Search results

The purpose of this paper is to conduct a large-sample empirical investigation of how relational capital impacts bullwhip at the supplier.

The study uses mandatory disclosures in regulatory filings of US firms to identify a supplier’s major customers and constructs empirical proxies of supply chain relational capital, i.e., length of the relationship between suppliers and customers and partner interdependence. Multivariate regression analyses are performed to examine the effects of relational capital on bullwhip at the supplier.

The findings show that bullwhip at the supplier is greater when customers are more dependent on their suppliers, but is reduced when suppliers share longer relationships with their customers. The results also provide additional insights on several firm characteristics that impact supplier bullwhip, including shocks in order backlog, selling intensity and variations in profit margins. Furthermore, the authors document that the effect of supply chain relationships on bullwhip tends to vary across industries and over time.

The study employs a novel data set that is constructed using firms’ financial disclosures. This large panel data set consisting of 13,993 observations over 36 years enables thorough and robust analyses to characterize supply chain relationships and gain a deeper understanding of their impact on bullwhip.

To create and sustain a resource-based competitive advantage, managers acquire and develop specialized resources as they grow their firms. The authors argue that an important part of committing to a resource-based strategy is a willingness to keep spending on specialized resources during periods when sales and profits are down. The authors seek to validate this conjecture by examining whether such resource-based commitment to a customer-centered strategy results in improved customer satisfaction. The authors use the stickiness of selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses to capture this commitment empirically. The authors first document that future customer satisfaction is positively associated with SG&A cost stickiness, consistent with the premise that the retention of specialized SG&A resources during low demand periods helps firms to build and maintain relationships with customers over time. Next, the authors test whether expected future benefits of customer satisfaction are enhanced when SG&A cost stickiness is higher. The authors find that the positive relation between Tobin’s Q and customer satisfaction is positively moderated by SG&A cost stickiness. Finally, the authors test whether earnings persistence, a quality of earnings associated with sustained performance over time, is positively associated with the interaction between customer satisfaction and SG&A cost stickiness. The authors find that it is. Their evidence supporting these predictions is consistent with the conjecture that resource-based commitment reflected in cost stickiness is an important dimension of creating and sustaining a resource-based competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between the strategic positioning of firms and the sustainability of firm performance. The paper argues that pursuing a differentiation strategy leads to more sustainable financial performance compared to following a cost leadership strategy. However, a differentiation strategy may also be associated with greater risk.

To investigate the research questions, the authors utilize publicly available archival data consisting of 12,849 firm-year observations for the period 1989-2003. In the first stage of the analysis, factor analysis is used to determine firms’ strategic positioning. The resulting factor scores are subsequently used in regression analysis to investigate the sustainability of performance based on the strategic positioning of firms.

The results indicate that both cost leadership and differentiation strategies have a positive impact on contemporaneous performance. However, the differentiation strategy allows a firm to sustain its current performance in the future to a greater extent than a cost leadership strategy. The differentiation strategy, though, is also associated with greater systematic risk and more unstable performance.

Sustainability of performance refers to how much a firm's current profitability can be sustained in future periods. The main contribution of this study is the comparison of generic strategies based on the sustainability of firm performance. This aspect of the strategy-performance link has not been considered in prior work. Another contribution of the study is that it considers multiple dimensions of firm performance in order to evaluate the trade-offs involved with pursuing different strategies. In particular, the authors contribute to the literature by documenting that while differentiation leads to more sustainable earnings, it also leads to riskier and more unstable earnings.