Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/24100
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiu, G-
dc.contributor.authorAroean, L-
dc.contributor.authorKo, WW-
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-10T16:24:24Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-10T16:24:24Z-
dc.date.issued2022-01-03-
dc.identifier.citationLiu, G., Aroean, L. and Ko, W.W. (2022 ) 'Power, shared goals and supplier flexibility: a study of the HUB-and-spoke supply chain', International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 42 (2), pp. 182 - 205 (24). doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-08-2021-0538.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0144-3577-
dc.identifier.urihttps://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/24100-
dc.description.abstractPurpose Supplier flexibility reflects a supplier's operations-related decisions in responsively providing the necessary inputs to the focal firm. Drawing on resource-dependency theory and transaction cost economics, this study develops a conceptual framework to explain the differential effects of a focal firm's power over supplier flexibility in the context of the hub-and-spoke supply chain (SC). This study also considers the goals shared between the focal firm and its suppliers as an important contingency factor within the framework. Design/methodology/approach This study tests the proposed conceptual framework using dyadic survey data from a hub-and-spoke SC consisting of a large construction contractor and its 100 suppliers in Indonesia. Findings The findings show that coercive power has an inverted U-shaped effect on supplier flexibility, while legal-legitimate power has a U-shaped effect. Furthermore, shared goals positively moderate the U-shaped effect between legal-legitimate power and supplier flexibility. Originality/value This study differentiates between the impacts of coercive power and legal-legitimate power on supplier flexibility in the hub-and-spoke SC. It also demonstrates that shared goals play a moderating role in affecting the impacts of legal-legitimate power on supplier flexibility. These findings also have important implications with regard to integrating resource-dependency theory and transaction cost economics to explain these associations.en_US
dc.format.extent182 - 205 (24)-
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEmeralden_US
dc.rightsThis author accepted manuscript is deposited under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC) licence. This means that anyone may distribute, adapt, and build upon the work for non-commercial purposes, subject to full attribution. If you wish to use this manuscript for commercial purposes, please contact permissions@emerald.com.-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/-
dc.subjectsupplier flexibilityen_US
dc.subjectpoweren_US
dc.subjectshared goalsen_US
dc.subjecthub-and-spoke supply chainen_US
dc.subjectinfluence strategiesen_US
dc.titlePower, shared goals and supplier flexibility: a study of the HUB-and-spoke supply chainen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2021-0538-
dc.relation.isPartOfInternational Journal of Operations and Production Management-
pubs.issue2-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
pubs.volume42-
dc.identifier.eissn1758-6593-
Appears in Collections:Brunel Business School Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfThis author accepted manuscript is deposited under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC) licence. This means that anyone may distribute, adapt, and build upon the work for non-commercial purposes, subject to full attribution. If you wish to use this manuscript for commercial purposes, please contact permissions@emerald.com.464.13 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons