تعامل با تامین کنندگان در CRM: نقش عدالت در روابط خریدار تامین کننده
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|21251||2013||8 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||5760 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : International Journal of Information Management, Volume 33, Issue 1, February 2013, Pages 20–27
Given the crucial role of suppliers in collaborative supply chains, it is surprising that little attention has been paid to the nature and management of supplier relationships in the implementation of a retailer's Customer Relationship Management (CRM) strategy. To address this gap in the extant literature, the theory of organizational justice is used to explore the extent to which perceived fairness in buyer–supplier relationships supports or inhibits supplier engagement with the CRM process. The rationale is that suppliers who feel fairly treated by key retail customers are more likely to invest resources in the acquisition and use of data central to the retailer's CRM strategy. By empirically testing a conceptual model linking downstream CRM to upstream SRM, the results provide evidence to indicate that customer data use is significantly influenced by perceptions of fairness, particularly with respect to the distribution of rewards, and the transparency of decision-making processes. As a key criticism of CRM centers upon the failure of organizations to exploit the full potential of customer data, the results highlight the usefulness of understanding the relational linkages between buyers and suppliers and the consequential behavior of suppliers in terms of engagement with customer data vital to the success of retailers’ CRM strategies.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
With reference to the main objective of this study, it may be concluded that there is a relationship between how fairly suppliers feel they have been treated, and their willingness to engage with the implementation of their customers’ CRM strategy. While suppliers are recognized as an important source of innovation, they need to be motivated to invest in their customers’ requirement for new product and project developments. Suppliers will be more likely to invest in such activities if buying organizations both understand and offer value, as perceived by suppliers (Ramsay & Wagner, 2009). This reinforces the view that buyers need to make themselves attractive to suppliers, by offering value to suppliers not just in terms of financial benefits, but also in terms of strategically significant non-monetary rewards such as knowledge, competencies (Smals & Smits, 2012) and reputation (Schiele et al., 2011). Buyers also need to understand the sources of such value to suppliers, defined as various buyer behaviors and characteristics that suppliers regard as beneficial or desirable, and which may be specific to individual suppliers (Ramsay & Wagner, 2009). This study confirms that one such source of value is how fairly suppliers feel they are treated. This finding therefore has a number of implications. For practitioners, a number of initiatives could contribute to positive collaborative organizational outcomes, for example recruiting, training and rewarding individual buyers and other functional managers to ensure suppliers are treated fairly both at the organizational level and individual personal relationship level. Joint training with key own brand suppliers in marketing, merchandising and new product development could also support supplier engagement with the implementation of a buying organization's CRM strategy. This also has implications at the policy level, in particular in markets where there is a power imbalance. The adoption of a rigorous conceptual framework that measures fairness from the supplier perspective, and is administered by an independent party, would help inform both industry and policy makers. The study has also contributed to theory by adapting, testing and applying a conceptual model which draws from disciplines other than economics to include behavioral dimensions at both the organizational and individual level within collaborative buyer supplier relationships. In addition, it explores the relationship from the underexplored perspective of the supplier. Although the study identifies the role of fairness in collaborative supply chain relationships, there are a number of limitations to the research. The research is restricted to Supermarket A and their relationship with a small number of regional suppliers, therefore generalizability to other contexts is limited. Additionally, the data results are weakened due to the small sample size, therefore further research may include additional data collection from other regional suppliers to Supermarket A. Further research could consider the relationships between other supermarkets and their suppliers, or other sectors where CRM is key to strategic success. The conceptual model opens up a number of rich research avenues, including the application to other contexts; identifying other positive and negative organisational outcomes, and exploring the role of individual dimensions of justice on performance outcomes in collaborative buyer–supplier relationships.