The influence of flexibility in buyer–seller relationships on the productivity of knowledge

Young, Greg; Sapienza, Harry J.; Baumer, David L.

doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(01)00243-0

Cited by 67 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite its adaptive advantages, high flexibility may increase relational risk under fewer formal safeguards (Young et al 2003). In this situation, a greater degree of trust mitigates conflicts by facilitating cooperative orientation in adjusting to changing environmental situations (Carson et al 2006;Madhok 1995;Sako and Helper 1998).…”

Section: Determinants Of Relational Governance Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Flexibility refers to the willingness of the parties to make adjustments to the initial agreement in order to adapt new knowledge (Heide and John 1992;Ivens 2004Ivens , 2005Joshi and Stump 1999;Noordewier et al 1990;Young et al 2003). Two items reflecting the partners' ability to make adjustments in accordance with changing circumstances are used to measure flexibility (Heide and John 1992;Young-Ybarra and Wiersema 1999).…”

Section: Flexibility (Flex)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Complementarity Between Formal and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Inter-organizational Networks: Combining Resource-Based and Relational Governance Perspectives

Gurcaylilar–Yenidogan

Windsperger

2014

Interfirm Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Determinants Of Relational Governance Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Flexibility (Flex)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementarity Between Formal and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Inter-organizational Networks: Combining Resource-Based and Relational Governance Perspectives

Gurcaylilar–Yenidogan

Windsperger

2014

Interfirm Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Reychav and J. Weisberg DOI: 10.1002/kpm on organizational performance (Collins and Smith, 2006). In an innovative, knowledge-intensive industry, knowledge sharing in intra-firm organizational relationships is an important resource for improving firm performance (Young et al, 2003). This study focuses on the individual level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Good for workers, good for companies: How knowledge sharing benefits individual employees

Reychav

Weisberg

2009

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper aims to identify the ways in which explicit and tacit knowledge sharing occur in organizations and to investigate the impact of sharing these two knowledge types on the employee's rewards, performance, and intention to leave. This paper focuses on two hi-tech companies working in the telecommunications field producing cellular networks. The final sample consisted of 278 completed questionnaires from business departments including finance, R&D, marketing, IT, engineering, and manufacturing. Explicit knowledge sharing is perceived by the employees as having: (1) a direct positive effect on the receipt of monetary rewards; (2) a positive indirect effect on the employee's performance; and it has a (3) positive direct and negative indirect effects on employee's intention to leave. Tacit knowledge sharing is perceived by employees as having: (1) a positive direct effect on the receipt of non-monetary rewards; (2) a positive direct effect on performance; and (3) it has a positive indirect effect on employee's intention to leave. Although the findings show that increased knowledge sharing results in positive outcomes at the individual level, the research model would benefit from an examination of larger samples for reasons of statistical complexity analysis and in order to allow for generalizability of the results to other companies that operate in similar environments. It would also be worthwhile to conduct a comparative analysis of companies from different industries. Understanding knowledge-sharing behaviors may prove helpful to managers in developing strategies to encourage organizational knowledge sharing and in the development of an organizational knowledge base. The knowledge sharing outcomes outlined here can give employees a way to predict potential positive outcomes and benefits that are likely to arise as a result of engaging in knowledge sharing activities. The model enables for the first time to substantiate, in a valid way, to hypothesize that knowledge sharing within an organization is perceived by employees to be a rewarding behavior, improving employees' performance, and decrease the intention to leave.

show abstract

“…From an offering perspective, supply chain flexibility requires a flow of detailed 'what-if' decision-supporting information that facilitates decisions regarding changes in product offers with current partners [76]. From a buyer perspective, sharing extensive, disaggregated information with suppliers allows for quick responses to financial, environmental and market changes [49,77], thus increasing commitment in the relationship [78].…”

Section: Rbv Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, the innovative characteristics of information are found to play a crucial role with regard to relational variables [70]. The sharing of disaggregated 'what-if' information promotes supply chain flexibility [7,28], increases coordination and adaptation [76,78] reduces relational risk [40] and indicates trustworthiness [66]. As the frequent exchange of timely and accurate information, information visibility promotes coordination and joint-solving processes, increases cooperation, and indicates that a partner is trustable [55,63,71].…”

Section: Model and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Generation of Value along Supply Chains: Balancing Control Information and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Downstream and Upstream Relationships

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Firms are involved in supply chains to achieve operative efficiency, develop strategic advantages, and generate financial profits. However, there is limited evidence regarding how governance mechanisms influence the generation of value from collaboration. Furthermore, how a particular buyer or supplier position provides benefits to partners is unclear. In this paper, we examine the roles of management control information as both a governance mechanism and a source of dynamic capabilities, and its interaction with relational variables to create and capture value following a demand-side perspective. Two separate studies are developed using multigroup structural equation modelling, which analyse buyer and supplier positions played by the firm as a complex supply chain node. The results demonstrate that the characteristics of information sharing have different impacts on value, depending on the role played in the relationship. Although timely information sharing appears to be the key source of operative and financial value in downstream relationships, disaggregated information sharing generates additional strategic advantages in upstream relationships. The presence of different control-trust frameworks mediates the process of value generation, leading to different managerial and theoretical implications.

show abstract

The influence of flexibility in buyer–seller relationships on the productivity of knowledge

Cited by 67 publications

References 33 publications

Complementarity Between Formal and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Inter-organizational Networks: Combining Resource-Based and Relational Governance Perspectives

Complementarity Between Formal and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Inter-organizational Networks: Combining Resource-Based and Relational Governance Perspectives

Good for workers, good for companies: How knowledge sharing benefits individual employees

Understanding the Generation of Value along Supply Chains: Balancing Control Information and Relational Governance Mechanisms in Downstream and Upstream Relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About