Supplier selection in the aftermath of a supply disruption and guilt: Once bitten, twice (not so) shy

Abstract

The supply management literature assumes that supplier selection is devoid of emotions and unaffected by the history and experience associated with a previously-selected supplier. In this paper, we relax these assumptions. Specifically, we consider the following sourcing opportunity: a sourcing professional had (alternatively, had not) recommended a critical-component supplier that originated an avoidable (alternatively, unavoidable) supply disruption (aka, the "disrupted supplier"). In the aftermath of this supply disruption, the sourcing professional is asked to recommend a supplier for a new-to-beoutsourced critical component (i.e., one unrelated to the component whose flow was interrupted), taking into consideration the influence of guilt as an emotional reaction to the supply disruption. Analyses of data from 286 sourcing professionals participating in a scenario-based, roleplaying experiment reveal that sourcing professionals experience higher levels of guilt when (a) they (versus their predecessor) had been responsible for selecting a disrupted supplier and (b) they deem the supply disruption to be controllable (versus uncontrollable) by the disrupted supplier. Guilt-laden sourcing professionals are then more likely to recommend a riskier albeit more advantageous supplier for a new-to-be-outsourced critical component. Our results provide the first evidence that prior supplier selection decisions gone awry influence future supplier selection decisions through the emotion of guilt. Moreover, they demonstrate that supply disruptions in one context have carryover effects on future sourcing decisions in unrelated contexts-an insight that is absent from the literature on supply disruptions.

You're driving me crazy! How emotions elicited by negative driver behaviors impact customer outcomes in last mile delivery

“…The simultaneous investigation of discrete emotions also offers an important contribution. Previous studies have conceptualized emotions as a unidimensional construct of purchase satisfaction (Griffis et al, 2012) or focused on a specific emotion such as anger (Polyviou et al, 2018) or guilt (Polyviou et al, 2022).…”

Advancing OSCM scientific knowledge by replicating empirical findings: Step‐by‐step procedure and illustration for transformative replication endeavors

“…For a BCE or TRF Replication, 12 Polyviou et al (2022) examined the effects of responsibility on post-disruption supplier selection via the emotion of guilt and, with these effects, conditional on controllability. The conceptual model in Polyviou et al (2022) differs from that in Polyviou et al (2018). As such, Polyviou et al (2022) does not constitute a replication of Polyviou et al (2018).…”

“…Table C3 in Online Appendix C confirmed the successful manipulation of controllability and responsibility. Note that full details about subjects, their recruitment, vignette design, experimental procedure, and experimental checks are reported in Polyviou et al (2022), who investigated guilt and not anger as an emotional response to a supply disruption and effects on post-disruption supplier selection instead of post-disruption supplier retention. 12…”

“…The conceptual model in Polyviou et al (2022) differs from that in Polyviou et al (2018). As such, Polyviou et al (2022) does not constitute a replication of Polyviou et al (2018). a H3a: Recovery leads experience greater anger for a supply disruption deemed controllable, rather than uncontrollable, by the disrupting supplier and are subsequently less likely to retain the disrupting supplier post disruption.…”