No abstract

A report on UK supermarkets published by the Competition Commission in October 2000 concluded that there was evidence that multiple food retailers were abusing their position of power and engaging in practices that adversely affected the competitiveness of suppliers. To address these adverse effects it was recommended that a code of practice be introduced to govern retailer-supplier relationships. The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) is co-ordinating a project that is designed to monitor the extent to which multiple retailers are complying with the principles set out in the code of practice. This paper presents the findings of exploratory research, conducted as part of this project, to investigate suppliers' current perceptions of the fairness of their trading relationships with the multiple retailers.

Purpose -To explore the nature and scope of good and bad practice in the relationships that UK supermarkets have with their suppliers of own-label products in the main commodity sectors (meat, dairy, fresh produce). Design/methodology/approach -The paper presents the results of a postal survey of supermarket suppliers, which formed part of a wider study of corporate social responsibility in UK supermarket supply chains. Findings -The results demonstrate the heterogeneity in relationships between supermarkets and their suppliers of own-label products in the main commodity sectors the extent to which retail and supply chain strategy is likely to influence the way in which supermarkets deal with suppliers. Best practice was most evident in the two supermarket supply chains where supply base rationalisation has virtually ceased and the adoption of lead suppliers and sole suppliers has been most evident in recent years.Research limitations/implications -Postal survey limited to suppliers in three commodity sectors, where buyer power is greatest. Would expect different results for relationships with branded suppliers. Practical implications -With supermarkets coming under increasing scrutiny over the way they treat suppliers, the conceptual framework and survey instrument represent a mechanism for independent assessment of supply chain relationships in sensitive markets, which could be used constructively to encourage the more widespread adoption of good practice and the elimination of bad practice in supermarket relationships. Originality/value -This paper presents the results of the first attempt anywhere to empirically measure fairness in relationships between supermarkets and their suppliers. Further research is necessary but the results of our early work are extremely encouraging.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual model of fairness applicable to buyer-supplier relationships within supply chains in order to generate a new line of empirical research within supply chain management (SCM). Design/methodology/approach -The paper presents a literature review on organisational justice drawn from the psychology discipline. Fairness within collaborative and long-term buyer-supplier relationships is discussed and conceptualised. A number of propositions are presented applicable to buyer supplier relationships within supply chains, given that successful implementation of supply chain strategies depends upon the actions and reactions of individuals across functions, both within and between organisations. Findings -Some of the assumptions made in the traditional intra-organisational setting are challenged. A conceptual model of fairness applicable to buyer-supplier relationships is developed, and supply chain moderating factors that may impact on perceptions of justice, and possible desired organisational as well as supply chain outcomes are identified. Originality/value -Specifically, a contribution is made to the gaps in the SCM literature on the social implications of SCM by developing a behavioural theoretical approach. Solutions to operational measurement difficulties are offered, together with implications for practising managers to consider when managing supply chain relationships. Opportunities and difficulties for future empirical research are also identified.