Search results

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the effects of cooperation history on contractual governance and the moderating effects of dependence asymmetry on those relationships from the perspective of a weaker firm in emergent economies. Drawing from resource dependence theory and contingency theory, this paper develops a conceptual model to investigate the impact of cooperation history on contractual governance.

The authors use data from 188 buyer–supplier relationships in China

The authors find that cooperation history is positively associated with contractual governance when dependence asymmetry is high but negatively associated with contractual governance when dependence asymmetry is low. Furthermore, the negative moderating effect of dependence asymmetry on the relationship between cooperation history and contractual complexity is stronger than the relationship between cooperation history and contract enforcement.

This study contributes to a better understanding of how cooperation history affects contractual governance with respect to the various levels of dependence on partners by incorporating a contingency view. This study also advances the literature on interfirm governance by distinguishing contractual governance into contractual complexity and contract enforcement.

The aim of the study is to explore how two dimensions of interpersonal relationships (i.e. size and range of relationships) affect supplier-initiating risk management behaviours (SIRMB) and supply-side resilience. Further, the study aims to explore the moderating role of dependence asymmetry.

Nine hypotheses are tested based on a moderated mediation analysis of survey data from 247 manufacturing firms in China. The data are validated using a subset of 57 attentive secondary respondents and archival data.

SIRMB positively relates to supply-side resilience. Further, SIRMB mediates the positive relationship between range and supply-side resilience, and this relationship is stronger at lower levels of dependence asymmetry. Yet, although dependence asymmetry positively moderates the relationship between range and SIRMB, it negatively moderates the relationship between size and SIRMB. We did not, however, find evidence that size has a conditional indirect effect on supply-side resilience through SIRMB.

Managers in buying firms can incentivise SIRMB to enhance supply-side resilience by developing a diverse rather than a large set of interpersonal relationships with a supplier. This might include allocating particular employees with a wide range of contacts within a supplier to that relationship, while it may be necessary to adopt different networking strategies for different supplier relationships. Firms in a highly asymmetrical relationship may seek to raise supplier expectations about the necessity to initiate risk management behaviour or look to change the dynamic of the relationship by managing contracts for fairness.

New knowledge on SIRMB as a mediating variable underpinning the relationship between interpersonal relationships and supply-side resilience is provided; and empirical evidence on the opposing moderation effect of dependence asymmetry is presented.

This study aims to explore how absorptive and joint learning can foster radical innovation. Furthermore, dependence asymmetry is investigated as a moderator of the effects of these factors on radical innovation. Radical innovation is an important source of any firm’s success. Yet, there has been a dearth of research in the literature on how different types of inter-partner learning cultivate the process of generating such innovation.

The authors use a sample of 204 Taiwanese electronics suppliers to test the effects of joint learning and absorptive learning on radical innovation. The empirical analysis adopts a structural equations modeling approach.

The authors find that a supplier’s joint learning has a stronger effect on radical innovation than its absorptive learning. However, when accounting for the moderating effect of dependence asymmetry, the analysis shows that absorptive learning does have a significant effect on radical innovation. The effect of joint learning on radical innovation is not moderated by the degree of dependence asymmetry.

This study broadens and deepens the understanding of how radical innovation by suppliers can be generated in customer–supplier relationships, and how this is shaped by the power-dependence structure.

Inter-partner learning; radical innovation; power; dependence.

Power use widely exists in buyer–supplier relationships (BSRs). Different directions of power use (i.e. buyer's power use and supplier's power use) intertwining with different types of power (i.e. coercive and noncoercive power) make it insufficient to regard power use as a single construct when examining its effect on a firm's following response. Besides, interdependence structure characterized by joint dependence and dependence asymmetry may influence the effect of a specific power use by shaping the firm's interpretation and cognition toward the relationship. Specifically, this study examines how four types of power use a buyer facing and an interdependence structure with its supplier affect its specific investments to the supplier.

This study tests the proposed relationships using regression analysis, based on data from 240 manufacturing firms in China on their perceived relationships with their major suppliers.

Results show that buyer's coercive power use (BCP) negatively affects buyer's specific investments while noncoercive power use (BNP) does not play a significant role. Both supplier's coercive power use (SCP) and noncoercive power use (SNP) are positively related to buyer's specific investments. Joint dependence positively moderates the effect of BNP and dependence asymmetry negatively moderates the effects of BCP and SNP on buyer's specific investments.

This study contributes to the literature on power use by identifying different types of power use and their different roles in influencing buyer's specific investments. The study also contributes to the literature on interdependence structure by demonstrating the different roles of joint dependence and dependence asymmetry.

While organization theories acknowledge the influence of specific assets on dependence and increasingly represent the latter as a structure of mutual dependence (dependence of A on B and dependence of B on A), there is, to the best of our knowledge, no empirical test concerning the impact of specific assets on a structure of dependence. Our chapter aims to fill this gap. It is all the more original in that it considers a case study where dependence changes sides according to the characteristics of the transaction. We examine the dependence between Chilean exporters and European importers when trading fresh produce. Such dependence originates with the need for just-in-time coordination and compliance with a compelling demand in a context of high price uncertainty.

Using a unique dataset from international trade in fresh produce between Chile and the rest of the world, we justify the use of a concentration sales ratio as a proxy for dependence and test the influence of a variety of specific assets on the side of dependence by using both categorical and dimensional approaches. Original findings show that certain transaction attributes have a strong influence on the side of dependence. In particular, the higher the frequency and the level of specific assets such as volume, niche varieties, and joint sales with other products, in the transaction, the greater the likelihood of a higher ratio of dependence for the importer rather than the exporter. Conversely, in the event of low levels of specific assets and less frequent operations, dependence tends to be greater on the side of the exporter.

The purpose of this study is to enhance the comprehensive understanding of the roles of resource investments, explicit contracts and three components of guanxi (i.e. renqing, ganqing and mianzi) in asymmetric research and development (R&D) partnerships. Treating dependence asymmetry as a multidimensional construct, this study examines the moderating effects of these elements on the relationships between resources and information asymmetry and opportunism.

The study was executed by issuing questionnaires to R&D managers participating in R&D projects and collaborations in the Shanghai and Jiangsu provinces via e-mail and face to face surveys. A multiple regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses.

The empirical test generally supported the conceptual model and produced the following findings: first, resources and information asymmetry significantly and positively affect opportunism. Second, the partner’s resource investments can weaken the effect of resources and information asymmetry on the partner’s opportunism. Third, explicit contracts can reduce the impact of information asymmetry on the partner’s opportunism. Fourth, renqing and ganqing but not mianzi can weaken the influence of information asymmetry on the partner’s opportunism.

This study provides a comprehensive and clear understanding of how opportunism can be curbed by jointly considering resource investments, explicit contracts and guanxi in asymmetric R&D cooperative relationships. Moreover, dependence asymmetry and guanxi are measured as a multidimensional construct and reveal their underlying structure, which expands previous understandings of risk management in R&D collaborations.

In this paper, the authors seek to contribute to the supply chain digitalisation literature by investigating a potential dark side of supply chain digitalisation from the viewpoint of the small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) suppliers, namely digital capability asymmetry and the partner opportunism of more digitally capable large buyers against SME suppliers. The authors seek to contribute further to the governance literature by investigating the effectiveness of the governance mechanism (legal contracts and relational contracts) in suppressing partner opportunism of this nature.

Using survey data collected from 125 Korean SMEs, the authors employed a hierarchical regression method to test a set of hypotheses focussing on the dark side of supply chain digitalisation and the effectiveness of the governance mechanism.

The study’s findings suggest that supplier-perceived digital capability asymmetry, wherein a buyer has a superior digital capability than its SME supplier, increases the SME supplier's dependence on the more digitally capable buyer, with the result that it is more exposed to buyer opportunism. Moreover, the results suggest that only relational governance is effective in protecting SME suppliers from buyer opportunism of this nature.

So far, the overwhelming majority of supply chain digitalisation research has debated its “bright side”. On the contrary, from the resource dependence theory perspective, this paper explains its dark side by providing empirical evidence on (1) the links between supplier-perceived digital capability asymmetry and a buyer's opportunism through an increased supplier's dependence and (2) the effectiveness of different types of governance in opportunism suppression.

Contemporary supply chain exchanges are governed by both contractual and relational governance mechanisms. However, the decision about when to use these mechanisms is likely driven by key relationship characteristics as well as the context in which they are needed. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the influence of dependence and information sharing on the governance decision within the context of inter-organizational conflict, and assess the degree to which contractual and relational governance approaches lead to more satisfying outcomes.

This research builds on both transaction cost and conflict resolution arguments to build hypotheses. To test the hypotheses, survey data were collected from supply chain professionals regarding specific episodes of conflict and analyzed using an ordinary least squares regression.

The results show a strong reluctance for the use of relational governance mechanisms to resolve conflict when the relationship is characterized by strong joint dependency or information sharing asymmetries. A strong dependence asymmetry and high degree of joint information sharing are associated with greater use of contractual and relational governance approaches, respectively. Finally, the authors find that contractual mechanisms do not necessarily lead to a dissatisfactory outcome for the manager involved.

This research investigates not only the use of contractual and relational governance mechanisms in inter-firm conflict resolution, but also the relationship specific factors that influence a firm’s decision to leverage either type of governance mechanism.

The purpose of this cross‐cultural study is to examine the moderating effect of power distance on perceived interdependence and relationship quality in a bank‐corporate client relationship.

Data were collected through surveys administered to bank customers in India and Canada. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Multiple Regression were employed to assess the relationships among model variables.

Results indicate that Power distance moderates the Interdependence and Relationship Quality Relationships.

This research was limited to only Indian and Canadian customers and their banks. Only one dimension of culture was used as a moderator of the Interdependence and Relationship Quality relationship. The study is limited to a single dimension of service banking.

Buyer‐seller relationships are dependent on the specific cultural basis of the parties. Managers must be cognizant of the cultural values of the buyer/client in order to understand the most effective means of establishing and nurturing the buyer‐seller relationship.

Given that Values, Interdependence, Interdependence Asymmetry, Trust and Commitment are critically important to the development of effective relationships, statistical data are presented supporting the fact that an element of national culture (Power Distance) moderates the degree of interdependence and the strength of the trust‐commitment linkage. To date, these relationships have not been explored in an eastern cultural context.

The purpose of this study is to analyse the role of relational power/dependent asymmetries and symmetries in shaping socially responsible supply chain management, whilst also examining how these issues are moderated by geographical distance between buyer and supplier.

The study draws on data from 339 buyer‐supplier relationships, and the authors use a set of regression models to test their hypotheses.

Joint dependency positively influences socially responsible supply chain management, whilst supplier power constrains it. Both joint dependency and buyer power become increasingly important determinants of socially responsible supply chain management as geographic distance increases.

Further work is needed to examine the conditions under which organisations will exercise their power advantage or their joint dependence position to improve socially responsible processes in the supply chain, as there may be situations where the buyer chooses not to exercise their power positions.

The authors' results indicate that jointly dependent relationships create the best conditions for socially responsible supply chain management, but they also find that supplier power advantage can constrain such initiatives.

This is the first paper to systematically analyse the implementation of socially responsible supply chain management, within a model that considers power a/symmetric positions of the buyer‐supplier relationship, and the role of geographical distance as a moderating influence on these power positions.