Developing Operational Capabilities in the Collaborative Practice-Adoption Process through Different Triadic Structures.
| Autor | Silva, Eliciane Maria |
| Cargo | Research Article |
INTRODUCTION
The Operations and Supply Chain Management (OSCM) literature has shown a growing interest in studying triads in recent years (Demirel, MacCarthy, Ritterskamp, Champneys, & Gross, 2019; Ta, Esper, & Hofer, 2018; Wynstra, Spring, & Schoenherr, 2015; Zhang, Lawrence, & Anderson, 2015) and multi-tiers theories (Kannan, 2021). However, most OSCM studies have focused on the relational context of dyadic relationships in supply chains (Gong, Jia, Brown, & Koh, 2018; Sauer & Seuring, 2019; Wilhelm, Blome, Bhakoo, & Paulraj, 2016). A dyad is a relationship that connected a buyer and a supplier. On the other hand, a triad consists of at least three nodes connected by two relationships, including several interactions involving buyers, suppliers, and end-users (Choi & Wu, 2009). According to Choi and Wu (2009): a dyad shows how a node affects another node, but it is not able to address how a link may affect another link ... the triad that captures the basic essence of a network and allows us to study the behavior of a network (Choi & Wu, 2009, p. 263).
Therefore, understanding the process of capability development from a triadic perspective is essential for supply chain theory and practice (Demirel et al., 2019; Ta et al., 2018; Wynstra et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2015).
Collective triadic relationships produce a superior performance to dyadic-diffused relationships since they can capture most benefits because of their greater bargaining power (Lanier, Wempe, & Zacharia, 2010; Nimmy, Chilkapure, & Pillai, 2019). However, triads are embedded in different structures, affecting how companies interact and collaborate (Ta et al., 2018; Wynstra et al., 2015; Zhang & Cao, 2015). Mena, Humphries, and Choi (2013) distinct triads according to the relationships established for the buyer with the first- and second-tier suppliers. In other words, how the buyer can access and influence the second-tier supplier affects how they collaborate. Despite the importance of the triadic and multi-tier approach to understand supply chain performance (Demirel et al., 2019; Ta et al., 2018; Wynstra et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2015), it remains uncharted how they interact to develop capabilities in a collaborative practice-adoption process (Nimmy et al., 2019).
Our research expands prior studies by focusing on understanding how the buyer-supplier-supplier collaborative practice-adoption process occurs in different triadic structures (Wu & Choi, 2005). Therefore, this study was guided by the following question: "How do triadic structures influence the collaborative practice-adoption process and the development of operational capabilities in supply chains?" This research aims to understand how collaboration from a triadic perspective affects the development of operational capabilities through a practice-adoption process. To answer these questions, we conducted a multiple case study in three supply chain triads (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 2014), analyzing buyer-supplier-supplier relationships in three industrial sectors in Brazil: the automotive, chemical, and electrical-electronic.
Thus, this study contributes to understanding the role of collaboration in developing operational capabilities in supply chains, particularly from a triadic perspective. The results indicate that collaboration makes room for capabilities development, such as customization, responsiveness, and cooperation capabilities. Moreover, we contribute to the OSCM literature by addressing how triadic structures affect the collaborative practice-adoption process and the development of operational capabilities (Mena et al., 2013).
Our findings suggest that in open triads, those in which the buyer has no direct connection to second-tier suppliers, the first-tier supplier has an essential role to play, diffusing information and knowledge throughout the entire triad. This 'middle-man' orchestrated the practice-adoption process in supply chains, developing need capabilities in its suppliers. However, it has limited action in some capabilities. On the other hand, in transactional and close triads, those in which the buyer reaches the second-tier supplier directly, the buyer established quality standards for the entire supply chain, sharing information and resources such as practices, tools, and equipment. Therefore, the buyer and the second-tier supplier should expand the triadic structure to at least a transitional triad to develop other capabilities, such as responsiveness.
The sequential order of this paper is as follows: Section 2 presents a literature review of practices and operational capabilities in the context of supply chain management. Section 3 describes the methodological approaches used based on a multiple case study. Section 4 gives the results of the analysis, while their discussion is found in Section 5. Finally, the main conclusions and suggestions for future studies are presented in the last section.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Operational capabilities' development in a practice-adoption process
Practices are internal and external activities that improve operational performance (Flynn, Sakakibara, & Schroeder, 1995; Wu, Melnyk, & Swink, 2012). With an internal focus, we can include practices such as just-in-time (JIT) (Flynn et al., 1995; Khalfallah & Lakhal, 2020), total quality management (TQM) (Alsawafi, Lemke, & Yang, 2021; Krause, Handfield, & Scannell, 1998), IT-based practices (Frohlich & Westbrook, 2001), and practices related to integrated product development (Tan, Kannan, & Narasimhan, 2007; Zimmermann, Ferreira, & Moreira, 2020). We can include integration practices adopted for buyers and suppliers with an external focus, such as quality management systems (QMS) and integrated product development (Bianchi & Ferraz, 2020).
Past studies have analyzed the extent of the integration of operational practices between suppliers and client firms, particularly in dyads (Gong et al., 2018; Sauer & Seuring, 2019; Wilhelm et al., 2016). In this study, we adopted the perspective of Krause, Handfield, and Scannell (1998). These authors argued that there is an evolutionary path to developing practices between buyer and supplier and two approaches to conducting them: the 'strategic approach' and the 'reactive approach.' In the former, cross-functional teams develop supply chain practices with "the intention to create a world-class supply base capable of providing a sustainable competitive advantage" (Krause et al., 1998, p. 45). Regarding the second approach, the practices are adopted merely to remedy or control the production process.
Operational practices lie at the root of capabilities. Implementing practices between firms provides a way of eliciting a firm's tacit knowledge embedded in its existing routines. This process then helps identify opportunities for improvement and select new routines (Bromiley & Rau, 2014). According to Wu, Melnyk, and Swink (2012), the skills, processes, and specific routines developed in operational systems and used for solving problems by employing operational resources could be considered operational capabilities. In a broader conceptualization, organizational capabilities are firm-specific, developed internally, and difficult to imitate or transfer (Swink & Hegarty, 1998). Capabilities provide both explicit elements (e.g., resources and practices) and tacit elements (e.g., know-how, skill sets, and leadership) (Saunila, Ukko, Rantala, Nasiri, & Rantanen, 2020). Therefore, operational capabilities are part of an organization's capabilities.
Swink and Hegarty (1998) defined seven categories of operational capability. The studies of Wu, Melnyk, and Flynn (2010) and Wu et al. (2012) complemented the former by clarifying the understanding of six of these categories. Table 1 presents a synthesis of the definitions of the operational capabilities employed in manufacturing processes.
Inter-organizational collaboration is strongly related to the development of capabilities. It can be expressed as ongoing participation by way of cross-functional teams (Monczka, Petersen, Handfield, & Ragatz, 1998), goal congruence (Cao & Zhang, 2011), a long-term partnership or commitment (Sheu, Yen, & Chae, 2006), or knowledge transfer (Grant, 1996). This paper extends prior studies (Wu, Melnyk, & Flynn (2010); Wu et al., 2012) by analyzing the development of operational capabilities based on inter-organizational collaboration and practices from a multi-tier supplier perspective.
Inter-organizational collaboration
A strong inter-organizational relationship with strategic partners can be a source of distinct value creation (Day, Fawcett, Fawcett, & Magnan, 2013; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). It can provide access to information, ideas, products, technologies, and process innovation (Dyer & Singh, 1998; Madhok, 2002). According to Eltantawy, Paulraj, Giunipero, Naslund, and Thute (2015), the flow of information increases in collaborative relationships and can also reduce costs and improve quality.
Few studies, however, have demonstrated the success achieved through collaboration and the attainment of distinct competitive advantages (Fawcett, McCarter, Fawcett, Webb, & Magnan, 2015; Swanson, Jin, Fawcett, & Fawcett, 2017). Previous studies have analyzed the effects of interfirm collaboration on different approaches, such as the development of new products, cost reduction (Braziotis, Tannock, & Bourlakis, 2017), the firm's performance (Cao & Zhang, 2011), and the effects of internal resources on level execution in the supply chain. Other studies explore the impact of supply chain collaboration on collaborative advantage and a firm's performance (Kotzab, Teller, Grant, & Friis, 2015). Nevertheless, the moderating effects of inter-organizational collaboration on operational practices and capabilities remain unexplored. Table 2 presents a synthesis of the constructs and dimensions of operational practices and inter-organizational collaboration in the supply chain...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
