage technology in both countries.
    5.1.3.5 Storage capacity. With regard to storage capacity, Omani firms scored
100 percent or 3.00 implying that there is enough storage capacity available with a
significant refrigerated capacity ranging from 100 to 2,600 tons. On the other hand, the              401
score for Tunisian firms reached 71.41 percent or 2.14.
    5.1.3.6 Storage quality. The level of storage quality depends on the conditions of
controlled atmosphere stores. Storage quality score for Tunisia is 98 percent or 2.94
which implies that all storage is under controlled atmosphere and pre-cooling takes
place before transport, even with the hired storage facilities. In Oman, the score is
70 percent or 2.1. The small firms visited have few or no controlled atmosphere storage
facilities, as a result, products are subject to different storage qualities. The largest
firms, however, were found to have high-quality storage facilities.
    5.1.3.7 Transport technology. The level of technology used in the transportation of
products for export has to include temperature and humidity control equipments in
order to control storage atmosphere either in the trucks or in the ships during
shipment. With regard to transport technology, Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79
which implies that most of the dates exporters use cold transport with technology to
control temperature and humidity in both land and sea transport. On the other hand,
Oman score is 61.05 percent or 1.83 which implies that most of the dates exporters use
non-cold transport, with low technology in both land and sea transportation.
    5.1.3.8 Transport quality. The level of transport quality can be evaluated based on
the availability of refrigerated containers and problems encountered en route to
customers. Sometimes, dates are stored for a long time before shipment (up to several
months). Owing to marketing conditions and packing possibilities, it is necessary to
sample each consignment, in order to make sure that the quality of the fruit has not
changed. During loading, it is important to ensure that the surfaces or packaging are
not damaged. All the labels and markings must be checked to ensure compliance with
the laws of the importing country, as well as the customer requirements. Furthermore,
since temperature and humidity are important factors in the preservation of the quality
of the dates, temperature and humidity control equipments with recorders must be
placed in the container or the truck. With regard to transport quality, Tunisia score is
95 percent or 2.85. Tunisian firms use cold transport with technology to control
temperature and humidity. The cost of cold transport is high, but with governmental
support, the exporters are able to use cold transport in order to preserve dates from
deterioration especially for the long distances between Tunisia and export destinations
in the EU. Oman score is 60 percent or 1.8. Oman firms use non-cold transport with low
technology to control temperature and humidity both in land and sea transport. The
cost of cold transport is high, and without governmental support, the exporters in
Oman are unable to use cold transport.
    Figure 3 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of
the eight KPIs of dimension 3. As indicated, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in
all the seven KPIs. At the range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators.
Tunisia scores 3 or 100 percent in processing and packing quality indicating the
existence of high-quality processing and packing operations for all firms in Tunisia.
BIJ                                                             Processing and
                                                              packing technology
18,3                                                                 3
                                                                                    Processing and
                                          Transport quality          2              packing quality
                                                                     1
402                               Transport technology               0                 Labelling flexibility



                                           Storage quality                         Storage technology

Figure 3.                                    Oman              Storage capacity
Export operational                           Tunisia
infrastructure
                                  Note: Summary of dimension 3

                     Omani firms are performing better than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely
                     storage capacity, because in Oman there is excess refrigerated storage capacity. This is
                     because of the low-processed volumes handled by Omani firms compared to their
                     initial planned capacity during establishment. At the range of 1-3, Oman scores 2-3 for
                     most indicators except two, namely, transport technology and transport quality.

                     5.2 Quantitative dimensions
                     5.2.1 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain.
                        5.2.1.1 Profit per ton. A firm adds to profits if marginal revenue from selling an
                     extra unit is greater than the marginal cost of production. Therefore, the PPT or per
                     unit will be equal to average revenue (AR) minus average total cost (ATC). That is, the
                     PPT ¼ AR 2 ATC. The firm with the highest PPT is therefore considered to be
                     performing better than the other firms. The PPT or profit per exported ton is used here
                     as measure of export performance. With respect to this indicator, Tunisian firms
                     achieved around US$418 per exported ton, whereas Omani firms achieved around
                     US$102 per exported ton. This implies that Tunisian exporters earn around four times
                     higher profit per exported ton than Omani exporters. In other words, Tunisian
                     operations are efficient and more profitable than Omani operations. It is important to
                     note that the observed differences in profitability between Oman and Tunisia, to some
                     extent, may be attributable to differences in variety, quality, price of raw material at
                     the farm level and pre- and post-harvest operations.
                        5.2.1.2 Profit per employee. Recently, firms create wealth by converting “raw”
                     intangibles into products, services, brands, intellectual capital and networks. The most
                     valuable intangibles are employee skills, reputation and relationships. They represent
                     competitive advantage in today’s business environment and are now the true source of
                     corporate wealth. In this regard, one new metric of business performance is profit per
                     employee (Wolfe, 2007; Lowell, 2007). Profit per employee or a contribution of each
                     employee to the firm profit is therefore a good proxy for earnings on intangibles and
                     hence a good indicator to evaluate the performance of a firm. With regard to profit per
                     employee, Tunisian firms achieved around US$3,874 per employee, whereas Omani
                     firms achieved around US$1,802 indicating that Tunisian are efficient and generate
                     more profit per employee than Omani firms.
5.2.1.3 Export intensity. It is another financial indicator of export performance.        Dates export
It is defined as the proportion of export sale in total sale (Export Intensity ¼             supply chain
Value of Export/Value of TP). With regard to this indicator, Tunisian firms score is
around 0.86 indicating that around 86 percent of their revenue comes from export earnings
and hence much more export oriented. Oman score, on the other hand, is around 0.35
implying that only 35 percent of Oman firms revenue come from export earnings. These
export intensity statistics clearly show that Tunisian firms are very successful in date                 403
export compared to Oman firms.
   Table X presents a summary of the three KPIs of dimension 4. As indicated, Tunisia
is performing better than Oman in all three indicators. Results of this dimension
complements and enrich the results of the previous three dimensions.

6. Conclusions and recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
The purpose of this study is two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach
employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia in order to identify
gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries.
Second, is to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. The Tunisian
DSC was used as the “best practice” or “benchmark” since, in many ways, it is more
advanced and efficient than dates-producing countries. The benchmarking measures
were put into two groups, namely, qualitative and quantitative group. The qualitative
group has three dimensions and the quantitative group has one dimension only. Each
of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. It is these KPIs that are
used to identify the gaps between Tunisia and Oman.
    The analysis required an audit of the export supply chains of both countries. The
audit was executed by visiting the exporters in both countries to collect the required
data by means of questionnaires. In total, ten date exporters were interviewed, three of
which were Omani and the remaining seven firms were Tunisian.
    Results from the benchmarking exercise were summarized in radar chart diagrams
to visualize multiple targets and gaps. The results show that Tunisia is performing
better than Oman in all the four dimensions. Evaluation and the implementation
of the gaps highlighted in this study would help Omani firms to adapt and respond to
safety and quality standards demanded by international market customers. It is
important to note that some of the practices that are feasible in Tunisia may not be
feasible in Oman. This is simply because there could be large variations in resource
availability, degree of modernization and market orientation of agri-food systems
between Oman, Tunisia and importing countries. A careful analysis of the findings
should enable Oman policy makers and stakeholders to produce an industry action
plan to correct the gaps and take the lead.


Key performance indicators                 Tunisian exporters             Omani exporters

PPT exported (US$)                                418                          102
Profit per employee (US$)                        3,874                        1,802                   Table X.
Export intensity                                    0.857                        0.353         Efficiency of the
                                                                                            export supply chain
Note: A summary of dimension 4 (efficiency of the export supply chain)                             (dimension 4)
BIJ    6.2 Recommendations
18,3   6.2.1 Coordination of the export SCM practices. The level of coordination seen in Oman
       is significantly lower than that in Tunisia where operations are highly coordinated in
       large and modern packinghouses. Hence, initiatives should be developed at firm level in
       Oman to increase the level of coordination among actors in the export supply chain.
       To increase the level of coordination in the DESC in Oman, there is a need to support and
404    encourage horizontal and vertical integration, as well as information sharing between
       exporter and producers and exporter and importers. Because of the likely welfare
       impacts of DESC, the public sector needs to be involved through direct investment and
       through availability of credits/loans to the private sector to invest in the DESC. The
       Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of National Economy and the Ministry of Commerce
       and Industry could work together to coordinate this so that social objectives such as
       employment and income are taken into account.
           Key to greater coordination in the DESC is a traceability system. In future, it will be
       impossible to export to most of the foreign markets (in North America, Europe and
       Asia) without having a traceability system in place. As a result, Oman needs to start
       now working on establishing such a system especially for economically important
       commodities such as dates. However, the fragmented nature of the DESC makes
       it difficult for Omani dates exporters to establish a traceability system. This is why the
       government leadership and involvement is needed to make sure that this done.
           6.2.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain. In this
       dimension, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative
       performance indicators. It is therefore clear that there is a lot that needs to be done to
       bridge the gaps identified. This will require significant investments on the part of the
       Omani Government, date exporters, as well as on the part of the stakeholders. These
       investments are of course costly and must be planned and executed carefully in a
       coordinated fashion in consultation with all the stakeholders.
           Because these investments are costly, they should not be borne entirely by the
       government, instead all the stakeholders should take part. As a result, it is important to
       assign more responsibility for ensuring safety and quality along the supply chain to
       the food companies themselves. This can be achieved by requiring date exporters and
       processors to obtain HACCP, ISO and other certifications that are necessary to win
       international and local customer confidence. Of course, obtaining these HACCP and
       ISO certifications and maintaining them, as articulated earlier herein, requires
       significant investments both in human and physical capital; including quality control
       infrastructures and business information systems.
           6.2.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure. Here Tunisia is performing
       better than Oman in seven out of the eight KPIs. Omani firms are only performing better
       than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely storage capacity. Export
       operational infrastructure which include eight items ranging from processing and
       packing technology, labelling technology to storage technology requires significant
       long-term investments that cannot be made by the private sector alone. The lack of
       technical and financial support in Oman very often makes the required investments in
       export operational infrastructure very difficult. Therefore, it is recommended to
       implement joint public/private initiatives to develop actionable strategies aimed
       at improving export infrastructure following Tunisian experience. Firm-level
       infrastructure-related investment should be done through preferential financing
arrangements as suggested earlier. Considerations must be given to innovative ways of            Dates export
financing improvements, such as contributions in the cost of factory establishment and            supply chain
factory upgrading (rehabilitation) similar to what is done by the Tunisian Government.
    6.2.4 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain. Results from dimension 4
show that the Tunisian DESC performance is more efficient than Oman in all three KPIs.
In fact, these results are consistent with the results of the previous three dimensions. More
need to be done to improve the efficiency of the DESC in Oman through training of                        405
employees and investment in technology. The following recommendations are important:
    .
       There are several date varieties in Oman most of which are of very low quality.
       At farm level, all these different varieties are mixed-up resulting in a substandard
       quality. To overcome this problem, the government needs to embark on long-term
       program to modernize and promote high-value varieties such as Medjool, Barhee
       Khalas, Abu Naringa, Barni, Madlouki and Faradh.
    .
       There is a need for investment in research and development to identify and develop
       alternatives uses for dates such as: baby food ingredients, sugar production out of
       dates, baking ingredients, ice cream, coffee, sweets, confectionery, chocolates,
       preservatives, salads, sauces, breakfast cereals and soft drinks.

References
Ahmed, P.K. and Rafiq, M. (1998), “Integrated benchmarking: a holistic examination of select
      techniques for benchmarking analysis”, Benchmarking for Quality Management &
      Technology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 225-42.
Allan, S. (1997), “Partners benchmarking”, available at: www.benchmarking.co.uk/bmark.
      htm#partners
Andersen, B., Fagerhaug, T., Randmoel, S., Schuldmaier, J. and Prenninger, J. (1999),
      “Benchmarking supply chain management: finding best practice”, Journal of Business &
      Industrial Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 378-89.
Anon. (2005), “Welfare benchmarking and herd health plans on organic dairy farms (OF0343)”,
      available at: http://orgprints.org/10776/ (unpublished).
Balm, G.J. (1996), “Benchmarking and gap analysis: what is the next milestone?”, Benchmarking:
      An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 22-33.
Barnes, C. (2007), “Study exposes weak links in grain chain”, Food Manufacture, 27 March,
      available at: www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/4483/Study_exposes_
      weak_links_in_grain_chain.html
Bhutta, K.S. and Huq, F. (1999), “Benchmarking best practices: an integrated approach”,
      Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 254-68.
Brandt, J.R. and Taninecz, G. (2004), “Benchmarking: an executive primer to locating and
      leveraging manufacturing best practices”, available at: www.mpi-group.net/
      thoughtleadership/ITC_MPI_Benchmarking.pdf
Camp, R. (1989), The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to Superior Performance,
      Productivity Press, Portland, OR.
CLAN (2006), “Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from Australian agriculture: the role of
      benchmarking in driving best management practice”, A discussion paper prepared by
      the Climate Change in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Agriculture
      Working Group, available at: www.greenhouse.gov.au/agriculture/publications/pubs/
      benchmarking.pdf
BIJ    Deloitte (2009), Benchmarking for Success: New Trends in North America’s Food and Beverage
              Processing Industry, Deloitte, New York, NY, available at: www.deloitte.com/assets/
18,3          DcomCanada/Local%20Content/Articles/Industries/Consumer%20business/ca_en_
              Benchmarking%20for%20success.pdf
       Food and Drink National Training Organisation (Ed.) (2001), Measuring Success: International
              Benchmarking of the Food and Drink Manufacturing Industry, Food and Drink National
              Training Organisation, London.
406
       Garcia Martinez, M. and Poole, N. (2003), “Developments in fresh produce quality and safety
              management: implications for Mediterranean countries”, paper presented at the 82nd
              European Seminar of the EAAE on Quality Assurance, Risk Management and
              Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks, Bonn, 14-16 May.
       GidF (2005), Groupment Interprofessionnel des Fruits, Ministry of Agriculture and Water
              Resources, Tunisia.
       Gilmour, P. (1999), “Benchmarking supply chain operations”, International Journal of Physical
              Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 29, pp. 259-66.
       Helgason, S. (1997), “International benchmarking experiences from OECD countries”,
              paper presented at a conference organized by the Danish Ministry of Finance on:
              International Benchmarking, Copenhagen, 20-21 February, Public Management Service
              (PUMA), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
       Holleran, E., Bredahl, M.E. and Zaibet, L. (1999), “Private incentives for adopting food safety and
              quality assurance”, Food Policy, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 669-83.
       Howard, M. and Kilmartin, B. (2006), Assessment of Benchmarking within Government
              Organizations, Accenture, Dublin, May.
       Laajimi, A. (2002), “National safety and quality systems in Tunisia: an analysis of the olive oil
                                                      ´                                  ´
              and dates sectors”, working paper, Departement d’Economie et de Developpement Rural,
              Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Tunis.
       Lowell, L.B. (2007), “The new metrics of corporate performance: profit per employee”,
              The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1, available at: www.massmac.org/newsline/0707/McKinsey.
              pdf
       Luther, R. and Abdel-Kader, M. (2006), “Management accounting practices in the British food
              and drinks industry”, British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 5, pp. 336-57.
       Omachonu, V.K. and Ross, J.R. (1994), Principles of Total Quality, St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.
       Poole, N., Marshall, F. and Bhupal, D.S. (2002), “Air pollution effects and initiatives to improve food
              quality assurance in India”, Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Vol. 41, pp. 363-86.
       Ronan, G. and Taylor, P. (2004), “Strategic planning and benchmarking: keys to sustainable
              economic development in food and fibre industries”, paper presented at the 48th Annual
              Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Melbourne,
              11-13 February, available at: www.aares.info/files/2004_ronan.pdf
       Russell, R.S. and Taylor, B.W. (1998), Production and Operations Management, Focusing on
              Quality and Competitiveness, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
       Sparling, D. and van Duren, E. (2003), “Supply chain management – trends and implications for
              ASEAN agribusiness in agribusiness management: systems approach”, SEAMO, pp. 169-76.
       Stephens, B. (2004), Benchmarking Arab Microfinance Institutions, The Microfinance Gateways,
              Washington, DC, available at: www.microfinancegateway.org/content/article/more/14260
       Thelwell, D. and Ritson, C. (2006), “The international competitiveness of the UK cereals sector”,
              paper presented at the 98th EAAE Seminar on Marketing Dynamics within the Global
              Trading System: New Perspectives, Chania, Crete, 29 June-2 July.
UNCTAD (2005), “Country case study on reflecting national circumstances and development               Dates export
       priorities in national codes on good agricultural practices that can be benchmarked to
       Eurepgap”, available at: www.unctad.org/trade_env/test1/meetings/eurepgap/                    supply chain
       UNCTAD%20Country%20Case%20Study.pdf
UNCTAD/WTO (2007), Fresh Tropical and Off-season Fruit and Vegetables, International Trade
       Center, Geneva, available at: www.intracen.org/mns/documents/Fruits_and_vegetables.pdf
UNIDO (2002), Continuous Improvement and Quality Management – Quality and Productivity,                     407
       United Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna, available at: www.unido.
       org/doc/501746.htmls
USDA (2008), “Benchmarking: findings and recommendations”, Final Report May 30, The US
       Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency Organizational Assessment, available at:
       www.fsa.USDA.gov/Internet/FSA_File/kbapp3benchmarking.pdf
   ´
Verıssimo, A. and Woodford, K. (2005), “Top performing farmers are information rich: case
       studies of sheep and cattle farmers in the South Island of New Zealand”, Proceedings of the
       Fifteenth International Farm Management Association Congress, Campinas, Brazil,
       August, Vol. 1, International Farm Management Association, Cambridge, pp. 365-8.
Wilson, R., Charry, A.A. and Kemp, D.R. (2004), “Performance indicators and benchmarking in
       Australian agriculture: a whole farm family centered approach”, available at: www.csu.edu.
       au/faculty/science/saws/afbmnetwork/conferences/2004/proceedings/Wilson_et_al.pdf
Wolfe, I.S. (2007), “Profit per employee: can HR be trusted to get the job done?”,
       Business 2 Business, May, available at: www.super-solutions.com/ProfitPerEmployee_
       B2BMay2007.asp
Yakovleva, N., Sarkis, J. and Sloans, T.W. (2009), “Sustainable benchmarking of food supply
       chains”, GPMI Working Paper No. 2009-02, George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark
       University, Worcester, MA, available at: www.clarku.edu/departments/marsh
Yasin, M.M. (2002), “The theory and practice of benchmarking: then and now”, International
       Journal of Benchmarking, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 217-43.
Zairi, M. (1994), “Benchmarking: the best tool for measuring competitiveness”, Benchmarking of
       Quality Management and Technology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-24.

Further reading
Andersen, B. and Pettersen, P.-G. (1996), The Benchmarking Handbook, Chapman & Hall,
      London.
Aramyan, L., Ondersteijn, C., Van Kooten, O. and Oude Lansink, A. (2005), “Performance
      indicators in agri-food production chains”, in Ondersteijn, C., Wijnands, J.H.M.,
      Huirne, R.B.M. and Van Kooten, O. (Eds), Quantifying Supply Chains, Kluwer Academic
      Publisher, Dordrecht.
Barreveld, W.H. (1993), “Date palm products”, FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 101,
      FAO, Rome.
Bateman, G.R. (1994), “Benchmarking management education teaching and curriculum”,
      in Camp, R. (Ed.), Benchmarking: The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to
      Superior Performance, Quality Resources, White Plains, NY.
Country Report (2003), “Development of dates production and marketing in Arab nation”,
      Country Report, October (Oman).
FAO (n.d.), FAO Statistics, FAO, XXX.
Matters, M. and Evans, A. (1997), “The nuts and bolts of benchmarking”, available at: www.
      ozemail.com.au/, benchmark/nuts.bolts.html
BIJ    Ministry of Agriculture, Oman (n.d.), available at: www.maf.gov.om
18,3   Oman Customs (2006), Foreign Trade Statistics.
       Shah, J. and Singh, N. (2001), “Benchmarking internal supply chain performance: development of
             a framework”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 37, pp. 37-47.
       Tunisian Agency for the Promotion of Agricultural Investment (n.d.), available at: www.tunisie.
             com/APIA
408    United Dates Factory (n.d.), Processing and handling of dates in Oman.

       Corresponding author
       Msafiri Mbaga can be contacted at: msafiri@squ.edu.om




       To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
       Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Contenu connexe

Similaire à 4.a comparative

Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDI
Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDIAbdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDI
Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDIAhmed Ali
 
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020Suhardiyoto Haryadi
 
Smgr corp presentation april 2014
Smgr corp presentation april 2014Smgr corp presentation april 2014
Smgr corp presentation april 2014Semen Indonesia
 
The case for uranium m&b
The case for uranium   m&bThe case for uranium   m&b
The case for uranium m&bMarkets Beyond
 
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among themThe top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among themALADDIN PERTANIAN INTERNASIONAL
 
290. buttons from horn
290. buttons from horn290. buttons from horn
290. buttons from hornDagim Solomon
 
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potential
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potentialThe importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potential
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potentialCIMMYT
 
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th july
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th julyUkti trade mission to myanmar 9th july
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th julyUmoekyaw
 
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...Alexander Decker
 
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdf
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdfPresentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdf
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdfXolaniRadebeRadebe
 
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among themThe top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among themALADDIN PERTANIAN INTERNASIONAL
 

Similaire à 4.a comparative (15)

Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDI
Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDIAbdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDI
Abdulrahman Ilyas - NWD - Policies to attract FDI
 
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020
Indonesia's palm oil outlook 2020
 
panorama-ed1en
panorama-ed1enpanorama-ed1en
panorama-ed1en
 
Wheat for Africa: Potentials and Challenges for Harnessing Opportunities
Wheat for Africa: Potentials and Challenges for Harnessing OpportunitiesWheat for Africa: Potentials and Challenges for Harnessing Opportunities
Wheat for Africa: Potentials and Challenges for Harnessing Opportunities
 
Smgr corp presentation april 2014
Smgr corp presentation april 2014Smgr corp presentation april 2014
Smgr corp presentation april 2014
 
The case for uranium m&b
The case for uranium   m&bThe case for uranium   m&b
The case for uranium m&b
 
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among themThe top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of cotton seed and turkey's ranking among them
 
290. buttons from horn
290. buttons from horn290. buttons from horn
290. buttons from horn
 
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potential
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potentialThe importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potential
The importance of wheat for food security in Africa: Challenges and potential
 
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th july
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th julyUkti trade mission to myanmar 9th july
Ukti trade mission to myanmar 9th july
 
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...
Level of oil palm production mechanization in selected local government areas...
 
Dairy Value Chain Uganda Report
Dairy Value Chain Uganda ReportDairy Value Chain Uganda Report
Dairy Value Chain Uganda Report
 
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdf
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdfPresentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdf
Presentation Study on UNECA ICSOE 2021 Investing in Eastern Africa.pdf
 
Chuma.e.nigeria.pres.ppt
Chuma.e.nigeria.pres.pptChuma.e.nigeria.pres.ppt
Chuma.e.nigeria.pres.ppt
 
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among themThe top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among them
The top ten producers of lentils and turkey's ranking among them
 

Plus de libfsb

Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
Principles of food  beverage  and labor cost controlsPrinciples of food  beverage  and labor cost controls
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controlslibfsb
 
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
Principles of food  beverage  and labor cost controlsPrinciples of food  beverage  and labor cost controls
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controlslibfsb
 
Foodbeverage
FoodbeverageFoodbeverage
Foodbeveragelibfsb
 
Food and beverage_operations
Food and beverage_operationsFood and beverage_operations
Food and beverage_operationslibfsb
 
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operators
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operatorsFood safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operators
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operatorslibfsb
 
The bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage bookThe bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage booklibfsb
 
The bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage bookThe bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage booklibfsb
 
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.edition
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.editionIntroduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.edition
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.editionlibfsb
 
Hotel front office management 3rd edition
Hotel front office management 3rd editionHotel front office management 3rd edition
Hotel front office management 3rd editionlibfsb
 
4.the singularity
4.the singularity4.the singularity
4.the singularitylibfsb
 
3.great profits
3.great profits3.great profits
3.great profitslibfsb
 
2.pleasing all
2.pleasing all2.pleasing all
2.pleasing alllibfsb
 
1.the recession,
1.the recession,1.the recession,
1.the recession,libfsb
 
9.greener library
9.greener library9.greener library
9.greener librarylibfsb
 
8.moving on
8.moving on 8.moving on
8.moving on libfsb
 
7.let them
7.let them7.let them
7.let themlibfsb
 
6.dealing with
6.dealing with6.dealing with
6.dealing withlibfsb
 
5.the management
5.the management5.the management
5.the managementlibfsb
 
4.making the
4.making the4.making the
4.making thelibfsb
 
2.free electronic
2.free electronic2.free electronic
2.free electroniclibfsb
 

Plus de libfsb (20)

Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
Principles of food  beverage  and labor cost controlsPrinciples of food  beverage  and labor cost controls
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
 
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
Principles of food  beverage  and labor cost controlsPrinciples of food  beverage  and labor cost controls
Principles of food beverage and labor cost controls
 
Foodbeverage
FoodbeverageFoodbeverage
Foodbeverage
 
Food and beverage_operations
Food and beverage_operationsFood and beverage_operations
Food and beverage_operations
 
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operators
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operatorsFood safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operators
Food safety basics a reference guide for foodservice operators
 
The bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage bookThe bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage book
 
The bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage bookThe bar & beverage book
The bar & beverage book
 
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.edition
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.editionIntroduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.edition
Introduction.to.management.in.the.hospitality.industry.10th.edition
 
Hotel front office management 3rd edition
Hotel front office management 3rd editionHotel front office management 3rd edition
Hotel front office management 3rd edition
 
4.the singularity
4.the singularity4.the singularity
4.the singularity
 
3.great profits
3.great profits3.great profits
3.great profits
 
2.pleasing all
2.pleasing all2.pleasing all
2.pleasing all
 
1.the recession,
1.the recession,1.the recession,
1.the recession,
 
9.greener library
9.greener library9.greener library
9.greener library
 
8.moving on
8.moving on 8.moving on
8.moving on
 
7.let them
7.let them7.let them
7.let them
 
6.dealing with
6.dealing with6.dealing with
6.dealing with
 
5.the management
5.the management5.the management
5.the management
 
4.making the
4.making the4.making the
4.making the
 
2.free electronic
2.free electronic2.free electronic
2.free electronic
 

4.a comparative

  • 1. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm BIJ 18,3 A comparative study of dates export supply chain performance: the case of Oman and Tunisia 386 Msafiri Mbaga Natural Resource Economics Department, College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman Mohammed Suleiman Rashid Al-Shabibi Ministry of Agriculture, Muscat, Oman, and Houcine Boughanmi and Slim Mohamed Zekri Natural Resource Economics Department, College of Agriculture and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach to the dates export supply chain (DESC) in Oman and Tunisia (taking Tunisia as a benchmark) to identify gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries. Second, is to utilize the information generated to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. Design/methodology/approach – Four benchmarking dimensions are developed, each dimension with a number of key performance indicators (KPIs). The KPIs are then used in the benchmarking exercise. Findings – Results show that Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the four dimensions. Originality/value – The study enables the readers and the stakeholders to gain some valuable insights in the subject matter. A careful analysis of the findings should enable Oman policy makers and stakeholders to produce an industry action plan to correct the gaps and take the lead. Keywords Sultanate of Oman, Tunisia, Exports, Performance criteria, Benchmarking Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction The date industry is an important component of the Oman economy and date is a leading cash crop. According to the 2005 census, there are an estimated 7.8 million date palm trees grown throughout the Sultanate, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area, employing a significant number of Omani people directly and indirectly. Statistics shows that in 2006 the Sultanate ranked ninth in the world in date production far behind its neighbors such as Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (Table I). Date production has been declining since 2001, the year date production reached its highest level in the Sultanate in recent years (FAO, 2008). Export disincentives which Benchmarking: An International include poor quality output, absence of a well-coordinated supply chain and lack of Journal aggressive export promotion, together with the 2002-2004 drought, have been widely Vol. 18 No. 3, 2011 pp. 386-408 recognized as being the reasons behind the decline in date production. q Emerald Group Publishing Limited Based on Table I, we see that Oman and Tunisia have consistently ranked ninth and 1463-5771 DOI 10.1108/14635771111137778 tenth, respectively, among the ten leading date producers in the world. However, even
  • 2. Dates export 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 supply chain World 4,966 5,447 5,624 6,172 6,503 6,724 6,653 7,092 6,682 6,704 1. Egypt 741 840 906 1,007 1,102 1,090 1,100 1,166 1,170 1,170 2. Iran 877 918 908 900 900 879 885 880 997 997 3. Saudi Arabia 649 648 712 712 712 830 884 901 970 970 4. Iraq 750 913 764 932 907 866 868 875 404 404 387 5. UAE 288 290 535 757 757 757 757 760 859 859 6. Pakistan 537 722 580 613 630 625 630 622 497 507 7. Algeria 303 387 428 366 370 418 492 470 516 491 8. Sudan 180 200 240 332 330 330 330 330 328 328 9. Oman 185 236 282 280 298 239 220 231 247 259 10. Tunisia 95 103 103 105 112 115 111 122 125 125 Table I. Note: 1,000 tons Main countries Source: FAO Statistics producing dates though Tunisia ranked tenth in terms of date production, the country ranked fourth (Table II) in terms of date export volume. Furthermore, Tunisia ranked first and third with regard to date export value and date export unit value, respectively. In 2005, for example (Table II), while Tunisia exported 50,180 metric tons (40 percent of its production) at a price of US$2,008 per metric ton, Oman managed to export only 4,090 metric tons (1.65 percent of its production) at a price of US$290 per metric ton. It is therefore clear from that Tunisia is performing better than other countries in the region in terms of export unit value and export value. In addition, even though Tunisia accounts for only 2 percent of world dates production, its share of global exports in value is around 30 percent (FAO and Table I). Given that an estimated 7.8 million date palm trees are grown throughout the Sultanate of Oman, occupying about 50 percent of the planted area, one would have expected Oman to be a leading date producer and exporter in the region. Statistics presented above, however, show that Oman is lagging behind in terms of date export volume and export value, while Tunisia is leading (Table II). Country Volume (Mt) Country Value (6,000 US$) Country Unit value (US$) 1. Iran 117,060 Tunisia 100,769 Israel 4,480 2. Pakistan 84,060 Iran 68,495 USA 3,188 3. Saudia 51,450 Israel 40,836 Tunisia 2,008 4. Tunisia 50,180 Saudia 32,456 Algeria 1,702 5. UAE 23,880 Pakistan 29,775 Jordan 942 6. Algeria 10,860 Algeria 18,492 Saudia 635 7. Israel 9,120 USA 13,723 Iran 585 8. Egypt 8,880 UAE 8,830 Egypt 551 9. USA 4,300 Egypt 4,893 UAE 370 10. Oman 4,090 Jordan 2,155 Pakistan 354 Table II. 11. Jordan 2,290 Oman 1,184 Oman 290 Dates export volume, value and unit value Note: Volume multiplied by unit value may not be exactly equal to total export value because of for the main exporting rounding countries based on 2005 Source: FAO Statistics statistics
  • 3. BIJ Furthermore, for the last nine years (2001-2009) as indicated in Table III, the internal 18,3 consumption (IC) of dates in Oman was only 49 percent of total dates production, This leaves 51 percent of dates produced in Oman potentially available for export. Therefore, there is a need for benchmarking so as to find ways to improve the dates export supply chain (DESC) in Oman. Based on these facts, Tunisia is taken as a benchmark or best practice among date-producing countries. 388 The purpose of this study is therefore two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia (Tunisia as a benchmark) so as to identify gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the export supply chain in the two countries. Second, is to utilize the information generated (regarding the gaps) to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a description of the DESC in Oman and Tunisia. Section 3 reviews the literature on benchmarking and supply chain. Section 4 presents the methodology and includes the various key performance indicators (KPIs) used to identify and quantify gaps in Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs. Section 5 presents the results and discussion. Lastly, Section 6 presents the conclusions and policy recommendations. 2. A description of Oman’s and Tunisia’s DESCs 2.1 Oman DESC For the purpose of this paper, dates supply chain (DSC) is defined as the various stages through which dates are channelled starting from farm until it reaches the consumers. Generally, the DSC includes three main stages: (1) production and harvesting; (2) initial processing at farm level, processing and packaging at factory level and transport to the port; and (3) handling of dates at the international markets by wholesalers, retailers and consumers. DESC, therefore, can be defined as steps through which dates undergoes, starting from post-harvest until dates arrives at the port of the exporting country. Stage two in the DSC is more or less the DESC itself. Activities in stages one and two of the DSC are performed in the exporting country – in this case Oman and Tunisia. Stage three activities are performed in the importing country. The marketing channels are a set of interdependent organizations involved in the process of making a product or service available for use or consumption. The DESC in Oman is one of the marketing channels that include: initial processing at farm level, Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010a TP 298 239 220 231 252 259 261 267 273 280 IC 123 125 118 120 123 127 132 134 133 135 Export 13 9 9 5 5 5 9 7 7 9 Excess 162 105 93 106 124 127 120 126 133 136 Table III. IC as a percentage of TP 41 52 54 52 49 49 51 50 49 48 Oman dates production, consumption an export, Note: aIndicate a forecast for 2010 based on a time trend 2001-2010 Source: Ministry of Agriculture (Statistics Department)
  • 4. processing and packaging at factory level and transportation to the port. Generally, Dates export it is how the dates are produced, sorted, graded, processed, packaged and transported supply chain that determines their final export market value. Furthermore, safety and quality management of dates along the DESC plays a very important role in the determination of their final market value. Currently, there are around four dates factories (exporters) in Oman beside several small processing units mostly for local consumption. 389 2.2 Tunisian DESC Tunisia is the world-leading producer of Deglet-Nour date variety and most of the dates-producing oases are concentrated in the Southern part of the country. Tunisia possesses approximately 50 percent of the world’s Deglet-Nour palm trees. The official production figure in 2006 was 125,000 tons for all varieties, of which about two-thirds were Deglet-Nour. The dates export sector in Tunisia is ranked third at export level after olive oil and seafood products. Dates production in Tunisia is characterised by five types of date varieties: Deglet-Nour, Allig, Khouat Allig, Kenta and Farmla. But Deglet-Nour is the most popularly produced variety and better appreciated as a noble variety because of its quality and flavour. Significant investments in modern Deglet-Nour plantations and an aggressive marketing strategy have led to a steady increase in exports. While exports ranged between 15,000 and 20,000 tons in the first half of the 1990s, exports reached 25,000 and 50,180 tons in 2000 and 2005, respectively. Dates destined for the export market are treated in more than 30 processing factories registered for exports. Dates export account for about 40 percent of total production (TP). Although Tunisia accounts for only 2 percent of world date production, the country ranks first in terms of export value and fourth in terms of export quantity (Table III). This is mainly due to the high market value of the Deglet-Nour variety, a good quality product, well appreciated in foreign markets, leading to higher market share. In general, Tunisia is well positioned in high-value markets with high purchasing power. Compared to its direct competitors, Tunisia represents 55 percent of EU imports in value. Tunisian dates are mainly exported to European countries accounting for more than 81 percent of total date imports and other Arab countries in second position with 15 percent of total date imports. Around 70 percent of Tunisian dates exports are processed dates. Tunisia’s top 20 clients in the international markets during 2005 are as presented in Table IV. The DESC in Tunisia is organized into somewhat comprehensive and complex marketing channels. All the agents are involved: producers, collectors, conditioners, exporters, wholesalers, etc. As most of these market participants operate individually and independently, it is difficult to monitor and control their actions. As a result, it is difficult to provide an estimate of the exact volumes of dates handled by each one. Date marketing takes place mostly in the last quarter of the year (October to December), and during the holy month of Ramadan. Given the strong tradition of date consumption in Tunisia, a large share of production is consumed within the country and especially in the producing areas. Dates for the domestic market are often bought by wholesalers and semi-wholesalers from the collectors (Laajimi, 2002). Decisions concerning the distribution of dates between export markets and domestic markets seem to be taken by collectors. They are the main marketing agent in the supply chain. They ensure the supply of dates to wholesalers, exporters and conditioning and packaging industries. Exports operations are undertaken ´´ either by foreign trade enterprises (Societes de Commerce International) or by the conditioning and packaging industries – dates factories (Laajimi, 2002).
  • 5. BIJ Country Export quantity (tons) 18,3 1. France 16,601 2. Morocco 9,405 3. Italy 6,179 4. Spain 4,794 390 5. Germany 4,095 6. Belgium 1,765 7. UK 1,700 8. Russia 1,388 9. Switzerland 909 10. Turkey 855 11. Indonesia 588 12. Senegal 533 13. Canada 492 14. Holland 476 15. Mauritania 407 16. Hungary 355 17. UAE 346 18. Malaysia 291 Table IV. 19. Greece 257 Tunisia’s clients in the 20. Bosnia and Herzegovina 233 international markets during 2005 Source: GidF (2005) 3. Literature review Benchmarking also known as “best practice benchmarking” is an approach used in management and particularly strategic management, in which organizations evaluate various aspects of their processes in relation to best practice, usually within the same sector – for example, in this case, Tunisia and Oman in relation to DESC. This then allows organizations to develop plans to adopt such best practice, usually with the aim of improving their performance even beyond that of the best practice. Benchmarking may be a one-off event, but is often treated as a continuous process in which organizations continually seek to challenge their practices. The benchmarking process is, therefore, valuable to producers and or companies in opening up many different ideas about processes, approaches and concerns (Allan, 1997). The benchmarking approach was first developed in the USA during the late 1970s by Xerox Corporation. It has since then been an effective way of improving productivity and competitiveness, and in fact today benchmarking has become a widely practiced and generally accepted method of assessing performance. The benchmarking approach is very versatile; it has been applied in many areas, from assessing public policy, as in Helgason (1997); in the food industry, as in the UK Food and Drink National Training Organisation (2001, 1998); in dairy, as in Anon (2005); in strategic planning in agriculture, as in Ronan and Taylor (2004); in food and beverage, as in Deloitte (2009); in grain supply chain, as in Barnes (2007); in food and drinks, as in Luther and Abdel-Kader (2006); international competitiveness in agriculture, as in Thelwell and Ritson (2006); in analyzing information flow to farmers, as in Verissimo and Woodford (2005); in agriculture performance indicators, as in Wilson et al. (2004); in analyzing good agricultural practices, as in UNCTAD (2005); in analyzing fruits and vegetable supply
  • 6. chain, as in UNCTAD/WTO (2007); in the area of quality management and productivity Dates export improvement, as in UNIDO (2002); in agriculture in relation to fresh produce quality supply chain and safety management, as in Garcia and Poole (2003); in locating and leveraging manufacturing best practices, as in Brandt and Taninecz (2004); in assessing microfinance institutions across countries, as in Stephens (2004); in agriculture in relation to greenhouse gas emissions, as in CLAN (2006); in assessing government organizations, as in Howard and Kilmartin (2006); in evaluating and comparing the performance of federal agencies, as 391 in USDA (2008); in evaluating the sustainability performance of food supply chains, as in Yakovleva et al. (2009) and many more. The process of benchmarking is more than just a means of gathering data on how well a company performs against others. It is also a method of identifying new ideas and new ways of improving processes to better meet the expectations of customers. According to Omachonu and Ross (1994), the ultimate objective of benchmarking is process improvements to meet and whenever possible exceed customer expectations. Benchmarking as a methodological tool has been gaining attention among academics and practitioners as a means of strengthening the ability to compete (Yasin, 2002). The benchmarking approach has an internal dimension whereby an organization critically examines itself in search of the best practice, as well as an external dimension whereby the organization analyses its industry and other domains in an attempt to identify external and competitive practices, which may be implemented in its operating environment (Yasin, 2002). In this study, both the internal and external dimensions are implemented. To date, there is no single benchmarking process that has been universally adopted. The wide appeal and acceptance of benchmarking has led to the emergence of various benchmarking methodologies. The most prominent methodology is the 12-stage methodology by Camp (1989), which consists of the following: (1) selection of the subject in advance; (2) clear definition of the process; (3) identification of the potential partners; (4) identification of data sources; (5) data collection from selected partners; (6) gap analysis; (7) establish process differences; (8) target future performance; (9) communicate; (10) adjust goal; (11) implement; and (12) review/recalibrate. A shorter version of the methodology as proposed by Camp (1989) includes six steps, namely: (1) identify problem areas; (2) identify other industries that have similar processes; (3) identify organizations that are leaders in these areas;
  • 7. BIJ (4) survey companies for measures and practices; 18,3 (5) visit the “best practice” companies to identify leading edge practices; and (6) implement new and improved business practices. Broadly, this shorter version will be adopted in this study. This study seeks to analyze the DESC in Tunisia and Oman in order to identify 392 gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries. The information generated will then be used to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. Generally, supply chain encompasses all the facilities, functions and activities performed in the process of producing and delivering a service or a product (in this case dates) from suppliers to the final customer (Russell and Taylor, 1998; Sparling and van Duren, 2003). More specifically, the concept of supply chain management (SCM) can be defined as collaboration among actors in a supply system, from the primary producer to the final retailer, with the aim of satisfying the consumer at lower costs possible. SCM in relation to agricultural commodities therefore focuses on improving efficiency and effectiveness in the system in order to deliver a wide range of safe and desirable agricultural products in a cost-effective manner. The performance of firms and the industry particularly with respect to food safety and quality standards is strongly influenced by the structural characteristics of the food chains, the strategies of individual firms and the level of coordination of the food system (Poole et al., 2002). With recent concerns regarding food-borne diseases, now food supply chains must be efficient, transparent and “traceable” as consumers expect to be able to trace each food item back to its earliest production stage. Traceability helps to increase consumer confidence on the product and hence value. Supply chains that are less flexible and inefficient, where supply chain processes and procedures cannot be upgraded very quickly, and products are not traceable, become a major impediment to trade (Garcia Martinez and Poole, 2003). Implicit in the benchmarking framework is the notion of gap analysis, namely, the difference between the level of operations in a given organization and that within a best practice company. Comparisons made within benchmarking are often about understanding the gap. Making comparisons against best practice or stated aims allows companies to assess the nature of the improvement that they have to make in order to catch or surpass world-class competitors. Analysis of gaps from base (current performance) to benchmark (current performance level of the best companies) helps companies to prioritize resource allocation (Balm, 1996). Identification of critical performance measures (or KPIs) and their comparison with similar performance measures of “Best in Class” organizations is at the heart of benchmarking (Bhutta and Huq, 1999). Identification of the proper measures is a fundamental part of the study as they represent the yardsticks, which tell people how well they have done, and as such motivates them to achieve higher targets (Zairi, 1994). The information sought in benchmarking usually consists of the following two parts: (1) qualitative business process descriptions; and (2) quantitative performance data used to determine the differences in performance levels among the companies being compared (Andersen et al., 1999). The next section shows how key benchmarking principles from the literature reviewed above have been utilized in this study.
  • 8. 4. Benchmarking methodological framework Dates export In businesses today, it is commonplace to benchmark practices and performance against supply chain other companies, both at home and abroad. Typically, firms aspire to best practice as a yardstick, wherever this is feasible. This study applies the benchmarking approach employed by Garcia et al. (2003) to analyze the DESC in Oman and Tunisia. The aim is to identify gaps in the DESC taking Tunisia as the benchmark or the best practice. This study, however, adds to the body of literature in that it goes beyond the Garcia et al. 393 (2003) by incorporating some additional simple quantitative indicators to enrich the analysis. 4.1 Development of benchmark measures The identification and development of proper benchmark measures is a fundamental part of benchmarking. Benchmark measures focus on dimensions of performance that reflects a firm’s capabilities to meet current export supply chain demands by international customers. In this study, these critical dimensions have been broadly grouped into qualitative and quantitative groups. The qualitative group has been further sub-divided into three dimensions. The quantitative group, however, has only one dimension. Each of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. The KPIs for dimensions 1-3 were developed to reflect the characteristics which describe internal and external business behaviour of the firms in the industry. When compared with “the best practice”, the KPIs will lead to the identification of a performance gap. These KPIs will therefore be used to identify and quantify the performance gap between Tunisia and Oman. Dimension 1 investigates how the export SCM practices are coordinated in Oman and Tunisia. Table V presents a summary of KPIs that form dimension 1. There are altogether eight KPIs for dimension 1. Dimension 2 looks at safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain in Oman and Tunisia. Safety and quality of exports are very important ingredients as far as the export business is concerned. Table VI presents a summary of KPIs that represents dimension 2. There are altogether six KPIs for dimension 2. Areas analysed Key performance indicators Coordination of the Exporter-producer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the export SCM practices relationship in terms of communication of requirements, specifications and regulations Exporter-importer information sharing. This reflects the directness of the relationship in terms of communication of the requirements, specifications and regulations Market orientation. This reflects the ability of exporter to predict customer requirements Production flexibility. This reflects the abilities of the exporter to meet changing customer requirements Customer orientation. Involves visits by customers to check and advise on safety and quality practices throughout the production and export system Vertical integration. Reflects the involvement of exporters in upstream and /or downstream processes in the supply chain Vertical coordination. The degree of co-ordination of operations in the supply chain Table V. Traceability systems. The existence of documented traceability systems Dimension 1 KPIs
  • 9. BIJ Areas analysed Key performance indicators 18,3 Safety and quality orientation Quality certification. The level of certification obtained by the firm, of the export supply chain e.g. ISO, HACCP, etc. Quality control specialists. The availability of specialists with the required skills 394 Training and knowledge. The availability of training for workers Social responsibility. The exporter’s policies with respect to worker health, safety and welfare Environmental management. The exporter environmental management policies and practices Table VI. Safety and quality requirements. Safety and quality specifications as Dimension 2 KPIs part of exporter-importer contracts or agreements Dimension 3 analyzes the export operational infrastructures under which Oman and Tunisian firms operate. Operational infrastructure for the purpose of this benchmarking exercise include: processing and packaging quality and technology used; labelling flexibility in processing and packaging in response to customer needs; storage technology and storage capacity; and transport quality and technology. A good export operational infrastructure is very important for the success of the export business. Table VII presents a summary of KPIs that represents dimension 3. There are altogether seven KPIs for dimension 3. Dimension 4 tracks the efficiency of the export supply chain in Oman and Tunisia. For the purpose of this benchmarking exercise, the efficiency of the export supply chain is measured by four KPIs which include: profit per ton (PPT) exported; profit per employee ratio; cost per ton exported and export intensity. Table VIII presents a summary of the four KPIs that represents dimension 4. 4.2 Questionnaire design and data collection To implement the benchmarking methodological framework presented in Tables V-VIII, a questionnaire was developed to collect the required data and other relevant information. Areas analysed Key performance indicators Export operational Processing and packaging technology. The technology used in processing infrastructure and packaging operations Processing and packaging quality. The quality of processing and packaging materials used and the extent of operational flexibility available to meet customer requirements Labelling flexibility in processing and packaging. Flexibility in meeting customer labelling requirements Storage technology. The level of technology or automation the firm uses in its storage facilities Storage capacity. The firm’s storage capacity Storage quality. The firm’s storage quality Transport technology. The level of technology or automation employed by the firm Table VII. Transport quality. The availability of transport of required quality and the Dimension 3 KPIs extent to which problems are encountered en route to the customer
  • 10. Each KPI in the benchmarking methodological framework was used to formulate questions Dates export used as a discussion guide during firm visits and interviews with dates exporters. The supply chain questionnaire was pre-tested for consistency and validity. Data were collected from seven Tunisian and three Omani dates exporters during June-July 2007. Table IX presents information on dates exporters in Oman and Tunisia where data were collected. The complexity and difficulties in benchmarking performance dimensions tends to be in assigning quantitative measures to the selected indicators. For dimensions 1-3, 395 a qualitative approach is used to compute each KPI as in other studies as follows (Garcia et al., 2004; Food and Drink National Training Organisation, 2001): . Level 1. Firm shows little or no capacity in achieving “best practice”. . Level 2. Firm shows some capacity in achieving “best practice”. . Level 3. Firm shows “best practice” in this area (e.g. consistent performance, clear and demonstrable systems in place). This method allows the identification of areas in which firms have room for improvement (Gilmour, 1999). For dimension 4, descriptive statistics were computed to measure the efficiency and the performance of the export supply chain. 5. Results and discussion Results from the benchmarking exercise are presented below. For clear presentation and comparison of results, the spider web or radar charts have been used (Mosley and Mayer, 1999). A spider web diagram shows at a glance multiple targets and gaps, and as a result, capture tradeoffs that occur between goals and their achievements (Ahmed and Rafiq, 1998). As indicated earlier, in this study, Tunisian exporters are taken as “best practice”. These are the practices which have often been assigned a “level 3” in the benchmarking analysis. Areas analysed Key performance indicators Efficiency of the export PPT exported. Measured in US dollars, this is the amount of profit generated supply chain per unit volume of business Profits per employee ratio. The amount of profit in US dollars generated per employee Cost per ton exported ðin US$Þ ¼ Cost of Export=Export Volume Table VIII. Export intensity ¼ Export revenue=Total revenue for the entire output Dimension 4 KPIs No. Company name (Tunisian companies) No. Company name (Oman companies) 1 Vacpa (in Beni Khalled – Tunis) 1 Ibn Nasser Al-Siyabi Trading 2 Horchani (in Tozeur – Tunis) 2 United Dates Factory Company 3 Cap Bon Frigorifique 3 Oman Dates International 4 Sages in Tunis 5 Jasmine Export Table IX. 6 Profruits Dates processing 7 Medi fruits companies in Tunisia 8 Les Agrumes Du Golse Flus and Oman
  • 11. BIJ 5.1 Qualitative dimensions 18,3 5.1.1 Dimension 1: coordination of the export SCM practices. 5.1.1.1 Exporter-producer information sharing. Exporter-producer information sharing is a key to the success of the export supply chain. This is because, it is through information-sharing process that feedbacks from consumers in the export market reach producers in exporting country. Through this process, consumer needs and 396 wants can very be incorporated in the production process at farm level in the producing country. In many cases, exporters are less likely to have systems in place for providing producers with information related to market intelligence, crop protection regulation, quality standards, etc. With regard to exporter-producer information sharing, Oman score is 51.8 percent or 1.55 in the KPI scale of 1-3 indicating a weak exporter-producer relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 68.2 percent or 2.05 (Figure 1). This is largely due to the lack of information sharing system in Oman. In Tunisia, some degree of vertical integration and contacts with government agencies facilitates communication greatly. 5.1.1.2 Exporter-importer information sharing. In addition to exporter-producer information sharing, information sharing between exporters and importers is very important. Exporters need to know the importing countries requirements and specifications. Importers also need to know safety and quality standards in the exporting countries. Therefore, strong information sharing between exporters and importers leads to high performance in the production and delivery of the products to importers and ultimately to the consumers. With regard to exporter-importer information sharing, Oman’s score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 in KPI scale indicating a relatively weak relationship, compared to Tunisia’s score of 85.7 percent or 2.57 in KPI scale (Figure 1). This is due to lack of a strong exporter organization in Oman and lack of a strong link with importers. In Tunisia, such organizational relationships exist and are strong. 5.1.1.3 Market orientation. Market orientation is another area of export supply chain coordination in which partners in different regions can share market intelligence. Market orientation plays a role in choosing the varieties to be grown, and this can change every year depending on market requirements and the type of agricultural commodity whether it is an annual crop. For a perennial crop, such as date palm changes take time. Exporters can develop their own information network through visiting trade fairs, getting advice from international organizations and following market trends. Exporter-producer information sharing 3 Exporter-importer Traceability 2 information sharing 1 Vertical coordination 0 Market orientation Figure 1. Vertical integration Production flexibility Benchmarking results on the coordination of the Oman Customer orientation export SCM practices Tunisia
  • 12. Omani dates export sector presents a medium degree of market orientation with a score Dates export of 77.8 percent or 2.33, as shown in the spider chart (Figure 1). The Omani exporters supply chain monitor demand trends in the international markets. They target mostly the developing countries in Asia where firms are generally not very well organized in terms of market research and they have inefficient promotion programs. All Omani firms supply three varieties of dates which are Faradh, Khalas and Khasab. Most of the exports are of Faradh variety which is in high demand in the traditional low-value Asian markets due 397 to its intact and non-sticky skins. On the other hand, Tunisian dates export sector with a score of (100 percent or 3, Figure 1) presents a high degree of market orientation. Tunisia monitors very closely demand trends in the European market and other international markets and firms seem to be generally very well organized. Firms have good relationships with other firms and organizations in the international markets, enabling them to work together efficiently. In this arrangement, information regarding domestic and export markets requirements flows efficiently along the export supply chain. This may be one of the reasons why Tunisian export firms have managed to compete successfully for a larger share of the EU market. 5.1.1.4 Production flexibility. Production flexibility can be defined as the ability of the exporter to meet changing customer requirements. Production flexibility can be enhanced by the existence of strong communication infrastructure capable of reaching and communicating with importers easily and efficiently. Omani firms score is 67 percent or 2.01 implying a limited flexibility in terms of changing varieties supplied and responding to customer demands. On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is 85.7 percent or 2.57 implying that Tunisian firms tend to be more proactively involved in changing their production processes to meet customer requirements. This is due to better communication infrastructure that constantly monitors and forecast consumer trends. 5.1.1.5 Customer orientation. Customer orientation can be measured by the number of visits from customers to audit, check and advice on safety, quality practices and all matters of interest throughout the production and export supply chain. Customer orientation is important as one of the coordination practices in the export supply chain. For both Oman and Tunisia, visits to exporters by customers take place regularly every season. However, their regularity and frequency depends on the customers. Results from survey data show that customers have fewer direct involvement in Oman (score 56 percent or 1.68) compared to Tunisia (score 90.5 percent or 2.72). 5.1.1.6 Vertical integration. Vertical integration is the involvement of exporters in upstream or downstream processes in the export supply chain. In vertical integration, the exporter may be vertically integrated from production to exportation and sometimes large and modern producers are directly involved in exportation. Tunisia’s score is 76.1 percent or 2.28 which imply a high degree of vertical integration in terms of production, processing and export. Oman’s score is 67 percent or 2.01 which imply a less direct involvement of exporters in production. 5.1.1.7 Vertical coordination. Vertical coordination includes operations such as harvesting, processing, packing, storage and transportation organized and coordinated in order to control product quality along the export supply chain. With regard to vertical coordination, Oman score is 78 percent or 2.01 which implies that generally there is some coordination of operations (harvesting, processing and export) but with
  • 13. BIJ no modern control systems, such as IT tracking systems. Tunisia score is 90.5 percent 18,3 or 2.72 implying that operations are generally highly coordinated in large and modern packinghouses equipped with IT tracking systems. This enables the system to monitor time closely and, as a result, making it possible to minimize time in storage and transportation. 5.1.1.8 Traceability systems. Product-tracing systems are essential for food safety and 398 quality control. Most of the foreign markets especially in North America and Europe require traceability system. Traceability systems help firms to solve safety and quality problems quickly with minimal disruption by tracing back the origin of the products. A well-functioning traceability system uniquely codes each item or product to identify time of production, line of production, place of production and sequence. With such specific information, the processor can trace faulty products to the minute of production and determine whether other products from the same batch are also defective. With regard to traceability systems, Tunisia score is 92.1 percent or 2.76 which imply that generally there is a high level of traceability. Any packing box sold in the European market carries codes and references that allows tracing of the product to the packinghouse, so the treatment undergone by the product at the packinghouse can be verified easily. Oman score is 66.6 percent or 2.00 which implies that many dates exporters have no traceability system in place. This will likely make it difficult for Oman to penetrate the lucrative EU and North American markets that require traceability systems. A summary of the eight KPIs (5.1.1.1-5.1.1.8) is shown in the radar chart (Figure 1). Figure 1 is a spider web that presents a visual graphical summary of the eight KPIs of dimension 1. Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all eight KPIs. At the range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators. On the other hand, Oman’s performance is not all that impressive. Its scores range from 1 to 2, achieving a score of above 2 in one indicator, namely market orientation. 5.1.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain. 5.1.2.1 Quality certification. As industries are widening their range of products, certification to national and international requirements has become necessary and crucial in winning consumer confidence. Varying levels of certification are seen in each country. Omani firms score reached 55.5 percent or 1.66 where some of them have ISO certificates and the majority are without certificates. On the other hand, Tunisian firms score reached 61.9 percent or 1.86, where some of them have several types of certificates (ISO 9001, ISO 22000, HACCP, BRC, IFS, ISO 14000), but just like in Oman, the majority are without certificates. 5.1.2.2 Quality control specialists. Quality control specialists are the employees who devise ways to guarantee the quality of products. They study products at various stages of development to make sure that they are safe, will satisfy customers and meet the company’s and regulators’ standards. With regard to quality control specialists, they are a norm in Tunisia with score reaching 100 percent or 3.00 and less common in Oman with score reaching 77.8 percent or 2.33. 5.1.2.3 Training and knowledge. Training is important because organizations need to upgrade the knowledge and skills of their professionals. In most cases, training is focused on achieving business goals leading to high-quality products and services. For this particular KPI, Oman score is 77.8 percent or 2.33 compared to Tunisia score of 81.9 percent or 2.46. Implying that there is no significant difference between the two countries in as far as training and knowledge is concerned.
  • 14. 5.1.2.4 Social responsibility. It is the obligation of the management of the firm. Social Dates export responsibility involves making decisions and taking actions that will enhance the supply chain welfare and interests of employees. This is important in increasing employee productivity. With regard to social responsibility, Omani firms score is 92.1 percent or 2.76 where workers are generally insured (social insurance) and labour regulations are generally adhered to, with access to medical care and provisions for the workers welfare (e.g. workers age, working hours, working conditions, legal and health requirements, 399 salary and number of days for vacation). Tunisian firms score is 95.91 percent or 2.88, where approximately all the non-seasonal workers are insured and labour regulations are adhered to, with access to medical care and provision for the workers welfare. 5.1.2.5 Environmental management. Lately, corporations have been confronted with a number of global environmental challenges such as global warming, acid rain, depletion of natural resources, waste management, green consumerism and pollution prevention. Nowadays, there is a growing pressure for corporations to deliver products and services which are GREEN or environmentally friendly. Various environmental management practices (e.g. implementing aggressive pollution-prevention programs; initiating environment-related performance measures; and developing green products and process technologies) provide opportunities for firms to strengthen their distinctive competence. With regard to environmental management, the score for Omani firms is 33.3 percent or 1 implying that generally there are no demonstrable environmental management policies or practices in many of the Omani firms. On the other hand, Tunisian firms score is 47.6 percent or 1.43 implying that there is generally very little verifiable efforts in place focused towards environmental management. 5.1.2.6 Safety and quality requirements. The competitiveness of food companies at national and international markets depends upon their ability to adopt production processes which meet food safety and quality requirements. Food safety and quality assurance affect the cost of carrying out business transactions, and implicit therein is the private incentive for adopting voluntary quality assurance systems. Quality assurance systems have the potential to reduce transaction costs by serving as the seller’s guarantee of safety or quality (Holleran et al., 1999). With regard to safety and quality requirements, Tunisian score is 80.7 percent or 2.42. In Tunisia, the safety and quality specifications are always put in the contract with the customers. In addition, because of Tunisian Government assistance in improving dates quality control systems, the safety and quality requirements are always met by the exporters. Omani score is 59.21 percent or 1.78 where exporters place more emphasis on personal contacts and good relationships with customers than on formal contracts. Moreover, because of low government assistance, dates quality control systems in Oman are not efficient sometimes hampering exporter’s ability to meet foreign customer specifications. Figure 2 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of the six key qualitative performance indicators of dimension 2. As indicated, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative performance indicators. At the range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators except for two, namely, quality certification and environmental management. Moreover, Tunisia scores 3 or 100 percent in quality control specialist indicator implying that Tunisia takes the issue of quality control very seriously by employing enough qualified quality control specialists.
  • 15. BIJ Quality certification 3 18,3 2 Quality control Safety and quality requirements specialist 1 400 0 Environmental Training and management knowledge Figure 2. Result on the safety and Oman Social responsibility quality orientation of the Tunisia export supply chain Note: A summary of dimension 2 On the other hand, Oman’s performance is not all that impressive – for three indicators, Oman scores range from 1 to 2. For quality control specialist, training and knowledge, and social responsibility indicators, Oman achieved scores above 2. 5.1.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure. 5.1.3.1 Processing and packing technology. Advances in packaging technology provide a potential for improved quality and extended shelf life of agricultural products. With regard to processing and packing technology, Oman is 77.73 percent or 2.33 and Tunisia 84.1 percent or 2.52. Both countries have some degree of automation in sorting and grading lines, varying in the age of equipments and states of the technology used. 5.1.3.2 Processing and packing quality. It depends on customer requirements and specifications. For instance, some customers require sterile foods with aseptic processing and packaging in a manner that leaves the food free of microorganisms. Such a requirement has public health significance, because it helps to prevent the growth of any microorganism under normal non-refrigerated storage condition and distribution. Some of the foods we buy from grocery stores go through non-refrigerated storage conditions; as a result, processing and packing quality are of paramount importance. With respect to processing and packing quality, Tunisian firms score is 100 percent or 3.00 indicating there are high-quality processing and packing operations in virtually all firms – with packaging materials readily available. In Tunisia, packaging requirements are pre-agreed with customers. Omani firms score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 indicating some level of processing and packing quality. 5.1.3.3 Labelling flexibility. Flexibility in dealing with customer labelling requirements varies across firms in the two countries. Some firms use excellent labelling systems which include bar coding whereas for others labelling is entirely manual. With regard to labelling flexibility, Omani firms score is 72.2 percent or 2.17 where labelling is carried out by hand in a few of the Omani firms. However, as long as customer requirements can be met by this method, there are no problems. There are also many traceability labelling requirements which not all Omani firms are able to meet. Tunisian firms score is 90.46 percent or 2.71 indicating that excellent labelling systems are used which include bar coding and use of coded reference. As a result, firms have no problem meeting customer labelling requirements. In Tunisia, firms’ use of advanced IT systems in labelling facilitates labelling flexibility.
  • 16. 5.1.3.4 Storage technology. High level of technology used in storage has to include Dates export temperature and humidity equipments control. With regard to storage technology, supply chain Oman score is 77.75 percent or 2.33 and Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79 indicating some level of investment and use of storage technology in both countries. 5.1.3.5 Storage capacity. With regard to storage capacity, Omani firms scored 100 percent or 3.00 implying that there is enough storage capacity available with a significant refrigerated capacity ranging from 100 to 2,600 tons. On the other hand, the 401 score for Tunisian firms reached 71.41 percent or 2.14. 5.1.3.6 Storage quality. The level of storage quality depends on the conditions of controlled atmosphere stores. Storage quality score for Tunisia is 98 percent or 2.94 which implies that all storage is under controlled atmosphere and pre-cooling takes place before transport, even with the hired storage facilities. In Oman, the score is 70 percent or 2.1. The small firms visited have few or no controlled atmosphere storage facilities, as a result, products are subject to different storage qualities. The largest firms, however, were found to have high-quality storage facilities. 5.1.3.7 Transport technology. The level of technology used in the transportation of products for export has to include temperature and humidity control equipments in order to control storage atmosphere either in the trucks or in the ships during shipment. With regard to transport technology, Tunisia score is 92.84 percent or 2.79 which implies that most of the dates exporters use cold transport with technology to control temperature and humidity in both land and sea transport. On the other hand, Oman score is 61.05 percent or 1.83 which implies that most of the dates exporters use non-cold transport, with low technology in both land and sea transportation. 5.1.3.8 Transport quality. The level of transport quality can be evaluated based on the availability of refrigerated containers and problems encountered en route to customers. Sometimes, dates are stored for a long time before shipment (up to several months). Owing to marketing conditions and packing possibilities, it is necessary to sample each consignment, in order to make sure that the quality of the fruit has not changed. During loading, it is important to ensure that the surfaces or packaging are not damaged. All the labels and markings must be checked to ensure compliance with the laws of the importing country, as well as the customer requirements. Furthermore, since temperature and humidity are important factors in the preservation of the quality of the dates, temperature and humidity control equipments with recorders must be placed in the container or the truck. With regard to transport quality, Tunisia score is 95 percent or 2.85. Tunisian firms use cold transport with technology to control temperature and humidity. The cost of cold transport is high, but with governmental support, the exporters are able to use cold transport in order to preserve dates from deterioration especially for the long distances between Tunisia and export destinations in the EU. Oman score is 60 percent or 1.8. Oman firms use non-cold transport with low technology to control temperature and humidity both in land and sea transport. The cost of cold transport is high, and without governmental support, the exporters in Oman are unable to use cold transport. Figure 3 is a spider web (radar chart) that presents a visual graphical summary of the eight KPIs of dimension 3. As indicated, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the seven KPIs. At the range of 1-3, Tunisia scores between 2 and 3 for all indicators. Tunisia scores 3 or 100 percent in processing and packing quality indicating the existence of high-quality processing and packing operations for all firms in Tunisia.
  • 17. BIJ Processing and packing technology 18,3 3 Processing and Transport quality 2 packing quality 1 402 Transport technology 0 Labelling flexibility Storage quality Storage technology Figure 3. Oman Storage capacity Export operational Tunisia infrastructure Note: Summary of dimension 3 Omani firms are performing better than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely storage capacity, because in Oman there is excess refrigerated storage capacity. This is because of the low-processed volumes handled by Omani firms compared to their initial planned capacity during establishment. At the range of 1-3, Oman scores 2-3 for most indicators except two, namely, transport technology and transport quality. 5.2 Quantitative dimensions 5.2.1 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain. 5.2.1.1 Profit per ton. A firm adds to profits if marginal revenue from selling an extra unit is greater than the marginal cost of production. Therefore, the PPT or per unit will be equal to average revenue (AR) minus average total cost (ATC). That is, the PPT ¼ AR 2 ATC. The firm with the highest PPT is therefore considered to be performing better than the other firms. The PPT or profit per exported ton is used here as measure of export performance. With respect to this indicator, Tunisian firms achieved around US$418 per exported ton, whereas Omani firms achieved around US$102 per exported ton. This implies that Tunisian exporters earn around four times higher profit per exported ton than Omani exporters. In other words, Tunisian operations are efficient and more profitable than Omani operations. It is important to note that the observed differences in profitability between Oman and Tunisia, to some extent, may be attributable to differences in variety, quality, price of raw material at the farm level and pre- and post-harvest operations. 5.2.1.2 Profit per employee. Recently, firms create wealth by converting “raw” intangibles into products, services, brands, intellectual capital and networks. The most valuable intangibles are employee skills, reputation and relationships. They represent competitive advantage in today’s business environment and are now the true source of corporate wealth. In this regard, one new metric of business performance is profit per employee (Wolfe, 2007; Lowell, 2007). Profit per employee or a contribution of each employee to the firm profit is therefore a good proxy for earnings on intangibles and hence a good indicator to evaluate the performance of a firm. With regard to profit per employee, Tunisian firms achieved around US$3,874 per employee, whereas Omani firms achieved around US$1,802 indicating that Tunisian are efficient and generate more profit per employee than Omani firms.
  • 18. 5.2.1.3 Export intensity. It is another financial indicator of export performance. Dates export It is defined as the proportion of export sale in total sale (Export Intensity ¼ supply chain Value of Export/Value of TP). With regard to this indicator, Tunisian firms score is around 0.86 indicating that around 86 percent of their revenue comes from export earnings and hence much more export oriented. Oman score, on the other hand, is around 0.35 implying that only 35 percent of Oman firms revenue come from export earnings. These export intensity statistics clearly show that Tunisian firms are very successful in date 403 export compared to Oman firms. Table X presents a summary of the three KPIs of dimension 4. As indicated, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all three indicators. Results of this dimension complements and enrich the results of the previous three dimensions. 6. Conclusions and recommendations 6.1 Conclusion The purpose of this study is two fold. First, is to apply the benchmarking approach employed by Garcia et al. (2004) to the DESC in Oman and Tunisia in order to identify gaps in the organizational and operational structures of the DESC in the two countries. Second, is to put forward recommendations to improve Omani DESC. The Tunisian DSC was used as the “best practice” or “benchmark” since, in many ways, it is more advanced and efficient than dates-producing countries. The benchmarking measures were put into two groups, namely, qualitative and quantitative group. The qualitative group has three dimensions and the quantitative group has one dimension only. Each of the four dimensions has a number of KPIs associated with it. It is these KPIs that are used to identify the gaps between Tunisia and Oman. The analysis required an audit of the export supply chains of both countries. The audit was executed by visiting the exporters in both countries to collect the required data by means of questionnaires. In total, ten date exporters were interviewed, three of which were Omani and the remaining seven firms were Tunisian. Results from the benchmarking exercise were summarized in radar chart diagrams to visualize multiple targets and gaps. The results show that Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the four dimensions. Evaluation and the implementation of the gaps highlighted in this study would help Omani firms to adapt and respond to safety and quality standards demanded by international market customers. It is important to note that some of the practices that are feasible in Tunisia may not be feasible in Oman. This is simply because there could be large variations in resource availability, degree of modernization and market orientation of agri-food systems between Oman, Tunisia and importing countries. A careful analysis of the findings should enable Oman policy makers and stakeholders to produce an industry action plan to correct the gaps and take the lead. Key performance indicators Tunisian exporters Omani exporters PPT exported (US$) 418 102 Profit per employee (US$) 3,874 1,802 Table X. Export intensity 0.857 0.353 Efficiency of the export supply chain Note: A summary of dimension 4 (efficiency of the export supply chain) (dimension 4)
  • 19. BIJ 6.2 Recommendations 18,3 6.2.1 Coordination of the export SCM practices. The level of coordination seen in Oman is significantly lower than that in Tunisia where operations are highly coordinated in large and modern packinghouses. Hence, initiatives should be developed at firm level in Oman to increase the level of coordination among actors in the export supply chain. To increase the level of coordination in the DESC in Oman, there is a need to support and 404 encourage horizontal and vertical integration, as well as information sharing between exporter and producers and exporter and importers. Because of the likely welfare impacts of DESC, the public sector needs to be involved through direct investment and through availability of credits/loans to the private sector to invest in the DESC. The Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of National Economy and the Ministry of Commerce and Industry could work together to coordinate this so that social objectives such as employment and income are taken into account. Key to greater coordination in the DESC is a traceability system. In future, it will be impossible to export to most of the foreign markets (in North America, Europe and Asia) without having a traceability system in place. As a result, Oman needs to start now working on establishing such a system especially for economically important commodities such as dates. However, the fragmented nature of the DESC makes it difficult for Omani dates exporters to establish a traceability system. This is why the government leadership and involvement is needed to make sure that this done. 6.2.2 Dimension 2: safety and quality orientation of the export supply chain. In this dimension, Tunisia is performing better than Oman in all the six key qualitative performance indicators. It is therefore clear that there is a lot that needs to be done to bridge the gaps identified. This will require significant investments on the part of the Omani Government, date exporters, as well as on the part of the stakeholders. These investments are of course costly and must be planned and executed carefully in a coordinated fashion in consultation with all the stakeholders. Because these investments are costly, they should not be borne entirely by the government, instead all the stakeholders should take part. As a result, it is important to assign more responsibility for ensuring safety and quality along the supply chain to the food companies themselves. This can be achieved by requiring date exporters and processors to obtain HACCP, ISO and other certifications that are necessary to win international and local customer confidence. Of course, obtaining these HACCP and ISO certifications and maintaining them, as articulated earlier herein, requires significant investments both in human and physical capital; including quality control infrastructures and business information systems. 6.2.3 Dimension 3: export operational infrastructure. Here Tunisia is performing better than Oman in seven out of the eight KPIs. Omani firms are only performing better than Tunisian firms in one of the indicators, namely storage capacity. Export operational infrastructure which include eight items ranging from processing and packing technology, labelling technology to storage technology requires significant long-term investments that cannot be made by the private sector alone. The lack of technical and financial support in Oman very often makes the required investments in export operational infrastructure very difficult. Therefore, it is recommended to implement joint public/private initiatives to develop actionable strategies aimed at improving export infrastructure following Tunisian experience. Firm-level infrastructure-related investment should be done through preferential financing
  • 20. arrangements as suggested earlier. Considerations must be given to innovative ways of Dates export financing improvements, such as contributions in the cost of factory establishment and supply chain factory upgrading (rehabilitation) similar to what is done by the Tunisian Government. 6.2.4 Dimension 4: efficiency of the export supply chain. Results from dimension 4 show that the Tunisian DESC performance is more efficient than Oman in all three KPIs. In fact, these results are consistent with the results of the previous three dimensions. More need to be done to improve the efficiency of the DESC in Oman through training of 405 employees and investment in technology. The following recommendations are important: . There are several date varieties in Oman most of which are of very low quality. At farm level, all these different varieties are mixed-up resulting in a substandard quality. To overcome this problem, the government needs to embark on long-term program to modernize and promote high-value varieties such as Medjool, Barhee Khalas, Abu Naringa, Barni, Madlouki and Faradh. . There is a need for investment in research and development to identify and develop alternatives uses for dates such as: baby food ingredients, sugar production out of dates, baking ingredients, ice cream, coffee, sweets, confectionery, chocolates, preservatives, salads, sauces, breakfast cereals and soft drinks. References Ahmed, P.K. and Rafiq, M. (1998), “Integrated benchmarking: a holistic examination of select techniques for benchmarking analysis”, Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 225-42. Allan, S. (1997), “Partners benchmarking”, available at: www.benchmarking.co.uk/bmark. htm#partners Andersen, B., Fagerhaug, T., Randmoel, S., Schuldmaier, J. and Prenninger, J. (1999), “Benchmarking supply chain management: finding best practice”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 378-89. Anon. (2005), “Welfare benchmarking and herd health plans on organic dairy farms (OF0343)”, available at: http://orgprints.org/10776/ (unpublished). Balm, G.J. (1996), “Benchmarking and gap analysis: what is the next milestone?”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 22-33. Barnes, C. (2007), “Study exposes weak links in grain chain”, Food Manufacture, 27 March, available at: www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/4483/Study_exposes_ weak_links_in_grain_chain.html Bhutta, K.S. and Huq, F. (1999), “Benchmarking best practices: an integrated approach”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 254-68. Brandt, J.R. and Taninecz, G. (2004), “Benchmarking: an executive primer to locating and leveraging manufacturing best practices”, available at: www.mpi-group.net/ thoughtleadership/ITC_MPI_Benchmarking.pdf Camp, R. (1989), The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to Superior Performance, Productivity Press, Portland, OR. CLAN (2006), “Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from Australian agriculture: the role of benchmarking in driving best management practice”, A discussion paper prepared by the Climate Change in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Agriculture Working Group, available at: www.greenhouse.gov.au/agriculture/publications/pubs/ benchmarking.pdf
  • 21. BIJ Deloitte (2009), Benchmarking for Success: New Trends in North America’s Food and Beverage Processing Industry, Deloitte, New York, NY, available at: www.deloitte.com/assets/ 18,3 DcomCanada/Local%20Content/Articles/Industries/Consumer%20business/ca_en_ Benchmarking%20for%20success.pdf Food and Drink National Training Organisation (Ed.) (2001), Measuring Success: International Benchmarking of the Food and Drink Manufacturing Industry, Food and Drink National Training Organisation, London. 406 Garcia Martinez, M. and Poole, N. (2003), “Developments in fresh produce quality and safety management: implications for Mediterranean countries”, paper presented at the 82nd European Seminar of the EAAE on Quality Assurance, Risk Management and Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks, Bonn, 14-16 May. GidF (2005), Groupment Interprofessionnel des Fruits, Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources, Tunisia. Gilmour, P. (1999), “Benchmarking supply chain operations”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 29, pp. 259-66. Helgason, S. (1997), “International benchmarking experiences from OECD countries”, paper presented at a conference organized by the Danish Ministry of Finance on: International Benchmarking, Copenhagen, 20-21 February, Public Management Service (PUMA), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris. Holleran, E., Bredahl, M.E. and Zaibet, L. (1999), “Private incentives for adopting food safety and quality assurance”, Food Policy, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 669-83. Howard, M. and Kilmartin, B. (2006), Assessment of Benchmarking within Government Organizations, Accenture, Dublin, May. Laajimi, A. (2002), “National safety and quality systems in Tunisia: an analysis of the olive oil ´ ´ and dates sectors”, working paper, Departement d’Economie et de Developpement Rural, Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Tunis. Lowell, L.B. (2007), “The new metrics of corporate performance: profit per employee”, The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1, available at: www.massmac.org/newsline/0707/McKinsey. pdf Luther, R. and Abdel-Kader, M. (2006), “Management accounting practices in the British food and drinks industry”, British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 5, pp. 336-57. Omachonu, V.K. and Ross, J.R. (1994), Principles of Total Quality, St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL. Poole, N., Marshall, F. and Bhupal, D.S. (2002), “Air pollution effects and initiatives to improve food quality assurance in India”, Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Vol. 41, pp. 363-86. Ronan, G. and Taylor, P. (2004), “Strategic planning and benchmarking: keys to sustainable economic development in food and fibre industries”, paper presented at the 48th Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Melbourne, 11-13 February, available at: www.aares.info/files/2004_ronan.pdf Russell, R.S. and Taylor, B.W. (1998), Production and Operations Management, Focusing on Quality and Competitiveness, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Sparling, D. and van Duren, E. (2003), “Supply chain management – trends and implications for ASEAN agribusiness in agribusiness management: systems approach”, SEAMO, pp. 169-76. Stephens, B. (2004), Benchmarking Arab Microfinance Institutions, The Microfinance Gateways, Washington, DC, available at: www.microfinancegateway.org/content/article/more/14260 Thelwell, D. and Ritson, C. (2006), “The international competitiveness of the UK cereals sector”, paper presented at the 98th EAAE Seminar on Marketing Dynamics within the Global Trading System: New Perspectives, Chania, Crete, 29 June-2 July.
  • 22. UNCTAD (2005), “Country case study on reflecting national circumstances and development Dates export priorities in national codes on good agricultural practices that can be benchmarked to Eurepgap”, available at: www.unctad.org/trade_env/test1/meetings/eurepgap/ supply chain UNCTAD%20Country%20Case%20Study.pdf UNCTAD/WTO (2007), Fresh Tropical and Off-season Fruit and Vegetables, International Trade Center, Geneva, available at: www.intracen.org/mns/documents/Fruits_and_vegetables.pdf UNIDO (2002), Continuous Improvement and Quality Management – Quality and Productivity, 407 United Nations Industrial Development Organization, Vienna, available at: www.unido. org/doc/501746.htmls USDA (2008), “Benchmarking: findings and recommendations”, Final Report May 30, The US Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency Organizational Assessment, available at: www.fsa.USDA.gov/Internet/FSA_File/kbapp3benchmarking.pdf ´ Verıssimo, A. and Woodford, K. (2005), “Top performing farmers are information rich: case studies of sheep and cattle farmers in the South Island of New Zealand”, Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Farm Management Association Congress, Campinas, Brazil, August, Vol. 1, International Farm Management Association, Cambridge, pp. 365-8. Wilson, R., Charry, A.A. and Kemp, D.R. (2004), “Performance indicators and benchmarking in Australian agriculture: a whole farm family centered approach”, available at: www.csu.edu. au/faculty/science/saws/afbmnetwork/conferences/2004/proceedings/Wilson_et_al.pdf Wolfe, I.S. (2007), “Profit per employee: can HR be trusted to get the job done?”, Business 2 Business, May, available at: www.super-solutions.com/ProfitPerEmployee_ B2BMay2007.asp Yakovleva, N., Sarkis, J. and Sloans, T.W. (2009), “Sustainable benchmarking of food supply chains”, GPMI Working Paper No. 2009-02, George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University, Worcester, MA, available at: www.clarku.edu/departments/marsh Yasin, M.M. (2002), “The theory and practice of benchmarking: then and now”, International Journal of Benchmarking, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 217-43. Zairi, M. (1994), “Benchmarking: the best tool for measuring competitiveness”, Benchmarking of Quality Management and Technology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-24. Further reading Andersen, B. and Pettersen, P.-G. (1996), The Benchmarking Handbook, Chapman & Hall, London. Aramyan, L., Ondersteijn, C., Van Kooten, O. and Oude Lansink, A. (2005), “Performance indicators in agri-food production chains”, in Ondersteijn, C., Wijnands, J.H.M., Huirne, R.B.M. and Van Kooten, O. (Eds), Quantifying Supply Chains, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht. Barreveld, W.H. (1993), “Date palm products”, FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 101, FAO, Rome. Bateman, G.R. (1994), “Benchmarking management education teaching and curriculum”, in Camp, R. (Ed.), Benchmarking: The Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to Superior Performance, Quality Resources, White Plains, NY. Country Report (2003), “Development of dates production and marketing in Arab nation”, Country Report, October (Oman). FAO (n.d.), FAO Statistics, FAO, XXX. Matters, M. and Evans, A. (1997), “The nuts and bolts of benchmarking”, available at: www. ozemail.com.au/, benchmark/nuts.bolts.html
  • 23. BIJ Ministry of Agriculture, Oman (n.d.), available at: www.maf.gov.om 18,3 Oman Customs (2006), Foreign Trade Statistics. Shah, J. and Singh, N. (2001), “Benchmarking internal supply chain performance: development of a framework”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 37, pp. 37-47. Tunisian Agency for the Promotion of Agricultural Investment (n.d.), available at: www.tunisie. com/APIA 408 United Dates Factory (n.d.), Processing and handling of dates in Oman. Corresponding author Msafiri Mbaga can be contacted at: msafiri@squ.edu.om To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints