Performance outcomes of behavioral attributes in buyer-supplier relationships

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explain the impact of relationship capital (trust and commitment) and the exchange climate (communication, conflict resolution and cooperation) on performance satisfaction in the context of buyer–supplier relationships. The study also examines the influence of national culture on the proposed relationships. Design/methodology/approach – A conceptual model and accompanying research hypotheses are tested on data from a survey of 169 US and 110 Brazilian buyers. Structural equation modeling (AMOS 18.0) is used to test the hypotheses. Findings – Results suggest that performance satisfaction is highly dependent on the level of relationship capital and climate of information exchange between buyer and supplier. Quality communication and conflict resolution have the greatest impact on performance satisfaction while trust’s influence is both direct and mediated by the exchange climate. Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to a two-country sample in a business-to-business (B2B) context. Also, this study examines only the impact of socio-psychological behaviors on performance outcomes; economic variables are not considered. Practical implications – Results provide insight into what behavioral attributes are most influential in increasing a buyer’s satisfaction with a supplier’s performance in distinct countries. Based on the findings, suppliers can better formulate strategies to enter overseas markets. Originality/value – This study extends the strategic alliance literature on performance-relevant behaviors to the context of buyer–supplier relationships. In addition, the study contributes to the extant literature by including a sample from an emerging market.

Providing a structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation for strategic outsourcing

“…Therefore, managing the supplier relationships is one of the most important parts of business Chatain, 2011;Prajogo and Olhager, 2012;Graca et al, 2015). Selecting the right supplier and making a long-term mutually beneficial relationship with them can have significant effects on financial and operational success Graca et al, 2015).…”

“…Therefore, managing the supplier relationships is one of the most important parts of business Chatain, 2011;Prajogo and Olhager, 2012;Graca et al, 2015). Selecting the right supplier and making a long-term mutually beneficial relationship with them can have significant effects on financial and operational success Graca et al, 2015). In this way, a suitable method for selecting and evaluating suppliers is vital for enterprises, especially in terms of selecting strategic suppliers that can meet enterprise expectations effectively in a long term (Chen, 2011;Partovi, 2013).…”

“…In traditional selection procedure, often some criteria such as cost, quality, and delivery play an important role in selection and evaluation decisions Chatain, 2011). Although in today's business climate, there are many other criteria that should be considered in order to make a successful supplier relationship (Mandal and Deskmukh, 1994;Talluri and Narasimhan, 2004;Dulmin and Mininno, 2003;Dowlatshahi, 2000;De Toni and Nassimbeni, 2001;Choy et al, 2002Choy et al, , 2003Chatain, 2011;Prajogo and Olhager, 2012;Graca et al, 2015), large numbers of possible suppliers with different capabilities make this procedure more complicated and a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem .…”

“…Earlier methods have applied traditional criteria such as price, delivery, and quality as a basis for comparing suppliers; but, companies have found that these criteria are not enough by themselves. Then, some other techniques have been developed that include multiple criteria concerning some other criteria related to environmental, political, and customer satisfaction aspects (Zeydan et al, 2011;Graca et al, 2015). Traditional models use only quantitative measures; but, by expanding the criteria, there are some measures that cannot be explored quantitatively.…”

“…So, new techniques should be able to work with both quantitative and qualitative measures. Also, multiple attribute decision making problems have been used in these methods that can consider both quantitative and qualitative measures such as cost, quality, reliability, and safety attributes in selecting and evaluating suppliers simultaneously Graca et al, 2015). Most of such qualitative attributes are subjective and can be only evaluated properly by using human judgment, although humans cannot provide complete judgment either by lack of information or the existing vagueness of meaning about attributes and their assessment (Yang et al, 2006;You et al, 2015).…”