A Taxonomy of Supply Networks

Harland, Christine; Lamming, Richard; Zheng, Jurong; Johnsen, Thomas

doi:10.1111/j.1745-493x.2001.tb00109.x

Cited by 237 publications

(163 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

154

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sustainability 2017, 9, 127 9 of 16 We conducted a survey that was formed based on an existing study, shown in Table 2, to verify the research model and hypotheses in the analysis. To perform the survey systematically, questionnaires were sent to SCM experts and a pilot test was completed.…”

Section: Scm Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Power Type and Partnership Quality Affect Supply Chain Management Performance?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A supply chain management (SCM) system is a strategic cooperative that organically integrates all supply chains to improve the performance of a company. The greatest critical success factor of SCM is partnership. Without cooperation between companies, SCM performance is limited. Does this imply, therefore, that companies within the supply chain can achieve mutual transactions equally? If the power between companies is unequal, how does this affect their partnership? The focus of this study is to assess whether power types enhance SCM performance through partnerships. We categorize power types as mediated and non-mediated. Mediated power is categorized based on coercion, reward, and legitimate, while non-mediated power is categorized based on information, expert, and reference. Therefore, this study examines how power types form a causal partnership relationship within the supply chain, and performs an empirical investigation on how the partnerships influence SCM performance.

show abstract

Section: Scm Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Power Type and Partnership Quality Affect Supply Chain Management Performance?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many researchers in the field of supply networks have commented on the need for them to develop and operate in accordance with their specific context (Gadde and Håkansson 2001;Harland et al 2001;Holmen et al 2003). As Holmen, Håkansson and Pedersen (2003) observe, both macro and micro contexts are likely to impact the of network structure adopted.…”

Section: Network Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Shared learning in supply networks: evidence from an emerging market supply network

Mason

Oshri

Leek

2012

European Journal of Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 SHARED LEARNING IN SUPPLY NETWORKS: EVIDENCE FROM AN EMERGING MARKET SUPPLY NETWORK STRUCTURED ABSTRACTPurpose: Firms face the challenge of developing learning capabilities that enable them to work as part of an effective business network. While an extensive literature examines learning capabilities within the firm little research examine the shared learning that occurs between networked firms. The paper explores how a manufacturer and businesses services provider learn to develop their supply network. Specifically, the paper investigates four areas of shared learning, central to supply network success and discusses the development of shared learning capabilities.Methodology/Approach: An in-depth, longitudinal case study of a supply network which involves an engineering company and two business services suppliers. Findings:The study suggests that developing shared learning capabilities in four key areas is imperative for network success: (i) business relationships, (ii) customers' desired values, (iii) firm boundaries, and (iv) network structures. Furthermore, there are three distinct types of shared learning that were common to all fours areas of shared learning identified. These are; strategic shared learning; operational shared learning and exchange shared learning. Research limitations:The research findings are based on a single case study. Additional research across multiple case studies is needed in order to verify the findings reported. Practical implications:The four learning areas have significant managerial implications for the way managers develop mechanisms to capture and share learning associated with developing supply networks. that organizations most likely to innovate are those which posses the ability to learn and share information within inter-firm relationships. However, the majority of the extant literature focuses on learning within firms rather than on shared learning between firms. Such research emphasises that learning varies depending on the learning context (Lane et al. 2001) and that over time, the basic conditions for network success change. In this regard, members of the network need shared learning, over time, to adjust to the changing conditions that may affect the success of their network (Bessant et al. 2003).Shared learning is essential because the competitive success of a value system (such as a supply network) depends upon the learning and development of the whole system, not just the core firm. Despite these observations the vast majority of studies have focused on understanding the key determinants of network success within a single firm. This study seeks to focus on learning capabilities between firms within the supply network. The purpose of this research is to explore how a supply network learns to adjust to the changing conditions 3 that affect network success. Network success is defined as the member's motivation to engage in future transactions between members of the network (Gallivan 2001a). The study contributes to our understanding of shared learning capabilities ...

show abstract

“…Harland et al (2001) determined that networks differ in degrees of complexity, concentration of power balance, environmental diversity and stage of network development. Grandori and Soda's (1995) classification focuses on power balance and divides networks in: (1) symmetric, parity-based or equity networks and (2) asymmetric, centralized or nonequity networks.…”

Section: On Networkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Grandori and Soda's (1995) classification focuses on power balance and divides networks in: (1) symmetric, parity-based or equity networks and (2) asymmetric, centralized or nonequity networks. Harland et al (2001) classifies networks according to their behaviour: (1) opportunistic networks and (2) non-opportunistic networks.…”

Section: On Networkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cooperation ‐ the Form of Sustainable Tourism Industry in Latvia / Bendradarbiavimas – Darnaus Latvijos Turizmo Forma

Šavriņa

Grundey

Berzina

2008

Technological and Economic Development of Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper draws attention to building networking and partnership amongst the market players of tourism industry in Latvia. The authors define cooperation as a process, which manifests in all fields of business operations, e.g. it occurs when two or more parties (enterprises) have business objectives which are mutually dependent. There are many ways and forms of cooperation that are of choice for every entrepreneur -formal and informal, vertical and horizontal, centralised and decentralised and others; it is just needed to evaluate all the benefits and contributions when to choose to compete and when to cooperate.

show abstract

A Taxonomy of Supply Networks

Cited by 237 publications

References 12 publications

How Do Power Type and Partnership Quality Affect Supply Chain Management Performance?

How Do Power Type and Partnership Quality Affect Supply Chain Management Performance?

Shared learning in supply networks: evidence from an emerging market supply network

Cooperation ‐ the Form of Sustainable Tourism Industry in Latvia / Bendradarbiavimas – Darnaus Latvijos Turizmo Forma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About