Complexity Assessment of Assembly Supply Chains from the Sustainability Viewpoint
The main point of the paper is to address supply chain networks in terms of sustainability. How can customization of physical networks help to better manage demand?
Analysis of Testing Criteria from Sustainability Viewpoint
Our description of relations between ASC structural complexity and sustainability seems to be useful to categorize the abovementioned testing criteria based on their importance to the sustainability objectives. In any given case, it was expected that the complexity indicators would reflect the three sustainability facets, i.e.:
- (Direct) energy costs;
- (Direct) material costs;
- (Direct) organizational costs.
Therefore, each of the criteria might validate at least one of the three cost items. By analyzing how these criteria reflect the abovementioned cost items, it can be found that they cover a different number of the cost items. Summarily, these differences are shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Testing criteria and their reflection on cost items.
| Testing Criteria | Material Costs | Energy Costs | Organizational Costs |
|---|---|---|---|
| C#2 | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ |
| C#3 | - | ✔ | ✔ |
| C#1 | - | - | ✔ |
| C#4 | - | - | ✔ |
| C#5 | - | - | ✔ |
As can be seen, all criteria include in themselves organizational costs. C#3 moreover covers energy costs and C#2 relates to all of the cost items. This viewpoint was further applied for the purpose of comparing the usability of ASC complexity indicators.