Supply Chain Collaboration, Inter-Firm Trust and Logistics Performance: Evidence from the Tourism Sector

Piboonrungroj, Pairach; Disney, Stephen Michael

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2050703

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Relationship history has the strongest effect on logistics performance ( H6 ). A satisfactory relationship history signifies that both companies are committed to attending to the other’s needs, and the accumulated outcomes enhance linkages among companies, fostering relationship continuity (Piboonrungroj and Disney, 2012). For example, Brazilian LSPs and carriers conduct a large range of activities and formal agreements with their partner shippers annually.…”

Section: Discussion and Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relationship history consists of a series of buyer-supplier interactions over time as an element of relationship development, and it is an important variable to consider in a collaborative relationship (Thomas et al , 2015), as it is an outcome of joint relationship effort and dedicated investments (Whipple et al , 2010; Piboonrungroj and Disney, 2012). A strong relationship history helps cultivate commitment, which is necessary for a trust, flexibility, and reciprocity, within the partnership (Min et al , 2005).…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A strong relationship history helps cultivate commitment, which is necessary for a trust, flexibility, and reciprocity, within the partnership (Min et al , 2005). Although several authors analyze relationship satisfaction as a partnership outcome (Piboonrungroj and Disney, 2012; Whipple et al , 2010), we understand relationship history as an antecedent of collaborative relationships (Prajogo and Olhager, 2012; Li et al , 2015) due to the influence of continuity expectations on joint actions (Heide and John, 1990).…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How logistics performance is affected by supply chain relationships

Aharonovitz

Vieira

Suyama³

2018

IJLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effect of logistics collaboration, meetings, relationship history, and supplier selection on the logistics performance of shippers, carriers, and logistics services providers. Rather than focusing on collaboration and performance, the research provides a wide analysis of how logistics collaboration and performance interact with other organizational practices. Design/methodology/approach To investigate the interaction among the constructs, the authors proposed a structural equation model to understand the influence of meetings, relationship history, supplier selection, and collaboration on logistics performance. The data were obtained through a survey of 199 managers of Brazilian companies in the retail sector. Findings Supplier selection has the strongest effect on logistics collaboration, and relationship history has the strongest effect on logistics performance. Rather than meetings and operational features, the elements of interpersonal skills, organizational culture, and communication appear to be the most important contributors to logistics performance achievements; relationship history leads to better performance. Originality/value This study contributes to our understanding of how and with whom to collaborate by highlighting the relationships among supplier selection, relationship history, meetings, and logistics collaboration and logistics performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How logistics performance is affected by supply chain relationships

Aharonovitz

Vieira

Suyama³

2018

IJLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While reciprocity has been observed in a number of settings among individuals, it is also a relevant characteristic in describing transactions between firms. As Morgan and Hunt (1994) and Piboonrungorj and Disney (2012) show, firms differ in trustworthiness and transactions between firms with higher trustworthiness benefit both parties -suggesting that trustworthiness is an intrinsic attribute that can separate firms. Why do firms differ in trustworthiness?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Morgan and Hunt (1994) find that when both commitment and trust are present in the buyer-supplier relationship it leads to increased efficiency, productivity and effectiveness. Piboonrungorj and Disney (2012) studied supplier relationships in the tourism industry and found that higher levels of inter-firm trust lead to better logistics performance. Doney and Cannon (1997) empirically found a positive correlation between the buying firm's trust in a supplier and the supplier's willingness to make relation-specific investments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Trustworthiness in a Supply Chain Be Signaled?

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between a buyer and its suppliers is important and often relies on factors beyond the terms of a contractual agreement. Buyers can therefore benefit from identifying trustworthy suppliers. We argue that pre-contractual actions by the supplier, for example making costly buyer-specific investments without a long-term contract, can signal a supplier's trustworthiness. We develop a theoretical model to reflect supplier trustworthiness, and identify when a buyer can benefit from identifying trustworthy suppliers. We show that costly relationship-specific investments can serve as a signal of trustworthiness, and that supply chain profits increase when trustworthy suppliers are able to identify themselves in this fashion. We demonstrate the importance of the signaling mechanism using laboratory experiments. The experimental results show that relationship-specific investments lead to more collaborative transactions, with buyers offering higher prices and suppliers reciprocating with higher quality goods. This results in increased profits for both buyers and suppliers. Additionally, we show that the benefit of the relationship-specific investment depends directly on the signaling mechanism. Finally, we show that the benefits of buyer-specific investments for both suppliers and buyers are strengthened when firms interact repeatedly.

show abstract