a b s t r a c t A system of interconnected buyers and suppliers is better modeled as a network than as a linear chain. In this paper we demonstrate how to use social network analysis to investigate the structural characteristics of supply networks. Our theoretical framework relates key social network analysis metrics to supply network constructs. We apply this framework to the three automotive supply networks reported in Choi and Hong (2002). Each of the supply networks is analyzed in terms of both materials flow and contractual relationships. We compare the social network analysis results with the case-based interpretations in Choi and Hong (2002) and conclude that our framework can both supplement and complement case-based analysis of supply networks.

a b s t r a c tIncreasingly, scholars recognize the importance of understanding supply network disruptions. However, the literature still lacks a clear conceptualization of a network-level understanding of supply disruptions. Not having a network level understanding of supply disruptions prevents firms from fully mitigating the negative effects of a supply disruption. Graph theory helps to conceptualize a supply network and differentiate between disruptions at the node/arc level vs. network level. The structure of a supply network consists of a collection of nodes (facilities) and the connecting arcs (transportation). From this perspective, small events that disrupt a node or arc in the network can have major consequences for the network. A failure in a node or arc can potentially stop the flow of material across network. This study conceptualizes supply network disruption and resilience by examining the structural relationships among entities in the network. We compare four fundamental supply network structures to help understand supply network disruption and resilience. The analysis shows that node/arc-level disruptions do not necessarily lead to network-level disruptions, and demonstrates the importance of differentiating a node/arc disruption vs. a network disruption. The results also indicate that network structure significantly determines the likelihood of disruption. In general, different structural relationships among network entities have different levels of resilience. More specifically, resilience improves when the structural relationships in a network follow the power-law. This paper not only offers a new perspective of supply network disruption, but also suggests a useful analytical approach to assessing supply network structures for resilience.

The concept of structural embeddedness refers to the importance of framing suppliers as being embedded in larger supply networks rather than in isolation. Such framing helps buying companies create more realistic policies and strategies when managing their suppliers. Simply put, the performance of a supplier is dependent on its own supply networks. By adopting the concept of structural embeddedness, we learn that a buying company needs to look at a supplier's extended supply network to arrive at a more complete evaluation of that supplier's performance. By doing so, a buying company may do a better job of selecting suppliers for long‐term relationships and may also find value in maintaining relationships with poorly performing suppliers who may potentially act as a conduit to other companies with technological and innovative resources.

We introduce a new type of critical supplier-the nexus supplier-that becomes evident when we consider suppliers from a network perspective. The extant literature focuses on the importance of strategic suppliers and identifies strategic suppliers as critical due to their significant impact on a buying firm's profit and risk position. These strategic suppliers are considered one-at-a-time and tend to be top-tier suppliers. In contrast, a nexus supplier can come from anywhere in a multitier supply network and is critical due to its network position and the resultant portfolio of interorganizational ties. In this study, we offer a theory of the nexus supplier by integrating the supply management and social network literature. The theory is presented in the form of typologies, which articulate three ideal types of nexus suppliers and how they distinctively influence a focal buying firm's operational performance. We use real-world examples to build our arguments. We discuss implications of the nexus supplier for both theory and practice.

The cooperative-adversarial dichotomy has served as the prevailing buyer-supplier relationship typology in the literature. Cooperative buyersupplier relationships have been associated with closely tied relationships, while adversarial relationships have been equated to arms-length relationships. We propose, however, that this perspective is overly simplified; a cooperative relationship is orthogonal to a closely tied relationship and an adversarial relationship to an arms-length relationship. That is, there can be a closely tied yet adversarial relationship and an arms-length yet cooperative relationship. We theorize the buyer-supplier relationship in two orthogonal aspects-(1) relational posture, that is, how two firms regard each other (as cooperative partners or as adversaries) and (2) relational intensity, that is, how much two firms' operations are interlinked (closely tied or arms-length). By considering the two aspects concurrently, this article proposes an expanded typology of buyer-supplier relationships. We label a closely tied and cooperative buyer-supplier type as "deep"; a closely tied but adversarial type as "sticky"; an arms-length and adversarial type as "transient"; and an arms-length but cooperative type as "gracious." We then present an analysis that supports the orthogonality of the two relational dimensions. This analysis suggests that the expanded relationship types are associated with different relational outcome tradeoffs. The data are collected from a global, large Japanese automaker and 163 of its suppliers in North America. Overall, the results provide empirical support for the expanded buyer-supplier relationship typology.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe different ways in which a buyer and supplier can be embedded in a dyadic relationship and how these differences influence patterns of inter-firm innovation activities and outcomes. Specifically, to address the relative paucity of theoretical work on how dyadic configurations influence parties’ joint innovation behavior, this study examines how different buyer-supplier embeddedness (BSE) configurations change the four choices that pertain to the levels of involvement buyers and suppliers exhibit in inter-firm innovation activities. These choices concern the processes buyers use to engage suppliers; the scope of efforts in each party; the locus of effects determining the beneficiaries; and the extent to which parties disclose private innovations within the relationship. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on social embeddedness literature, the authors conceptualize dyad level, BSE in two dimensions: relational and structural. The relational dimension describes the quality of relationship, while the structural dimension describes the intensity of exchanges between the parties. Together these dimensions allow the authors to map the differences in BSE configurations and provide a basis for exploring their links to inter-firm innovation patterns. Findings – The authors demonstrate the configurational approach to the innovation patterns in inter-organizational setting. That is, the authors conclude that different configurations of BSE are likely to produce distinctive patterns of choices for inter-firm innovation activities. Originality/value – This study applies social embeddedness perspective to conceptualize dyadic BSE. Adoption of this concept allows dimensionalizing the dyadic relationships into two distinct dyadic elements, relational, and structural dimensions. Also, the concept has rich implications for how partner firms interact and share information. The dyad’s innovation potential and patterns are considered based on the configurations of dyadic embeddedness.

This study integrates two disparate genres within tie-strength literature into one model to investigate the mechanisms for value creation in the buyer-supplier context. This research brings together the opposite ends of the tie-strength continuum: the “weak ties,” which are instrumental in tapping into novel ideas and emerging technologies, and the “strong ties,” which promote joint resource investments and capability development. By doing so, we bring salience to the existence of “intermediate ties” (i.e., the ties of moderate strength) and their implications for value creation. Even though the intermediate ties are likely most common in the buyer-supplier context, they have been given short shrift in the literature. We predict a U-shaped relation, where weak ties and strong ties are more effective than intermediate ties in value creation. Furthermore, we explore the moderating role of dependence asymmetry. Our hypotheses are tested using survey data from a major global automaker and its North American suppliers. The results demonstrate that both the weak and strong buyer-supplier ties lead to higher value creation, whereas intermediate ties do not increase value creation. Also, the study illustrates that, overall, asymmetric buyer-supplier ties show diminished value creation, and this moderating effect is particularly pronounced for intermediate ties.

Our study extends the emerging inter-firm-level theorization of dynamic capabilities by articulating how firms can develop and adapt their resource bases through supplier relations.Specifically, we aim to explore how different embedded relational aspects function together or separately to induce various inter-firm routines that presumably underpin the buying firm's dynamic capabilities. The research design is a multiple case study involving 34 buyersupplier dyad-level innovation events across six product groups of three multinational buying firms in the Pharmaceuticals, Aerospace, and Fast-Moving Consumer Goods sectors. Our inductive analysis suggests that the social, cognitive, and physical aspects of relational embeddedness play roles, in a cumulatively sequential fashion, in inducing three distinctive routine types-unilateral, quasi-unilateral, and bilateral-in the buyer-supplier dyads that underpin the three clusters of dynamic capabilities-sensing, seizing, and transforming, respectively. Furthermore, our study identifies two contingencies that explain variances in the observations and inferences. We therefore investigate the 'black box' of dynamic capabilities in inter-firm contexts, elucidating the roles and association of relational embeddedness and patterned activities (routines) in these relationships.