Configuring and managing strategic supplier portfolios

Acknowledging that not all supplier relationships can nor should be close partnerships, this article explores the development of strategic supplier portfolios. The strategic portfolio perspective considers risks, trade-offs, and interdependencies between the firm's array of supplier relationships. Based on over 50 interviews with managers and archival data from 12 multinational companies, a strategic supplier portfolio management framework is developed. The authors explore processes that firms use to plan, implement, and monitor strategic supplier portfolios. This research indicates that by assembling superior supplier bases, developing suppliers and integrating them into product development and manufacturing, strategic supplier portfolios contribute to competitive advantage.     

Power and interdependence in buyer supplier relationships: A purchasing portfolio approach

Power and interdependence are generally considered to be important concepts for understanding buyer-supplier relationships. Yet, empirical research on power and interdependence in buyer-supplier relationships is still limited. Power and interdependence issues also play an important role in Kraljic's portfolio approach, which is increasingly used by purchasing practitioners for managing different supplier relations and developing appropriate purchasing strategies. In this paper, the concepts of power and interdependence have been quantified for each quadrant of the Kraljic portfolio matrix, using data from a comprehensive survey among Dutch purchasing professionals. Several hypotheses have been tested and the findings largely confirm the theoretical expectations. The observed supplier dominance in the strategic quadrant of the Kraljic matrix is a notable finding, which indicates that even satisfactory partnerships are dominated by the supplier. Therefore, the presumed power symmetry of buyer-supplier relationships in the strategic quadrant seems no longer valid.     

Buyer and supplier attractiveness in a strategic relationship — A dyadic multiple-case study

In a strategic buyer–supplier relationship (BSR), both the buyer and the supplier aim to leverage the relationship for gaining competitive advantage. Since strategic BSR requires a lot of effort from both parties, firms have become very selective in terms of with whom they engage in a strategic BSR. Therefore, both buyers and suppliers must shape their attractiveness in order to get the other party to put effort to the relationship. Towards this end, the present study explores the drivers of buyer and supplier attractiveness in strategic relationship through 43 interviews in six buyer–supplier dyads. We identified four main categories of both buyer and supplier attractiveness: 1) economic-based, 2) behavior-based, 3) resource-based, and 4) bridging-based attractiveness. We find economic- and behavior-based attractiveness strongly present in all dyads, while resource- and bridging-based attractiveness are emphasized when the strategic intent has more explorative elements and when the aim is to leverage the dyadic relationship in developing businesses outside the dyad. We synthesize our results to a model of attractiveness in a strategic BSR, which bring forth dyad considerations of buyer and supplier attraction.     

Leveraging who you know by what you know: Specialization and returns to relational capital

Research Summary: This paper investigates the interaction effects of specialization and relational capital on performance. We distinguish between upstream and downstream relational capital and theorize that higher levels of specialization will buffer against decreases in upstream relational capital, because of deeper domain expertise and stronger downstream relational capital. Conversely, higher levels of generalization permit greater gains from increases in upstream relational capital, due to leverage across a more diversified downstream portfolio of activities. We test and find support for these hypotheses in the context of the US lobbying industry. Our study contributes to the strategic human capital literature by isolating the dimension of specialization and relational capital embodied within individuals and providing performance implications of the interactions. Managerial Summary: Both “what you know” and “whom you know” impacts performance. Generalists and specialists are different on the “what you know” dimension. On the “who you know” dimension, we distinguish between upstream (supplier) and downstream (client) relationships. We show that specialists are buffered by deeper downstream relations from performance declines when their powerful upstream connections lose power. Generalists benefit from broader networks when their upstream connections gain power. Thus, when the value of their relationships change, specialists and generalists should each assess when they can reap performance benefits, and when they need to bolster against adversities. For firms, our study suggests hiring the right mix of specialists and generalists is important to reduce risks from relational losses while enjoying the performance benefits from relational gains.     

创新项目组合管理绩效关键影响因素的实证研究

为了维持长期的竞争优势,企业需要不断进行技术创新和产品创新。如何在有限的研发资源下使创新项目组合的绩效最大化是企业进行创新管理中面临的主要问题。本文从创新项目组合的战略一致性、平均项目绩效和业务协同3个指标来度量创新项目组合管理绩效,并从流程和管理者的视角研究其关键影响因素。通过实证研究发现,高管参与和项目组合管理流程的设计与实施对项目组合的战略一致性有显著的正向影响;高管参与、项目经理胜任力和项目终止质量对平均项目绩效有显著正向影响;项目经理胜任力、项目组合管理流程的设计与实施和项目中止质量对业务协同有显著正向影响。     

Improving Supplier New Product Development Performance: The Role of Supplier Development

Suppliers play an increasingly central role in helping firms achieve their new product development (NPD) goals. The literature implicitly assumes that suppliers are able to meet or exceed the quality standards and technological expectations of the firm, and yet, in practice, suppliers often lack the technological capabilities needed to undertake collaborative NPD. In such situations, a firm may choose to intervene and actively develop the supplier's technological and product development capabilities. We develop a theoretical framework that conceptualizes supplier development activities within interorganizational NPD projects as part of a bilateral knowledge‐sharing process: design recommendations, technical specifications, and new technology flow from supplier to the firm, and in turn, the firm can implement supplier development activities to upgrade the supplier's technological capabilities. Antecedents (supplier responsibility, skills similarity, single sourcing strategy) and consequences of supplier development activities (on supplier, product, and project performance) are examined using a sample of 153 interorganizational NPD projects within UK manufacturers. We find broad support for our hypotheses. In particular, we show that the relational rents (in the form of improved product and project performance) attained from supplier development activities in new product development are not achieved directly, but rather indirectly, via improvements in the supplier's creative and technological capabilities. Our results emphasize the importance of adopting a strategic view of the potential returns available from investing in the NPD capabilities of key suppliers, and provide clues about underlying reasons for the suboptimal experiences of many companies' collaborative NPD projects.     

Relational key account management: Building key account management effectiveness through structural reformations and relationship management skills

Literature has widely recognised the importance of key account management (KAM) in building long-term customer relationships. Although KAM grounds significantly on the relationship marketing theory, most empirical studies focus on the financial impact a KAM programme can produce. Hence, only normative work can advise practitioners on the implications from adopting a relational approach in managing their business with customers who can help the supplier realise a broader set of strategic objectives. Drawing from 304 cases of different suppliers, this article seeks to start filling this gap in the literature and offer empirical evidence regarding the structural and relational implications from a KAM programme. In summary, the findings suggest that adopting a relational perspective through the development of key account management orientation (KAMO) will result in certain, necessary, structural reformation while allowing for specific relational skills to develop. Consequently, supplier's performance also improves. Moreover, this chain of effects remains strong independently of resources available to the supplier, suggesting that KAM can be a significant basis for developing a competitive advantage irrespectively of the supplier's size.     

Demand‐side strategy,relational advantage,and partner‐driven corporate scope: The case for client‐led diversification

Research Summary: We advance research on corporate diversification by joining insights from the demand‐side and relational views in strategy to offer a novel theory of client‐led diversification. We propose that client‐led diversification results from a combination of the customer‐driven opportunities emphasized in the demand‐side view and the creation of added value through relational assets that is a central tenet of the relational view. Furthermore, we hypothesize that suppliers’ client‐specific knowledge, clients’ relational commitment to suppliers, and growth opportunities in clients’ markets (relative to the suppliers’ own markets) will magnify the client‐led diversification effect. We test our hypotheses using a longitudinal dataset on patent law firms and their diversification into new domains of patent prosecution work for their corporate clients. Managerial Summary: Explanations of why firms diversify into new lines of business have largely concerned the redeployment of underutilized resources, with little regard to opportunities or influences stemming from firms’ existing customers. In our article, we show how the changing scope of business needs from a knowledge‐based supplier firm's set of existing clients is a central driver of supplier‐firm diversification, and this is especially the case when the level of relational assets shared between a supplier and its clients is higher. In a competitive landscape where suppliers compete intensively for the business of clients, our results show how managers can increase the likelihood of capturing additional business from its existing exchange relationships rather than bearing the risks of seeking new exchange relationships.     

Comparing the resource‐based and relational views: knowledge transfer and spillover in vertical alliances

We compare resource‐based and relational perspectives to examine competitive advantages within the context of vertical learning alliances. Previous research has shown that through such alliances suppliers acquire knowledge to forge new capabilities and attain performance improvements. We ask whether such improvements are exclusive to the learning partnership, or are available in other average partnerships of this supplier. We posit that the extent to which such performance improvements are partnership exclusive depends on whether the newly forged capabilities lie entirely within the supplier firm's boundaries, or at the learning dyad level. As such, we untie two forms of performance improvements arising from learning dyads. While the resource‐based view helps explain the performance gains learning suppliers deploy across average partners, the relational view reveals the additional performance edge that remains exclusive to the learning partnership. Based on empirical evidence from a survey of 253 suppliers to the equipment industry, we find that partnership exclusive performance (i.e., ‘relational performance’), the true source of learning dyads' competitive advantage, is a function of suppliers acquiring know‐how within the dyad, developing dyad‐specific assets and capabilities, and structuring buyer‐supplier relational governance mechanisms. We discuss implications for research and practice. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategic Suppliers' Technical Contributions to New Product Advantage: Substitution and Configuration Options

Current theory lacks clarity on how different kinds of resources contribute to new product advantage, or how firms can combine different resources to achieve a new product advantage. While several studies have identified different firm‐specific resources that influence new product advantage, comparatively little research has explored the contribution of strategic supplier resources. Combining resource‐based and relational perspectives, this study develops a theoretical model investigating how a strategic supplier's technical capabilities impact focal firm new product advantage and how firms combine different resources to gain this advantage. The model is tested using detailed survey data collected from 153 interorganizational new product development projects in the United Kingdom within which a strategic supplier had been extensively involved. Empirical results support our research hypotheses. First, supplier technical performance is shown to have a significant positive impact on new product advantage. Next, we show that while supplier technical capabilities have a positive influence on supplier technical performance, the a priori nature of the supplier's task moderates the relationship. Finally, our data support our hypotheses related to the positive relationship between relationship‐specific absorptive capacity and new product advantage, and the proposed negative moderation of supplier technical capabilities on this relationship. Based upon these findings, we encourage managers to recognize that strategic suppliers' with greater technical capabilities perform better regardless of the degree of creativity required by their task; but that strategic suppliers with lower technical capabilities may partially compensate (substitute) for their lack of technical capabilities, if they are able to respond to high problem‐solving task requirements. Furthermore, we suggest that the firm's development of relationship‐specific absorptive capacity is much more important when a strategic supplier is less technically capable. A buying firm's relationship‐specific absorptive capacity can, according to our data, substitute for low supplier technical capabilities. On the other hand, where the supplier has strong technical capabilities, investments in relationship‐specific absorptive capacity have no effect on new product advantage. Our findings reinforce recent calls for research on how firms can combine different resources and capabilities to achieve superior performance.     

The impact of buyer–supplier relationships on supplier innovativeness: An empirical study in cross-border supply networks

Drawing on organizational learning and the relational view of the firm, this study seeks to understand the factors that drive supplier innovativeness in the context of cross-border supply relationships. To address this research objective, a survey included 189 parts and components manufacturers (suppliers) in Turkey; hierarchical regression analysis is used to test the hypotheses. The findings demonstrate that interfirm knowledge sharing routines, relation-specific investments, and governance mechanisms may promote supplier innovativeness by expanding the supplier's knowledge resources and encouraging it to invest in innovative activities. In addition, this research emphasizes differentiating effects of the supplier's tier position for the impacts of buyer assistance and cooperative tie. As such, this study contributes to the purchasing and supply management literature by empirically showing how buyer–supplier relationships, particularly in cross-border supply networks, affect supplier innovativeness.     

Decomposing the effect of supplier development on relationship benefits: The role of relational capital

Buyers invest considerably in developing their suppliers, yet the performance effects of such investments are not universal. Drawing on social capital theory, this research investigates whether the relationship between supplier development and relationship benefits may be facilitated by the generation of relational capital. The authors examine mediating and moderating roles of relational capital in the relationship between two aspects of supplier development (capability development, supplier governance) and two dimensions of relationship benefits (supplier benefits, buyer benefits), using survey data collected from 185 suppliers of a large manufacturing firm. Investment in supplier development does not automatically result in benefits for the supplier or reciprocated benefits for the buyer. Rather, relational capital “bridges” supplier development and relationship benefits. Without relational capital, benefits from capability development do not accrue, and the impact of a supplier governance regime can be even detrimental. In conditions of high relational capital, capability development results in lower perceived buyer benefits. The results can help managers ensure that the benefits from their supplier development efforts fully materialize.     

The architecture of coopetition: Strategic intent,ambidextrous managers,and knowledge sharing

The study investigates the significance of strategic intent, manager's ambidexterity, and knowledge sharing routines for firms in their quest to pursue coopetition. We utilize the resource-based view and the dynamic capabilities theory to ground our hypotheses. We test the hypotheses using the data collected from 313 firms that engage in coopetition relationships through an online survey. The findings forward knowledge sharing and ambidextrous managers as intervening variables, in that when complemented with knowledge sharing, a firm's strategic intent could better guide the firm's managers to pursue coopetition successfully. Findings further advocate that knowledge sharing complements to enable the relationship between a firm's strategic intent and its ambidextrous managers, as well as the relationship between strategic intent and coopetition. Furthermore, results also indicate that ambidextrous managers, with a skillset of a combination of exploration and exploitation, are positively associated to coopetition. Overall, the findings make important theoretical as well as empirical contributions to the coopetition and strategic alliance literature.     

Supplier segmentation using fuzzy logic

Supplier segmentation means that the suppliers of a specific firm are categorized on the basis of their similarities. This supply-side business-to-business (B2B) segmentation is of special importance to companies with many suppliers. Supplier segmentation yields a manageable number of segments, each of which requires a separate strategy. Standard supplier segmentation methods have serious shortcomings, for instance because they fail to make a proper connection between supplier segmentation and other supplier-related activities such as supplier selection and development. Moreover, these standard methods typically use a limited number of segmentation criteria and different sets of criteria are suggested for each method. It is unclear for practitioners how to choose a particular method. The purpose of this paper is to form a practical tool for supplier segmentation taking into account all suggested segmentation criteria. The principal result of this paper is the design of a rule-based method to segment the suppliers of a firm based on two overarching dimensions: supplier capabilities and supplier willingness. The method is applied to a real-world situation to show how the results can be used in practice. A general sensitivity analysis procedure for fuzzy rule-based systems is proposed and then implemented, to identify the most important supplier capabilities and willingness criteria and to formulate better supplier development strategies. A major conclusion of the paper is that the fuzzy logic approach to supplier segmentation is simple to apply in practice, yet considers all available segmentation criteria and their inherent fuzziness in a way that is easily adaptable to a specific industrial context.     

Relationship keyness: The underlying concept for different forms of key relationship management

For companies, relationships with external actors may constitute intangible assets. Many firms have put in place key account management programs in order to pay sufficient attention to strategically important customers and the marketing literature has studied such programs. However, a company's relationship portfolio also comprises relationships with other types of actors. The objective of this paper is to show that - across the different types of external relationships a company may develop - some relationships have more importance than others and, hence, are key. The authors argue that, as a consequence, the keyness of certain relationships has led to the emergence of approaches which can be referred to as key relationship management. For this purpose, the authors first present empirical material on the management of relationships between companies and their partners in strategic alliances from the French IT sector. They then discuss the concept of keyness as well as the common characteristics of different forms of key relationship management such as key account management, key supplier management and strategic alliance management.     

The influence of resource bundling on the speed of strategic change: Moderating effects of relational capital

Integrating the theoretical perspectives of resource orchestration and relational capital, this research examines how the managerial capability involved in resource bundling approaches (i.e., stabilizing, enriching, and pioneering) affect the speed of strategic change, and how managerial ties (i.e., government ties, customer ties and supplier ties) as external resources influence the effects of resource bundling capabilities on strategic change speed. Using data from 508 Chinese firms, we demonstrate that the stabilizing bundling process is negatively related to the speed of strategic change, and enriching and pioneering bundling processes are positively related to the speed of strategic change. Importantly, we find that specific effects of resource bundling on strategic change speed are influenced by different types of external social relationships. These results suggest that managerial capabilities and external ties affect the speed with which strategic change can be implemented.     

Finding true north: Design and implementation of a strategic sourcing framework

This study investigates the evolution of the design, development and implementation of a strategic sourcing framework able to support decision-makers in formulating differentiated, rather than generic supplier base strategies. These strategies are in turn implemented through specific action plans, assuring the coherence and alignment between the different strategic hierarchical levels, beginning with business strategy, through category strategy to specific tactical sourcing levers. The proposed framework is the result of a longitudinal study executed through two action research cycles engaging in a strategic sourcing project in a leading European specialty steels manufacturer. By integrating and refining in our framework three dominant purchasing portfolio models - i.e. Kraljic, Olsen & Ellram, and Scott & Westbrook - we highlight the importance of adopting multiple perspectives to manage the complexity of formulating a purchasing strategy and its related implementation decisions. The proposed framework has been designed to facilitate dynamic learning mechanisms through a feedback loop to continuously update the three integrated models and in turn allow managers to gain a strategic perspective of the evolution of buyer-supplier relationships, the influence of previous decisions and external factors. A critical discussion explores the proposed solution through the main theoretical lenses emerged throughout the research process.     

基于战略Partnering模式的工程项目组合管理研究

工程项目组合管理模式的选择对项目组合综合效益有显著影响,将战略Partnering模式应用于工程项目组合管理中,有助于提高工程项目组合的管理水平及收益。通过对战略Partnering模式概念和特点的分析,设计了战略Partnering模式的组织结构,提出了战略Partnering模式的工作流程,详述了基于战略Partnering模式的工程项目组合管理机制应包括信任机制、沟通机制、协作机制、利益机制与调节机制。     

Venture capitalists' decision to withdraw: The role of portfolio configuration from a real options lens

When does a venture capital firm withdraw from an investment project prior to its completion? This study offers a real options view on this decision by examining the contingent effects of portfolio configuration. We explore how project withdrawal can be influenced by two distinct dimensions of portfolio configuration, portfolio focus in a strategic domain and portfolio diversity across multiple domains. The empirical analysis shows that while portfolio focus weakens the negative effect of industry‐level uncertainty on a venture capitalist's propensity to withdraw from a project, portfolio diversity strengthens the effect of uncertainty. This study informs current research on the boundary of real options theory and sheds light on the behavior of venture capitalists in financing entrepreneurship. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When can you trust “trust”? Calculative trust,relational trust,and supplier performance

Our research empirically assesses two distinct bases for trust: calculative trust, based on a structure of rewards and penalties, versus relational trust, a judgment anchored in past behavior and characterized by a shared identity. We find that calculative trust and relational trust positively influence supplier performance, with calculative trust having a stronger association than relational trust. Yet, important boundary conditions exist. If buyers invest in supplier‐specific assets or when supply side market uncertainty is high, relational trust, not calculative trust, is more strongly associated with supplier performance. In contrast, when behavioral uncertainty is high, calculative trust, not relational trust, relates more strongly to supplier performance. These results highlight the value of examining distinct forms of trust. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.