As can be seen in Table 1, the overall adherence of the organisation's supply chain management practices to those described within the GSCF framework were high, even though the organisation does not formally ascribe to the GSCF framework. The average scores achieved per supply chain management process represent a high average score across all the subprocesses, and generally not a combination of low and high scores. When taken as an overall percentage, the level of adherence of the organisation's processes to the framework equals 76%.

As can be seen in Figure 2, 94% of the activities within the strategic processes of the framework were considered to be critical or important by the respondents. This was the case even for activities where adherence to best practice was low. This result suggests the validity of the GSCF framework, at least from the perspective of the respondents. The level of importance ascribed can also be contrasted against the 76% overall adherence to the practices within the framework in the identification of improvement opportunities and the priority to be assigned to such opportunities.

Across all of the supply chain management processes, with the exception of product development and commercialisation, the management within the supply chain function actively manages the processes and leads other functions within the organisation. This is supported by the supply chain management activities being coordinated by a dedicated supply chain function within the organisation, with a number of individuals broadly managing each of the supply chain management processes. The supply chain function is also represented at the executive level by a supply chain director.

As can be seen in Table 2, the customer facing processes are well developed within the organisation, with the two highest scores achieved being those for the customer relationship management (91%) and customer service management (86%) processes. There are extensively developed formal communication and coordination mechanisms in place with key customers, with the clear identification and segmentation of key customers and customer segments, and formally documented procedures for the parameters for the negotiation of agreements with customers. Business relationships are also formally documented in the form of product and service agreements and the sharing of improvements from re-engineering and reconfiguration projects and initiatives. The formal discussion and agreement of product and service agreements (PSAs) between senior management of the respective organisations, with cross-functional assistance and input, is the primary integrating mechanism. The extent of business that takes place between the respective organisations serves as the basis for collaboration. Ongoing reviews of joint metrics and performance on the targets ascribed to in the PSAs indicate that there is commitment between the respective organisations to achieving the objectives of set out in the PSAs.

It was apparent in the responses given by a number of the respondents that there is extensive internal cross-functional involvement in the management of the supply chain management processes within the organisation. Whilst each of the processes is effectively owned by a particular function within the supply chain function, there is a high level of involvement, buy-in and awareness of the activities, metrics, goals, and functioning of each process. There is also extensive involvement from other functions within the organisation, such as sales, legal and regulatory compliance, manufacturing, finance, and the business units that manage different product lines. Collaboration is driven by common objectives, such as order fill-rate and overall profitability. Regular cross-functional meetings and reviews, and documented roles and responsibilities for specific activities drive integration (Peristeris 2014:193).

However, the same level of integration and collaboration is not prevalent with customers and suppliers in activities outside of the customer relationship and supplier relationship management and product development and commercialisation processes. The indication is that certain processes are considered to be the concern of internal functions to determine and formulate, whilst others are naturally externally focused, and by their nature involve integration with customers and suppliers in the supply chain (Peristeris 2014:193).

The organisation has well developed business strategies for each functional area that communicated effectively throughout the organisation. There is a cascading approach in the implementation of the strategies, with plans and objectives being established for each division, business unit, department and work team level. This creates a high degree of awareness and understanding within the organisation regarding various related strategies and the objectives to be achieved, as well as an awareness of the steps to be taken by each department to achieve the strategies over the various time-periods for the execution of different strategies (Peristeris 2014:193).

It was indicated in the responses that conflicts such as inventory availability and working capital requirements, manufacturing economies and planning flexibility, volume buying of inputs to production and storage costs, and order cycle time and logistics costs, were reported amongst metrics used within processes and groups of functions, as well as amongst metrics used by specific functions. The respondents to the survey indicated that these conflicts were a normal part of the functioning of the organisation, and whilst they presented challenges to meeting their objectives, they did not represent a fundamental problem within the organisation (Peristeris 2014:193).

Respondents indicated that customers understand their impact on certain supply chain management processes, yet they act in a manner that negatively affects the performance of the supply chain management processes.

On the other hand, suppliers understand their influence on supply chain processes, and their actions normally avoid harming their customers in the supply chain processes in which they have a role to play (Peristeris 2014:195).

The organisation makes extensive use of documented standard operating procedures (SOPs). Each functional area and its related activities had SOP documentation indicating the policies of the organisation, the steps to be followed to carry out tasks, as well as guidelines regarding the options that could be followed in a particular activity. The procedures also covered compliance rules and regulations, which are especially applicable for a food manufacturing company. These kinds of documents were well understood and frequently referred to by different functional heads during the course of the survey process. Ongoing discussion of the effectiveness and validity of processes and revision of the SOP documents takes place or new options or requirements are identified. Employees are also formally trained on the contents of the SOPs, which ultimately leads to standardisation and consistency in the execution of supply chain management activities (Peristeris 2014:196).

Importantly, once the initial decisions on a strategic and tactical level were taken, these documented procedures provided the basis for the implementation, as well as continuous improvement of supply chain management process activities within the organisation on a day-to-day basis (Peristeris 2014:196).

As can be seen in the scores recorded for the activities related to metrics in Table 3, the organisation makes extensive use of process and financial metrics, and sets performance goals in the management of its supply chain processes and activities. The metrics to be used at each level of the organisation are set out by the corporate headquarters, and a comprehensive process of analysis and discussion takes place at the top management level with the directors of the various divisions and business units establishing the goals that need to be achieved in the respective areas, in order for the organisation to achieve the objectives that have been set by the corporate headquarters for the financial year in terms of revenue, profitability, and growth. At the senior management level, it is also determined which goals and metrics are joint metrics that require the involvement of multiple divisions or departments to be achieved, and the necessary coordination is established. A cascading process of establishing goals at each level with the divisions and departments is then followed. This process of breaking down the goals into more specific goals per department and division and aligning them to each other, enables the achievement of the goals and objectives set at the top level (Peristeris 2014:193).

As can be seen in Table 3, the organisation has not developed its supplier relationship management process to the extent described in the framework. A number of key activities are not being carried out, such as the drawing up of product and service agreements, profitability reports for suppliers, and formal procedures concerning areas such as sharing of process improvements with suppliers and customisation alternatives for supplier PSAs (Peristeris 2014:197).

The difference in the maturity between the supplier relationship and customer relationship management processes can be partly explained by the emphasis within the organisation on revenue-generating sales and marketing activities, whereby the processes and activities involving interaction with customers are prioritised and developed. Typically, within organisations, the procurement function is viewed as a cost centre and as an input into the manufacturing process, with supplier relationships being adversarial and characterised by negotiations regarding the cost of materials. This approach is especially prevalent in the confectionery industry where the main inputs to production are raw materials with low levels of inherent technology such as sugar, glucose, cocoa, and food additives. This would thus drive a transactional cost-focussed approach to be taken with suppliers, with the capacity of suppliers being assessed, and the capability of suppliers to provide materials meeting the standards required for the manufacturing of food products being the key criteria for selection as suppliers (Peristeris 2014:197).

As indicated by Table 2, the organisation has a high level of overall performance in terms of the benchmark practices found within the GSCF framework. This performance includes the organisation's capacity to supply large volumes of product to a growing market, the maintenance of relationships with the largest national retail chains and wholesale retailers, financial performance, reputation for food quality and safety, the strength of its brands in the market, high levels of customer service and logistical execution performance, and innovation in new product development. Ultimately, this can be largely attributed to the development and implementation of supply chain management processes and the extensive use of procedures, methodologies, metrics, and performance goals that drive the achievement of the organisation's objectives (Peristeris 2014:198).

The first limitation of the study is the focus on a single large South African confectionery manufacturer as the respondent and focus of the study. The results of the study will therefore only be applicable to this manufacturer, and cannot be generalised as an industry characteristic.

A second limitation is the use of a single supply chain management best practice framework (the GSCF framework) as the means of benchmarking the supply chain management processes of the chosen company.

Furthermore, the research only focussed on the strategic-level supply chain processes, tasks, based on the chosen best practice framework, and thus precluded, and analysis of the operational level supply chain processes and tasks.

The research also did not interview external parties to measure their perspectives of the integration of the processes across the supply chain.