Original Articles
“Previous research demonstrates numerous benefits of mutual commitments between parties. However, less is understood about the effect of unilateral commitments, when one party (the committer) makes a relationship-specific investment without an established current or forthcoming reciprocal commitment by the other party (the recipient). This problem is particularly relevant in the supply chain management domain, where organizations often make investments in their supply chain partners, and frequently assume great risks in doing so. To help organizations understand how they can initiate unilateral commitments to their benefit, we develop theory regarding the outcomes of unilateral commitments based on their temporal duration. We evaluate our hypothesis using data collected from three distinct studies, each using different methodologies and samples: a laboratory experiment of graduate students, a vignette experiment of operations management practitioners, and a secondary data analysis of baseball contracts. We find compelling support that unilateral commitments of shorter duration successfully drive recipient cooperative behavior; however, a significant decrease in recipient cooperation results from longer term unilateral commitments. Our research contributes broadly to the literature on unilateral commitments, and in particular its manifestation within supply chain management, where this research stands to make substantial impact due to the prevalence of unilateral commitments.”
This research has been featured in our Spotlight series, details can be found here :https://www.journalofsupplychainmanagement.com/new-blog/2021/9/10/spotlight-driving-cooperative-action-a-multi-method-study-of-the-temporal-duration-of-unilateral-commitments
https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12273
“While the extant literature has examined causes for buyer–supplier relationship dissolution, the restoration of severed buyer–supplier relationships has been overlooked. Drawing on organizational justice theory, our research develops and tests a model of relationship restoration. We examine how the supplier's restoration tactics—acknowledgment, compensation, and operational transparency, influence the interactional, distributive, and procedural fairness perception, respectively, of the buyer, resulting in relationship restoration. The results are based on a 2 (Acknowledgment – Yes/No) × 2 (Compensation – Yes/No) × 2 (Operational Transparency – Yes/No) vignette-based study with 390 experienced practitioners. The analysis shows that compensating the buyer and providing transparent procedures for dealing with similar situations in the future, lead to higher distributive fairness and procedural fairness, respectively, resulting in restored relationships. Compensation makes up for past supplier malperformance, whereas operational transparency mitigates future concerns. We also find that restoration tactics based on interactional justice are less effective than those based on procedural and distributive justice. There is only marginal support for the indirect positive effect of acknowledgment on restoration intentions (p < 0.10). These results point to the importance of knowing how to approach a buyer to initiate relationship restoration. Managers must understand and evaluate the specific needs of each buyer when proposing a compensatory design that appeals to the buyer. Additionally, establishing procedures that are appealing to all buyers can be a challenge for a supplier, due to the differing benefits to the supplier provided by each buyer.”
This research has been featured in our Spotlight series, details can be found here: https://www.journalofsupplychainmanagement.com/new-blog/2021/9/3/spotlight-mending-fences-in-a-buyersupplier-relationship-the-role-of-justice-in-relationship-restoration
The full article can be found here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jscm.12272
ttps://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12272
“Buyer–supplier relationships provide ample opportunities for trust violations to occur. Yet the literature on the impact and outcomes of violations of trust in buyer–supplier relationships is underdeveloped. In this study, we report the results from three complementary scenario-based experiments that evaluate the impact of a supplier-induced violation on a buyer's trust in that supplier. We establish a spillover effect of supplier integrity violations onto the buyer's competence dimension of trust, and of supplier competence violations onto the buyer's integrity dimension of trust. We also examine the role of inter-organizational governance, finding that contractual and relational governance are differentially effective at mitigating trust damages experienced by a buyer after a supplier violation. Specifically, we observe that relational governance helps mitigate damages to buyer's trust following a supplier competence violation, whereas some evidence suggests that contractual governance serves to preserve buyer's trust following a supplier integrity violation. These findings have important theoretical and managerial implications for the management of buyer–supplier relationships. We discuss why the governance structures adopted by firms involved in a buyer–supplier relationship have distinct impacts on trust assessments following a violation.”
This research has been featured in our Spotlight series, details can be found here: https://www.journalofsupplychainmanagement.com/new-blog/2021/7/9/spotlight-trust-violations-in-buyer-supplier-relationships-spillovers-and-the-contingent-role-of-governance-structures
The full article can be found here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jscm.12270
https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12270
EMERGING DISCOURSE INCUBATOR: EMERGING APPROACHES FOR DEVELOPING SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT THEORY
”In introducing the 2020 Emerging Discourse Incubator, Flynn et al. (2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12227) urged supply chain scholars to leverage fresh approaches in order to develop supply chain-specific theory, including approaches that are underutilized within the discipline. In response, we explain how more examination of configurations—meaningful sets of observations within a sample—can enhance theory development and, in particular, fuel the construction of supply chain-specific theory. First, we describe the value of configurational theorizing while contrasting it with two more popular approaches: one that centers on linear relationships and one that spotlights the unique features of individual observations. Second, we explain the main configurational approaches available to scholars. Here, we pay special attention to qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)—an approach to configurational theorizing that is relatively new to organizational research. Third, we offer examples of how configurational theorizing via the use of QCA can be used to develop supply chain management theory. Although QCA is employed regularly in neighboring fields, QCA remains something of a conceptual curiosity within supply chain management research. This state of affairs represents an important opportunity because QCA's emphasis on causal complexity fits well with the fact that supply chain outcomes usually arise from an array of variables—often at different levels of analysis—and the interplay among them. Thus, better leveraging configurational theory development can facilitate the creation of novel conceptualizations and useful advice for practice.”
This research has been featured in our Spotlight series, details can be found here: https://www.journalofsupplychainmanagement.com/new-blog/2021/12/2/spotlight-configurational-approaches-to-theory-development-in-supply-chain-management-leveraging-underexplored-opportunities
The full article can be found here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jscm.12275
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
“This editorial encourages supply chain management researchers to conduct and submit replication research for publication consideration to the Journal of Supply Chain Management. The Journal is particularly interested in efforts to replicate both recently published papers that have the potential to change the direction of the discipline and highly influential or “seminal” papers in the supply chain management discipline, regardless of where they were initially published. The Journal will be using the registered report process for these submissions to create strong incentives for researchers to conduct replication studies.”