The impact of upstream supply and downstream demand integration on quality management and quality performance

Abstract

Purpose

There are many studies on the impact of supply chain integration (SCI) on performance. However, the definitions, the measurements, the sample sizes, and scope of both SCI and the performance vary significantly from research to research. Conclusions are not consistent either. Researchers still believe that little is known about the impact of SCI on performance and call for more empirical research. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact on quality practices and quality performance of upstream integration with suppliers and downstream integration with customers.

Design/methodology/approach

The research is based on the empirical data from a large international survey of over 600 manufacturing companies from 20 countries. An intensive literature review was conducted on the definition and scope of SCI as well as its relationship with quality practice and performances. In total, five hypotheses were formulated and a conceptual model was proposed. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses reflecting and interrelationship among the four variables.

Findings

The research reveals that downstream integration with customers influences both the quality management practice and the quality performance of the company, while upstream integration with suppliers only influences the quality practice but not the quality performance.

Originality/value

This research is different to previous research in three aspects. First, SCI covers both the upstream integration with suppliers and downstream integration with customers. Second, integration measurement covers both material integration and information integration. Third, it considers both quality management practices and quality performance.

Citation

Sun, H. and Ni, W. (2012), "The impact of upstream supply and downstream demand integration on quality management and quality performance", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 872-890. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656711211270342