Strategic Choice Along The Vertical Coordination Continuum
Starting from the generalized notion of a vertical coordination continuum introduced by Williamson and others, the article more specifically defines the nature of the continuum, especially the array of hybrid strategies. The continuum as presented includes five distinct groups of strategy Â– spot markets, specification contracts, relation-based alliances, equity-based alliances, and vertical integration. The article then presents a decision making framework that can be used by firms to determine which place on the continuum makes the most sense for a particular transaction. The framework suggests that five assessments are critical to adopting a specific change in coordination strategy: (1) Is the current strategy too costly?; (2) Would an alternative strategy reduce the cost?; (3) Is an alternative programmable?; (4) Is an alternative implementable?; (5) Is the risk/return tradeoff acceptable? If the answers to all five assessments are "yes," then a change in strategy would be expected to occur.
Volume (Year): 04 (2001)
Issue (Month): 02 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: 1 (202) 429-1610
Web page: http://www.ifama.orgEmail:
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dennis R. Henderson, 1994. "Measuring and Assessing Vertical Ties in the Agro-food System," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 42(4), pages 549-560, December.
- Joskow, Paul L, 1987. "Contract Duration and Relationship-Specific Investments: Empirical Evidence from Coal Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(1), pages 168-85, March.
- Williamson, Oliver E, 1973. "Markets and Hierarchies: Some Elementary Considerations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 316-25, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:34469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.