Creating Strategic Value from Supply Chain Visibility- the Dynamic
Capabilities View
Hsiao-Lan Wei
Eric T.G. Wang
National Taiwan University of Science and
National Central University Technology
ewang@mgt.ncu.edu.tw
hlwei@cs.ntust.edu.tw
Abstract
This study investigates how supply chain visibility To understand the role of supply chain visibility in can provide strategic advantage in a turbulent creting strtegic vlue, this study pplies the environment.
dynamic capabilities view to investigate the nature of supply chaimportain visibility. This research identifies four
nt measurable constructs of supply chaaain 2. Conceptual background
visibility that are proposed to drive supply chareconfigur
aain
bility nd improve supply chain Firms within rapidly changing environments tend performance. They are sensing for visibility, learning to use supply chain management strategies to increase for visibility, coordinting for visibility, nd their capabilities to control external turbulence [51]. integrating for visibility. Implicaations for better aAlthough different theoretical perspectives focus on understanding the nature and the role of supply chain the different aspects of supply chain visibility and visibility are provided based on the research model benefits, environmental uncertainty plays a key role in and survey results.
many studies. Greater environmental uncertainty calls for higher levels of supply chain visibility to realize 1. Introduction the benefits of supply chain integration derived from
closer relationships. Thus, supply chain visibility
Over the last few years, research topics related to between supply chain members should be increased to
e-procurement, e-SCM, business-to-business reduce uncertainty and enhance supply chain exchanges, and net-enabled organizations have performance [50]. To understand the role of supply emerged [3,7,20,32,40,42]. These studies claim that chain visibility in a turbulent environment, this study the web-based applications can provide many applies the dynamic capabilities view, which operating benefits, e.g. flexibility and time-to-market, addresses firm capabilities in rapidly-changing than traditional inter-organizational systems (IOS), environments, to uncover the nature of supply chain thus eventually leading to financial benefits [3,20,52]. visibility. The reason behind the superior Internet-enabled
integration is the ability to improve information
2.1. Supply chain visibility – the dynamic
visibility across organizations.
capabilities view Supply chain visibility is viewed as the degree to
which supply chain partners have on-hand
The dynamic capabilities view focuses on information related to demand and supply for exploiting internal and external firm-specific
planning and control management [41]. Real time
competencies and developing new ones to address strategic and tactical information is important for
changing environments [54]. Renewing competencies supply chain members to lower uncertainty, improve
and reconfiguring organizational resources are two coordination, and enhance customer satisfaction [3].
key aspects to achieve new forms of competitive As supply chain visibility determines the ways that
advantage. Dynamic capabilities are the unique the physical and cash flows are carried out, it is
processes to integrate, reconfigure, gain and release central to the decision-making process in supply
resources [17,54]. Many specific routines or particular chains [34]. In particular, sharing timely information
processes are identified as dynamic capabilities, e.g., along the supply chain can dramatically reduce the
product development routines, strategic decision demand distortion known as the ‘bullwhip effect’ [33].
making routines, knowledge creation routines, and 1530-1605/07 $20.00 2007 IEEE©1
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
alliance routines [17]. The supply chain management process that integrates new resources into the firm from external sources can be viewed as an important dynamic capability because it may create the modification of operating routines in both the buying and the supplying firms. Moreover, dynamic capabilities need to rely on real-time information to quickly understand the changing situation and adjust building capabilities, a firm can extend its knowledge base from supply chain relationships and explore the external sources of knowledge to improve performance [17,31,54]. Zollo and Winter [60] suggest that dynamic capabilities arise from learning and emerge from three important learning mechanisms: experience accumulation, knowledge articulation, and knowledge codification. For building dynamic actions [17]. Therefore, effective supply chain management typically involves the improvement of supply chain visibility. Based on the dynamic capabilities view, we can understand the nature and the important role of supply chain visibility in supply chain management.
Dynamic capabilities are difficult to conceptualize, operationalize, and measure due to their complex and tacit nature [14], but they can be identified as a specific set of processes [17,44,60]. Accordingly, Pavlou [44] proposes reconfiguration as the deployment process to achieve new configuration, and four enabling processes to facilitate reconfiguration: (a) sensing the environment; (b) learning; (c) coordinating activities, and (d) integrating resources. Based on this framework, supply chain visibility consists of four important constructs: sensing for visibility, learning for visibility, coordinating for visibility, and integrating for visibility.
2.1.1. Sensing for Visibility. Sensing for visibility is important from the dynamic capabilities view as it represents a firm’s ability to sense and acquire real-time information about external, changing environments and to adjust its actions accordingly. In order to react to change, firms in supply chains need to obtain sensing for visibility in the following information areas: information about external-sensed events and information about supply chain change [20]. The most important external information in supply chains is market intelligence about customer needs. Market trend and customer demand information is critical for both responding to market changes and creating new opportunities. Sharing such information allows a firm to sense the needs of its partners and also communicate its own needs to the partners [20]. Firms that engage in broader information exchanges with current partners, including product changes, customer preference changes, and demand changes, are likely to be aware of new opportunities and may be able to sense and adapt to key supply chain events [36].
2.1.2. Learning for Visibility. Learning for visibility represents the extent to which a firm can learn new information and knowledge from supply chain partners. As external knowledge is fundamental to
capabilities through learning from supply chain partners, firms need to exchange information related to their specific domain experience, discuss different ideas and viewpoints, and share performance evaluation and valuable knowledge for improving supply chain performance. Complementary knowledge from external linkages may involve into important sources of new ideas and improve performance [12,13,48]. Frequent contacts and regular meetings among supply chain members can increase the amount of complex knowledge transferred and facilitate the sharing of different interpretation of information. In these interacting processes, people are forced to reflect on how they understand their work and articulate their tacit knowledge as explicit knowledge. The explicit knowledge can then be combined into more complex and systematic sets of new knowledge [43].
2.1.3. Coordinating for Visibility. Coordinating for visibility is central for effective decision-making in a supply chain [46]. Complete information to support specific decision-making can align all decisions to accomplish global system objectives and improve supply chain performance by effective resource allocation. This shared information provides visibility to coordinate the flow of products in the supply chain [49]. Malone and Crowston [39] propose a general definition of coordination: “coordination is managing dependencies.” Three kinds of dependencies need to be coordinated in supply chain management: prerequisite constraints, transfer, and usability [39]. According to coordination theory, coordinating for visibility is able to provide critical information for managing different kinds of dependencies in supply chain relationships. Managing prerequisite dependency is the most common coordination in supply chains. Christiaanse and Kumar [10] indicate that upstream flows of customer orders and downstream flows of shipping information coordinate the operations of supply chains. One way of managing transfer dependency about storage is to share information for controlling the timing that items are delivered and used, such as through just-in-time practices [39]. Another way is to establish stocks of inventory to buffer between two dependent activities. Therefore, some planning related information like
2
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
material requirements plans, order forecasts, production schedules, and transportation schedules can help firms manage transfer dependency. For usability dependency, organizations must realize the product characteristics that customers want. This can be done by market research or by participatory design [39]. Supplier involvement in new product design helps manage this kind of dependency in supply chains.
2.1.4. Integrating for Visibility. Integrating for have adopted new supply chain practices to deliver better products/services to customers, such as postponement strategies, virtual integration, JIT purchasing, vendor managed inventory (VMI), collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR) programs [37,45,55,58]. These practices reconfigure supply chain processes as a whole by integrating physical and information flows of collaborative firms.
Prior research illustrates different supply chain visibility emphasizes the information that can help arriving at collaborative goals and building up a collective identity for a supply chain. The integration of external activities and technologies is important for creating strategic advantage [54]. Dyer [15] asserts that developing a collective identity of a supply chain is very important in supply chain management. Therefore, a strategic mind-set with regard to supply chain partners and a collective identity of a supply chain are important characteristics of supply chain integration. To develop a strong supply chain identity, requires that supply chain members share understanding of key features in a supply chain. Information sharing facilitates the creation of collective meanings and consensus on actions among partners [20]. It provides the understanding of each firm’s capabilities, strengths, goals, and skills and helps achieve goal congruence in a supply chain [29]. As goals become increasingly aligned, the perceived accomplishment of common goals is an important facilitating condition to achieve strategic outcomes. Long-term, collaborative relationships utilizing data exchange will display greater level of integration [18]. In this sense, integrating for visibility can help create a supply chain identity and reach a consensus on supply chain goals and actions
2.2. Supply chain benefits
2.2.1. Supply chain reconfigurability. Supply chain reconfigurability is an important dynamic capability in a supply chain for generating competitive advantage in changing environments. Pavlou [44] suggests that reconfigurability is the ability to deploy new configurations that match the environment and to reconfigure resources with timeliness and efficiency. A new configuration of competencies relates to the innovative redeployment of existing resources as well as to the novel synthesis of existing resources into new applications Therefore, different supply chain configurations may exhibit different levels of operational efficiency and market knowledge creation [38]. It is important for a supply chain to quickly reconfigure its resources into the right combination to address shifting market opportunities. Many firms
configurations from different theoretical perspectives. Distinct configurations are based on different logics of coordination and provide their own ways to deal with environmental uncertainties. Supply chain management strategy may involve choosing a unique value creation logic for different situations. From the information processing view, Bensaou and Venkatraman [6] describe a set of supply chain configurations with different ways to develop effective interorganizational relationships and match the information processing needs. Thus, organizations need to create their own means to balance the needs and capabilities for information processing. In their research of supply chain partnership configurations, Malhotra et al. [38] propose five different supply chain configurations based on the integrative interorganizational processes and partner interface-directed information systems. As distinctions among the configurations can predict performance differences, moving to a higher level performance will require efforts to change supply chain processes and investment in new IT resources [38]. For instance, only those firms that can effectively undertake a new configuration to better match the environment will be able to achieve to greater supply chain performance.
2.2.2 Supply chain performance. Supply chain performance has received substantial attention in supply chain management. Different aspects of time-based performance including delivery speed, new product development time, delivery reliability, manufacturing lead-time, and customer responsiveness are proposed as critical supply chain benefits [23,30,57]. From a more systematic perspective, Beamon [5] argues that three types of performance measures must be included in any supply chain performance measurement system: resource measures (e.g., costs and inventory), output measures (e.g., fill rate, on-time delivery, and customer response time) and flexibility (e.g., volume flexibility, mix flexibility, and new product flexibility). Moreover, Gunasekaran et al. [21] classify a list of key supply chain performance measures at the strategic, tactical,
3
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
and operational levels. Craighead et al. [11] also alternative resource combinations. Better visibility indicate that the benefits of supply chain management allows firms to reconfigure their channel to customer systems can be oriented as strategic or operational. In needs, so that supply chain members can make this regard, Ho et al. [24] suggest that a supply chain appropriate arrangement of products [20]. The broad performance measure must be tied to the strategy range and reach of market information provided by reflected in the choice of competitive priorities supply chain partners opens up the possibilities for including cost, quality, flexibility, and delivery.
rapidly reconfiguring the supply chain to respond to customer demand for value [10].
3. Theoretical framework and hypotheses
Learning for visibility has been proposed as a strategic resource [26]. The supply chain relationship This section discusses the research model and is a flexible resource because it renews a firm’s develops the hypotheses to be tested. In the research knowledge base necessary for using and reconfiguring model illustrated in Figure 1, the dynamic capabilities existing resources [59]. Learning for visibility is view provides the overarching theory base. As important for facilitating supply chain change and discussed in the previous section, supply chain creating new configurations. Sharing each other’s visibility is proposed as an important factor enabling experience in a supply chain can extend the partners’ supply chain reconfigurability, an important dynamic knowledge base and this new knowledge will be capability in supply chains. From the dynamic combined with existing knowledge to create an capabilities view, firms need to respond to uncertain innovative resource configuration. Further, discussing environments through reconfiguring supply chain different ideas in supply chain meetings is an resources. The nature of supply chain visibility, based important knowledge articulation effort and reduces on the theory, consists of four important constructs: the causal ambiguity of supply chain performance, visibility for sensing, learning for visibility, resulting in adaptive adjustments to the existing coordinating for visibility, and integrating for configuration or in enhanced resource reconfiguration visibility based on the dynamic capability framework for more fundamental change [60].
of Pavlou [44].
For effectively allocating and using disperse resources in a supply chain, coordinating for visibility can help organizations recognize the value of their Supply Chainexisting resources and synchronize activities in new configurations [28]. Modern information technology, H2Performancewhich provides a broad range of information Supply Chain Visibilitycommunication and coordination channels, facilitates -Sensing for Visibility supply chain redesign [10]. For example, IT makes it -Learning for Visibility possible to detach information flows from physical -Coordinating for Visibility H1 H3flows and this allows firms to anticipate and prepare -Integrating for Visibility Supply chain for the arrival of a physical shipment. Consequently, Reconfigurabilityfirms can create many different new ways of rapidly reconfiguring supply chains to respond to the market under a broader solution space enabled by greater Figure 1 Research model
coordinating for visibility.
Any single firm cannot execute the implementation of a new supply chain configuration. Supply chain 3.1. Supply chain visibility and supply chain integration is essential for developing new logic for performance
accomplishing architectural innovations in a supply chain. Integrating for visibility can help build a shared Reconfiguration requires the ability “to scan the understanding, create a common ground, and develop environment, to evaluate markets and competitors, a new perceptual view among supply chain partners. and to quickly accomplish reconfiguration and It therefore contributes to reaching consensus and transformation ahead of competition” [54]. For mutual goals at the strategic level, thus facilitating instance, sensing for visibility is prerequisite to an supply chain reconfigurability. Accordingly, we ability of enterprises to quickly adapt to change [20]. propose the following hypotheses:
Only after sensing the need for change in current H1: Supply chain visibility is positively associated
process configuration will firms be able to develop with supply chain reconfigurability.
mechanisms for dealing with change and reconsider
H1a: Sensing for visibility is positively associated
with supply chain reconfigurability.
4
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
H1b: Learning for visibility is positively associated
with supply chain reconfigurability. H1c: Coordinating for visibility is positively
associated with supply chain reconfigurability.
H1d: Integrating for visibility is positively
associated with supply chain reconfigurability.
Supply chain visibility not only can enhance supply chain reconfigurability but also improve supply chain performance directly. Firms would have better performance if their network relationships maximized diverse information access [4]. The flexibility created from new knowledge stocks obtained from external partners can enhance supply chain performance because it gives the supply chain the ability to handle customized orders, to rapidly adjust production capacity, and to respond to target markets [56]. These new knowledge sources prevent firms from overemphasizing existing knowledge and being trapped in limited organizational actions [59], thus enhancing the creation of innovation. Therefore, we present the following hypotheses:
H2: Supply chain visibility is positively associated
with supply chain performance.
H2a: Sensing for visibility is positively associated
with supply chain performance.
H2b: Learning for visibility is positively associated
with supply chain performance.
H2c: Coordinating for visibility is positively
associated with supply chain performance. H2d: integrating for visibility is positively
associated with supply chain performance. Rapidly shifting environments force firms to respond quickly to changing competitive priorities [22]. Time-based capabilities thus become extremely important in order for firms to capture the benefits of flexible response to changing conditions [25,27]. Firms who are able to respond quickly to changes rely on new strategies such as vendor management inventory, just-in-time delivery, and postponement within supply chains. These strategies often require supply chain redesign and resource reconfiguration to achieve cycle time reduction as well as customer satisfaction. From the dynamic capabilities view, supply chain reconfigurability helps recombining existing resources to develop superior new configurations in supply chains. Thus, reconfigurability creates favorable innovations to better match market needs and prevent the obsolescence of outdated configurations with rigidities [35,44]. Empirical evidence also shows that this dynamic capability can influence product quality and cycle time [28]. Therefore, we present the
following hypothesis:
H3: Supply chain reconfigurability is positively
associated with supply chain performance.
4. Methodology
4.1. Data collection
A cross-sectional mail survey was administrated for collecting data from manufacturing firms in Taiwan. A draft survey was developed largely based on measures that were identified in the literature as suitable for the current study. After compiling the English version of the questionnaire, the survey items were first translated into Chinese by a bilingual research associate and verified and refined for its translation accuracy by one MIS professor and two senior doctoral students. The Chinese version of the draft was then pre-tested with 35 senior managers (including purchasing, operation, material management, supply chain management, sales, marketing managers, and CEOs) for reliability and validity, resulting in modifications of the wording of some survey items. Nine hundred and eighty five survey packages were mailed to the senior purchasing manager of the companies from the directory of the 2002Top 1000 largest firms in Taiwan published by Common Wealth Magazine. 187 surveys were returned, with 181 completed surveys available for subsequent analysis, yielding an effective response rate of 18.4%. The average working time of the informants is 13.4 years in their respective firms, indicating the informants should have sufficient knowledge to answer the survey.
Non-response bias was assessed by verifying that early and late respondents did not significantly differ in their demographic characteristics [2]. The respondents were divided into two halves based on the dates of return. Early respondents were identified by selecting those that responded in the first few weeks (n=105). The comparison on company capital and employee numbers between the two groups showed no significant differences based on the independent sample t test (p = 0.60 and 0.58, respectively). Accordingly, non-response bias should not be a problem in this study.
4.2. Measures
Supply Chain Visibility includes four important concepts based on the dynamic capabilities view [44]: sensing for visibility, learning for visibility, coordinating for visibility, and integrating for visibility. The measure of sensing for visibility
5
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
consists of four items that focus on product changes, marketing plans, market trends, and demand or exception, all items loaded more highly on their own
Econstruct than on other constructs. Also, by
customer preference changes [20]. We assessed learning for visibility with six items based on the three learning mechanisms for dynamic capability building, i.e. experience accumulation, knowledge articulation, and knowledge codification [60]. The measure of coordinating for visibility consists of nine items pertaining to notification (e.g. ordering and shipping information), planning (such as material requirements and production schedules), and requirements (e.g. customer needs and product specification). Integrating for visibility is measured with six items that focus on business planning, strategic issues, competencies, business processes, and shared understanding.
Supply Chain Reconfigurability is the ability to deploy new supply chain configurations to match a changed environment and to reconfigure supply chain resources timely and efficiently. We assessed it with a three-item scale that focused on reconfiguring resources to generate new assets, to better match the market, and to create novel combinations [44].
Supply Chain Performance focuses on strategic benefits from supply chain relationships. Strategic benefits are related to learning about customers and markets, new product creation, and business opportunities [53], and were measured .with three items.
5. Result
5.1. Measurement model
The psychometric properties of the scales were assessed in terms of item loadings, discriminant validity, and internal consistency. Item loadings and internal consistencies (also known as composite reliability) greater than .70 are considered acceptable [19]. From the factor analysis results, all the items loaded highly (>.70) on their respective construct. All the constructs also exhibited good internal consistency as evidenced by their composite reliability scores, which were all greater than .90.
Discriminant validity was assessed by two criteria [9]: (1) items should load more highly on the construct that they are intended to measure than on other constructs (i.e. loadings should be higher than cross-loadings) and (2) the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) should be larger than the inter-construct correlations. Cross-loadings were computed by calculating the correlations between a latent variable’s component scores and the manifest indicators of the other latent constructs [1,9]. Without
comparing the inter-construct correlations and the square root of AVE (shaded leading diagonal) as shown in Appendix A, the square root of the AVE for each construct was greater than 0.707 (i.e. AVE > 0.50) and also greater than the correlations between the construct and other constructs, indicating that all the constructs share more variance with their indicators than with other constructs. Overall, the self-report measurement instrument exhibited sufficiently strong psychometric properties to support our subsequent test of the proposed structural model.
4.2. Structural model
The PLS structural model and hypotheses were assessed by examining path coefficients (similar to standardized beta weights in regression analysis) and their significance levels. The significant path coefficients and explained variances for the model are shown in Figure 2. All of the constructs were modeled as reflective. Following Chin [9], bootstrapping (with 200 resamples) was performed to obtain the estimates of standard errors for testing the statistical significance of path coefficients using t test.
Table 1 summarizes the model-testing results. For Hypothesis 1, we find that supply chain visibility is positively associated with supply chain reconfigurability in some aspects. Learning for visibility (t = 4.72, p < 0.01), coordinating for visibility (t = 2.00, p < 0.05), and integrating for visibility (t = 3.25, p < 0.01) have significant impacts on reconfigurability, supporting H1b, H1c, and H1d. However, the direct effect of sensing for visibility on reconfigurability is insignificant (t = 0.17, p > 0.1), thereby H1a is not supported. Hypothesis 2, which posits that supply chain visibility would influence supply chain performance, is only partially supported. Sensing for visibility (t = 2.13, p < 0.05) and integrating for visibility (t = 1.88, p < 0.1) have a significant effect on strategic performance, thereby partially supporting H2a and H2d. The direct effects of learning for visibility and coordinating for visibility on supply chain performance are insignificant, thus H2b and H2c are not supported. As for Hypothesis 3, we find that, supply chain reconfigurability is positively associated with supply chain performance (validating H3, t = 4.78, p < 0.01). Supply chain visibility explains 64% of the variances in supply chain reconfigurability. xplained variances for supply chain performance are 62%.
6
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
operationalizes the important concept of supply chain visibility from the dynamic capabilities view. The proposed model is based on four specific measurable Sensing for constructs, i.e. sensing for visibility, learning for .17(H2a)Visibility visibility, coordinating for visibility, and integrating
Supply Chainfor visibility. These four constructs thoroughly Performanceencompass rich information needs in a supply chain. (R2=.62) In doing so, this study overcomes the ambiguity of
supply chain visibility and opens new avenues for
Learning formore empirical, quantitative, and analytical research .40(H3).42(H1b)Visibility in supply chain management in turbulent
Supply chain .19(H2d)Reconfigurability2=.64) Coordinating.15(H1c)(Rfor Visibility .30(H1d)Integrating Only supported links are for Visibility showed with coefficients Figure 2 PLS results for research model
Table 1 PLS results of path significance
HypothesiPath T-value SignificancesSCVШSVISШSCR (H0.17 No SCR (H1) 1a)LVISШSCR (H1b)4.72*** Yes CVISШSCR (H1c)
2.00** Yes IVISШSCR (H1d)
3.25*** Yes SCVШSVISШSPER (HSPER 2a)2.13** Yes (H2) LVISШSPER (H2b)1.29 No CVISШSPER (H2c)1.24 No IVISШSPER (H2d)1.88* Yes SCRШSCRШSPER (HSPER 3)4.78*** Yes (H3) SCV=Supply Chain Visibility; SVIS=Sensing for Visibility; CVIS= Coordinating for Visibility; LVIS=Learning for Visibility; IVIS= Integrating for Visibility; SCR= Supply Chain Reconfigurability;SPER= Supply Chain Performance Note: *, **, *** indicates significant at p<0.1; p<0.05; p<0.01 respectively (two-tailed test) 6. Conclusion This study identifies, conceptualizes, and environments. Also, the dynamic capabilities view
provides a theoretical foundation to investigate the role of supply chain visibility in obtaining superior performance and reveals that it can improve
performance not only directly but also indirectly through supply chain reconfigurability. Overall, the
findings of this study provide certain empirical support to the proposed research model.
This study introduces the dynamic capabilities view in IS and supply chain management areas, providing a different perspective to investigate IT value in SCM. For better understanding how IT can enable competitive advantage in turbulent environments [47] and how supply chain management capabilities can create value in response to uncertain environments, the proposed model lays the groundwork for exploring the role of supply chain visibility as a potential driver of competitive advantage through
dynamic capabilities in turbulent environments. Moreover, we extend the dynamics capabilities view
beyond the traditional firm level. The finding
contributes to the relational view [16] in the sense that
dynamic capabilities can be also interorganizational in nature and they can help create competitive advantage in a collaborative relationship.
Since supply chain management strategy is
increasingly important in turbulent environments, managers must be very adaptable in order to prepare for environmental changes. As a variety of possibilities for flexibility and coordination are
inherent in the Internet era, managers may be trapped
into implementing various information systems for redesigning their supply chains [10]. However, many firms may mainly focus on improving coordination information exchange, which is just part of the overall supply chain visibility a firm needs to respond to environmental changes effectively. Malhotra et al. [38] find that extensive coordination information may be detrimental as such information may swap enterprises in certain configurations and lead to preoccupation. To avoid failing to sense the market changes due to lack of rich information, this study provides four
important visibility for managers to enhance supply
chain performance. Managers can investigate their
7
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
current needs in these different aspects of supply chain visibility and invest in the parts that they need to improve.
7. References E
aa
E
[12] Decarolis, D.M. and Deeds, D.L., \"The Impact of
Stocks and Flows of Organizational Knowledge on Firm
Performance: An mpirical Investigation of the Biotechnology Industry\Strategic Management Journal,1999, 20(10), 953-968. [13] Deeds, D.L. and Hill, C., \"Strategic Alliances and the Rate of New Product Development: An Empirical Study of New Biotechnology Firms\Journal of Business Venturing, 1996, 11(1), 41-58. [14] Diericks, I. and Cool, K., \"Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage\E[1] Agarwal, R. and Karahanna, E., \"Time Flies When You're Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage\MIS Quarterly,2000, 24(4), 665-694.
aaaa[2] Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S., \"stimating Non-Response Bias in Mail Surveys\Journl of Marketing Research, 1977, 14, 396-402. [3] Barua, A., Konana, P., Whinston, A.B., and Yin, F., \"An Empirical Investigation of Net-Enabled Business Value\MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(4), 585-620. [4] Baum, J.A.C., Calabrese, T., and Silverman, B.S., \"Don't Go It Alone: Alliance Network Composition and Starup's Performance in Canadian Biotechnology\Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21(3), 267-294. [5] Beamon, B., \"Measuring Supply Chain Performance\International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 1999, 19, 275-292. [6] Bensaou, M. and Venkatraman, N., \"Configurations of
Interorganizational Relationships: A Comparison between U.S. And Japanese Automakers\Management Science, 1995, 41(9), 1471-1492. [7] Cagliano, R., Caniato, F., and Spina, G., \"E-Business Strategy: How Companies Are Shaping Their Supply Chain through the Internet\International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2003, 23(10), 1142-1162. [8] Chen, I.J. and Paulraj, A., \"Toward a Theory of Supply Chain Management: The Constructs and Measurements\Journl of Opertions Mngement, 2004, 22(2), 119-150. [9] Chin, W.W., The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, ed. G.A. Marcoulides, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1998, 295-336. [10] Christiaanse, . and Kumar, K., \"Ict-nabled Coordination of Dynamic Supply Webs\International Journl of Physicl Distribution & Logistics Management, 2000, 30(3/4), 268-285. [11] Craighead, C.W., Patterson, J.W., Roth, P.L., and Segars, A.H., \"Enabling the Benefits of Supply Chain Management Systems: An Empirical Study of Electronic Data Interchange (Edi) in Manufacturing\International Journal of Production Research, 2006, 44(1), 135-157.
Management Science, 1989, 35(12), 1504-1511. [15] Dyer, J.H., Collaborative Advantage: Winning through Extended Enterprise Supplier Networks, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000. [16] Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H., \"The Relationship View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage\Acdemy of Mngement ReviewE, 1998, 23(4), 660-679. [17] isenhardt, K.M. and Martin, J.A., \"Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They?\" aStrategic Maanaa
gement Journal, 2000, 21(10-11), 1105-1121. [18] Elgarah, W., Falaleeva, N., Saunders, C.C., Ilie, V., Shim, J.T., and Courtney, J.F., \"Data Exchange in Interorganizational Relationships: Review through Multiple Conceptual Lenses\The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 2005, 36(1), 8-29. [19] Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., \"Evaluating Structural Equations Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error\EJournal of Marketing Research,1981, 18(1), 39-50. [20] Gosain, S., Malhotra, A., and Sawy, O.A.., \"Coordinating for Flexibility in E-Business Supply Chains\Journal of Management Information Systems,2004, 21(3), 7-45. [21] Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., and Tirtiroglu, E., \"Performance Measures and Metrics in a Supply Chain Environment\International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2001, 21(1/2), 71. [22] Handfield, R.B. and Bechtel, C., \"The Role of Trust and Relationship Structure in Improving Supply Chain Responsiveness\Industril Mrketing Mngement,2002, 31(4), 367-382. [23] Handfield, R.B. and Pannesi, R.T., \"Antecedents of Leadtime Competitiveness in Make-to-Order Manufacturing Firms\Interntionl of Journl of Production Research, 1995, 33(2), 511-537. [24] Ho, D.C., Au, K.F., and Newton, E., \"Empirical Research on Supply Chain Management: A Critical
8
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
Review and Recommendations\International Journal Eof Production Research, 2002, 40, 4415-4430.
[25] Hult, G.T.M., Hurley, R.F., Giunipero, L.C., and Nichols, J.E.L., \"Organizational Learning in Global Purchasing: A Model and Test of Internal Users and Corporate Buyers\Decision Sciences, 2000, 31(2), [37] Magretta, J., \"The Power of Virtual Integration: An Interview with Dell Computer's Michael Dell\Harvard Business Review, 1998, 76, 72-84. [38] Malhotra, A., Gosain, S., and Sawy, O.A.., \"Absorptive Capacity Configurations in Supply Chains: Gearing for Partner-nabled Market Knowledge 293-325. [26] Hult, G.T.M., Jr., D.J.K., and Jr., .L.N., \"Organizational Learning as a Strategic Resource in Supply Chain Management\Journal of Operations Management, 2003, 21(5), 541-556. E[27] Hult, G.T.M., Nichols Jr, E.L., Giunipero, L.C., and Hurley, R.F., \"Global Organizational Learning in the Supply Chain: A Low Versus High Learning Study\Journal of International Marketing, 2000, 8(3), 61-83. [28] Iansiti, M. and Clark, K.B., \"Integration and Dynamic Capability: Evidence from Product Development in Automobiles and Mainframe Computers\Industrial and Corporate Change, 1994, 3(3), 557-605. EE[29] Jap, S., \"Pie-xpansion fforts: Collaboration Processes in Buyer-Seller Relationships\Journal of Marketing Research, 1999, 36, 461-475. [30] Jayaram, J., Vickery, S.K., and Droge, C., \"An Empirical Study of Time-Based Competition in the North American Automotive Supplier Industry\International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 1999, 19, 1010-1033. E[31] Johnson, J.L. and Sohi, R.S., \"The Role of Relational Knowledge Stores in Interfirm Partnering\Journal of Marketing Research, 2004, 68(3), 21-36. [32] Kauffman, R.J. and Mohtadi, H., \"Proprietary and Open Systems Adoption in -Procurement: A Risk-Augmented Transaction Cost Perspective\Journal of Management Information Systems, 2004, 21(1), 137. [33] Lee, H.L., Padmanabhan, V., and Whang, S., \"Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect\Management Science, 1997, 43(4), 546-558. [34] Lejeune, M.A. and Yakova, N., \"On Characterizing the 4 C's in Supply Chain Management\Journl of Operations Management, 2005, 23, 81-100. [35] Leonard-Barton, D., \"Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development\Strategic Management Journal, 1992, 13, 111-125. [36] Madhavan, R., Koka, B.R., and Prescott, J.E., \"Networks in Transition: How Industry vents (Re)Shape Interfirm Relationships\Strategic Management Journal, 1998, 19(5), 439-459.
Creation\MIS Quarterly, 2005, 29(1), 145-187. [39] Malone, T.W. and Crowston, K., \"The Interdisciplinary Study of Coordination\ACM Computing Surveys, 1994, 26(1), 87-119. [40] Min, H. and Galle, W.P., \"Electronic Commerce Usage in Business-to-Business Purchasing\International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 1999, 19(9), 909-921. a[41] Mohr, J. and Spekman, K., \"Characteristics of Partnership Success: Partnership Attributes, Communication Behavior and Conflict Resolution Techniques\Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15, 135-152. [42] Mukhopadhyay, T. and Kekre, S., \"Strategic and Operational Benefits of Electronic Integration in B2b Procurement Processes\Management Science, 2002, 48(10), 1301. [43] Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., and Konno, N., \"Seci, Ba and Leadership: A Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation\Long Range Planning, 2000, 33, 5-34. [44] Pavlou, P.A., It-Enabled Dynamic Capabilities in New Product Development: Building Competitive Advantage in Turbulent EnvironmentsE
, in Anderson
Graduate School of Management. 2004, University of California, Riverside: Riverside. [45] Raghunathan, S., \"Interorganizational Collaborative Forecasting and Replenishment Systems and Supply Chain Implications\Decision Sciences, 1999, 30(4), 1053-1071. [46] Sahin, F. and Robinson, E.P., \"Flow Coordination and Information Sharing in Supply Chains: Review, Implications, and Direction for Future Research\Decision Sciences, 2002, 33(4), 505-536. [47] Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A.S., and Grover, V., \"Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of It in Contemporary Firms\MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(2), 237-263. [48] Shan, W. and Walker, G., \"Interfirm Cooperation and Starup Innovation in the Biotechnology Industry\Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15(5), 387-394. [49] Simatupang, T.M., Sandroto, I.V., and Lubis, S.B.H., \"Supply Chain Coordination in a Fashion Firm\Supply Chain Management, 2004, 9(3), 256-268.
9
Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2007
[50] Srinivasan, K., Kekre, S., and Mukhopadhyay, T., \"Impact of Electronic Data Interchange Technology on Jit Shipments\Management Science, 1994, 40(10), 1291-1304. [51] Stonebraker, P.W. and Liao, J., \"Envrionmental Turbulence, Strategic Orientation: Modeling Supply Chain Integration\International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2004, 24(10), 1037-1054. [52] Straub, D., Rai, A., and Klein, R., \"Measuring Firm Performance at the Network Level: A Nomology of the
Business Impact of Digital Supply Networks\EJournal of
Management Information Systems, 2004, 21(1), 83-114. [53] Subramani, M.R., \"How Do Suppliers Benefits from Information Technology Use in Supply Chain Relationship?\" MIS Quarterly, 2004, 28(1), 45-73. [54] Teece, D., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A., \"Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management\Strategic Management Journal, 1997, 18(7), 509-533. [55] van Hoek, R.I., \"Postponement and the Reconfiguration Challenge for Food Supply Chains\Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,1999, 4(1), 18-34. [56] Vickery, S., Calantone, R., and Droge, C., \"Supply Chain Flexibility: An Empirical Study\The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 1999, 35(3), 16-24. [57] Vickery, S.K., Droege, C.L.M., Yeomans, J.M., and Markland, R.., \"Time-Based Competition in the Furniture Industry: An Empirical Study\Production and Inventory Management Journal, 1995, 36(4), 14-21. [58] Waller, M., Johnson, M.., and Davis, T., \"Vendor-Managed Inventory in the Retail Supply Chain\Journal of Business Logistics, 1999, 20(1), 183-203. [59] Zahra, S.A. and George, G., \"Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension\Academy of Management Review, 2002, 27(2), 85-203. [60] Zollo, M. and Winter, S.G., \"Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities\Organization Science, 2002, 13(3), 339-351.
Appexdix A
Correlation matrix and composite factor reliability scores aConstructsCRMeanSTD1 2 3 4 5 6 SCV
1. SVIS0.923.530.730.86 2. CVIS0.953.760.740.66 0.81 3. LVIS0.933.580.700.65 0.59 0.82 4. IVIS 0.943.490.740.71 0.63 0.84 0.865. SCR
0.963.420.880.60 0.59 0.76 0.750.94
6. SPER 0.933.510.790.60 0.48 0.70 0.700.740.90SCV=Supply Chain Visibility; SVIS=Sensing for Visibility;
CVIS= Coordinating for Visibility; LVIS= Learning for Visibility; IVIS= Integrating for Visibility;
SCR= Supply Chain Reconfigurability;SPERa
= Supply Chain PerformanceItems on diagonal (shaded) represent the square root of the AVE scores.
Appexdix B
Survey Items of Supply Chain Visibility
Sensing for Visibility
Upcoming product or service related changes,
promotion and marketing plans, market demand trends and forecasts, demand shifts, and changes in customer preferences Coordinating for Visibility
Ordering information, shipping information,
payment processing information, transportation schedules, material requirements, order forecasts, production schedules, customer preferences or needs information, and new product requirements information
Learning for Visibility
Performance evaluation information,` new ideas,
different knowledge, different points of view, new insights, documents containing valuable knowledge for performance improvement Integrating for Visibility
Business plan establishment information,
strategic issues, common supply chain issues, supplier skills and competencies, core business processes, and shared understanding of supply chain information
10
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容