IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sjobre/v73y2021i2d10.1007_s41471-021-00113-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choice Behavior in Innovation Exchange Between Buyers and Sellers

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Wäldchen

    (Bundeswehr University Munich)

  • Andreas H. Glas

    (Bundeswehr University Munich)

  • Michael Essig

    (Bundeswehr University Munich)

Abstract

This article extends the research on Behavioral Supply Management, and specifically characterizes the decision to exchange supplier–developed innovations. For the innovation exchange to take place, both actors in the dyad must actually make the decision to exchange an innovation with one another. Therefore, buyers’ as well as suppliers’ decision making are part of this research. The decision to exchange innovation is highly relevant, as innovations play an increasingly important role in business research. The applied methodology is a mouse-lab process-tracing experiment. The study is based on computer cursor moving and click data from 658 managers. As the conceptualized decision situation is highly specific, practitioners can build upon their business experience and are the experiment respondents. The sample includes buyer and supplier sub-groups. We differentiate our findings based on innovation intensity (i.e., incremental vs. disruptive innovations). The findings show that the intensity of an innovation does not imply different decision-making per se, although distinguishing incremental from disruptive innovation is often proposed. Furthermore, the relevance of exclusiveness (i.e., a buyer has exclusive access to a supplier’s innovation) is of minor relevance for the supplier but also for the buyer, even when these innovations are disruptive. Finally, the intensity of innovations is only relevant in high-quality buyer–supplier relationships. Under these circumstances, decision makers show irrational behavior, as they prefer alternatives with low economic benefits. That aspect points to the identification of relational decision traps and other theoretical and managerial implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Wäldchen & Andreas H. Glas & Michael Essig, 2021. "Choice Behavior in Innovation Exchange Between Buyers and Sellers," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 273-305, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sjobre:v:73:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41471-021-00113-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s41471-021-00113-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41471-021-00113-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41471-021-00113-9?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gooroochurn, Nishaal & Hanley, Aoife, 2007. "A tale of two literatures: Transaction costs and property rights in innovation outsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1483-1495, December.
    2. Holger Schiele & Richard Calvi & Michael Gibbert, 2012. "Customer attractiveness, supplier satisfaction and preferred customer status: Introduction, definitions and an overarching framework," Post-Print hal-00948480, HAL.
    3. Thomas Johnsen, 2009. "Supplier involvement in new product development and innovation: Taking stock and looking to the future," Post-Print hal-00771091, HAL.
    4. Barbara Flynn & Mark Pagell & Brian Fugate, 2018. "Editorial: Survey Research Design in Supply Chain Management: The Need for Evolution in Our Expectations," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 54(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2008. "Leveraging technology assets in the presence of markets for knowledge," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 122-134, April.
    6. Dayan, Mumin & Di Benedetto, C. Anthony, 2011. "Team intuition as a continuum construct and new product creativity: The role of environmental turbulence, team experience, and stress," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 276-286, March.
    7. Yi‐Chuan Liao & Kuen‐Hung Tsai, 2019. "Innovation intensity, creativity enhancement, and eco‐innovation strategy: The roles of customer demand and environmental regulation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 316-326, February.
    8. Christine M. Beckman & Pamela R. Haunschild & Damon J. Phillips, 2004. "Friends or Strangers? Firm-Specific Uncertainty, Market Uncertainty, and Network Partner Selection," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 259-275, June.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:8:p:641-658 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Thomas Johnsen & Marie-Anne Le Dain & Nadine Kiratli & Holger Schiele, 2022. "Editorial: Purchasing and innovation: Past, present and future of the field of research," Post-Print hal-03761525, HAL.
    2. Enrique Acebo & José‐Ángel Miguel‐Dávila & Mariano Nieto, 2021. "External stakeholder engagement: Complementary and substitutive effects on firms' eco‐innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2671-2687, July.
    3. Subramanian, Nachiappan & Gunasekaran, Angappa & Abdulrahman, Muhammad D. & Qiao, Crystal, 2019. "Out-in, in-out buyer quality innovation pathways for new product outcome: Empirical evidence from the Chinese consumer goods industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 183-194.
    4. Marika Makkonen & Anna Aminoff & Katri Valkokari, 2018. "Stimulating Supplier Innovation In A Complex And Regulated Business Environment — A Dyadic Case Study," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-34, April.
    5. Jie Ren & Jar-Der Luo & Ke Rong, 2020. "How Do Venture Capitals Build Up Syndication Ecosystems for Sustainable Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    7. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    8. Marco Valeri & Rodolfo Baggio, 2021. "A critical reflection on the adoption of blockchain in tourism," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 121-132, June.
    9. Li, Dan, 2013. "Multilateral R&D alliances by new ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-260.
    10. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    11. Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Li, Ying & Van de Vrande, Vareska, 2009. "The dual role of external corporate venturing in technological exploration," MPRA Paper 26488, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    12. Hangeun Lee & Seong Ho Lee, 2019. "The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Long-Term Relationships in the Business-to-Business Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-12, September.
    13. Hesping, Frank Henrik & Schiele, Holger, 2016. "Matching tactical sourcing levers with the Kraljič matrix: Empirical evidence on purchasing portfolios," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 101-117.
    14. Zhiang (John) Lin & James A. Kitts & Haibin Yang & J. Richard Harrison, 2008. "Elucidating strategic network dynamics through computational modeling," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 175-208, September.
    15. Lee, Gilsoo & Cho, Sam Yul & Arthurs, Jonathan & Lee, Eun Kyung, 2020. "Celebrity CEO, identity threat, and impression management: Impact of celebrity status on corporate social responsibility," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 69-84.
    16. Zbigniew Drewniak & Rafal Drewniak & Robert Karaszewski, 2020. "The Assessment of the Features of Inter-organisational Relationships: Benefits, Duration, Repeatability and Maturity of the Relationship with the Company's Stakeholders," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 443-461.
    17. Jessica L. Darby & David J. Ketchen & Brent D. Williams & Travis Tokar, 2020. "The Implications of Firm‐Specific Policy Risk, Policy Uncertainty, and Industry Factors for Inventory: A Resource Dependence Perspective," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 56(4), pages 3-24, October.
    18. Farzana Riva & Solon Magrizos & Mohammad Rabiul Basher Rubel, 2021. "Investigating the link between managers' green knowledge and leadership style, and their firms' environmental performance: The mediation role of green creativity," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 3228-3240, November.
    19. 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).
    20. Antonella La Rocca & Ivan Snehota, 2021. "Mobilizing suppliers when starting up a new business venture," Post-Print hal-03328945, HAL.

    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:spr:sjobre:v:73:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s41471-021-00113-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.