Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate retailers’ power-dependence management through the lens of supply chain diversification, and explore how it is linked to their logistic arrangements in managing suppliers and their retail performance.

Hypotheses are tested using a structural equation modelling based on survey data from 186 merchandising division heads at Japanese retail companies.

The results reveal that quick-response inventory replenishment is positively related to retailers’ use of power-dependence management. This management practice leads to enhanced retail competitiveness and, thus, higher sales growth in supply chain relationships.

This study contributes to understanding how retailers’ logistic arrangements work by modelling power relations within supply chains, drawing on power-dependence theory. The authors propose an alternative view of logistics systems to that of the widely adopted transaction cost theory. The authors find that supplier investments in quick-response inventory management may not be a relationship-specific asset.

This paper tries to provide a theoretical explanation from case studies in which I analyzed the impact of firms’ behavior on negotiation processes. Particularly, it concentrates on the impact of the power‐dependence relationship on negotiation behavior choice in joint ventures and (nonhostile) acquisitions. Previous studies have found that negotiation behavior is a key factor in determining the results of negotiations and the subsequent implementation and performance of the strategy. Drawing on interview material from six cases, three acquisition negotiations and three joint venture negotiations, the empirical analysis allowed me to consider that the equilibrium situation of power‐dependence is more associated with integrative negotiation behaviors adopted by all the parties. This situation facilitates win/win agreements (negotiation success). However, the value‐creation basis appears as a key factor to be analyzed because its influence on (1) the perception of dependence and (2) the possible use of a power disequilibrium situation. This factor seems to be especially important in acquisition negotiations. Based upon my analysis, I recommend some issues to be studied and contrasted empirically in future research.

The purpose of this study is to review the existing typologies of buyer-supplier relationships (BSRs) in the literature, to critically assess their dimensions and underlying assumptions, and to propose a more complete BSR typology and future directions for BSR typology research.

This study takes a conceptual approach in highlighting the limitations of existing BSR typologies and synthesizing their key typology-defining variables when proposing an alternative BSR typology.

The proposed BSR typology is based on alternative behavioral assumptions: bounded rationality and choice-determinism, and uses relationalism, supplier dependence and buyer dependence as the typology-defining variables. This BSR typology captures four prominent BSR types in the extant literature (i.e. market/discrete relationship, captive-buyer/supplier-dominant relationship, captive-supplier/buyer-dominant relationship and strategic/bilateral partnership) and four new BSR types developed in this study (i.e. supplier-led collaboration, buyer-led collaboration, competitive/win–lose partnership, and free will/voluntary collaboration).

The performance implications of the new BSR types have yet to be empirically tested; however, empirical approaches for future research are discussed.

As BSR typology research has been conducted over the years, a thorough review and systematic assessment of the extant research in terms of fundamental assumptions, typology-defining variables, overall progress and limitations becomes an important reflective task in guiding future research efforts toward the collective advancement in this line of inquiry. Departing from the existing literature, this study also uses more realistic BSR assumptions and a more complete set of typology-defining variables in developing an alternative BSR typology, arguably more complete and more theoretically sound than the previous BSR typologies in the literature.

Research on strategic procurement was mostly focussed on the clients' and main contractors' perspectives, while limited work had been done from a subcontractor's perspective. The paper hypothesises that “strategic capability” influences the latent constructs of power, dependence and collaboration in the main contractor–subcontractor relationship. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of a subcontractor's strategic capabilities on power, dependence and collaboration.

A survey questionnaire was developed and distributed amongst the subcontractors in Australia, and 212 complete responses were received. Then second order confirmatory factor analysis and partial least square structure equation modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis were performed to test the hypothesised relationships.

The findings support “strategic capabilities” as a construct expressive of a subcontractor's unique market position and good business reputation. The findings also suggest that strategically capable subcontractors enhance their potential for forming partnerships with main contractors through dependence (StratC. → Dep., β = 0.84; Effect Size (ES) = 0.713; p < 0.01), collaboration (StratC. → Collab., β = 0.84; ES = 0.697; p < 0.01) and bargaining power (StratC. → Pow., β = 0.83; ES = 0.672; p < 0.01).

The study is one of its kind to explore the impact of a subcontractor's strategic capability on their bargaining power, dependability and ability to form collaborations. Furthermore, results indicate that the “strategic capabilities” of subcontractors can strongly influence their ability to create “dependence”, foster “collaboration” and exert “power” over a main contractor. The findings can help improve the strategic procurement decision-making processes of both subcontractors and main contractors to build better business relationships.

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.

Additive manufacturing, that is, layer-based manufacturing technologies, is thought to change supply chain operations from global to local, while also affecting design processes and product structures. As this transformation happens, a power struggle among various actors relating themselves to additive manufacturing has emerged. The purpose of this paper is to discuss and explain the development of additive manufacturing from a power dependence point of view.

The paper is based on data collected from a number of seminars hosting a total of 620 industry experts representing 102 companies in the area, and reflecting every step of the supply chain.

The paper points out how measures to deal and create power imbalances occur also related to indirect parties, and how the disruptive character of the supply chain leads to exercised power.

The power struggle provides new insights into how an emerging technology is realised and the effect of protectionism on such attempts. Specifically related to additive manufacturing, the paper illustrates the business side from various actors’ point of view, which adds to technological perspectives on additive manufacturing, as well as studies viewing the supply chain from a bird’s-eye perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a model to build visibility for mitigating supplier risk. The model has shown that visibility can be an important information-based capability for a buying firm to mitigate supplier risk. Such an importance, however, may not hold in all settings but is contingent on the power-dependence structure between a buyer and its supplier. In particular, under high dependence of buyer on supplier, visibility is more needed to mitigate risk. In reverse, the importance of visibility is reduced if buyer is not dependent on its supplier. Two sides of antecedents to visibility are also posited and tested.

Seafood processing firms in Vietnam are surveyed to test the model. Reliabilities and validities of measures are tested before the structured analysis. To test the model, partial least square (variance-based structural equation modeling) with 500 boostrapping samples is used.

For the samples of seafood processing firms in Vietnam, visibility into their suppliers are found to be the key in mitigating supplier risks when the firms depend highly on their suppliers. In the reverse cases, the importance of visibility is reduced. Visibility is also found to be anteceded by information technology integration between buying firms and their suppliers.

The model helps develop and empirically test an important approach in proactively mitigating supplier risk. That is to develop buying firm’s visibility into a key supplier. Further, the model is developed to test the ways that visibility can be built. Those include both soft and hard sides of facilitating information exchange from supplier to its buyer. Thus the model is contributed to both the literature of supplier risk and power-dependence.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how technological innovations mitigate inefficiencies in marketing channels in the context of microfinance markets in emerging markets. By examining in detail, specific market inefficiencies that inhibit the efforts of micro and small enterprises to access microfinance in emerging markets and the use of technology to alleviate these failures, the authors bridge the literatures on marketing channel inefficiencies and technological innovation relevant to emerging markets.

The authors use a qualitative method in the form of phenomenological interviews and participant observation in Ghana, West Africa, to investigate the research question.

The three themes that arise from the findings are: channel structure and structure selection; power-dependence relationships and relational outcomes; and conflict mechanisms and control behaviors. Customerization of technology is observed to mitigate inefficiencies in mobile marketing channels by facilitating data sharing, reminders, peer referencing and other marketing strategies of awareness, affordability, access and scalability.

The limitations of this study are the fact that the context of the study is only one emerging market country – Ghana. This market is however experiencing dynamic changes in mobile technology innovations that is revolutionizing the microfinance industry.

Mobile money innovations have advanced the scope of marketing channels to the point that an updated perspective of the role of mobile technology in mitigating marketing channels inefficiency is both appropriate and timely.

The authors make the contribution of customerization as an aspect of mobile technology that is a key enabler in microfinance marketing channels, serving to mitigate microfinance market inefficiencies. Additionally, the study augments theories on the marketing channels framework by contributing perspectives on mobile technology.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the explanatory power of reactance theory and power dependence theory in predicting the moderating effect of job embeddedness on the organizational trust-workplace deviance relationship.

Cross-sectional data were collected from a sample of nurses (n=353) via an online survey organization. The data were analyzed using hierarchical regression.

Job embeddedness significantly moderated the organizational trust-workplace deviance relationship such that participants who experienced low organizational trust and high job embeddedness engaged in more workplace deviance than those experiencing low organizational trust and low job embeddedness.

Organizations should attempt to build and maintain employees’ organizational trust since employees who lack organizational trust are more likely to act deviantly. Additionally, organizations should realize that job embeddedness is not always beneficial. Therefore, organizations should seek to reduce negative perceptions of job embeddedness by alerting employees (especially those who are the most distrusting) of other job opportunities and providing more generalizable skill training, to enhance employees’ perceptions of mobility.

This study demonstrates that job embeddedness can be applied to models (i.e., the organizational trust-workplace deviance relationship) beyond those that have previously included turnover as an outcome (i.e., Lee et al., 2014), and that such influences may be negative. More notably, the results provide evidence supporting the notion of the negative side of job embeddedness.

In light of the inconclusive findings in literature, the aim of this paper is to answer the question: how can negotiation behavior be explained in a situation of power imbalance?

Based on Kim et al., the paper proposes a theoretical model that is empirically studied through a case study.

Power relationship is a key contextual factor in determining negotiation behavior in joint ventures (JVs), but it has to be defined more in terms of the perceived value of the alternatives rather than the amount of available better alternatives to a negotiation agreement (BATNAs). Thus, when a partner looks to gain access to knowledge (market, technology, etc.) about the counterpart, although it has a greater number of BATNAs, they perceive a situation of mutual dependency.

Understanding how the negotiating context affects behavior is crucial for firms to anticipate the reactions and behavior of their counterparts and thus display suitable behavior to gain the most favorable agreement possible in JVs (win/win agreements in view of the importance of establishing long‐term commitment for a correct implementation and performance). The correct selection of the negotiating team also appears as a key element for consideration (people capable to maintain an integrative orientation to confront any competitive reaction).

The paper focuses on the determination of negotiation behavior in joint ventures, an overlooked research area. In particular, it gives light to the inconsistent results found in earlier works centered in analyzing the impact of power‐dependence relationship in negotiation behavior choice.