Search results

1 – 4 of 4
Article
Publication date: 12 April 2024

Ramesh Dangol, Rangamohan V. Eunni, Patrick J. Bateman and Alina Marculetiu

This study aims to investigate the conflicting views in supply chain and strategic management literature regarding cooperative supply chain relationships (CSCR) and firm…

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to investigate the conflicting views in supply chain and strategic management literature regarding cooperative supply chain relationships (CSCR) and firm performance. Supply chain literature suggests a universally positive impact of CSCR on performance, irrespective of a firm’s strategy. In contrast, strategic management literature contends that the effectiveness of CSCR depends on their alignment with the firm’s competitive strategy. The research aims to clarify this disparity, offering insights into the strategic use of CSCR for enhancing firm performance.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper theorizes the integration of perspectives for the impact of CSCR on firm performance by examining the relationships considering the alignment of cost leadership and product differentiation strategies with supplier and customer relationships. Plant-level survey data is analyzed using regression techniques to test four hypotheses.

Findings

All four main relationships (cost leadership, product differentiation, supplier relationship and customer relationship) on firm performance are statistically significant. However, cost leadership firms are better aligned to their chosen strategy when they have strong relationships with suppliers, whereas similar relationships with customers create misalignment, negatively influencing firm performance. In contrast, product differentiators benefit by investing in relationships with customers rather than with suppliers.

Practical implications

A firm’s performance does not solely depend on its CSCR efforts but on aligning them with the firm’s overall strategy. Therefore, managers need to be cognizant of the firm’s competitive strategy when investing in CSCR. Failing to do so could negatively impact firm performance and, eventually, its ability to compete in the marketplace.

Originality/value

Scholars have advocated for the importance of examining competing perspectives of phenomena, both within and across various bodies of literature, as cross-disciplinary analysis often brings enhanced focus and depth, leading to improved understanding. This research is one of the initial efforts to empirically analyze the varying perspectives on CSCR in supply chain and strategic management literature. This cross-disciplinary approach can yield a more integrated perspective.

Details

Management Research Review, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2040-8269

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 11 November 2014

Ramesh Dangol and Anthony Kos

– The purpose of this paper is to propose a new way to distinguish a firm’s dynamic capabilities from operational capabilities.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new way to distinguish a firm’s dynamic capabilities from operational capabilities.

Design/methodology/approach

Conceptual paper/literature review.

Findings

Current literature on dynamic capabilities posits that dynamic capabilities are those firm capabilities that can induce change in other capabilities, while operational capabilities are static. Distinguishing between these capabilities in this manner is not helpful because changes occur continuously in all capabilities to at least some extent. In addition, empirical studies show that even task-level operational capabilities can change on their own and can induce change in other capabilities. In contrast to focussing on the presence or lack of change to determine if a capability is dynamic or operational, this paper distinguishes between them by determining a priori the expected nature of the outcome. By focussing on the outcomes of change rather than the changes themselves, this paper proposes that capabilities should be considered operational if they produce outcomes that can be predicted using probability distribution while those capabilities that produce outcomes that cannot be predicted using probability distribution should be considered dynamic.

Research limitations/implications

Future research on dynamic capabilities should not only investigate whether or not change is occurring, but the outcome of change to understand whether a change is precipitated by dynamic or operational capabilities.

Originality/value

Existing dynamic capabilities literature is unclear about how to distinguish between dynamic capabilities from operational capabilities. Previous research attempts to distinguish these capabilities by arguing dynamic capabilities are those firm capabilities that can induce change in other capabilities, while operational capabilities are static and do not induce change. This is not particularly helpful. A clear distinction between dynamic and operational capabilities could facilitate further advancement of the dynamic capability literature; this study makes a rudimentary effort to distinguish between them.

Details

Journal of Strategy and Management, vol. 7 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1755-425X

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 7 August 2009

Thawatchai Jitpaiboon, Ramesh Dangols and James Walters

This paper aims to examine the interrelationships among cooperative relationships (CRs), mass customization (MC), and organizational performance using structural equation modeling…

1279

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to examine the interrelationships among cooperative relationships (CRs), mass customization (MC), and organizational performance using structural equation modeling (SEM) methodology.

Design/methodology/approach

The research framework investigates the mediating roles of MC in enhancing organizational performance. The CRs are the drivers in the model. CRs can be measured using two sub‐constructs – customer integration (CI) and supplier integration (SI). The surveyed data are collected from 220 manufacturing firms. The SEM methodology is used to develop valid and reliable instruments to measure these constructs and test the hypothesized relationships described in the framework.

Findings

The results reveal that firms with high levels of CI were more successful at MC compared to those with low levels of integration. Firms that involve customers in the creation of goods and services might have the ability to understand and respond to customer needs quickly, thereby enabling them to reduce the inherent risks of innovation. As a result, they are more likely to include only those product functions that add value to end‐users, thereby enabling them to reduce product costs.

Research limitations/implications

This study does not find a direct link between SI and MC. SI may be moderated by buyers and suppliers core competences and type of business in which they compete. Therefore, a future study examining a moderating relationship between the two might be fruitful. Researchers may be required to include not only the type of business of sample firms, but also the position they occupy in the supply chain.

Practical implications

The firms with higher level of CI would have an ability to understand customer preferences, thereby, enabling them to process customized products at low cost (MC).

Originality/value

The paper measures and validates the measurement for CRs which can be applied to research in supply chain management area.

Details

Management Research News, vol. 32 no. 9
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0140-9174

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 19 July 2022

Yi Li, Nelson Oly Ndubisi, Jinpeng Xu and Gang Li

From the dedication–constraint perspective, this study aims to complement ongoing discussions on the effects of switching costs on performance and explain the role of customer…

Abstract

Purpose

From the dedication–constraint perspective, this study aims to complement ongoing discussions on the effects of switching costs on performance and explain the role of customer involvement and relationship quality in the relationship between switching costs and performance.

Design/methodology/approach

After collecting data from Chinese manufacturing firms, the authors employed structural equation modeling to test their theoretical model incorporating switching costs, new product development performance, relationship quality and customer involvement.

Findings

The findings show that switching costs negatively affect three dimensions of new product development performance covering new product development market performance, new product development speed, new product development cost. More importantly, relationship quality positively moderates the relationship between switching costs and new product development performance, while customer involvement takes positive moderation effects.

Originality/value

These conclusions contribute to the knowledge of switching costs and supplier–customer relationship, and provide theoretical contributions and managerial insights for both academics and practitioners.

Details

Management Decision, vol. 60 no. 9
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0025-1747

Keywords

1 – 4 of 4