Interfirm Conflict Research Articles

The Impact of Monitoring on Reseller Slackness: The Mediating Role of Channel Conflict

ABSTRACT Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how monitoring influences reseller slackness. We try to answer the following: (1) How do monitoring (behavior monitoring and output monitoring affect reseller slackness? (2) What is the mechanism by which monitoring affects reseller slackness? Methodology/approach The study proposed a theoretical framework using behavior monitoring, output monitoring, and channel conflict as the antecedents, as well as reseller slackness as a consequence. To validate the model, we collected data from resellers across multiple industries in China and analyzed data from 222 valid responses using multiple regression methods. Findings Supplier behavior monitoring decreases reseller slackness, whereas supplier output monitoring increases it. In addition, channel conflict mediates the impact of monitoring on reseller slackness. Research implications Based on the expectation that the partnership will grow in the long term, both partners should minimize channel conflict, and resellers need to curb their slack behavior. While output monitoring can give resellers more freedom to make decisions, this study shows that output monitoring can exacerbate inter-firm conflict and promote reseller slackness. Therefore, managers should be cautious about using output monitoring strategies for reseller slackness management. Practical implications Our findings suggest that behavior monitoring can mitigate channel conflict and reduce reseller slackness. However, output monitoring can facilitate channel conflict, promoting reseller slackness. As a result of these findings, suppliers can better manage reseller slackness by understanding the effects of different types of monitoring. Originality/value This study makes two contributions to existing literature. Firstly, it empirically examines the role of behavior and output monitoring on reseller slackness, thus enriching the existing literature on reseller slackness. Secondly, it further clarifies the specific pathways through which monitoring affects reseller slackness and lays the foundation for future research on managing it.

Mitigating the damage of a global pandemic on the international buyer-supplier relationship: Evidence from Chinese suppliers

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic severely damaged the global supply chain, resulting in markdowns across the global economy. A growing body of research has explored the influence of this global pandemic on firm strategy and performance. However, despite the substantial impact of the pandemic on the global supply chain, no empirical studies have examined its impact on buyer–supplier relationships. Building on the literature on transaction cost economics (TCE) and interfirm governance, this study examines the effects of COVID-19 pandemic severity on interfirm conflict and opportunism in international exchange relationships, as well as the role of contractual and relational governance in shaping these effects. Based on data from a two-period survey of manufacturing firms in China and their foreign buyers with archival data, our findings reveal that pandemic severity increases interfirm conflict and buyers’ opportunism in international exchanges. Moreover, contractual governance aggravates the detrimental effect of pandemic severity on buyers’ opportunism, while relational governance weakens the detrimental effect of pandemic severity on interfirm conflict. When contractual and relational governance are implemented jointly, they can weaken the detrimental effect of pandemic severity on buyers’ opportunism.

Conflict management strategies and their relationships with exchange performance in supply chains

PurposeDeveloping appropriate conflict management strategies (CMSs) is important for a firm to achieve better relationships with its supply chain partners. However, the literature has rarely considered how firms may simultaneously adopt various CMSs to address interfirm conflicts. Accordingly, this study aims to identify manufacturers' CMS archetypes with their main suppliers based on interfirm interdependence structure, further examining the relationship between various CMS archetypes and exchange performance.Design/methodology/approachFirst, the authors theoretically propose a manufacturer's CMS archetypes configured with Rahim's five CMSs based on interfirm interdependence structure. Second, cluster analysis with data from 200 Chinese manufacturers is used to generate a manufacturer's actual CMS archetypes. Third, the authors analyze the relationship between interfirm interdependence structure and Rahim's five CMSs as well as that with the new configured CMS archetypes. Finally, the authors use Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to compare exchange performance disparities among manufacturers using different CMS archetypes.FindingsFirst, cluster analysis results show that three archetypes – cooperative, competitive and cooperative-competitive CMS – emerge during interfirm conflict management. Second, regression analysis shows how interfirm interdependence structure can affect manufacturers' choice of different CMSs and CMS archetypes. Third, ANOVA results indicate that when addressing interfirm conflicts, the strong cooperative, strong competitive and strong cooperative-competitive CMS archetypes can help manufacturers get good relationship satisfaction with main suppliers. Regarding supplier opportunism, while both strong cooperative and strong competitive CMS archetypes are effective at restraining opportunism, the cooperative-competitive CMS archetype may trigger higher levels of supplier opportunism.Originality/valueThis study enriches the interfirm relationship management literature and provides insights for manufacturers to better address interfirm conflicts.

Who should introduce the third-party platform channel under different pricing strategies?

This work is motivated by the emergence of increasing cooperation between retailers and third-party (3P) platforms in China. When both the manufacturer and the retailer can sell through 3P platforms, a question arises: Who should use a 3P platform channel? Having the option of more than one channel, the manufacturer and the retailer may adopt different pricing strategies: a uniform pricing strategy (UP strategy) or differentiated pricing strategy (DP strategy). This study explores the impact of the pricing strategy on the selection of the channel structure and the joint decision of the channel structure and pricing strategy. We establish a Stackelberg game with the manufacturer being the leader and consider three channel structures: the manufacturer uses the 3P platform channel (M), the retailer uses the 3P platform channel (R) and both of them use the 3P platform channel (MR). We find that the pricing strategy has a huge impact on the channel structure selection. Specifically, the intuitive result is that the manufacturer prefers MR, but the retailer prefers R under the DP strategy. However, under the UP strategy, both the manufacturer and the retailer prefer MR (Pareto zone) if the channel competition and the agency fee are low and prefer R (Pareto zone) otherwise. When both the manufacturer and the retailer jointly determine the pricing strategy and the channel structure, for the manufacturer, (MR, DP) is his best choice when the agency fee is reasonable, while the retailer's best choice may be (MR, UP) or (R, DP), depending on the channel competition and the agency fee. We also find that the inter-firm conflict can be reduced due to the manufacturer's use of UP strategy.

Coopetition and sales performance: evidence from non-mainstream sporting clubs

PurposeSmall sports clubs are the life-blood of particular communities, even though many are under-resourced and have difficulties in operating under an individualistic business model. Although coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition) has been recognised as a positive driver of performance, the complexities of this association remain under-researched. Consequently, grounded in resource-based theory and the relational view, the purpose of this current study is to examine the moderating roles of inter-firm conflict and competitive intensity in the coopetition–sales performance relationship.Design/methodology/approachAfter undertaking 25 field interviews, survey data were collected from 151 non-mainstream sporting clubs in New Zealand. This setting was ideal, since it hosts high-degrees of cooperativeness and competitiveness. After assessing the statistical data for all major robustness checks (including common method variance and endogeneity bias), the hypothesised and control paths were tested through a hierarchical regression analysis.FindingsCoopetition had a positive relationship with sales performance, but inter-firm conflict yielded a negative interaction effect. Surprisingly, this link was positively moderated by competitive intensity.Practical implicationsUnder-resourced entrepreneurs (like those in many small sports clubs) should consider cooperating with their competitors, as these strategies can assist them to improve their sales performance. However, they should be careful when engaging in such activities due to the considerable risk that rival firms could behave opportunistically, which might harm their performance. That being said, owner-managers are advantaged if they operate in sectors where there are lots of competitors because there is increased scope to collaborate with “complementary” and trustworthy rivals that can help them to achieve mutually-beneficial outcomes. Indeed, sporting governing bodies (including those that operate on a non-profit basis) should encourage their members to engage in coopetition due to these positive financial consequences.Originality/valueThis investigation contributes to the extant literature by evaluating the competitive forces affecting the link between coopetition and sales performance. Specifically, new evidence emerges on the circumstances where coopetition is (and is not) a performance-enhancing entrepreneurial strategy. Further, this investigation provides unique insights regarding coopetition among non-mainstream sporting clubs, adding new knowledge to the sports entrepreneurship literature. Moreover, by infusing resource-based theory with the relational view, stronger arguments feature how owner-managers can navigate the paradoxical forces that drive coopetition activities. This study ends with several practitioner implications, alongside a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

Enabling roles of relationship governance mechanisms in the choice of inter-firm conflict resolution strategies

PurposeThis study aims to present an integrated framework and investigate the enabling roles of governance mechanisms (i.e. contract, interdependence, trust and communication) in the choice of effective conflict resolution strategies (CRS) that in turn facilitate buyer–supplier relationship (BSR) performance.Design/methodology/approachUsing Web-survey, data are collected from 170 Finnish small- and medium-sized enterprises that have key relationships with suppliers. This study uses structural equation modeling to test the research framework and hypotheses of the study.FindingsThe results based on empirical evidence demonstrate how the firms’ choice of CRS depends on the governance mechanisms. The problem solving approach is the most preferable choice, while the legalistic approach remains the last resort influenced by different governance mechanisms. Interdependence and trust between firms drive them to compromise while resolving inter-organizational conflicts. The selected strategies by firms may also either reinforce or deteriorate relationship performance.Practical implicationsSupply chain managers should recognize the context in which these choices of CRS are made, as it guides them to anticipate their partner’s behavior as well as influences their strategy choice decisions when coping with conflicts. A trustworthy environment supports in providing a certain level of confidence while interdependency drives firms to compromise. The legalistic strategy can hurt the partner’s feelings and diminish relationship performance.Originality/valueConflicts in BSR have become inevitable, but the existing literature is missing evidence on how companies use CRS to enhance relationship performance. Hence, this study differs from those of earlier conflict studies, as it provides a more integrative perspective of buyer–supplier conflict resolution process. This study argues that relationship governance mechanisms can be connected to the choice of effective CRS when tensions arise. Moreover, by assessing the relationship between CRS and relationship performance, this study offers valuable insights to understand that effective strategies enable partners to mutually adapt constructive approaches that facilitate cooperative behavior and accommodate both parties’ interests and needs.

The role of dependence and information sharing on governance decisions regarding conflict

PurposeContemporary supply chain exchanges are governed by both contractual and relational governance mechanisms. However, the decision about when to use these mechanisms is likely driven by key relationship characteristics as well as the context in which they are needed. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the influence of dependence and information sharing on the governance decision within the context of inter-organizational conflict, and assess the degree to which contractual and relational governance approaches lead to more satisfying outcomes.Design/methodology/approachThis research builds on both transaction cost and conflict resolution arguments to build hypotheses. To test the hypotheses, survey data were collected from supply chain professionals regarding specific episodes of conflict and analyzed using an ordinary least squares regression.FindingsThe results show a strong reluctance for the use of relational governance mechanisms to resolve conflict when the relationship is characterized by strong joint dependency or information sharing asymmetries. A strong dependence asymmetry and high degree of joint information sharing are associated with greater use of contractual and relational governance approaches, respectively. Finally, the authors find that contractual mechanisms do not necessarily lead to a dissatisfactory outcome for the manager involved.Originality/valueThis research investigates not only the use of contractual and relational governance mechanisms in inter-firm conflict resolution, but also the relationship specific factors that influence a firm’s decision to leverage either type of governance mechanism.

Effect of Detailed Contracts and Partner Irreplaceability on Interfirm Conflict in Cross-Border Package Tour Operations: Inbound Tour Operator’s Perspective

The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of detailed contracts and partner irreplaceability on interfirm conflict in cross-border package tour operations. The study is based on an analysis of relations between 129 inbound tour operators and their overseas outbound tour operator partners. Data were collected using a standard questionnaire containing questions that capture constructs of interest. Hypotheses were tested with partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS 3. The results show that more detailed contracts significantly reduce conflict. The direct effect of partner irreplaceability on conflict is not significant. However, partner irreplaceability significantly weakens the efficacy of detailed contracts to reduce conflict.

An Integrative Framework of Buyer–Supplier Negative Relationship Quality and Dysfunctional Interfirm Conflict

ABSTRACTPurpose: Problems of relationship quality and interfirm conflict in business-to-business settings are serious concerns that need to be addressed. Thus, the authors have engaged in an extensive review to promote an understanding of these complex issues. This article develops an integrated framework for analyzing wide-ranging relations between individual representatives and patterns of interfirm incompatibility for managerial control.Methodology/approach: The review involves numerous sources that include articles and monographs. A theoretical framework is constructed to integrate fragmented empirical data. In particular, social identity and commitment-trust theories are mobilized for this framework.Findings: The review of studies has a substantial consistency with the theoretical framework. The article outlines a causal chain from interpersonal agent dissimilarities to dysfunctional buyer–supplier relations, culminating in interfirm pathological conflict. Moderating factors in the causal chain are: agent identity differentiation (for interpersonal dissimilarity), supplier relations mismanagement (for buyer–supplier relationship quality), and interfirm opportunism (for interfirm pathological conflict). Buyer–supplier interfirm incompatibility mediates the causal link between interpersonal dissimilarity and buyer–supplier relationship quality. Identity differentiation, the validation of one’s self-image, is introduced as a process that determines buyer–supplier agent interpersonal dissimilarity judgments. This framework uses a contextual perspective. It describes interactions between observations of micro-level phenomena of interpersonal dissimilarities and macro-level models of interfirm fit. From a managerial perspective, interpersonal relations between individual buyer and supplier agents may be further strengthened by such strategies as expanding the scope of the interpersonal relationship, relaxation of role responsibilities, and volunteering business-related contact referrals.Originality/value: A new theoretical framework has been devised to predict and explain relationship quality and interfirm pathological conflict in the business-to-business context. The framework contributes to the value of the knowledge base by serving as a means for building new diagnostic tools for assessment of interfirm behavioral issues affecting exchanges. New concepts are introduced to enhance current literature on business-to-business marketing. The framework provides concreteindicators that operationally define ideas and enable or improve measurement for empirical modeling.

프로젝트 공급망 참여기업의 신뢰와 관계적 규범이 기업 간 협업 및 갈등 그리고 성과에 미치는 영향연구

복잡다단한 프로젝트 기반의 공급망관리는 여러 협력업체와의 지속적인 통합노력이 요구된다. 본 연구의 목적은 프로젝트 공급망에 참여한 바 있는 협력업체들의 성과를 최종적인 종속요인으로 설정하고, 기업 간 협력과 갈등, 신뢰와 관계적 규범 등과 같은 주요 선행요인 간의 상호연관관계를 분석하는데 있다. 프로젝트 공급망 참여기업으로부터 조사한 설문데이타를 토대로 분석한 결과, 기업간 협력과 갈등은 성과에 영향을 미치며, 기업 간에 인지되는 신뢰는 협력과 갈등관계에 영향을 미친다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 다만 관계적 규범은 협력관계에는 영향을 미치지만 갈등해소에는 유의한 영향을 미치지 못한다는 통계적 결과가 도출되었다. 본 연구의 분석결과가 프로젝트 기반의 공급망 운영에 관한 의미있는 시사점을 제시해 줄 수 있을 것으로 사료된다. Supply chain management for complex project requires continuous integration activities with the suppliers and subcontractors. This study proposes the firm performances, trust, relational norms, interfirm conflict and cooperation as major research variables, and collected the survey responses from the suppliers and subcontractors having experiences with complex projects. The statistical results indicate that the cooperation and conflict influence the firm performances, and that the inter-firm trust have some impact on the level of cooperation and conflict. It was also found that the inter-firm cooperation is influenced by relational norm. But on the contrary to our expectation, the relational norm has no significant impact on the inter-firm conflict. These findings may offer the significant implications leading to successful implementation of collaborative supply chain management in the context of project engineering area.

Why Do Business Partners Divorce? The Role of Cultural Distance in Inter-Firm Conflict Behavior

ABSTRACT This research discusses reasons for dissolution of business relationships. By means of a case study of a dispute that ended in a lengthy court battle, an exploration of one predisposing factor that existed before the unfortunate relationship was established is undertaken. Factors addressed are cultural distance in terms of different degree of relative uncertainty avoidance and power distance. Conclusions indicated that, under certain circumstances, cultural distance is so wide that the relationship should never have been established in the first place. The aim is to increase manager's awareness when selecting new business partners, and to improve strategies for recovering faltering relationships. The article ends by discussing managerial implications.

Network perspectives on interfirm conflict: reassessing a critical case in international business

Power and conflict have long been central to research on interfirm relationships in marketing. While studies on power and conflict in distribution channel research have largely taken a dyadic approach, network theories pioneered by the Industrial Marketing and Purchasing (IMP) group have explained power and conflict in terms of the configuration of relationships among firms. This article contrasts dyadic and network interpretations of a ‘critical’ case of conflict between Australian and Japanese firms. As well as showing how network analysis provides a fuller understanding of power and conflict in this case, the article suggests wider issue areas for further theoretical development.

The Effects of Perceived Interdependence on Dealer Attitudes

Channels research has consistently argued that asymmetric channel relationships are more dysfunctional than those characterized by symmetric interdependence. The authors propose that the degree of both interdependence asymmetry and total interdependence affect the level of interfirm conflict, trust, and commitment. Using survey data from automobile dealers, they demonstrate that, with increasing interdependence asymmetry, the dealer's trust in and commitment to the supplier decline while interfirm conflict increases. In addition, they demonstrate that relationships with greater total interdependence exhibit higher trust, stronger commitment, and lower conflict than relationships with lower interdependence. The effects on conflict are consistent with those predicted by bilateral deterrence theory, and the effects on trust and commitment are in accord with the authors’ bilateral convergence predictions.

Determinants of Political Opposition Among Large American Corporations

Political sociologists have focused considerable attention on the extent to which corporate elites are politically unfied. Few studies, however, have examined the extent to which corporations oppose one another. This study examines the deterninants of corporate political conflict by focusing on the extent to which pairs of firms contributed to opposing Congressional candidates in the 1980 elections. Using a sample of 1,596 dyads created by relations among 57flrms, several hypotheses about the effects of interfirm social and economic relations on political opposition are tested. Variables found to decrease the likelihood of political opposition included common stockholdings, director interlocks with the samefinancial institutions, membership in the same primary industry, and market constraint relations between the industries in which firms produce. The findings are consistent with arguments that suggest the importance of social and economic networks in deterring conflict among firms. Political sociologists have focused considerable attention on the extent to which the business community in advanced capitalist societies is unified. Recent works have included analyses of large networks (Domhoff 1983; Mintz & Schwartz 1985; Mizruchi 1982; Useem 1984), iterature reviews (Berg & Zald 1977; Useem 1980), and studies of corporate political behavior (Burris 1987; Clawson & Neustadtl 1989; Clawson, Neustadtl & Bearden 1986; Mizruchi & Koenig 1986,1988; Mizruchi 1989a; Neustadtl & Clawson 1988; Whitt 1982; see all of the above for extensive citations to additional literature in this area). Some studies, especially those by Useem (1984) and Mizruchi (1989a, 1990a; Mizruchi & Koenig 1986; 1988) have examined the conditions or segments of the business community within which unity occurs. Interestingly, however, virtually none of these studies has systematically examined the determinants of corporate conflict. That is, under what conditions do corporations compete head-to-head over particular issues? Most of this work, including my own, has operated under the assumption that the absence of unity is equivalent to (or not *Researchfor this article wasfunded by two grantsfrom the National Science Foundation (SES8619230 and Presidential Young Investigator Award SES-8858669) to the author and by the Department of Sociology at Columbia University. I would like to thank Ron Burtfor his data on market constraint and Gwen Dordick, Raymond Ho, Katherine Hughes, Helen Reid, and Kambiz Sakhaifor their assistance with the collection of the opposition data. Iwould also like to thank three anonymous reviewersfor their comments. Please address correspondence to the author at the Department of Sociology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 0 The University of North Carolina Press Social Forces, June 1990, 68(4):1065-1088 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.58 on Sat, 17 Sep 2016 05:24:52 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 1066 / Social Forces 68:4, June 1990 analytically distinct from) conflict:' In their analysis of unity and opposition in Congressional races, Clawson, Neustadtl, and Bearden (1986) noted an interesting paradox. Political scientists specializing in business political behavior had argued that business was not unified because firms engaged in two very different strategies toward campaign contributions, which Handler and Mulkem (1982) termed and ideological. Although Cawson et al. found a considerable amount of variation in the extent to which particular firms engaged in pragmatic versus ideological strategies, they found that corporations rarely engaged in direct conflict in particular Congressional races. In only 27% of the 461 US. Congressional races in 1980 did fewer than 90% of the business contributions go to one candidate. Business contributions were less than a two-to-one ratio for one candidate in only 6.9% of the races. In other words, although corporations engaged in different strategies, they rarely engaged in opposing ones. This is consistent with Whitt's (1982) finding that corporations tend to avoid direct political conflict. The relative absence of direct conflict among firms does not mean that the conflict that exists is unimportant. On the contrary, just as situations of crisis often unmask important social conflicts that lay dormant beneath the surface (Zeitlin 1974; Mizruchi 1983), the existing situations in which firms go head-to-head may yield important insights into the sources of conflict within the business community. In this study I present and test a model that predicts the conditions under which opposing political behavior occurs. The model is tested with data on contributions to Congressional campaigns by corporate political action committees. In addition, I examine sources of interfirm conflict identified or hypothesized by theorists of corporate political behavior.