IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v239y2014i1p119-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How should process capabilities be combined to leverage supplier relationships competitively?

Author

Listed:
  • Tang, Xinlin
  • Rai, Arun

Abstract

Two process capabilities have been identified in the operations management literature to leverage supplier relationships for competitive performance: the ability to continuously improve processes with suppliers (process alignment) and the ability to make changes to these relationships (partnering flexibility). While firms may need both capabilities to be successful, it is unclear what strategy should be used to combine these two seemingly contradictory process capabilities. Using data collected from 318 manufacturing firms on a focal firm’s process capabilities to manage supplier relationships, we examine the performance impacts of two dimensions of a particular strategy: balancing (focusing on achieving a close match between the two process capabilities) and complementing (focusing on creating synergy between the two process capabilities). Our results indicate that the balancing dimension has a much stronger effect on a firm’s competitive performance than the complementing dimension. Also, when a firm pursues a high balance and strong complements strategy (combining high levels of both process capabilities), it is able to reduce its competitive performance risks more than when it pursues a high balance and weak complements strategy (combining low levels of both capabilities) or when it implements unbalanced strategies that emphasize either process alignment or partnering flexibility (combining low levels of one capability with high levels of the other). We conclude by discussing the theoretical contributions and practical guidelines.

Suggested Citation

  • Tang, Xinlin & Rai, Arun, 2014. "How should process capabilities be combined to leverage supplier relationships competitively?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(1), pages 119-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:239:y:2014:i:1:p:119-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.04.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221714003269
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.04.017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L. & Stoddard, Donna B., 1998. "Business process redesign: Radical and evolutionary change," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 15-27, January.
    2. Arun Rai & Xinlin Tang, 2010. "Leveraging IT Capabilities and Competitive Process Capabilities for the Management of Interorganizational Relationship Portfolios," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 516-542, September.
    3. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    4. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    5. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    6. Akbar Zaheer & N. Venkatraman, 1994. "Determinants of Electronic Integration in the Insurance Industry: An Empirical Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(5), pages 549-566, May.
    7. Burke, Gerard J. & Carrillo, Janice E. & Vakharia, Asoo J., 2007. "Single versus multiple supplier sourcing strategies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 95-112, October.
    8. Candace Young-Ybarra & Margarethe Wiersema, 1999. "Strategic Flexibility in Information Technology Alliances: The Influence of Transaction Cost Economics and Social Exchange Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 439-459, August.
    9. Kannan Srinivasan & Sundar Kekre & Tridas Mukhopadhyay, 1994. "Impact of Electronic Data Interchange Technology on JIT Shipments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(10), pages 1291-1304, October.
    10. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    11. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    12. Brian Uzzi & Ryon Lancaster, 2003. "Relational Embeddedness and Learning: The Case of Bank Loan Managers and Their Clients," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 383-399, April.
    13. Grieger, Martin, 2003. "Electronic marketplaces: A literature review and a call for supply chain management research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 280-294, January.
    14. Hillol Bala & Viswanath Venkatesh, 2007. "Assimilation of Interorganizational Business Process Standards," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 340-362, September.
    15. Otto, Andreas & Kotzab, Herbert, 2003. "Does supply chain management really pay? Six perspectives to measure the performance of managing a supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 306-320, January.
    16. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Todd R. Zenger & William S. Hesterly, 1997. "The Disaggregation of Corporations: Selective Intervention, High-Powered Incentives, and Molecular Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 209-222, June.
    18. Ghiyoung Im & Arun Rai, 2008. "Knowledge Sharing Ambidexterity in Long-Term Interorganizational Relationships," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1281-1296, July.
    19. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?," Working Papers 02-0130, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    20. Gunasekaran, A. & Ngai, E. W. T., 2004. "Information systems in supply chain integration and management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(2), pages 269-295, December.
    21. Christopher D. Ittner & David F. Larcker, 1997. "The Performance Effects of Process Management Techniques," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 522-534, April.
    22. Wagner, Stephan M. & Friedl, Gunther, 2007. "Supplier switching decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(2), pages 700-717, December.
    23. Qing Cao & Eric Gedajlovic & Hongping Zhang, 2009. "Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 781-796, August.
    24. Iida, Tetsuo, 2012. "Coordination of cooperative cost-reduction efforts in a supply chain partnership," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 222(2), pages 180-190.
    25. Dovev Lavie, 2007. "Alliance portfolios and firm performance: A study of value creation and appropriation in the U.S. software industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(12), pages 1187-1212, December.
    26. Samaddar, Subhashish & Nargundkar, Satish & Daley, Marcia, 2006. "Inter-organizational information sharing: The role of supply network configuration and partner goal congruence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(2), pages 744-765, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiao-Ying Bao & Lei Zhang, 2018. "Green Procurement Relationships Development under Carbon Emissions Regulations: A Bi-Level Programming Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Yi Liu & Wenqian Li & Yuan Li, 2020. "Ambidexterity between low cost strategy and CSR strategy: contingencies of competition and regulation," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 633-660, September.
    3. Dong, Caiting & Liu, Xielin & Tang, Fangcheng & Qiu, Shumin, 2023. "How upstream innovativeness of ecosystems affects firms' innovation: The contingent role of absorptive capacity and upstream dependence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Liu, Shan & Wang, Lin & Huang, Wei (Wayne), 2017. "Effects of process and outcome controls on business process outsourcing performance: Moderating roles of vendor and client capability risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(3), pages 1115-1128.
    5. Chi, Maomao & Zhao, Jing & George, Joey F. & Li, Yanhui & Zhai, Shanshan, 2017. "The influence of inter-firm IT governance strategies on relational performance: The moderation effect of information technology ambidexterity," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 43-53.
    6. Adomako, Samuel & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Frimpong, Kwabena, 2022. "Human capital, reverse engineering and new venture growth: The moderating role of competitive strategy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arun Rai & Xinlin Tang, 2010. "Leveraging IT Capabilities and Competitive Process Capabilities for the Management of Interorganizational Relationship Portfolios," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 516-542, September.
    2. Ghiyoung Im & Arun Rai, 2014. "IT-Enabled Coordination for Ambidextrous Interorganizational Relationships," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 72-92, March.
    3. Gu, Minhao & Yang, Lu & Huo, Baofeng, 2021. "The impact of information technology usage on supply chain resilience and performance: An ambidexterous view," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    4. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    5. Uriel Stettner & Dovev Lavie, 2014. "Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 1903-1929, December.
    6. Lee, Jeoung Yul & Yang, Young Soo & Park, Byung Il, 2020. "Interplay between dual dimensions of knowledge sharing within globalized chaebols: The moderating effects of organization size and global environmental munificence," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    7. Wong, Christina W.Y. & Wong, Chee Yew & Boon-itt, Sakun, 2013. "The combined effects of internal and external supply chain integration on product innovation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 566-574.
    8. Chang, Yi-Ying & Hughes, Mathew, 2012. "Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17.
    9. Singh, Nitya P. & Hong, Paul C., 2020. "Impact of strategic and operational risk management practices on firm performance: An empirical investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 723-735.
    10. Vahlne, Jan-Erik & Jonsson, Anna, 2017. "Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in the globalization of the multinational business enterprise (MBE): Case studies of AB Volvo and IKEA," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 57-70.
    11. Hsiang-Lin Cheng & Ming-Chang Huang, 2021. "Does dual Embeddedness matter? Mechanisms and patterns of subsidiary ambidexterity that links a Subsidiary’s dual Embeddedness with its learning strategy," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1431-1465, December.
    12. Matsuno, Ken & Kohlbacher, Florian, 2020. "Proactive marketing response to population aging: The roles of capabilities and commitment of firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 93-104.
    13. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    14. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    15. Balasubramaniam Ramesh & Kannan Mohan & Lan Cao, 2012. "Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 323-339, June.
    16. Hansen, Eric & Nybakk, Erlend & Panwar, Rajat, 2015. "Pure versus hybrid competitive strategies in the forest sector: Performance implications," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 51-57.
    17. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    18. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    19. Hyojung Kim & Namgyoo Park & Jeonghwan Lee, 2014. "How does the second-order learning process moderate the relationship between innovation inputs and outputs of large Korean firms?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 69-103, March.
    20. Liu Li, 2020. "Trade-Off Exploration and Exploitation as Moderators: How does Technological Heterogeneity among Cooperators Affect Firms Financial Performance?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(4), pages 380-398, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:239:y:2014:i:1:p:119-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.