Sourcing strategies, practices and effects on organisational performance

Abstract

Today's highly competitive world requires successful businesses to 'reinvent' themselves almost continuously. Manufacturers face tremendous challenges on a variety of fronts. Sourcing has emerged as an integral part of firms' competitive advantage building. One of the distinguishing attributes of effective sourcing strategy is that it plays an integrative role in the firm's strategic planning process. This means firms must have comprehensive strategic decision-making procedures. The study is based on Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) theory and Resource-Based View (RBV) and the results lend support to types of sourcing strategies that have significant effects on both financial and non-financial performance. Specifically both models indicated the 'Make' and 'Buy' Strategies affect non-financial performance more than the financial performance. The results also show both sourcing strategies received most of the supply from local suppliers. All the findings provide new insights into the understanding of sourcing strategies of manufacturing based firms.

Does Service Innovation Act as a Mediator in Differentiation Strategy and Organizational Performance Nexus? An Empirical Study

“…So, it suggested that further study can divide the survey instrument to be completed by various department managers separately to avoid respondent bias and measurement error. Many firms have successfully implemented managerial capabilities, technological capabilities, marketing capabilities, competitive priorities, strategic flexibilities and sourcing activities that improve performance (Naqshbandi & Idris, 2012;Parnell, 2011;Hilman & Mohamed, 2011;Gyampah & Acquaah, 2008;Javalgi, Whipple & Ghosh, 2005). However, the questions of how above mentioned strategic factors could well align with Malaysia hotels' business strategies are still vague.…”

New Tools for Measuring Global Academic Performance

“…Research has been conducted on organizational performance and a number of performance measures have been developed (e.g., Kaplan & Norton, 2005; Lebas & Euske, 2006). Some are based on financial measures (e.g., Kamyabi & Devi, 2012; Liao & Wu, 2009) and nonfinancial indicators (e.g., Gronum, Verreynne, & Kastelle, 2012; Hilman & Mohamed, 2011; Kaplan & Norton, 2005; Kirby, 2005) and others are based on the combination of both financial and nonfinancial measures (e.g., Bititci, Carrie, & McDevitt, 1997; Kaplan & Norton, 2005; MacDougall & Pike, 2003). These indicators are developed to serve profit-oriented organization, which could not be appropriate to be applied to organizations in the academia where teaching, community service, research, and publications are the main business.…”

Establishing a highly competitive university: a strategic management perspective

“…Also, Allen and Helms (2002) reported that organisational strategy has a positive effect on the performance of an organisation. Additionally, recent literature indicates a positive relationship between strategy and performance (Ajagbe et al, 2016;Hilman and Mohamed, 2011;Hilman and Kaliappen, 2015;Ndubisi et al, 2015;Saffarzadeh and Jandaghi, 2013;Sohail and Ghamdi, 2012).…”