Enabling roles of relationship governance mechanisms in the choice of interfirm conflict resolution strategies
Shahzad, Khuram; Ali, Tahir; Kohtamäki, Marko; Takala, Josu (2020-01-27)
Emerald
27.01.2020
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2019112043364
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2019112043364
Kuvaus
vertaisarvioitu
©2020 Emerald Publishing Limited. This manuscript version is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY–NC 4.0) license, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
©2020 Emerald Publishing Limited. This manuscript version is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY–NC 4.0) license, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Tiivistelmä
Purpose – This study presents an integrated framework and investigates the enabling roles of governance mechanisms (i.e., contract, interdependence, trust, communication) in the choice of effective conflict resolution strategies (CRS) that in turn facilitate buyer-supplier relationship (BSR) performance.
Design/methodology/approach – Using web-survey, data are collected from 170 Finnish small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that have key relationships with suppliers. This study employs structural equational modelling to test the research framework and hypotheses of the study.
Findings – The results based on empirical evidence demonstrate how the firms’ choice of CRS depends on the governance mechanisms. The problem-solving approach is the most preferable choice, while the legalistic approach remains the last resort influenced by different governance mechanisms. Interdependence and trust between firms drive them to compromise while resolving inter-organizational conflicts. The selected strategies by firms may also either reinforce or deteriorate relationship performance.
Practical implications – Supply chain managers should recognize the context in which these choices of CRS are made as it guides them to anticipate their partner’s behaviour as well as influences their strategy choice decisions when coping with conflicts. A trustworthy environment supports in providing a certain level of confidence while interdependency drives firms to compromise. The legalistic strategy can hurt the partner’s feelings and diminish relationship performance.
Originality/value – Conflicts in BSR have become inevitable, but the existing literature is missing evidence on how companies use CRS to enhance relationship performance. Hence, this study differs from those of earlier conflict studies as it provides a more integrative perspective of buyer-supplier conflict resolution process. This study argues that relationship governance mechanisms can be connected to the choice of effective CRS when tensions arise. Moreover, by assessing the relationship between CRS and relationship performance, this study offers valuable insights to understand that effective strategies enable partners to mutually adapt constructive approaches that facilitate cooperative behaviour and accommodate both parties’ interests and needs.
Design/methodology/approach – Using web-survey, data are collected from 170 Finnish small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that have key relationships with suppliers. This study employs structural equational modelling to test the research framework and hypotheses of the study.
Findings – The results based on empirical evidence demonstrate how the firms’ choice of CRS depends on the governance mechanisms. The problem-solving approach is the most preferable choice, while the legalistic approach remains the last resort influenced by different governance mechanisms. Interdependence and trust between firms drive them to compromise while resolving inter-organizational conflicts. The selected strategies by firms may also either reinforce or deteriorate relationship performance.
Practical implications – Supply chain managers should recognize the context in which these choices of CRS are made as it guides them to anticipate their partner’s behaviour as well as influences their strategy choice decisions when coping with conflicts. A trustworthy environment supports in providing a certain level of confidence while interdependency drives firms to compromise. The legalistic strategy can hurt the partner’s feelings and diminish relationship performance.
Originality/value – Conflicts in BSR have become inevitable, but the existing literature is missing evidence on how companies use CRS to enhance relationship performance. Hence, this study differs from those of earlier conflict studies as it provides a more integrative perspective of buyer-supplier conflict resolution process. This study argues that relationship governance mechanisms can be connected to the choice of effective CRS when tensions arise. Moreover, by assessing the relationship between CRS and relationship performance, this study offers valuable insights to understand that effective strategies enable partners to mutually adapt constructive approaches that facilitate cooperative behaviour and accommodate both parties’ interests and needs.
Kokoelmat
- Artikkelit [2798]