Topic : Analyzing The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation's Comprehensive End-to-
End Supply Chain Strategies: From Procurement to Final Delivery
ABSTRACT:
This research offers an exhaustive examination of the systematic end-to-end supply chain
procedures adopted by the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), a notable
government-affiliated institution in India. The analytical framework encompasses a thorough
evaluation of TASMAC's strategies starting from the intricate procurement phase to the
culmination in the final product delivery. By systematically dissecting and interpreting
TASMAC's methodologies and tactical implementations at every sequential step, the study seeks
to derive profound insights which could be pivotal in enhancing the corporation's supply chain
proficiency, optimization, and overall throughput. Furthermore, beyond the immediate scope of
TASMAC's operations, the revelations drawn from this research may provide instrumental
guidance and have far-reaching ramifications for refining and redefining supply chain
management protocols and best practices in the extensive public sector arena.
KEYWORDS: Supply chain Proficiency, Supply Chain optimization, public sector,
Procurement Strategies
INTRODUCTION
The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) plays a pivotal role in the state's
revenue generation through the exclusive wholesale supply of Indian Made Foreign Liquor
(IMFL). TASMAC's supply chain, spanning from procurement to final delivery, is a complex
operation worthy of analysis. This research paper offers a detailed examination of TASMAC's
end-to-end supply chain strategies and problems. It dissects the procurement phase, operations,
and final delivery, seeking to uncover insights to enhance supply chain efficiency. Beyond
TASMAC, these insights can inform supply chain best practices in the public sector. By studying
TASMAC's supply chain, this research contributes to the improvement of government-affiliated
institutions' operations, fostering efficiency and transparency in public sector supply chains.
RESEARCH DESIGN
a) Source of data
The study consists of both primary data and secondary data.
Primary data:
The primary data was collected from 150 respondents through Stratified Random Sampling
Technique through Interview Schedule Method.
Secondary data:
The secondary data was collected from journals, websites and newspapers.
b) Methodology
A study was conducted in Tirunelveli District involving one hundred and fifty
TASMAC workers in various positions, including supervisors, salesmen, and supply
managers.
c) Statistical tools
The following statistical tools were used to analyze the data
1. Compound Growth Rate
2. Garrett Ranking Technique.
3. Weighted Average Ranking Method.
GROWTH OF TASMAC REVENUE
TABLE NO: 1. GROWTH OF TOTAL REVENUE GENERATED BY TASMAC
S. No Year Total Revenue Generated by TASMAC (in crores)
1 2015 - 2016 25,845.58
2 2016 - 2017 26,995.25
3 2017 - 2018 26,797.96
4 2018 - 2019 31,157.83
5 2019 - 2020 33,133.24
6 2020 - 2021 33,811.15
7 2021 - 2022 36,050.65
8 2022 - 2023 44,098.56
Source:
Table 2 clearly illustrates a rising trend in the total revenue generated by TASMAC over
the years. From 2015-2016 to 2022-2023, there has been consistent growth, with revenue
increasing from 25,845.58 crores to 44,098.56 crores. However, it is essential to note that during
the years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, the total revenue was affected due to disruptions in the
supply chain caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This highlights the critical role of a robust
supply chain in sustaining revenue growth.
CHART NO: 1. GROWTH OF TOTAL REVENUE GENERATED BY TASMAC
It would be appropriate to calculate the Compound Growth Rate of the revenue generated by
TASMAC. Compound Growth Rate is calculated using the following formula.
CGR = ( Vfinal / V begin ) 1/t – 1
V begin = Beginning value
Vfinal = Final value
t = Total no. of Years
Compound Growth Rate = (44,098.56 / 25,845.58) 1/8 – 1 = 0.065 Percent
It is inferred that the revenue generated by TASMAC is increasing at a compound growth rate of
0.065 percent.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE RANKING METHOD
The Weighted Average Ranking Method is employed to analyze and assess the issues within
TASMAC's supply chain.
SURVEY CONDUCTED AMONG TASMAC SUPPLY CHAIN WORKERS
TABLE 2 :
Problems 5 4 3 2 1 Total
Regulatory Compliance 40 5 0 80 25 150
Vendor Relations 0 40 10 35 65 150
Inventory Management Challenges 0 30 100 10 10 150
Supply Chain Visibility 70 35 0 25 20 150
Distribution Logistics 40 40 40 0 30 150
Source: Primary data
CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED IN SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT AT TASMAC
TABLE 3:
PARTICULARS 5 4 3 2 1 WA MEAN RANK
(200) (20) (0) (160) (25)
Regulatory Compliance 405 2.700 IV
40 5 0 80 25
(0) (160) (30) (70) (35)
Vendor Relations 295 1.966 V
0 40 10 35 65
Inventory Management (0) (120) (300) (20) (10)
450 3.000 III
Challenges 0 30 100 10 10
(350) (140) (0) (50) (20)
Supply Chain Visibility 560 3.733 I
70 35 0 25 20
(200) (160) (120) (0) (30)
Distribution Logistics 510 3.400 II
40 40 40 0 30
Source: Primary data
Interpretation:
Among the supply chain problems evaluated in the study, "Supply Chain Visibility"
secured the top rank. Following closely, "Distribution Logistics" claimed the second rank.
"Regulatory Compliance" took the third position, while "Inventory Management Challenges"
held the fourth rank. It is noteworthy that "Vendor Relations" received the lowest ranking among
the problems considered, indicating it was of least importance to the respondents.
GARRETT RANKING TECHNIQUE
Strengths in the supply chain is analyzed by using Garrette Ranking Technique.
The percentage position of each rank is converted into scores using Garrett table. The percentage
position is determined with the help of the following formula:
Percentage position = 100 (R – 0.5) / N
Where,
R = Rank assigned for the statements by the respondents.
N = Number of statements ranked by the respondents.
TABLE NO: 3 STRENGTHS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF TASMAC
RANK
GARETTE
SCALE I II III IV V TOTAL MEAN
STRENGTHS MEAN
VALUE SCORE RANK
SCORE
X 75 60 50 40 25
F 36 21 31 33 29 150
Centralized
360 132 57.166 I
Procurement Fx
2700 0 1550 0 725 8575
F 41 19 29 10 51 150
Price Control 114 48.933 IV
Fx
3075 0 1450 400 1275 7340
F 19 21 55 34 21 150
Warehouse
126 136 48.800 V
and Storage Fx
1425 0 2750 0 525 7320
F 42 30 27 22 29 150
Standardized
180 52.700 II
Retail Outlet Fx
3150 0 1350 880 725 7905
F 12 59 8 51 20 150
Regulatory
354 204 49.200 III
Compliance Fx
900 0 400 0 500 7380
Source: Primary Data
Interpretation:
The data from Table 3 indicates that, with the highest mean score of 57.16, "Centralized
Procurement" has been ranked 1st by the respondents. " Standardized Retail Outlet " and "
Regulatory Compliance " have been ranked 2nd and 3rd, respectively.
