IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v13y2023i8p174-d1205301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indicators of Value Creation and Their Perception by Suppliers in Slovakia

Author

Listed:
  • Dana Kušnírová

    (Department of Macro and Microeconomics, Faculty of Management Science and Informatics, University of Zilina, 010 26 Zilina, Slovakia)

  • Mária Ďurišová

    (Department of Macro and Microeconomics, Faculty of Management Science and Informatics, University of Zilina, 010 26 Zilina, Slovakia)

  • Eva Malichová

    (Department of Macro and Microeconomics, Faculty of Management Science and Informatics, University of Zilina, 010 26 Zilina, Slovakia)

Abstract

The research aims to identify individual value-creation indicators, which are provided to suppliers, and their significance in building and maintaining sustainable, long-lasting mutual relationships between enterprises and their suppliers. The enterprises (in the position of suppliers) assigned the importance of the individual value-creation indicators which are provided to them and expressed the level of satisfaction with the relationships with their buyers. The research was carried out through structured questionnaires and collected answers from 112 managers of enterprises from Slovakia. Research results include the list of 21 individual value-creation indicators (defined in the questionnaire) and show which value-creation indicators are provided to the enterprises (suppliers) the most, which of these indicators are essential for the suppliers, and if the suppliers are provided with the values, they consider significant. The analysis of individual value creation indicators was done separately using Chi-squared and Cramer’s V tests and Rank–Biserial Correlation. The logistic regression was used to analyze all factors and their influence on the relationship between suppliers and the enterprise. Enterprises (suppliers) are generally satisfied with their relationship with buyers. However, almost 19% of suppliers consider their relationship neutral or unsatisfying. This result points out that there is room for improvement, which can be done by providing significant value-creation indicators to suppliers.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana Kušnírová & Mária Ďurišová & Eva Malichová, 2023. "Indicators of Value Creation and Their Perception by Suppliers in Slovakia," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:13:y:2023:i:8:p:174-:d:1205301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/13/8/174/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/13/8/174/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mei-Yung Leung & Anita Liu, 2003. "Analysis of value and project goal specificity in value management," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 11-19.
    2. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    2. Richard A. Hunt & Mathew L. A. Hayward, 2018. "Value Creation Through Employer Loans: Evidence of Informal Lending to Employees at Small, Labor-Intensive Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 284-303, April.
    3. Carolin Haeussler & Henry Sauermann, 2016. "The Division of Labor in Teams: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Collaborations in Science," NBER Working Papers 22241, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    5. Teng, Yuanyang & Zheng, Jianzhuang & Li, Yicun & Wu, Dong, 2024. "Optimizing digital transformation paths for industrial clusters: Insights from a simulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. Swart, Juani & Powell, John, 2012. "An analytical theory of knowledge behaviour in networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 807-817.
    7. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    8. Narayan Ramasubbu & Jennifer Shang & Jerrold H. May & Youxu Tjader & Luis Vargas, 2019. "Task Interdependence and Firm Performance in Outsourced Service Operations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 658-673, July.
    9. Muhammad Akram Naseem & Jun Lin & Ramiz ur Rehman & Muhammad Ishfaq Ahmad & Rizwan Ali, 2019. "Moderating role of financial ratios in corporate social responsibility disclosure and firm value," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    10. Un, C. Annique & Rodríguez, Alicia, 2018. "Local and Global Knowledge Complementarity: R&D Collaborations and Innovation of Foreign and Domestic Firms," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 137-152.
    11. Felix Homfeldt & Alexandra Rese & Hanno Brenner & Daniel Baier & Til Fabio Schäfer, 2017. "Identification And Generation Of Innovative Ideas In The Procurement Of The Automotive Industry: The Case Of Audi Ag," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(07), pages 1-31, October.
    12. Kolloge, Konstantin, 2009. "Die Messung des Kooperationserfolges in der empirischen Forschung: Ergebnisse einer Literaturstudie," Arbeitspapiere 76, University of Münster, Institute for Cooperatives.
    13. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500117 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    15. Julien Husson & Aicha Aguezzoul, 2015. "Design of an innovative pharmaceutical platform for a public hospital," Post-Print hal-02989719, HAL.
    16. Robert D. Weaver, 2008. "Collaborative pull innovation: origins and adoption in the new economy," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 388-402.
    17. Simon Gaechter & Georg von Krogh & Stefan Haefliger, 2006. "Private-Collective Innovation and the Fragility of Knowledge Sharing," Discussion Papers 2006-21, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    18. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    19. Kalle Pajunen, 2006. "Living in Agreement with a Contract: The Management of Moral and Viable Firm–Stakeholder Relationships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-258, October.
    20. Janina Milena Goldberg & Holger Schiele, 2019. "Innovating With Dominant Suppliers: Lessons From The Race For Laser Light," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(01), pages 1-26, January.
    21. Clovia Hamilton & Simon P. Philbin, 2020. "Knowledge Based View of University Tech Transfer—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    value creation; indicators; suppliers; perception; relationship; B2B;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jadmsc:v:13:y:2023:i:8:p:174-:d:1205301. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.