The US auto industry has undergone tremendous changes during the past decade. Companies have increased their level of out-sourcing and are relying more heavily on their supply chain as a source of their competitive advantage. Thus, determining which suppliers to include in the supplier chain has become a key strategic consideration. However, previous studies of supplier selection have not considered a company's position in the supply chain. In this paper, we compare supplier-selection practices based on a survey of companies at different levels in the auto industry. Our findings rebut the common thinking that indirect suppliers who are more involved in commodity purchasing emphasize initial price and de-emphasize relational considerations. We learned that selecting suppliers based on the potential for a cooperative, long-term relationship is just as important to direct and indirect suppliers as it is to the auto assemblers. We also learned that price is one of the least important selection items, regardless of position on the supply chain. Further, contrary to the existing understanding that quality and delivery are separate constructs, they formed a single construct in our study. To summarize the empirical results, no differences among the auto assemblers, direct suppliers, and indirect suppliers were found for the importance placed on consistency (quality and delivery), reliability, relationship, flexibility, price, and service. Statistically significant differences were found between the auto assemblers and indirect suppliers on the importance placed on technological capability and financial issues.

As competition moves beyond a single firm into the supply chain, researchers are beginning to explore quality management (QM) in a supply chain context. The literature suggests that supply chain management (SCM) consists of internal practices, which are contained within a firm, and external practices, which cross organizational boundaries integrating a firm with its customers and suppliers. Supplier quality management and customer focus are two QM practices that are also clearly in the domain of SCM. In this study we investigate how these two supply chain management-related quality practices lead to improved performance and examine the practices that precede and mediate those relationships. In doing so, we replicate and extend the relationships among the QM practices and their effects on firm performance suggested in Kaynak [Kaynak, H., 2003. The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management 21, 405-435] using survey data gathered from firms operating in the U.S. The inclusion of customer focus and supplier quality management in the QM model supports the importance of internal and external integration for quality performance. Implications of the results for researchers and practitioners are discussed, and further research implications are suggested. #

Reducing the time required to develop new products has become an important factor of competition in many industries. This paper empirically tests whether management of the buyer‐supplier interface affects supplier‐related delays and, in turn, if these delays slow the overall project. Product development engineers and engineering managers in 79 assembly industry firms were surveyed to gather the data for this study. Results of analysis of covariance show that working with a supplier that has strong technical capabilities reduces supplier‐related delays. However, the benefits of commonly cited interface management techniques such as early supplier involvement, increasing the supplier's responsibility for design, and greater buyer‐supplier communication were not confirmed. A significant relationship was found between supplier‐related delays and overall project delays. The priority that the buyer's top management places on the project and the degree of technical change were also significantly related to overall project delays.

No abstract

No abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to extend our understanding of the importance of supplier dependence on the buyer's firm and its relationship to supplier training and supplier involvement in product development with respect to the supplier's performance. Design/methodology/approach -A random sample of 231 firms provided the data that were analyzed for this study. Using structural equation modeling, a sub-set of the sample consisting of 166 manufacturing firms was used to test the five hypothesized relationships in the model. Findings -The main findings indicate that supplier dependence is a significant contributor to increasing supplier participation in buyer supported training and increasing supplier involvement in product development. Also, supplier training and supplier involvement are significant contributors to the supplier's operational performance.Research limitations/implications -The model tested in this study used a random sample of US manufacturing firms. Thus, future studies should include a random sample of non-manufacturing firms and firms outside of the USA. The study explored the buyer's perspective only; a study of suppliers may provide further insights to extend this study. Although the use of supplier training was relatively low, significant relationships were identified. Practical implications -Based on this research, key suppliers can better understand the relationships among supplier dependence, supplier training, supplier involvement in product development and their effects on supplier's operational performance. Originality/value -Although supplier development has emerged in previously published studies as a critical factor in improving performance, the role of supplier dependence on the buyer has not been empirically examined. Further, an integrated research model that investigates the relationships among supplier dependence, supplier training, supplier involvement in product development and supplier's operational performance has not been offered.

No abstract

No abstract