Essays on supplier responsiveness and buyer firm value - Nyenrode ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.4 Scope PhD thesis This thesis focuses on answering the research question about how a marketing focus influences relational idiosyncratic risk and consequently buyer firm value. The primary motivation behind the research questions is the gap in marketing literature because of a scholarly focus on the intraorganizational perspective of market orientation and risk relationship. As a consequence of a focus on intra-organizational perspective of market orientation and risk scholars have ignored the inter-organizational perspective, specifically in the strategic buyer-supplier relationship context. Therefore, this thesis focuses on market orientation and idiosyncratic relational risk in the interorganizational context. Moreover, strategic buyer and supplier relationships have been extensively researched in many domains in addition to marketing, such as, sales and purchasing. Indeed, sales and purchasing have made important contributions to the topic of strategic buyer and supplier relationships, but as the main contribution of this thesis is an academic one, therefore, it is important to make a clear academic contribution to scientific literature. Hence, as the research area of interest is in the marketing domain, namely market orientation, the theoretical lens chosen for this dissertation is a marketing one. However, this does lead to a limitation of focusing on marketing, and as a consequence sales and purchasing literature have not substantially cross-pollinated the current study. In addition, as mentioned earlier this thesis focuses on the strategic buyer and supplier relationship context. The primary reason for choosing this context is because organizational market orientation is an expensive and time consuming exercise. Therefore, for a supplier to be market oriented the buyer needs to be committed to continuing the relationship for the long-term period in order to regain the initial investment in the relationship. This this thesis deals with those relationships that are strategic, meaning the product or service supplied is high in terms of financial risk and supply risk. But focusing on strategic relationships means that this thesis does not cover non-strategic relationships. This thesis focuses primarily on strategic supplier market orientation and its impact on their buyer in the context of two countries, namely the United States and The Netherlands. Although, there are many other countries that could have been included such as China or Japan, the primary research interest of the researchers involved in this thesis was in The Netherlands and the United States. Moreover, because of time and budget constraints a including a larger number of countries was not possible. In addition, as stated in Chapter 3 The Netherlands and the United States are similar on all dimensions of the Hofstede index except masculinity and femininity. Therefore, it was of interest to determine whether supplier responsiveness would achieve the same effect in both countries and whether this effect would be channeled through similar mediators. This thesis was primarily conducted for an academic objective. Therefore, we have not explicitly focused on practical outcomes. However, the theoretical insights from this dissertation can be used by managers to confirm or disconfirm beliefs they may have. Moreover, the introduction of IdRR as a metric could be considered a practical contribution of this thesis. 1.5 Research Methodology Based on the Research Questions This section reviews the sample used in this dissertation, the data collection procedure, and the statistical method used for the analysis of the data. Throughout this dissertation, the methodology 18
is common to all papers because the surveys used for the United States and The Netherlands are identical and the data were collected in the same time frame. 1.5.1 Sample and data collection The responses we have used in this dissertation were collected from a professional panel of purchasing managers. The respondents worked for both publically and privately listed companies from the U.S. and The Netherlands. We use key informant methodology in selecting our respondents (Philips, 1981). On average, the respondents were purchasing managers with more than seven years of experience with strategic purchases. The data collection employed an Internet survey because of speed, cost, and efficiency considerations. We initially consulted academics about our survey. We then conducted a test survey with students on campus to check the robustness of the instrument. This survey took place during the spring of 2009. We collected data during the summer of 2009. In Chapter 2 we collected publically listed and unlisted U.S. firms’ data. In Chapter 3, we used both U.S. and Dutch data. In Chapter 4, we used a sub-sample of the sample used in Chapter 2. We selected only those respondents who worked for publically listed companies. We then used the difference in net income over a three-year period (2009-2011) as a source of objective firm earnings. We acquired the net income data from Google financials, powered by the Reuters database. 1.6 Data Analysis We used quantitative and qualitative data analysis. In our quantitative analysis, we used factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling. For the qualitative data analysis, we conducted a textual analysis of the interviews we conducted. In the following three paragraphs, we explain the data analysis used in Chapters 2, 3, and 4. 1.6.1 Data analysis, Chapter 2 In Chapter 2, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis based on data collected from the United States. We applied a factor analysis to five of our scales: supplier responsiveness, buyer satisfaction, IdRR, supplier brand value, and buyer firm value. Based on the results of the factor analysis, we chose the most appropriate items for each scale. In addition, we checked for multicollinearity by running a series of linear regression equations in SPSS with our independent variables and mediators. The VIF for all four equations was less than ten, meaning that multicollinearity was not an issue with our data (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 2006). We then conducted a confirmatory factor analysis with AMOS 17. We used 39 items from our original questionnaire. After a number of iterations, we achieved model fit with 10 items. The standardized residual covariances were all less than plus two or greater than minus two and all the inter-item correlations were above plus 0.3 or less than minus 0.3. We also achieved construct reliability and acceptable levels of average variance extracted. We finally analyzed our data analysis using a structural equation model using our 10 items and 5 constructs. We used the maximum likelihood estimation method in AMOS 17. The results indicated that four of our hypotheses were supported and one hypothesis was not supported. The goodness of fit indices were within acceptable range. 1.6.2 Data analysis, Chapter 3 We conducted a factor analysis based on data from The Netherlands of publically listed and privately owned companies with the 10 items used in Chapter 2 and 5 constructs (n=92). We analyzed the model of Chapter 2 using structural equation modeling and data from The 19
Page 2 and 3: ISBN 978-90-8980-055-8 © M. Abrahi
Page 4 and 5: Examination Committee Supervisor: P
Page 6 and 7: 2.3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPTUAL M
Page 8 and 9: 5.1 RESEARCH FINDINGS 114 5.2 OVERA
Page 10 and 11: List of Tables Table 2.1 Representa
Page 12 and 13: PREFACE Oscar Wilde once said, “I
Page 14 and 15: Chapter 1 Introduction to the Thesi
Page 16 and 17: Figure 1.1 Mckinsey Survey Results
Page 20 and 21: Netherlands. We used the maximum li
Page 22 and 23: 2.1 Introduction A central tenant o
Page 24 and 25: only provide an assessment of the s
Page 26 and 27: Table 2.1 highlights several promin
Page 28 and 29: other hand, they later argue that m
Page 30 and 31: Therefore, there is a convergence i
Page 32 and 33: usiness performance, firms need to
Page 34 and 35: means is that the more better a str
Page 36 and 37: Supplier responsiveness or market o
Page 38 and 39: Naryandas, 1995). Further, idiosync
Page 40 and 41: They might also include the ease wi
Page 42 and 43: they ask about intimate supplier in
Page 44 and 45: Table 2.2 Modified Items of the MAR
Page 46: Table 2.2 Modified Items of the MAR
Page 49 and 50: market intelligence, offering flexi
Page 51 and 52: We considered several scales before
Page 53 and 54: Table 2.7 Component Matrix Buyer Sa
Page 55 and 56: een monitored to make sure they gav
Page 57 and 58: satisfaction and strategic supplier
Page 59 and 60: 2.5 Measurement Model For creating
Page 61 and 62: In the third step, we used maximum
Page 63 and 64: incremental fit index (IFI) is one
Page 65 and 66: ange of 100-150 (Hair et al., 2006,
Page 67 and 68: indicator that has a link to custom
Page 69 and 70:
and strengths and their stock marke
Page 71 and 72:
accompanies any innovation, accordi
Page 73 and 74:
important finding because it provid
Page 75 and 76:
3.1 Introduction The Netherlands, d
Page 77 and 78:
possibility that firm size may infl
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 3.1 The Netherlands and Unit
Page 81 and 82:
comprehensive agreement on each oth
Page 83 and 84:
Why do we pay more for an orange wi
Page 85 and 86:
constructs, for cross-cultural fact
Page 87 and 88:
will discuss the SEM analysis of th
Page 89 and 90:
BFV Hypothesis 4 IdRR->SBV Hypothes
Page 91 and 92:
products. Overall, the effects of s
Page 93 and 94:
more diverse comparison. China is a
Page 95 and 96:
Chapter 4 The Quest for Performance
Page 97 and 98:
insurance premiums. Hence, perceptu
Page 99 and 100:
theoretical contribution regarding
Page 101 and 102:
should reinforce objective measures
Page 103 and 104:
Table 4.2 Standardized Regression W
Page 105 and 106:
Table 4.5 SEM Results Construct Dir
Page 107 and 108:
4.7 Discussion We start this discus
Page 109 and 110:
Jaowrski and Kohli (1993) provided
Page 111 and 112:
Using the findings of our current s
Page 113 and 114:
iii) iv) Indeed, there may not be m
Page 115 and 116:
uyer firm performance through a ser
Page 117 and 118:
specifically highlighted the import
Page 119 and 120:
5.5 Practical Implications From a m
Page 121 and 122:
Summary in English This dissertatio
Page 123 and 124:
is that, when developing marketing
Page 125 and 126:
isk by 0.98 standard deviations. Su
Page 127 and 128:
collectivist culture and a Confucia
Page 129 and 130:
Overwegende dat Verhoef en Leeflang
Page 131 and 132:
van de waarde te communiceren dat d
Page 133 and 134:
erkennen dat dit niet altijd een mo
Page 135 and 136:
ij de vraag of cultureel risico voo
Page 137 and 138:
Businessweek. (2012). S&P/BusinessW
Page 139 and 140:
-industry-09012011.html Grewal, R.,
Page 141 and 142:
Langerak, F. (2001). Effects of mar
Page 143 and 144:
Quelch, J. (2007). How to brand an
Page 145 and 146:
Verhoef, P. C., & Leeflang, P. S. H
Page 147 and 148:
1. The name of the company where yo
Page 149 and 150:
9.The supplier seems to have good i
Page 151 and 152:
17. The supplier takes a very long
Page 153 and 154:
25. If the supplier were to find ou
Page 155 and 156:
33.Does your strategic supplier als
Page 157 and 158:
41.To what degree do those specific
Page 159 and 160:
Supplier Brand Value 51.How likely
Page 161 and 162:
Appendix B Scatter Plot Diagrams fo
Page 163 and 164:
163
show all

Essays on supplier responsiveness and buyer firm value - Nyenrode ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?