![Sample our Economics, Finance,Business & Industry journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5931/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Economics-Finance-Business-Industry.jpg"})
Abstract
It is extremely difficult for small- and medium-sized (SMS) suppliers to survive and secure a stable performance without effectively dealing with manufacturer opportunism. Given the strategic importance of safeguarding or reducing manufacturer opportunism for SMS suppliers, our understanding on the issue is very limited. This research develops and tests a conceptual model that describes the linkages of the antecedent variables, such as supplier capabilities (core capabilities, operations capabilities), transaction-specific investments and interpersonal networks to the outcome variable, manufacturer opportunism. The conceptual model proposes that the antecedent variables affect manufacturer opportunism through two important mediating variables, a manufacturer's dependence on a buyer and a manufacturer's trust of a buyer.
Seven hypotheses are derived on the basis of our research model and theoretical background. Data were collected through a survey. Participating organizations are SMS suppliers which have had exchange relationships with large manufacturers in Korea. The list of suppliers was obtained from purchasing managers at three large manufacturers, which are each internationally well-recognized organizations in semi-conductors, electronics, and automobile parts, respectively .
Covariance structure analysis was performed to test the hypotheses of this research. The major findings can be summarized as follows. First, the path from a supplier's core capability to a manufacturer's dependence as hypothesized in H1a is not significant. The path from the operations capability to dependence as hypothesized in H1b is significant.
Second, the path from a supplier's TSIs (Transaction-specific investments) to a manufacturer's dependence is not significant, whereas that from a supplier's TSIs to a manufacturer's trust is highly significant. Thus H2a is not supported, whereas H2b is supported.
Third, the path from a supplier's interpersonal networks to a manufacturer's trust is significant, implying that H3 is supported, unlike H4 – a manufacturer's opportunism is not significantly influenced by the manufacturer's dependence. This is consistent with H5: the path from a manufacturer's trust to the manufacturer's opportunism is negative and highly significant. Implications and future research directions are discussed.
中小型供应商没有一个有效地和制造商投机主义的处理方式，要想存活和确保一个稳定的性能是非常困难的。有不少的研究是为了找到与制造商机会主义行为有关的因素，这篇文章报告了影响投机主义的资产专用性、环境不确定性、关系规范、关系终止成本、依附性、利益关系和共享价值（Anderson & Narus, 1990; Joshi & Stump, 1999; Macneil, 1980; Morgan & Hunt, 1994）。
对于中小型供应商，应该保护还是减少制造商机会主义的争论，我们理解的还十分有限。我们提出用企业的资源基础观用来形容中小型供应商面对大型制造商的处理行为。通过资源的基础观可以知道，公司的竞争优势是来源于公司的能力（Barney, 1990）。制造商们为获取竞争优势将会委托与那些能起到杠杠作用，并使他们自身性能提高的供应商(Palmatier, Dant, & Grewal, 2007)。由于那些供应商的能力引发的消费者依赖性，这些供应商可以通过消费者依赖性将他们的能力转化为竞争优势(Scheer, Miao, & Garrett, 2010)。
这个调查提出和证实了一个概念模型，这个模型描述了前因变量、供应商能力（核心能力和运作能力）、专项投资、人际网络和结果变量（制造商机会主义）的关系。这个概念模型表明了前因变量通过两个重要的中间变量影响制造商投机主义，那就是制造商依赖于消费者和制造商委托于消费者。根据研究模型和理论背景，我们提出了7个假设。
| 假设1a： | = |
供应商提供的核心能力与制造商对这个供应商的依赖性是成正相关的 |
| 假设1b： | = |
供应商的运作能力与制造商对这个供应商的依赖性是成正相关的 |
| 假设2a： | = |
供应商的TSI与制造商对这个供应商的依赖性是成负相关的 |
| 假设2b： | = |
供应商的TSI与制造商对这个供应商的信任是成正相关的 |
| 假设3： | = |
供应商的人际网络与制造商对这个供应商的信任是成正相关的 |
| 假设4： | = |
制造商对供应商的依赖性是正相关于制造商投以主义对供应商的抵制 |
| 假设5： | = |
制造商对供应商的信任是负相关于制造商投以主义对供应商的抵制 |
数据来源于一次调查，参加调查的组织是韩国那些已经改变了与制造商关系的中小型供应商，这些供应商的名单是从三个大型制造商的采购经理处得到的，这些制造商分别是在半导体、电子、汽车零部件行业公认的国际组织。
通过协方差进行了结构分析，证实了这次调查得出的假设。通过X检验、适当指数以及数据的均方根残值计算，得出这个模型整体是符合的。X检验(χ2(364)=539.06, p<.01)是重要的，均方根残值（0.055）是略微的大于0.05。但是，整体的适合指数超过了0.90这个一般被认为是可行的界限：AGFI=.90, NFI=.90, NNFI=.94, CFI=.95, 和 IFI=.95 (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006)。
对这个模型使用标准化的估计方法，用来检验这些假设，这个结果指出，供应商核心能力影响制造商对它的依赖性的假设是不显著的，假设1a是不成立的。在假设1b中：供应商的运营能力影响制作商对它的依赖性的假设是显著的，因此，供应商的运营能力和制作商对它的依赖性是正关系的假设是被支持的。
供应商的TSI影响制造商对它的依赖性是不显著的，但是供应商的TSI与制作商对它的信任是十分显著的，因此假设2a是不成立的，然而假设2b确实成立的。
供应商的人际网络影响制造商对它的信任是显著的，表明假设3是成立的。和假设4不同，制造商的依赖性对制造商投资主义的影响不显著，假设4是不成立的。但是符合假设5，制造商的信任对制作商投资主义的影响是负相关而且显著的，因此假设5是成立的。讨论了所涉问题及今后的研究方向。