Search results

The purpose of this paper is to study the relational impact of using win-win or win-lose negotiation strategies within different types of buyer-supplier relationships.

A multi-method approach is used. Qualitative interviews with supply chain managers reveal that relationship-specific assets and cooperation are important relational factors in buyer-supplier negotiations. Framing interview insights within the social exchange theory (SET), hypotheses are tested using a scenario-based behavioral experiment.

Experimental results suggest that win-lose negotiators decrease their negotiating partner’s commitment of relationship-specific assets and levels of cooperation. In addition, the use of a win-lose negotiation strategy reduces levels of relationship-specific assets and cooperation more in highly interdependent buyer-supplier relationships than relationships that are not as close.

Buyer-supplier relationships are complex interactions. Negotiation strategy choice decisions can have long-term effects on the overall relationship. As demonstrated in this study, previous research focusing on one side “winning” a negotiation as a measure of success has oversimplified this complex phenomenon.

The use of a win-lose negotiation strategy can have a negative impact on relational outcomes like cooperation and relationship-specific assets. For companies interested in developing strong supply chain relationships, buyer and suppliers should choose their negotiation strategy carefully as the relational impact extends beyond the single negotiation encounter.

Previous research predominantly advocates for the use of a win-win negotiation strategy within interdependent relationships. This research offers evidence that the use of a win-lose strategy does have a long-term relational impact.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how the history of a supply chain relationship impacts expectations concerning negotiation strategy use.

Following a grounded theory approach, experienced buyers and suppliers were interviewed to enhance understanding of the complexity of supply chain negotiations.

Qualitative analysis developed a theoretical framework emphasizing the impact of relationship history on negotiation strategy expectations in long-term buyer-supplier relationships. Data supports that previous negotiation interactions build a history between the involved organizations. This relationship history creates expectations. When negotiation strategy use is consistent with expectations, the relationship history will continue to develop in the same manner as it has previously. When negotiation strategy expectations are violated, the relationship impact will differ depending on evidence of an Extrarelational Factor that leads to the strategy change.

Results of this study present a theoretical framework that future research can quantitatively test, which has the potential to open up new streams of research on relationship history and supply chain negotiations.

Results show that buyers and suppliers should consider the strategy expectations of their negotiation partner. When actions are inconsistent with expectations, the effects impact the relationship.

Negotiation research has largely focussed on negotiations as discrete events with economic outcomes. This ongoing buyer-supplier relationship research highlights the impact that previous negotiations (relationship history) have on negotiation expectations. It also explores the relational impact when those expectations are or are not met.

Building on the dual-system approach and resource-advantage theory, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how a particular personality trait of negotiators – namely, agreeableness – moderates the effectiveness of using coercion and reward power to appropriate value in buyer-supplier negotiations.

Simulated negotiations in buyer-supplier dyads with 152 participants are analyzed using hierarchical regression analysis.

The analysis shows that negotiators’ agreeableness moderates the effectiveness of using coercion and reward power for suppliers, but not for buyers. Negotiators in the role of suppliers use reward power more effectively and coercion power less effectively if they have high agreeableness. Buyer negotiators benefit from using coercion, regardless of their personality.

This research focuses on two common negotiation tactics and one particularly relevant personality trait. Future research might examine additional tactics and personality traits, and might delve deeper into explaining the observed differences between negotiators in the role of buyer and supplier.

The findings suggest that negotiators on the supplier side can improve their effectiveness by choosing tactics that fit their personality. Negotiators on the buyer side should consider using coercion power, regardless of their personality.

This research introduces dual-system theory to the supply chain management (SCM) literature and suggests that SCM research can benefit from simultaneously examining conscious decision processes and subconscious influences. It further suggests that the effects of dual-system interactions are sensitive to context, and more theory accounting for differences between buyers and suppliers in a dyad should be developed.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the role of relationality in buyer–supplier negotiations and how it varies across cultural settings.

Using a multisession simulation design, this study recruited research participants (n = 82) from diverse cultural backgrounds to play the role of either buyer or supplier for two negotiation tasks. Regression analyses were used to test the relationships among relational constructs as well as the moderating role of relational culture.

Results show that negotiators’ relational self-construal enhances their relational commitment to the ongoing negotiations, which leads to a higher level of relational capital accumulated at the end of negotiations. The impact of relational self-construal on relational commitment and that of relational commitment on counterparts’ relational capital are stronger for negotiators from a high (as opposed to low) relational cultural background. Furthermore, intercultural negotiation context, when compared with intracultural context, weakens the impact of relational commitment on relational capital.

This research is among the first to empirically examine the culturally varied relationality in negotiations. The findings offer important theoretical and practical implications regarding how relationality, when interacting with cultural factors, has varying impacts on business negotiations.

This paper seeks to fill the literature gap that lacks of exploring negotiation strategy with competing partners under asymmetric production-cost information. The purpose of this paper is to examine firms’ optimal contract negotiation strategies in buyer–supplier–supplier triads where there are concurrent negotiations between the retailer and two competing manufacturers.

The authors consider a two-echelon supply chain, in which the retailer has the option of segmented or unified negotiation policy, whereas the two competing manufacturers can withhold or share production cost information in the negotiation. Based on game theory, the authors derive the manufacturers’ optimal wholesale prices and the retailer’s optimal retail prices with eight possible scenarios. Optimal strategic choices and operational decisions are then explored through the comparative analysis of equilibriums of eight possible scenarios.

The authors find that the retailer will adopt different negotiation strategies depending on manufacturers’ decisions on sharing or withholding their production-cost information. When both manufacturers share their production-cost information, the retailer will adopt a unified negotiation policy. The high-efficiency manufacturer should adopt the same information-sharing strategy as the low-efficiency manufacturer in order to gain more profit.

The modelling helps to bring further clarity in supply chain contract negotiation by offering a conceptual framework to enhance our understanding of the effects of information-sharing strategy and negotiation policy in the negotiation process form the perspectives of all engaging parties. Managerial insights derived from the research will enable retailers and manufacturers to make informed and better strategic and operational decisions to improve market competitiveness.

The paper presents evidence of a gap between the competition‐to‐co‐operation narrative of the purchasing, marketing and supply chain management fields and the negotiating practice of professional buyers. Drawing on evidence from negotiation theory and practice, it argues that the discovered buyer behaviour is entirely rational. A plea is made for the study of negotiation in the supply chain management field, and it concludes that the current narrative, describing a journey from uninformed adversarial buyer‐supplier attitudes towards enlightened co‐operative relations in chains, may be more fictional than factual.

This paper aims to analyze the underlying factors of contract renewals in business-to-business (B2B) contracts.

The authors build a unique data set with 296 contracts signed between a major firm supplying petrochemical goods and its 128 customers between 2013 and 2016. They use Insider Econometrics as their methodological approach.

The econometric results suggest that contracts involving higher volume of trade, higher levels of dedicated assets representing seller’s specific investments in each transaction, and contracts comprising more than one product present an increased likelihood of being renewed.

Although limited to a single organization, this paper contributes to management theories focused on buyer–supplier relationships in which coordination between interdependent parties is required.

Practitioners engaged in B2B relationships may benefit from the findings to shape their bargaining strategies in contexts of high levels of asset specificity and bilateral dependence.

This paper contribute to theories related to the strategic negotiation between buyers and suppliers by emphasizing the importance of asset specificity in a nuanced and multifaceted fashion, by highlighting aspects related to resource dependency, and idiosyncratic characteristics on contract renewal.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the importance of purchasing strategies contribution on manufacturing performance, realizing purchasing function as a key component in organizations.

A total of 750 questionnaires were distributed via e‐mail and resulted in 158 questionnaires or 21 percent being returned with complete information and used for statistical analysis, to study the significant level of the constructed model among manufacturing firms located in major industrial states in Malaysia.

The results obtained reveal that purchasing strategies create significant positive impact on manufacturing performance which comprises the competitive priorities of the firms in terms of quality, cost, cycle time, new product introduction time line, delivery speed and dependability and finally, customization responsiveness performance.

Manufacturing firms should focus on purchasing strategies, effective negotiation, supplier collaborative relationship and interaction; effective cost management and supply base management as navigators for their excellence performance in the current volatile market conditions.

The paper shows that purchasing strategies are vital for manufacturing firms in order to remain competitive and relevant in the challenging and competitive business environment.

The purpose of this paper is to systematically review and analyze the important, yet under-researched, topic of relationality in negotiations and propose new directions for future negotiation research.

This paper conducts a systematic review of negotiation literature related to relationality from multiple disciplines. Thirty-nine leading and topical academic journals are selected and 574 papers on negotiation are reviewed from 1990 to 2014. Based on the systematic review, propositions regarding the rationales for relationality in negotiations are developed and future research avenues in this area are discussed.

Of 574 papers on negotiations published in 39 peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and 2014, only 18 papers have studied and discussed relationality in negotiations. This suggests that relationality as a theoretical theme has long been under-researched in negotiation research. For future research, this paper proposes to incorporate the dynamic, cultural and mechanism perspectives, and to use a qualitative approach to study relationality in negotiations.

This paper presents the first systematic review of the negotiation literature on relationality, and identifies new research topics on relationality in negotiations. In so doing, this research opens new avenues for future negotiation research on relationality.

This study seeks: (1) to identify whether the form of governance adopted (relational or contractual) drives suppliers' and buyers' collaboration in the same way; (2) to examine if both parties hold a similar view on the simultaneous use of both governance forms; and (3) to explore whether their perceptions on governance, collaboration and performance differ.

The study used data from a survey of 150 matched buyer–supplier dyads from South Korea, using structural equation modeling (SEM) for the analysis.

(1) While governance mechanisms assist collaboration and affect operational and innovation outcomes, the significance and relative strength of the proposed relationships are perceived differently by buyers and suppliers. (2) Contrasting results are found regarding the interaction effect of the governance mechanisms on collaboration: a complementary relationship for the buyer and a substitutive relationship for the supplier.

Studies on buyer–supplier relationships have yielded inconsistent results regarding whether the interactions of governance mechanisms function as substitutes or complements, because research has largely been conducted from the buyer's perspective, rather than the supplier's; this imbalanced view calls for integrated perspectives.