MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981125826 · doi:10.1108/01443571011094262

Buyer supplier perspectives on supply chain relationships

2010· article· en· W1981125826 on OpenAlexaff
Eamonn Ambrose, Donna Marshall, Daniel F. Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Operations & Production Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransaction costSocial exchange theorySupply chainBusinessMarketingOriginalityDatabase transactionSupplier relationship managementIndustrial organizationSupply chain managementPerceptionMicroeconomicsEconomicsComputer scienceQualitative researchPsychologySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The paper aims to employ transaction cost theory and social exchange theory to compare how buyers and suppliers perceive relationship mechanisms. The paper also explains the antecedents and dynamics of relationship performance by comparing buyer and supplier perceptions of the same relationships. The paper specifically focuses on the issue of relationship success and test the hypothesis that the antecedents of perceived relationship success for buyers differ from those of suppliers within supply chain relationships. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a study of the supply chain relationships of a major ICT company where matched pairs of buyers and suppliers were surveyed on the nature of their relationships. The survey instrument drew from previously published constructs on key relationship dimensions such as trust, commitment, power, communication, uncertainty and performance. A series of nested measurement models were then developed and tested for the two groups – buyers and suppliers. Findings The study found that buyers and suppliers have significantly different perceptions of their relationships across a range of dimensions. In addition, the antecedents of relationship success for both groups bear little similarity, thus supporting our hypotheses. Originality/value The paper directly compares transaction cost theory and social exchange theory and finds that both are useful in explaining success in buyer‐supplier relationships. Methodologically, the paper is unique due to the combination of over 100 matched buyer‐supplier dyads with a comprehensive survey of relationship constructs. Given the use of both transaction cost and social exchange theory, the breadth of the dimensions studied, the unique access to practitioners gained and the nature of the matched‐pair data, this paper is an important contribution to the literature on relationship management. Furthermore, the findings indicate a rich seam of potential future research topics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations166
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Operations & Production ManagementSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207