Influence strategy efficacy in supplier–distributor relationships

The impact of coercive and non-coercive forms of influence on trust, commitment, and compliance in supply chains

“…Other researchers dispute this finding with their own studies showing coercive influence strategies are counterproductive in producing compliance, while non-coercive influence strategies are more effective (Boyle & Dwyer, 1995;Hu & Sheu, 2005). Threats, a coercive strategy, will result in lower levels of compliance than other types of influence (Payan & McFarland, 2005;Payan & Nevin, 2006). Meanwhile, Hausman and Stock (2003) and McGowan and Madey (1998) find that neither coercive nor non-coercive influence strategies promoted compliance.…”

“…Furthermore, all joint actions are not the same. A recent study found that the nature of the request has a dramatic impact on compliance; with requests necessitating less time and effort and fewer resources being complied with more often (Payan & Nevin, 2006). The tendency to test the impact of influence in relatively simple models also has made it difficult to understand how influence strategies fit into the big picture of achieving the types of joint action necessary for supply chain service efficiency.…”

“…More specifically, a threat, while coercive, has degrees. As an example, while a firm might use coercive influence to affect joint action, it might use a mixture of threats, which commonly result in lower compliance, and promises, which commonly result in higher compliance (Payan & Nevin 2006). Another firm might only use threats.…”

“…Another study finds an impact on joint action emanating from non-coercive influence tactics (Frazier & Rody, 1991). Threats, a specific type of coercive influence, are specifically identified as producing less joint action than promises, a type of non-coercive influence (Payan & Nevin, 2006). Further studies are necessary to provide clarity and guidance for firms wishing to motivate joint action in their partners.…”

Incentivos Extracontratuais e Comportamentos Ex Post no Relacionamento entre Shopping e Lojista

“…Diante disso, como o monitoramento, por sua natureza, é abrupto, pode haver prejuízos nas políticas de compliance, prejudicando o desempenho (Murry & Heide, 1998). Por fim, dado que estratégias ameaçadoras têm resultados negativos e que as estratégias de razão e lógica têm efeitos positivos nos níveis de compliance (Payan & Nevin, 2006), acredita-se que o monitoramento, por ser ponderado mais de modo negativo, ameaçador e de imposição, prejudique a relação entre políticas de compliance e o resultado de vendas. Assim sendo:…”