Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management最新文献

In a platform supply network, a platform owner uses a digital platform to link other firms such as suppliers, customers, logistics firms and other service firms for resource combination to manage supply chains in a comprehensive manner. Resources from different providers are combined on the platform to create value for suppliers. The literature on the Service-Dominant Logic (SDL) has implied that resource density (defined as the optimal combination of resources) is key to value co-creation. Resource density is enhanced when the number and variety of resources and/or their combinability at the opportune time and place are boosted. Yet the process by which the platform owner, complementors (independent companies providing complementary services) and suppliers interact to make this happen is still unclear. This research aims to explore how these three kinds of actors interact to build a resource density situation that guarantees satisfactory value creation in a platform supply network. Based on a qualitative study of a Business-to-Business (B2B) e-commerce digital platform, we identify three mechanisms through which these companies achieve resource density. The findings demonstrate how the mechanisms for achieving resource density manifest in the platform supply network context. We reveal that resource density can be achieved at three different levels, and that artificial intelligence and digital platforms play key roles in optimizing resource density.

Buyer-supplier relationships may be exposed to ethically questionable purchasing practices. This can have major financial and reputational consequences for individuals and organisations. Various studies have assessed procurement professionals' ethical judgements regarding questionable purchasing practices and a handful have estimated the prevalence of these practices. The insights from these studies, however, cannot be straightforwardly extrapolated to today's practice. First, the studies have mostly estimated prevalence without controlling for social desirability bias. The estimation of the prevalence of questionable practices based on subjects' responses is non-trivial, as it may be prone to socially desirable response behaviour. Second, most of the studies were conducted decades ago and the role of the purchasing function has changed significantly ever since. Based on these observations, the present study makes two main contributions to the literature. First, it methodologically extends extant studies by estimating the prevalence of questionable purchasing practices in Europe while controlling for social desirability bias. Specifically, the present study applies the recently developed Extended Crosswise Model to test for socially desirable answers and presents these prevalence estimates in comparison to estimates obtained via a direct questioning technique. The findings highlight the ongoing prevalence of unethical practices in buyer-supplier relationships and the need for organisations to be vigilant in addressing them. Post-hoc analyses indicate that gender, work experience, perceived levels of public sector corruption, and governmental procurement agreements affect the involvement in questionable purchasing practices. Second, the present study examines how earlier and newly identified questionable practices are perceived in the current business environment. The results suggest that ethical perceptions have changed and that most unethical practices are observed in supplier selection. From a theoretical perspective, the present study responds to both the call to further investigate ethical issues in supply chains (Quarshie et al., 2016) and the call to address social desirability bias in purchasing and supply management research (Ried et al., 2022). From a managerial perspective, our research can serve as a starting point for organisations to develop strategies to mitigate their impact and promote ethical behaviour throughout the purchasing process.

Digital supply chain management provided opportunities to mitigate the effects of supply chain disruptions on business activities. Unfortunately, the real-life impacts of digital technology deployment in mitigating supply chain disruptions and enhancing resilience have not been fully evaluated, and it is unclear which digital technology deployment strategy had the greatest effect on firms' operations. This research seeks to fill this gap using data from the annual reports of 123 Chinese automotive manufacturers during the COVID-19 crisis. We focus on two dimensions of digital technology deployment: amount and category. Metrics describing financial and operational performance are used to estimate firms' overall performance. Additionally, this research presents econometric models to assess the effects of digital technology deployment from the two aforementioned dimensions. We found that the deployment of digital technology assets could mitigate negative effects on firms' performance during COVID-19 crisis, albeit with a time lag. Different categories of digital technology deployment, however, had different effects on firms' financial and operational performance. Digital front-end technologies were more efficient in improving the financial performance of the automotive firms. Meanwhile, digital base technologies were more impactful on the firms’ operational performance. This research contributes to the body of research on digital SCM and supply chain risk management by examining the effect of digital technologies from a dynamic capability perspective.

This response to Leuschner et al. (2023) expands upon their conceptualisation of supply chain finance (SCF), arguing for a more strategic perspective. It contends that SCF risks being relegated to an operational role within treasury departments, thus limiting its potential. This response proposes a redefined ideal type for SCF that transcends tactical leverages for shareholder value optimisation, positioning SCF as a key driver for systemic change. The formulation of this new ideal type revolves around three core dimensions: micro-foundations, institutions, and corporate purpose. Micro-foundations require a deeper understanding of credit ratings across supply chains and an incorporation of broader literature, particularly concerning innovative programmes such as PUMA's sustainable SCF. Institutional aspects involve acknowledging and integrating the impact of entities such as rating agencies and governmental bodies on SCF practices. Lastly, aligning SCF with corporate purposes beyond profit maximisation and as a catalyst for systemic change is proposed. This re-conceptualisation aims at revitalise SCF as a strategic tool capable of addressing broader societal challenges and, ultimately, redefining its role in supply chain management.

Supply chain disruptions have a well-documented detrimental impact on firm performance, and recent crises have reaffirmed this effect. While the relationship between a supplier's overall performance and the frequency and duration of supply chain disruptions is often suggested, it lacks substantial empirical evidence. We conducted three comprehensive empirical analyses using panel data involving 352 suppliers to investigate the relationship between supplier performance and supply chain disruptions. Our findings indicate a negative correlation between supplier performance and the frequency and duration of disruptions, that is, poorly performing suppliers are associated with more frequent and longer disruptions. Furthermore, disruption intensity (disruption frequency × disruption duration) exacerbates the negative impact on performance. We find that disruptions have a milder negative performance effect when they emanate from suppliers that have a history as “good performers” compared to “poor performers.” A supplementary analysis shows that disruptions notably affect supplier quality. This study bears significance for practitioners and contributes to the literature on supplier resilience. Our analyses highlight that supplier performance is not only an important predictor for the occurrence of supply chain disruptions but also mitigates (i.e., moderates) the negative effects in case they occur.