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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Netherlands. We used the maximum likelihood estimation method. Because of sample size considerations (described in detail in Chapter 3) we decided to split the model tested in Chapter 2 into two sub-models, Model 2 and Model 3. Model 2 includes the supplier responsiveness, buyer satisfaction, and buyer firm value variables. Model 3 includes the supplier responsiveness, IdRR supplier brand value, and buyer firm value variables. We found that the fit statistics were acceptable for both models and that the data supported all our hypotheses. Furthermore, we compared and contrasted the hypotheses’ significance with the hypotheses in Chapter 2. 1.6.3 Data analysis, Chapter 4 We analyzed the two models in Chapter 2 based on 87 respondents who worked for publically listed companies in the United States. We initially conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The fit statistics were all within the acceptable range for the model. Next, we analyzed the data using structural equation models and applied the maximum likelihood estimation procedure. In our subjective data model, four of our hypotheses were supported by the data, whereas in our objective data model, only three of our hypotheses gained support. 1.7 Limitations Many additional future research directions can be suggested on the basis of the limitations of the current research. The following are some of the limitations of this dissertation: Longitudinal research design. Our cross-sectional study allowed us to draw associations at best but not conclusions about causality. To further improve this design, data collected for a time series analysis could allow the deduction of evidence regarding causality. However, there has been some recent evidence that inferences from cross-sectional studies about causality may not be much different from inferences about longitudinal studies (Rindfleisch et al., 2008). Limited sample of industries for depth. We traded off depth for width in our industry sectors. However, specific sectors may vary more with supplier responsiveness than others. For instance, in the commodities industry, price may be more of a determining factor, whereas, in the technical goods industrial sector, the supplier response may be a key determining factor as to whether relationships continue. Future studies could concentrate on a few sectors and check the robustness of our findings across various moderators, such as market turbulence and increased technological risk. Narrow cultural comparison. Although the US and The Netherlands are different in some respects, they share similarities as well. Both are industrialized nations, both are vibrant democracies, both have capitalist economies, both have a degree of similar occidental culture, and both nations are internationally competitive economies (Deshpande & Webster, 1989). Some cultural idiosyncrasies do occur, such as acceptance of boasting on job interviews in the United States and the preference for modesty in job interviews in The Netherlands, but nevertheless, they both can be considered western cultures. On the other hand comparison with an Asian culture in Chapter 3 would have provided a more diverse cultural comparison and insights into whether the model proposed in Chapter 2 holds across more diverse cultural settings. Existing relationships. In the current study we only examined existing relationships. It is possible that the current study could be improved upon by examining different stages in a relationship and examine whether the importance of market orientation and idiosyncratic relational risk varies across nations and in different stages of the relationship. 20
Chapter 2 In Pursuit of the Buyer: Does it Make Relational and Financial Sense to be a Responsive Strategic Supplier? Abstract Do responsive strategic suppliers create substantial value in the buyer-supplier relationship? The evidence from the marketing literature is mixed. Closer collaboration with a strategic supplier is known to influence risk and relational outcomes, but this influence does not always generate substantial benefits for the buyer as well as for the supplier. For business-tobusiness (B2B) strategic relationships, substantial benefits are important; if channel partners do not receive reasonable benefits from a relationship, then the partnership could suffer. In this study, we examine how strategic supplier responsiveness creates meaningful value for both the buyer and the supplier through the mediator of idiosyncratic relational risk. We used survey data (n=164) from listed and unlisted companies in the United States and employed structural equation modeling for our analysis. The primary finding of interest is that a supplier’s responsiveness (i.e., market orientation) is negatively associated with a buyer’s idiosyncratic relational risk. This challenges the widely held belief that risk and market orientation are positively related. In tandem, the results show that being responsive reduces the supplier’s risk in terms of the repurchase likelihood by their strategic buyer. At the end of this paper, we discuss the managerial and academic implications. Keywords: supplier responsiveness, idiosyncratic relational risk, buyer satisfaction, supplier brand value and buyer firm value. 21
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 18 and 19: 1.4 Scope PhD thesis This thesis fo
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?