TEDARİKÇİYE ÖZEL YATIRIM İLE YENİ ÜRÜN PERFORMANSI ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: ÇIKTI VE SÜREÇ KONTROLÜNÜN YÖNLENDİRİCİ ETKİLERİ

Öz

Gelişmekte olan pazarlardaki şirketler, yeni ürünlerin performansını iyileştirmek için tedarikçilerle olan bağlantılarını bu çalışma sonucunda daha net anlaşılacak şekilde yönetmelidir. İlişkisel bakış ve işlemsel maliyet ekonomisi perspektifinden yaklaşarak, iki kontrol mekanizmasının, yani süreç ve sonuç kontrolünün, tedarikçilere özel yatırım ve yeni ürün performansı arasındaki ilişki üzerindeki etkilerini inceliyoruz. Bu çalışmada Türkiye'de 125 ikiliden (yani 125 üretici ve 125 ana tedarikçi) oluşan ikili bir veri kullanarak, tedarikçiye özel yatırımın üreticilerin yeni ürün performansını artırdığını bulduk. Ayrıca, çıktı kontrolünün yeni ürün performansıyla doğrudan ve olumlu bir şekilde ilişkili olduğunu, süreç kontrolünün ise yeni ürün performansı üzerinde olumsuz bir etkiye sahip olduğunu bulduk. Son olarak, bu çalışmada sunulan sonuçlar, çıktı kontrolünün tedarikçiye özel yatırım ile yeni ürün performansı arasındaki ilişkiyi olumlu yönde etkilediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Aksine, ampirik veri analizi süreç kontrolü, tedarikçiye özgü yatırım – yeni ürün performans ilişkisi üzerinde olumsuz bir etkiye sahip olduğunu gösteriyor.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tedarikçiye özel yatırım
• süreç kontrolü
• çıktı kontrolü
• yeni ürün performansı

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUPLIER SPECIFIC INVESTMENT AND NEW PRODUCT PERFORMANCE: THE MODERATING EFFECTS OF OUTPUT AND PROCESS CONTROL

Öz

In order to improve the performance of new products, companies in emerging markets should manage their connections with suppliers in ways that are more clearly understood as a result of this study. Approaching from the perspective of relational view and transactional cost economics theory, we dissect the effects of two control mechanisms, namely process and outcome control on the relationship between manufacturer specific investment in suppliers and new product performance. Using a dyadic data, which consists of 125 dyads (i.e., 125 manufacturers and 125 main suppliers) in Turkey, we find that supplier specific investment increases new product performance of manufacturers. We also find that output control direct and positively relates to new product performance while process control has a negative effect on new product performance. Finally, the results reveal that output control positively moderate the relationship between supplier specific investment and new product performance. Contrarily, process control has a negative effect on the supplier specific investment – new product performance relationship.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Supplier specific investment
• output control
• process control
• new product performance

Kaynakça

1. References Adams, J. H., Khoja, F. M., & Kauffman, R. (2012). An empirical study of buyer–supplier relationships within small business organizations. Journal of Small Business Management, 50(1), 20-40.
2. Asanuma, B. (1989). Manufacturer-supplier relationships in Japan and the concept of relation-specific skill. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 3(1), 1-30.
3. Atuahene‐Gima, K., & Li, H. (2006). The effects of formal controls on supervisee trust in the manager in new product selling: Evidence from young and inexperienced salespeople in China. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(4), 342-358.
4. Bahadir, S. C., Bharadwaj, S. G., & Srivastava, R. K. (2015). Marketing mix and brand sales in global markets: Examining the contingent role of country-market characteristics. Journal of International Business Studies, 46, 596-619.
5. Bain, J.S. (1968) Industrial organization (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
6. Barney, J. B. (1999). How a firm's capabilities affect boundary decisions. MIT Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 137.
7. Bello, D. C., & Gilliland, D. I. (1997). The effect of output controls, process controls, and flexibility on export channel performance. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 22-38.
8. Bensaou, M., & Anderson, E. (1999). Buyer-supplier relations in industrial markets: when do buyers risk making idiosyncratic investments?. Organization Science, 10(4), 460-481.

9. Carbonell, P., & Rodriguez-Escudero, A. I. (2013). Management control, role expectations and job satisfaction of new product development teams: The moderating effect of participative decision-making. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(2), 248-259.
10. Casciaro, T., & Piskorski, M. J. (2005). Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(2), 167-199.
11. Das, T. K., & Rahman, N. (2001). Partner misbehaviour in strategic alliances: Guidelines for effective deterrence. Journal of General Management, 27(1), 43-70.
12. Dekker, H. C. (2004). Control of inter-organizational relationships: evidence on appropriation concerns and coordination requirements. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(1), 27-49.
13. Dong, B., & Sivakumar, K. (2017). Customer participation in services: domain, scope, and boundaries. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 944-965.
14. Dyer, J. H. (1996). Specialized supplier networks as a source of competitive advantage: Evidence from the auto industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 271-291.
15. Dyer, J. H., & Hatch, N. W. (2006). Relation‐specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: creating advantage through network relationships. Strategic Management Journal, 27(8), 701-719.
16. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy Of Management Review, 23(4), 660-679.
17. Dyer, J. H., Singh, H., & Hesterly, W. S. (2018). The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 3140-3162.
18. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994). An introduction to the bootstrap. CRC press.
19. Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Evans, K. R. (2008). Influence of customer participation on creating and sharing of new product value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 322-336.
20. Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Evans, K. R. (2008). Influence of customer participation on creating and sharing of new product value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 322-336.
21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
22. Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1-19.
23. Ghosh, M., & John, G. (1999). Governance value analysis and marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 63(4_suppl1), 131-145.
24. Gundlach, G. T., Achrol, R. S., & Mentzer, J. T. (1995). The structure of commitment in exchange. Journal Of Marketing, 59(1), 78-92.
25. Gundlach, G. T., Achrol, R. S., & Mentzer, J. T. (1995). The structure of commitment in exchange. Journal of Marketing, 59(1), 78-92.
26. He, Y., Lai, K. K., Sun, H., & Chen, Y. (2014). The impact of supplier integration on customer integration and new product performance: The mediating role of manufacturing flexibility under trust theory. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 260-270.
27. Heide, J. B., Wathne, K. H., & Rokkan, A. I. (2007). Interfirm monitoring, social contracts, and relationship outcomes. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 425-433.
28. Hill, C. W. (1990). Cooperation, opportunism, and the invisible hand: Implications for transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 15(3), 500-513.
29. Hill, C. W. (1990). Cooperation, opportunism, and the invisible hand: Implications for transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 15(3), 500-513. Hunt, S. D., & Davis, D. F. (2008). Grounding supply chain management in resource‐advantage theory. Journal of supply chain management, 44(1), 10-21.
30. Huo, B., Guo, M., & Tian, M. (2023). The impact of supply chain specific investments on firms’ market performance: the mediating role of innovation. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 38(1), 208-222.
31. Jaworski, B. J., Stathakopoulos, V., & Krishnan, H. S. (1993). Control combinations in marketing: conceptual framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 57-69.
32. Jayaram, J., & Tan, K. C. (2010). Supply chain integration with third-party logistics providers. International Journal of Production Economics, 125(2), 262-271.
33. Joshi, A. W., & Sharma, S. (2004). Customer knowledge development: antecedents and impact on new product performance. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 47-59.
34. Ju, M., Murray, J. Y., Kotabe, M., & Gao, G. Y. (2011). Reducing distributor opportunism in the export market: Effects of monitoring mechanisms, norm-based information exchange, and market orientation. Journal of World Business, 46(4), 487-496.
35. Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 217-237.
36. Kathuria, A., Karhade, P. P., & Konsynski, B. R. (2020). In the realm of hungry ghosts: multi-level theory for supplier participation on digital platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(2), 396-430.
37. Kim, Y., & Choi, T. Y. (2018). Tie strength and value creation in the buyer-supplier context: A U-shaped relation moderated by dependence asymmetry. Journal of Management, 44(3), 1029-1064.
38. Krajewski, L., Wei, J. C., & Tang, L. L. (2005). Responding to schedule changes in build-to-order supply chains. Journal of Operations Management, 23(5), 452-469.
39. Kreutzer, M., Walter, J., & Cardinal, L. B. (2015). Organizational control as antidote to politics in the pursuit of strategic initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9), 1317-1337.
40. Lewis, M. W., Welsh, M. A., Dehler, G. E., & Green, S. G. (2002). Product development tensions: Exploring contrasting styles of project management. Academy of Management Journal, 45(3), 546-564.
41. Li, Y., Xie, E., Teo, H. H., & Peng, M. W. (2010). Formal control and social control in domestic and international buyer–supplier relationships. Journal of Operations Management, 28(4), 333-344.
42. Lo, D., Zanarone, G., & Ghosh, M. (2022). Contracting to (dis) incentivize? An integrative transaction‐cost approach on how contracts govern specific investments. Strategic Management Journal, 43(8), 1528-1555.
43. Lukas, B. A., & Menon, A. (2004). New product quality: intended and unintended consequences of new product development speed. Journal of Business Research, 57(11), 1258-1264.
44. MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1-23.
45. Mele, C., Russo Spena, T., & Colurcio, M. (2010). Co‐creating value innovation through resource integration. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(1), 60-78.
46. Mesquita, L. F., Anand, J., & Brush, T. H. (2008). Comparing the resource‐based and relational views: knowledge transfer and spillover in vertical alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 29(9), 913-941.
47. Mitsuhashi H. and Greeve H. (2009). “A matching theory of alliance formation and organizational success: Complementarity and compatibility”, Academy of Management Journal, 52, 975-995.
48. Nakos, G., & Brouthers, K. D. (2008). International alliance commitment and performance of small and medium-size enterprises: The mediating role of process control. Journal of International Management, 14(2), 124-137.
49. Ndubisi, N. O., Dayan, M., Yeniaras, V., & Al-hawari, M. (2020). The effects of complementarity of knowledge and capabilities on joint innovation capabilities and service innovation: The role of competitive intensity and demand uncertainty. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 196-208.
50. Nyaga, G. N., Whipple, J. M., & Lynch, D. F. (2010). Examining supply chain relationships: do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ?. Journal of Operations Management, 28(2), 101-114.
51. O'Cass, A., & Heirati, N. (2015). Mastering the complementarity between marketing mix and customer-focused capabilities to enhance new product performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 30(1), 60-71.
52. Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25(9), 833-848.
53. Petersen, K. J., Handfield, R. B., & Ragatz, G. L. (2003). A model of supplier integration into new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20(4), 284-299.
54. Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 707-725.
55. Pulles, N. J., Ellegaard, C., & Veldman, J. (2022). The Interplay Between SupplierSpecific Investments and Supplier Dependence: Do Two Pluses Make a Minus?. Journal of Management, 01492063221087643.
56. Quayle, M. (2001). Purchasing in the UK and Switzerland: an empirical study of sourcing decisions. European Business Review, 13(1), 42-60.
57. Ramsay, J. (2001). The resource based perspective, rents, and purchasing's contribution to sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37(2), 38-47.
58. Ramsey, E., Ibbotson, P., Bell, J., & Gray, B. (2003). E‐opportunities of service sector SMEs: an Irish cross‐border study. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(3), 250-264.
59. Riordan, M. H., & Williamson, O. E. (1985). Asset specificity and economic organization. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3(4), 365-378.
60. Rokkan, A. I., Heide, J. B., & Wathne, K. H. (2003). Specific investments in marketing relationships: Expropriation and bonding effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(2), 210-224.
61. Schiffer, M., & Weder, B. (2001). Firm size and the business environment: Worldwide survey results (Vol. 43). World Bank Publications.
62. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422-445.
63. Sihag, V., & Rijsdijk, S. A. (2019). Organizational controls and performance outcomes: A meta‐analytic assessment and extension. Journal of Management Studies, 56(1), 91-133.
64. Song, M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2008). Supplier's involvement and success of radical new product development in new ventures. Journal of Operations Management, 26(1), 1-22.
65. Takeishi, A. (2002). Knowledge partitioning in the interfirm division of labor: The case of automotive product development. Organization Science, 13(3), 321-338.
66. Turner, K. L., & Makhija, M. V. (2006). The role of organizational controls in managing knowledge. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 197-217.
67. Wallenburg, C. M., & Schäffler, T. (2014). The interplay of relational governance and formal control in horizontal alliances: A social contract perspective. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 50(2), 41-58.
68. Wang, E. T., Tai, J. C., & Grover, V. (2013). Examining the relational benefits of improved interfirm information processing capability in buyer-supplier dyads. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 149-173.
69. Wang, K., Huo, B., & Tian, M. (2021). How to protect specific investments from opportunism: A moderated mediation model of customer integration and transformational leadership. International Journal of Production Economics, 232, 107938.
70. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications: a study in the economics of internal organization. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship.
71. Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: the governance of contractual relations. The journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233-261.
72. Williamson, O. E. (1985). Assessing contract. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1(1), 177-208.
73. Yeniaras, V. (2023). Contractual and relational governance, supplier integration and new product performance: Moderating roles of supplier dependence and supplier-specific investment. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16(1), 83-116.
74. Yeniaras, V., & Gölgeci, I. (2023). When does boundary-spanner burnout connect participation and customer relationship performance? The role of the firm's network centrality and network density. Industrial Marketing Management, 112(July), 1-13.
75. Yeniaras, V., & Kaya, I. (2022). Customer prioritization, product complexity and business ties: implications for job stress and customer service performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(2), 417-432.
76. Yeniaras, V., Kaya, I., & Dayan, M. (2020). Mixed effects of business and political ties in planning flexibility: Insights from Turkey. Industrial Marketing Management, 87, 208-224.
77. Yeniaras, V., & Unver, S. (2016). Revisiting the mediating effect of entrepreneurial behaviour on proactiveness–performance relationship: The role of business ties and competitive intensity. European Management Review, 13(4), 291-306.
78. Yeniaras, V., Di Benedetto, A., & Dayan, M. (2021). Effects of relational ties paradox on financial and non-financial consequences of servitization: Roles of organizational flexibility and improvisation. Industrial Marketing Management, 99, 54-68.
79. Yoon, J., & Moon, J. (2019). The moderating effect of buyer purchasing strategy on the relationship between supplier transaction-specific investment and supplier firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 99, 516-523.