Search results

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is two‐fold: to examine two approaches buying firms can utilize to manage supplier quality; and to investigate the ways in which factors inherent in supply chain relationships affect the use of these approaches in supply chain quality management.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on agency theory, this paper proposes a conceptual framework that relates the underlying factors of a supply chain relationship to the use of quality management approaches. Two types of approaches, outcome‐based and behavior‐based, are discussed in terms of their focuses, purposes, and methods. Propositions are developed about the effects of these factors on the decisions buying firms make about supply chain quality management.FindingsThis study suggests that rather than relying on one generic supply chain quality management approach for all suppliers, firms need to choose different management mechanisms for different suppliers based on the salient attributes of individual suppliers and their relationships with the buyers. Five types of agency‐based factors are discussed. These factors – information asymmetry, goal conflict, risk aversion of suppliers, length of relationship, and task characteristics – can be expected to influence how firms design and manage their quality management systems for supply chains.Practical implicationsA better understanding of the distinction between outcome‐based and behavior‐based approaches helps managers evaluate which approach is best suited to managing the quality of their suppliers. The propositions pertaining to the key factors provide managers with some guidelines about the critical conditions they should consider when building their firm's supply chain quality management system.Originality/valueHaving an effective quality management system of a supply chain is essential for maintaining a smooth supply of high quality products and services to customers. However, little is known about how a firm should design this supply chain quality management system. The paper addresses this gap by applying agency theory to examine the two essential approaches to managing supplier quality and to explore the critical factors that should be taken into account when considering the appropriate approaches for different suppliers.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to extend understanding of supplier development theory by investigating the relationships among communication methods, information sharing within a firm, information sharing between firms, and support aimed at supplier development and the effects these relationships have on firm performance.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from a random sample of 231 firms are used to test hypothesized relationships by employing structural equation modeling.FindingsThe main findings indicate that traditional communication methods, information sharing within a firm, and information sharing between firms, and supplier development are significant factors for improving a buyer's performance though their indirect and direct effects on firm performance vary.Research limitations/implicationsThe model tested in this study should be reinvestigated by employing better developed measures of advanced communication methods. Furthermore, when investigating the relationship between supplier development and firm performance, future studies should include mode of supplier development approach – reactive versus proactive – as a variable.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study provide insights into what makes supplier development activities effective for practitioners.Originality/valueAlthough communication/information sharing has emerged in previously published studies as a critical factor in developing suppliers, an integrated research model that investigates the relationships among communication media, information sharing, supplier development activities, and buying firms' performance has not been offered. This is the gap filled by this study.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to adopt the dynamic capability (DC) view as a theoretical framework to empirically investigate the relationships among human resource (HR)-related quality management (QM) practices: new product development (NPD) as a specific DC, learning orientation, knowledge integration, and strategic flexibility. Learning orientation and knowledge integration represent two antecedents of strategic flexibility, and strategic flexibility is the developed ability that facilitates NPD.Design/methodology/approachTo empirically test the relationships, the authors used data from 236 European firms and performed structural equation modeling.FindingsResults indicate that HR-related QM practices contribute to creating a learning-oriented company, integrating knowledge, and supporting successful NPD. Furthermore, knowledge integration is positively related to NPD through strategic flexibility.Practical implicationsThis study is relevant for practitioners because it identifies key points in QM implementation that enable firms to be more strategically flexible and thus better able to regularly develop new products.Originality/valueWhen organizations must sustain their competitive positions by continuously adapting to environmental changes, it is important to study not only how QM implementation is positively related to the firm performance on which a significant portion of the QM literature has focused but also to study whether QM implementation is related to strategic variables and can make a contribution to strategic processes. To fill the void in the HR and QM literature, this study offers an integrated framework with empirical support that identifies the role of HR-related QM practices in learning orientation, knowledge integration, strategic flexibility, and NPD.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to extend our understanding of the importance of supplier dependence on the buyer's firm and its relationship to supplier training and supplier involvement in product development with respect to the supplier's performance.Design/methodology/approachA random sample of 231 firms provided the data that were analyzed for this study. Using structural equation modeling, a sub‐set of the sample consisting of 166 manufacturing firms was used to test the five hypothesized relationships in the model.FindingsThe main findings indicate that supplier dependence is a significant contributor to increasing supplier participation in buyer supported training and increasing supplier involvement in product development. Also, supplier training and supplier involvement are significant contributors to the supplier's operational performance.Research limitations/implicationsThe model tested in this study used a random sample of US manufacturing firms. Thus, future studies should include a random sample of non‐manufacturing firms and firms outside of the USA. The study explored the buyer's perspective only; a study of suppliers may provide further insights to extend this study. Although the use of supplier training was relatively low, significant relationships were identified.Practical implicationsBased on this research, key suppliers can better understand the relationships among supplier dependence, supplier training, supplier involvement in product development and their effects on supplier's operational performance.Originality/valueAlthough supplier development has emerged in previously published studies as a critical factor in improving performance, the role of supplier dependence on the buyer has not been empirically examined. Further, an integrated research model that investigates the relationships among supplier dependence, supplier training, supplier involvement in product development and supplier's operational performance has not been offered.