IntroductionImmense research regarding studies of diversification as one of the most important approaches to corporate growth strategy (e.g., Oki, 2013; Palich, Cardinal, & Miller, 2000) has been conducted. Most such studies, however, tend to focus only on diversification at particularly large companies, with less research on diversification considering small- and medium-sized businesses (e.g., Kono, 2016). In addition, we observe limited studies focusing on diversification at the supplier firms that manufacture and sell intermediate products to other businesses, despite the fact that these suppliers account for the bulk of the economy (e.g., Konno, 2007).The most important dimensions of the diversification strategy for suppliers, most of which are smaller than companies dealing in finished products, are extending (product range) and customers (customer reach) within the same industry. For example, supplying a new product to an existing company with a historical relationship is an example of extending in the former dimension; moreover, supplying an existing product to a new customer with no previous relationship is an example of extending in the latter dimension.Numerous studies, both theoretical and empirical, on diversification regarding each of these two dimensions exist separately. Practically, however, decisions about diversification along these two dimensions are not necessarily made independently. No existing studies have considered the two in an integrated manner, notwithstanding the fact that decisions are often made based on comparing and validating them at the same time, implying that they are closely interdependent. This study integrates the two perspectives of product scope dimension and customer scope dimension to provide empirical analysis and discussion regarding the relationship between the supplier diversification strategy and management performance.MethodThis study examines the differences in duration of continuing business and probability of the business continuing for each of the following five categories of business between suppliers and customers.As shown in Figure 1, we first divide the business relationship into two categories of existing and new business. Subsequently, we further categorize new business as either existing or new along the two dimensions of customer scope and product scope, using the growth matrix approach from Ansoff (1965), yielding four categories of business. This results in a total of five categories of business: existing, existing customer/existing product, new customer/existing product, existing customer/new product, and new customer/ new product.For example, business already in place at some point in time would be categorized as existing business, while business commencing after that point in time would be categorized as new business. Within a new business, providing a new product to an existing customer would be considered existing customer/new product1 and providing an existing product to a new customer with no past business would be considered new customer /existing product. Supplying an existing product to a customer with a historical relationship would be considered existing customer/existing product, while providing a new product to a new customer with no historical relationship would be considered new customer /new product. The problem we posed to ourselves is whether any differences would be visible across these five categories of business in the outcome variables-the duration of the business relationship and the probability of it continuing.In the following part, we estimate the duration of the business relationship and probability of it continuing (survival rate) for the Japanese automobile component supplier industry from 1990 to 2008, using the Kaplan-Meier method,2 to obtain an answer to the problem we posed.DataWe consider a business by a particular supplier in a particular component with an automotive manufacturer. …
Read full abstract