The Coevolution of Relationship Dominant Logic and Supply Risk Mitigation Strategies

被引:27
作者
Kaufmann, Lutz [1 ]
Carter, Craig R. [2 ]
Rauer, Johan [1 ]
机构
[1] WHU Otto Beisheim Sch Management, Supply Chain Management, Vallendar, Germany
[2] Arizona State Univ, WP Carey Sch Business, Supply Chain Management, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
关键词
risk management; evolution; relationship dominant logic; resources; rare earth metals; grounded theory; GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH; CHAIN DISRUPTIONS; MANAGEMENT; CAPABILITIES; PERFORMANCE; LOGISTICS; PERSPECTIVES; INTEGRATION; DEPENDENCE; COALITIONS;
D O I
10.1111/jbl.12126
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
How and why do risk mitigation strategies evolve? And which resources are needed for engaging in such changes? This paper contributes to the understanding of risk management in supply chains by developing theory about the interplay between supply risk mitigation strategies and the purchasing team's relationship dominant logic (RDL), which we define as the purchasing team's orientation toward and shared cognitive map of the management of its supply chain relationships. Specifically, we propose that RDL and supply risk mitigation strategies are fundamentally intertwined. Following a Straussian approach to grounded theory, this study analyzes data generated from the purchasing teams of Western green-tech firms trying to mitigate supply risk for technically indispensable rare earth metals from China. Our findings from this context that is heavily shaped by state-influenced supply chain members show that the firms chose their mitigation strategies in line with their RDL. Human capital, social capital, and financial capital seem to moderate the link between RDL and mitigation strategies. We link our findings with the strategic management literature in deriving theoretical propositions concerning these relationships.
引用
收藏
页码:87 / 106
页数:20
相关论文
共 92 条
[41]   DO NORMS MATTER IN MARKETING RELATIONSHIPS [J].
HEIDE, JB ;
JOHN, G .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 1992, 56 (02) :32-44
[42]  
Hendricks KB, 2005, PROD OPER MANAG, V14, P35, DOI 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2005.tb00008.x
[43]  
Hensel N.D., 2011, Business Economics, V46, P171, DOI [10.1057/be.2011.17, DOI 10.1057/BE.2011.17]
[44]  
Humphries Mark., 2012, RARE EARTH ELEMENTS
[45]  
ISABELLA LA, 1990, ACAD MANAGE J, V33, P7, DOI 10.5465/256350
[46]   Can small firms gain relational advantage? Exploring strategic choice and trustworthiness signals in supply chain relationships [J].
Jones, Stephen L. ;
Fawcett, Stanley E. ;
Wallin, Cynthia ;
Fawcett, Amydee M. ;
Brewer, Barry L. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH, 2014, 52 (18) :5451-5466
[47]   The impact of individual debiasing efforts on financial decision effectiveness in the supplier selection process [J].
Kaufmann, Lutz ;
Carter, Craig R. ;
Buhrmann, Christian .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, 2012, 42 (05) :411-433
[48]   HOW TO DEMONSTRATE RIGOR WHEN PRESENTING GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT LITERATURE [J].
Kaufmann, Lutz ;
Denk, Nikola .
JOURNAL OF SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT, 2011, 47 (04) :64-72
[49]   Proactive planning for catastrophic events in supply chains [J].
Knemeyer, A. Michael ;
Zinna, Walter ;
Eroglu, Cuneyt .
JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, 2009, 27 (02) :141-153
[50]   Boundaries Innovation and Knowledge Integration in the Japanese Firm [J].
Kodama, Mitsuru .
LONG RANGE PLANNING, 2009, 42 (04) :463-494