Deal-Making Negotiations by Governments and Major Product Suppliers: A Case Study of the U.S. Department of Defense and Airbus versus Boeing

Abstract

This short case study deals with the analysis of the airborne refueling tanker contract placed by the U.S. Department of Defense to the U.S. group Boeing. The data used in this case is all drawn from secondary sources, and the story told chronologically. Initially, the scene is set with a discussion of the types of relationship, planned and de facto, that emerge when companies do business with each other, and an analysis of the situations when different emphasis is placed upon specific benefits and costs of the relationship. Discussion continues around the concept that relationship benefits are perceived as more important for the continuation of a relationship than relationship costs – when relationship value, direct switching costs, and sunk costs exist, the search for a new partner is reduced.

The question of why Boeing was favored by the U.S Department of Defense over competing Airbus Industries stands in the center of this analysis. The analysis explains how existing business relations and their binding effects, as well as resulting advantages and disadvantages, influence subsequent behavior.

Citation

Kleinaltenkamp, M., Behrens, R. and Reh, S. (2014), "Deal-Making Negotiations by Governments and Major Product Suppliers: A Case Study of the U.S. Department of Defense and Airbus versus Boeing", Field Guide to Case Study Research in Business-to-business Marketing and Purchasing (Advances in Business Marketing and Purchasing, Vol. 21), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1069-096420140000021011