2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.01.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supply source selection criteria: The impact of supplier performance on distributor performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 100 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
43
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach with respect to performance measures has been successfully applied in previous studies (e.g., Homburg, Khromer, & Workman, 2003). In the context of organisational performance in supply chains, Katsikeas, Paparoidamis, and Katsikea (2004), following precedent studies by Morgan and Piercy (1998) and Kotabe and Murray (1990) make the case for subjective measures of performance encompassing such items as sales growth, market share and profitability.…”
Section: Measure Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach with respect to performance measures has been successfully applied in previous studies (e.g., Homburg, Khromer, & Workman, 2003). In the context of organisational performance in supply chains, Katsikeas, Paparoidamis, and Katsikea (2004), following precedent studies by Morgan and Piercy (1998) and Kotabe and Murray (1990) make the case for subjective measures of performance encompassing such items as sales growth, market share and profitability.…”
Section: Measure Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Jain, Benyoucef and Deshmukh (2009) observed, the selection of the supplier is a major purchasing decision; therefore, according to the authors, initiatives that promote greater understanding regarding how this selection may be affected are welcome. However, as observed by Katsikeas, Paparoidamis and Katsikea (2004), research efforts rarely identify how the channels are perceived in the buyer ´s selection criteria. Similarly, although many studies have examined the collaborative relationships between supplier and buyer, little is known about how attributes of the buyer, the supplier and the buyer-supplier relationship affect the choice of the service channel by the buyer; the present study aims to fill this knowledge gap.…”
Section: Marketing Channelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, independent representatives (i.e., intermediaries) can serve customers more homogeneously. However, even noting these differences, what the client supposedly wants is to be given priority of service by the manufacturer (Shipley et al, 1991;Katsikeas et al, 2004). Therefore, given an intention to purchase a product, the customer will prefer to be served by the manufacturer rather than third-party sales representatives.…”
Section: Supplier Attributesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the studies that include performance often emphasize the observable indicators such as sales, interfirm power, retail productivity, return on assets and investments, asset turnover, payoff ratios, profits, market share, and economic as well as social satisfaction (for example, Frazier, Gill, & Kale, 1989;Geyskens & Steenkamp, 2000;Katsikeas, Paparoidamis, & Katsikea, 2004;Ramaseshan, Yip, & Pae, 2006). They have all been used either separately or in ad hoc combinations as criteria to evaluate the marketing channel performance.…”
Section: Literature Review Performance Evaluation Of Internet Channelsmentioning
confidence: 99%