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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 2.5 Rotated IdRR Component Matrix IdRR Items 1 2 1.To what extent does your strategic supplier help you reduce your factory .731 or manufacturing costs? 2.In the past has your strategic supplier been willing to invest in technology that would improve your supply chain cost efficiency? .645 3.In the past has your strategic supplier been willing to invest in technology that would improve your research and development and engineering cost efficiency? .646 4.To what extent does you strategic supplier influence your channel or distribution costs? .627 5.Does the strategic supplier help you in reducing your sales cost? .563 6.Does your strategic supplier also provide you with intelligence on the markets in which you operate? .736 7.To what extent does your strategic supplier influence your inventory management? .777 8.Does your strategic supplier offer you flexible payment schedules? .607 9.To what extent does your supplier help you manage your inventory? .723 10.To what degree does your strategic supplier influence your cash conversion cycle? A definitional clarification: The cash conversion cycle is the time duration in which a firm is able to convert its resources into cash. It is actually .684 the total time period. 11.To what extent does using your strategic supplier influence your ability to minimize the time needed for your firm to provide solutions for your customers? .519 12.To what extent have your strategic suppliers tried to simplify your supply chain processes? .732 13.To what extent do your strategic suppliers correctly invoice your company? .686 14.To what degree do those specific investments make it difficult for the strategic supplier to end their relationship with you? .836 15.To what extent does the strategic supplier help you increase your products or service quality? .695 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. KMO=0.910, Chi-Suaqre=1056, p
We considered several scales before arriving at a conclusion about which scale was best and whether we should use one unified or two separate constructs to measure economic and non-economic satisfaction. We first considered the scale developed by Rukert and Churchill (1984), which they used to measure satisfaction on the following dimensions: product, financial, assistance, and social interaction. The product dimension assesses the demand, quality, and awareness of a supplier’s offering (Rukert & Churchill, 1984). The financial dimension evaluates the financial attractiveness of the supplier’s offering (Rukert & Churchill, 1984). The assistance dimension evaluates how much assistance the channel member or customer receives from the supplier in promoting their products (Rukert & Churchill, 1984), while the social interaction dimension evaluates the interactions between the supplier’s sales representatives and the buyer (Rukert & Churchill, 1984). Moreover, Rukert and Churchill (1984) measured satisfaction through what they termed direct and indirect measurement, specifically they reworded the questions in the direct measurement scale to directly inquire about satisfaction from the customer and in the indirect scale to indirectly acquire satisfaction information from the customer. Only seven items on the indirect scale passed the 0.7 Chronbach’s alpha threshold value (Hair et al., 2006). In effect, only the social interaction dimension of the satisfaction construct had reliable item measurements. Similarly, when Rukert and Churchill (1984) measured satisfaction directly, they only had two items that were reliable. Although Rukert and Churchill (1984) do present some scale results that have sufficient Chronbach’s alpha values, they doubt their own results when they state that “one should not put much faith in an alpha computed on only two or three items” (p. 229). Hence, drawing from this analysis, we can conclude that only a few items reliably measure satisfaction and that they are not loading in enough quantity to warrant a separate dimension measurement or a secondary factor analysis. Some scholars, such as Ganesan (1994), have used a single reliable construct for the measurement of channel member satisfaction (Chronbach’s alpha of 0.94). But Ganesan (1994) focuses only on the emotional or non-economic satisfaction, whereas we have specified the domain to include both economic and non-economic evaluations by the customer. Therefore, this scale was ruled out for use in our research. The scale created by Dwyer and Gassenheimer (1992) measures economic and non-economic distributors or buyer satisfaction with their supplier on one latent variable. Moreover, the scale that they constructed is reliable and covers the four dimensions given by Rukert and Churchill (1984). Therefore, we decided to use the scale specified by Dwyer and Gassenheimer (1992). We slightly modified the sentences to suit our study, as detailed in Table 2.6 and included an additional question generated by ourselves, “what is your overall satisfaction with this supplier?” 51
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 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: market intelligence, offering flexi
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?