Obstacles to supply chain integration of the performance management process in buyer‐supplier dyads: The buyers' perspective

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explain to what degree supplier relationship obstacles and operational tool obstacles hinder supply chain integration of the performance management (PM) process.

Design/methodology/approach

This is a hypothetical‐deductive study, where the results are based on a survey of 257 purchasing managers in nine manufacturing industries in Sweden.

Findings

Supplier relationship obstacles (lack of trust, different goals and priorities and lack of parallel communication structure) were found to significantly hinder PM process integration the most, which is in accordance with previous studies. The operational tool obstacles (manual performance data management and non‐standardized performance metrics) were seen on an overall level to hinder PM process integration. However, the hypothesis that non‐standardized performance metrics hinder PM process integration was not verified, which does not accord with previous studies.

Research limitations/implications

The use of single informants in data collection presents a limitation of the study.

Practical implications

Contrary to previous studies, the paper has applied a broader, quantitative survey methodology, and hence provides deeper knowledge about the impact of obstacles on PM process integration. It identifies critical obstacles which are important for industry to overcome.

Originality/value

Most previous studies of supply chain PM are either case‐ or experience‐based. Here, hypotheses are tested on empirical data and general results presented regarding lack of supplier relationships and operational tools as obstacles for supply chain integration of PM.

Citation

Forslund, H. and Jonsson, P. (2009), "Obstacles to supply chain integration of the performance management process in buyer‐supplier dyads: The buyers' perspective", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 77-95. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910925370