مدیریت و توسعه روابط تامین کننده اصلی: مقدمه ای بر موضوع خاص، بحث و گفتگو و مفاهیم
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|21249||2013||4 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Industrial Marketing Management, Volume 42, Issue 2, February 2013, Pages 135–138
This article provides an introduction to this special issue on managing and developing key supplier relationships. Key suppliers are increasingly seen as strategic assets of buying companies which need careful nurturing to fully utilize their potential for value creation. The six articles of this special issue, each providing a distinct contribution to the extant knowledge base on key supplier management, are briefly introduced. Finally, this introduction concludes by providing our vision on the key supply management concept and some suggestions for future research directions.
In recent decades, the management of strategic relationships, be it vertical (e.g. buyer–supplier), horizontal (e.g. strategic alliances), or lateral (e.g. with NGOs), has received increasing interest. Studies have focused upon different relationship types, from setting up joint ventures or other types of alliances with specific suppliers (Houston & Johnson, 2000) to the development of suppliers across the supply base (Modi & Mabert, 2007), and from assessing the quality of buyer–seller relationships (Ivens and Pardo, 2007 and Moorman et al., 1992) to meta-analytical studies aiming at developing generic models of relationship marketing (Geyskens et al., 1999 and Palmatier et al., 2006). In general, companies all have a diverse set of supplier relationships. Within such a supplier portfolio it is common to use some sort of segmentation and to identify those relationships most important or most “key” to the buying company (Ivens, Pardo, Salle, & Cova, 2009). When looking forward in the supply chain, key relationships are usually considered to be part of a key account management (KAM) program, a concept which is also well-established in the marketing literature (e.g. Boles et al., 1999, Boles et al., 1994, Pardo, 1999 and Shapiro and Moriarty, 1984). In a series of empirical studies, authors have tried to identify differences between KAM and the management of accounts that are not key for the performance of a company (e.g. Ivens & Pardo, 2007), analyzed whether different forms of KAM exist (e.g. Homburg, Workman, & Jensen, 2002), or what performance implications the introduction of KAM has (Workman, Homburg, & Jensen, 2003). Key supplier management (e.g. Corsten and Felde, 2005, Pardo et al., 2011 and Ulaga and Eggert, 2006) is another concept firms increasingly implement in order to manage important supplier relationships. We propose that key supplier management (KSM) can be interpreted as the mirror image of key account management. Fundamentally, it deals with the question how to analyze, plan, manage, and control interactions with these key suppliers. Within this research area, Van de Vijver (2009) provided a comprehensive overview of literature on dealing with collaboration in buyer–supplier relationships, whereas there are also several case-based “narratives” showing how close relationships can develop in a good or bad manner (e.g. Anderson and Jap, 2005 and Narayandas and Rangan, 2004). However, the idea of managing a KSM program is not as strongly developed (e.g. Pardo et al., 2011). Meanwhile, managing key suppliers is becoming increasingly important for companies as illustrated by the launch of dedicated key supplier programs and the integration of supplier relationship management in their organizations. Hence, the main objective of this special issue is to further explore the KSM phenomenon: how should it be organized, what are the (organizational) implications, and which benefits can be realized.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The special issue articles each focus on different aspects of KSM. Moreover, they provide their own way of looking at KSM. In general their perspectives and results corroborate the key arguments advanced in the KSM literature so far. We believe that they contribute to advance both scholarly knowledge and managerial practice in the area of KSM. However, we also observe that KSM remains an ambiguous concept.