My dear

It is very good question, I think that corporate value addition is achieved through the integration among value chain, supply chain, and competitive advantage.

When we talk of 'value creation at every stage through efficient management' (as quoted from your explanation), we also think  of the strategies for 'business process re-engineering', BPR. Process can include supply chain, value chain.

'Strategic value creation' will of course depend upon host of other (strategic) considerations. Approach should not be, what I feel, the same for every case. That will largely depend on the 'challenges' of the changing 'business environment'. Say for example, as the latest news making round today (from yahoo e-news sources), soft-drinks giants like coke or pepsi, are now seriously thinking of such 'value creation' [to meet stake holders expectations], by diversifying the business very soon. so is the case of the companies like Redington or ITC.

Just a few thoughts.

Regards;Rabi

Its an interesting topic that Jaharkanti has raised. I look at it from two different perspectives. From the internal strategic perspective, value creation through value chain can be a complementary for process and productivity efficiency. While from the external perspective, companies with successful value creation strategy are seems to have competitive advantage over their competitors because of the network and supplies sustainability.

I would say that a supply chain exists due to the possibilities for profit along a value chain.

It's not quite what you're getting at, but I've been struggling to define the difference between value chains and supply chains, which imo are broadly similar for many analytical purposes.

I'm curious if, in the very same context as your question, if anyone might comment on what they see as differences in the ways we might define a value chain and a supply chain. In some cases, I consider them to be practically synonymous.

I would say that strategic value creation happens at the level of private and/or public entities, where the fact of identifying opportunities for net benefit across an entire value chain leads to the creation of supply chains with varying degrees of horizontal and vertical integration depending on technologies, level of market competition, etc. These same technologies and levels of competition (also access to infrastructure and various other inputs) will define whether competitive advantage or complementarities (within given value chains and between entirely different sectors) are stronger factors in making it possible for these private and/or public entities to engage in strategic value creation.

But I'm still struggling with the notion of how the terms "value chain" and "supply chain" differ, and how these differences make it possible to open up the scope of analysis or provide useful hints for practical purposes in the creation of private benefit and/or net social benefit.

(I think it iw well established in certain subfields of marketing that significant opportunity for value creation can occur through analysis of entire value/supply chains, in order to search for efficiencies and/or complementaries which may improve quality and/or reduce costs.

Hi Nathan. Its normal to get confuse on certain concepts, especially when we try to relate the concept into practicality. Some  terms are beautiful in concepts but complicated when it is been translated into practice.

I have a slightly different view than you that, value chain only exist only when a supply chain contributes to a profitable transaction. In practice there are occasions where supply chain can be unprofitable or not adding value to the process; such as redundant supply chain transaction, or even there are cases of 'destructive' supply chain (which may incur either more cost or time).

Dear All, 

when we refer to strategic value creation we have to determine what kind of perspective we take; 

- will it be a company, suplliers, customers or all stakeholders perpective? The value drivers are different for different types of stakeholders, the whole point is to make it cohesive and looking attracitve for everyone, which is challenging but that's why we talk about different business models' propositions in order to fit all different expectations

From the question' description I sense it's either company or stakeholders' perspective. 

So, talking about value chains we take a broader perspective - we consider eg. supply chain composition plus analyse what kind of value this brings to whom and who monetizes it. 

So, eg. you can create competetive advantage by effective supply chain composition, which is also coherent with customers' expectations, effectively communicated, monetized by the company, and reinforced by the rest of stakeholders. 

best regards