PurposeAsset specificity is a focal feature of buyer–supplier exchanges; however, whether unilateral asset specificity encourages opportunistic value expropriation or promotes trust-based value creation remains controversial. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how institutional forces shape the controversial roles of buyer asset specificity in supply chain relationships.Design/methodology/approachWith a survey of 217 matched manufacturer–supplier dyads in China, the study adopts ordinary least squares regression analyses to test hypotheses.FindingsThe results show that two key institutional forces, guanxi importance and government intervention, play different roles in shaping the value expropriation and value creation roles of buyer asset specificity. As an informal institutional force, guanxi importance weakens the impact of buyer asset specificity on opportunistic value expropriation and facilitates trust-based value creation. Moreover, as a formal institutional force, government intervention amplifies the effect of buyer asset specificity on opportunism but strengthens its connection with trust.Originality/valueBy incorporating an institutional view to investigate how institutional forces affect this “valuable but vulnerable” dilemma of asset specificity, this study reconciles the controversy concerning value expropriation vs value creation and enriches understanding of the critical roles of institutional parameters in supply chain management.
PurposeIn the pursuit of co-exploration, the strength and brokerage dimensions of dyadic ties create a novelty–action trade-off: tie strength facilitates coordination but constraints novelty, while tie brokerage expands knowledge diversity but aggravates coordination difficulty. This study contributes towards a better understanding of this tension by comparing two dimensions of relational ties and examining their contingent values given different environmental factors and exchange characteristics.Design/methodology/approachThe authors used survey data from 194 matched buyer–supplier dyads in China's high-tech industries and employed hierarchical moderated regression analysis to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsThe authors find that compared with tie strength, tie brokerage has a stronger positive effect on co-exploration. Moreover, guanxi importance amplifies the effect of tie strength while decreasing the value of tie brokerage. As market uncertainty increases, the role of tie brokerage becomes more salient. Additionally, tie strength becomes less effective when buyer centralization is high, whereas tie brokerage exerts a stronger impact on co-exploration when an exchange is highly formalized.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the supply chain literature by adopting a relational perspective to integrate relational ties into the study of buyer–supplier co-exploration and by elaborating on the different implications of tie strength and tie brokerage in resolving the novelty–action trade-off. Furthermore, it provides a more nuanced understanding of when distinct dimensions of relational ties are effective, by clarifying boundary conditions in terms of environmental factors and exchange characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.