Triads

Abstract

Triads examine the associations among three actors, involving, at a minimum, the analysis of two dyadic ties among three interrelated actors. By making apparent the indirect ties bearing on actors, the triad is the smallest unit of analysis for a network. Despite extensive conceptual and empirical work, little systematic attention is given to the triad in the marketing literature. This article reviews literature spanning multiple academic disciplines and makes three contributions. First, it provides an overview of the triad concept combining sociological insights with more recent work emerging in operations management and marketing. Second, the article identifies three distinct forms of triadic relationships in existing literature: (1) brokerage, focused on the action of the third between two others; (2) mediation, describing different mechanisms by which a dyadic relationship affects and is affected by a relationship with a third party; and (3) coalition, capturing the configuration and evolution of ties in the three-actor system as a whole. Finally, this article develops an initial research agenda for triadic marketing research.

How can logistics service providers foster supply chain collaboration in logistics triads? Insights from the Italian grocery industry

“…However, in line with NT "the expansion of the alliance and growing density of ties" (Siltaloppi and Vargo, 2017;p. 404) can be emblematic of trust and LSPs may serve as third-party enablers of trust-building processes fostering the adoption of SCC initiatives.…”

“…Logistics service providers and supply chain collaboration within logistics triads Supply chain relationships have mainly been explored from a dyadic perspective (Soosay and Hyland, 2015). Nonetheless, dyads may not be appropriate to understand the complexity of modern supply chains completely, as they cannot capture the multidirectional and complex relationships that "constitute contexts for collaboration, competition, and value creation" (Siltaloppi and Vargo, 2017;p. 396).…”

“…Supply chain relationships have mainly been explored from a dyadic perspective (Soosay and Hyland, 2015). Nonetheless, dyads may not be appropriate to understand the complexity of modern supply chains completely, as they cannot capture the multidirectional and complex relationships that “constitute contexts for collaboration, competition, and value creation” (Siltaloppi and Vargo, 2017; p. 396). Therefore, the use of triadic models to capture the basic essence of networks in supply chains has been proposed (Borgatti and Li, 2009; Choi and Wu, 2009; Huang et al , 2020).…”

“…In a triad, each member can act as an intermediary between the other two, playing a dual-task whether to ally or to separate (Choi and Wu, 2009). In a setting with a seller/manufacturer, a buyer/retailer and an LSP, internal or external coalitions may emerge where two parties form alliances to turn back the power and authority of the stronger party (Salo et al , 2009; Siltaloppi and Vargo, 2017). On the other hand, LSPs can behave as non-partisan mediators, generating harmony and balancing out sources of conflict between two disputing parties (Simmel, 1950).…”

“…Triads also represent the minimum units of analysis needed to investigate collaboration adequately (Larson and Gammelgaard, 2001), as dyads cannot explain how the relationship between two players may affect a third actor or another relationship (Choi and Wu, 2009; Borgatti and Li, 2009; Huang et al , 2020). However, previous studies in the managerial literature mainly explored dyadic setups (Siltaloppi and Vargo, 2017) and few contributions explored the figure of LSPs in logistics triads or investigated the collaborative efforts required to implement SCC solutions (Vlachos and Dyra, 2020). Moreover, the available literature has focussed on LSPs as conductors of material and information flows, overlooking the relational enablers of SCC (Yu and Huo, 2018).…”