Breaching relational obligations in a buyer-supplier relationship: Feelings of violation, fairness perceptions and supplier switching

Blessley, Misty; Mir, Saif; Zacharia, Zach G.; Aloysius, John

doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.04.011

Cited by 56 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, rather than examining whether a reward claim may be acceptable for the supplier, we investigate when such claiming mechanisms should be effectively used. Based on a review of the SCM literature, specifically the psychological contract (e.g., Blessley et al., ; Kaufmann et al., ) and supplier development (e.g., Krause, Scannell & Calantone, ; Terpend, Tyler, Krause & Handfield, ) literatures, we propose two types of claiming mechanisms: economic and social reward claims. Both types differ in terms of their beneficiary (i.e., the buyer versus both firms in the NPD dyad), the parties required to expend effort (i.e., one‐sided versus two‐sided) and the time dimension (i.e., short‐term versus long‐term) (Kumar, Heide & Wathne, ).…”

Section: Reward Claiming By the Buying Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social reward claims focus on benefits that must be provided voluntarily (Blau, ; Das & Teng, ). However, although such claims have no immediate financial consequences, there may exist potential financial value for both organizations in the future (Blessley et al., ).…”

Section: Reward Claiming By the Buying Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even when written contracts between buyers and suppliers are in place, their interpretations can differ and hence give rise to psychological contracts (MacNeil, ; Rousseau & McLean Parks, ), defined as the subjective and idiosyncratic interpretation of exchange agreements between parties (Rousseau, ; Shore & Tetrick, ). Psychological contracts are inherently perceptual in nature and exist purely in the eye of the beholder (Blessley, Mir, Zacharia & Aloysius, ; Robinson & Rousseau, ). Extant supply chain management (SCM) literature has devoted considerable attention toward understanding the role of psychological contracts in managing buyer–supplier relationships (e.g., Hill, Eckerd, Wilson & Greer, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Managing NPD exchanges requires high levels of flexibility and causes partners to rely on alternative governance mechanisms, such as the psychological contract. In this context, perceived obligations of the psychological contract can be transactional/economic in nature, such as helping one another if time, cost, or quality goals are in danger, or relational/social in nature, such as developments in how the parties communicate or collaborate with one another (Blessley et al., ). Each party in the exchange has their own expectations about the degree to which these behaviors should be exhibited, and there are certainly instances where those expectations are exceeded and lead to favorable outcomes for the perceiver (Kaufmann, Esslinger & Carter, ; Lawson, Petersen, Cousins & Handfield, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Who Cares? Supplier Reactions to Buyer Claims after Psychological Contract Over‐Fulfillments

Esslinger

Eckerd

Kaufmann

et al. 2019

J Supply Chain Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Buyer–supplier engagement leads to numerous opportunities for unexpected positive benefits to occur. How these events come about and are managed (i.e., what entities are responsible for the outcomes and how the benefits are shared) remains an under‐investigated phenomenon in the supply chain literature. This research uses attribution theory and a systems thinking perspective to investigate a supplier's experience of psychological contract over‐fulfillment followed by a buyer claim. We hypothesize that a supplier's reaction to a buyer's claim depends on whether the type of claim (economic versus social) fits with the locus of causality the over‐fulfillment is attributed to: (1) the buying organization (buyer‐only attributions), (2) the buyer and the supplier jointly (dyad attributions), or (3) a third party in the buyer's innovation network (buyer‐network attributions). Results from a multi‐stage scenario‐based experiment suggest that following the supplier's experience of psychological contract over‐fulfillment, the supplier's trust toward the buyer is highest for dyad attributions, while the supplier's appreciation for the buyer's network is highest with dyad and buyer‐network attributions. Once the buyer claims value, however, the influence of attributions diminishes. While social reward claims had almost no impact on relational outcomes, economic reward claims significantly harm the supplier's perceptions of the buyer. Regardless of the type of claim, the locus of causality was largely irrelevant for the supplier's reaction to the buyer's reward claim. Our study contributes to the supply chain psychological contract literature by investigating positive over‐fulfillments of the psychological contract, as opposed to previous literature that has focused on negative breaches. We also extend attribution theory by introducing a novel supply chain‐specific attribution for the locus of causality, and we establish boundary conditions of attribution theory in the face of supply chain‐typical claiming mechanisms. For managers, locus of causality for a positive event seems to be irrelevant once claiming sets in.

show abstract

Section: Reward Claiming By the Buying Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reward Claiming By the Buying Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Who Cares? Supplier Reactions to Buyer Claims after Psychological Contract Over‐Fulfillments

Esslinger

Eckerd

Kaufmann

et al. 2019

J Supply Chain Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We presume that the supplier will communicate this feeling both if he is treated fairly or unfairly (H2d). Breaching relational obligations in B2B relationships has negative consequences on fairness perception and may cause emotional responses (Blessley, Mir, Zacharia, & Aloysius, 2018). Hence, he will not be afraid to communicate this information also in public via the Internet (H2a), press or TV (H2b) or on events (H2c).…”

Section: Comparison Of the Expectations With The Outcomes Determiningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing supply network transparency: structure model, mapping procedure and performance impact

Kappel¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tobias and my two paranymphs Frederik and Vincent from Twente-as well as Holger, Andreas, Eika, Patrick, Colin, Constantina, Sebastian, Micha and Catja from Münster. While climbing different stages and enjoying good times together, I am glad that some of you became close friends of mine. Looking forward, several of you already completed their academic journey, while others are still on different heights of their mountains. Good luck to all of you in completing your projects-just keep climbing, I am sure you will make it! Special thanks go to my family-above all my mother Edith and my brother Benedikt. Thank you very much for your patience, understanding and unconditional support in the last years. You helped me keeping my motivation and recharging my batteries when energy was low. I could always count on you. This thesis is dedicated to you. Last but not least, I am very grateful to have my longtime friends Marina, Daniela, Laura, Anne and Vanessa from my hometown Wiedenbrück; the "Stuttgart Crew" Jule, Johanna, Martina, Kathrin, Eva, Bene and Konrad; and my dear friends Tatiana and Josiane in Münster. On my journey towards the top of the mountain, you always kept celebrating small stage victories with me and encouraging me when muscles were aching. All of you have been part of this exciting hike and joined me climbing it to the summit cross. Thanks a lot. Without you, this project would have been impossible.

show abstract

Tales from the Other Side: An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Third‐party Enforced Psychological Contract Breach Risk on Breachers and their Relationships During a Work‐to‐rule Teacher Strike

Michaud

Somogyvari

2023

Can J Adm Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little research has been done on psychological contract breach situations from the perspective of the breacher, including situations in which potential breach actions were enforced by a third‐party. This exploratory study aims to see how enforced breach affects the breacher, their reactions to the situation, and their relationships with community stakeholders. Semi‐structured long‐form interviews with Canadian teachers whose union decided to go on a work‐to‐rule strike, risking relational breaches with school community stakeholders, were undertaken. Teachers experienced negative emotions and engaged in breach mitigating actions. Implications include being aware of the negative effects on unwilling breachers and the relationships with the source of breaches, and the possibility of mitigating breaches while still removing obligations if breachers engage in mitigating actions.

show abstract

Breaching relational obligations in a buyer-supplier relationship: Feelings of violation, fairness perceptions and supplier switching

Cited by 56 publications

References 49 publications

Who Cares? Supplier Reactions to Buyer Claims after Psychological Contract Over‐Fulfillments

Who Cares? Supplier Reactions to Buyer Claims after Psychological Contract Over‐Fulfillments

Increasing supply network transparency: structure model, mapping procedure and performance impact

Tales from the Other Side: An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Third‐party Enforced Psychological Contract Breach Risk on Breachers and their Relationships During a Work‐to‐rule Teacher Strike

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About