Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Information system innovations and supply chain management: Channel relationships and firm performance

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores how innovations surrounding supply chain communication systems (SCCS) affect channel relationships and market performance. Drawing on the resource-based view of the firm, the study hypothesizes that certain SCCS innovations can be viewed as firm resources that enhance channel capabilities, which in turn affect a firm’s market performance. The empirical research is based on 184 responses from a survey with U.S. supply chain and logistics managers using structural equation modeling as the analytic method. The results suggest that the effect of applied technological SCCS innovations on channel capabilities is mediated by interfirm systems integration. In contrast, administrative SCCS innovations enhance information exchange and coordination activities directly. Furthermore, the influence of applied technological innovations for SCCS is not strong enough to affect either responsiveness of the partnership or firm performance, whereas administrative innovations for SCCS affect both.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, Helen, Virpi Havila, and Asta Salmi. 2001. “Can You Buy a Business Relationship? On the Importance of Customer and Supplier Relationships in Acquisitions.”Industrial Marketing Management 30 (7): 575–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach.”Psychological Bulletin 103 (3): 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, Richard P., Youjae Yi, and Lynn W. Phillips. 1991. “Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research.”Administrative Science Quarterly 36 (3): 421–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, Jay. 1991. “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage.”Journal of Management 17 (1): 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bello, Daniel C. and David I. Gilliland. 1997. “The Effect of Output Controls, Process Controls, and Flexibility on Export Channel Performance.”Journal of Marketing 61 (1): 22–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowersox, Donald J., David J. Closs, and M. Bixby Cooper. 2002.Supply Chain Logistics Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——, and Theodore P. Stank. 1999.21st Century Logistics: Making Supply Chain Integration a Reality. East Lansing: Michigan State University and Council of Logistics Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, Erik. 1993. “The Productivity Paradox of Information Technology.”Communications of the ACM 36 (12): 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Lorin Hitt. 1996. “Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending.”Management Science 42 (4): 541–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr. 1979. “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs.”Journal of Marketing Research 16 (1): 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemons, Eric K. and Michael C. Row. 1992. “Information Technology and Industrial Cooperation: The Changing Economics of Coordination and Ownership.”Journal of Management Information Systems 9 (2): 9–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1993. “Limits to Interfirm Coordination Through Information Technology: Results of a Field Study in Consumer Packaged Goods Distribution.”Journal of Management Information Systems 10 (1): 73–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Closs, David J. and Katrina Savitskie. 2003. “Internal and External Logistics Information Technology Integration.”International Journal of Logistics Management 14 (1): 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collis, David J. 1994. “Research Note: How Valuable Axe Organizational Capabilities?”Strategic Management Journal 15 (Special Issue): 143–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cote, Joseph A. and M. Ronald Buckley. 1987. “Estimating Trait, Method, and Error Variance: Generalizing Across 70 Construct Validation Studies.”Journal of Marketing Research 24 (3): 315–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, Paul J. and Walter W. Powell. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited—Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.”American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esper, Terry L. and Lisa R. Williams. 2003. “The Value of Collaborative Transportation Management (CTM): Its Relationship to CPFR and Information Technology.”Transportation Journal 42 (4): 55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, Claes and David F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models With Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.”Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1): 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatignon, Hubert and Jean-Marc Xuereb. 1997. “Strategic Orientation of the Firm and New Product Performance.”Journal of Marketing Research 34 (1): 77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, Robert M. 1996. “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm.”Strategic Management Journal 17 (Winter Special Issue): 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez-Espallardo, Miguel and Narciso Arcas-Lario. 2003. “The Effects of Authoritative Mechanisms of Coordination on Market Orientation in Asymmetrical Channel Partnerships.”International Journal of Research in Marketing 20 (2): 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettinger, William J., Varun Grover, Subashish Guha, and Albert H. Segars. 1994. “Strategic Information Systems Revisited: A Study in Sustainability and Performance.”MIS Quarterly 18 (1): 31–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Dong-Jin, M. Joseph Sirgy, James R. Brown, and Monroe Murphy Bird. 2004. “Importers’ Benevolence Toward Their Foreign Export Suppliers.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 32 (1): 32–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Ira. 2001. “Logistics and Electronic Commerce: An Interorganizational Systems Perspective.”Transportation Journal 40 (4): 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Alexander Talalayevsky. 1997. “Logistics and Information Technology: A Coordination Perspective.”Journal of Business Logistics 18 (1): 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, Thomas W., Joanne Yates, and Robert I. Benjamin. 1987. “Electronic Markets and Electronic Hierarchies.”Communications of the ACM 30 (6): 484–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, Michael A. and Jonathan W. Kohn. 1993. “Logistics Strategy, Organizational Environment, and Time Competitiveness.”Journal of Business Logistics 14 (2): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, Jakki and John R. Nevin. 1990. “Communication Strategies in Marketing Channels: A Theoretical Perspective.”Journal of Marketing 54 (4): 36–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Ravipreet S. Sohi. 1995. “Communication Flows in Distribution Channels: Impact on Assessments of Communication Quality and Satisfaction.”Journal of Retailing 71 (4): 393–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Robert M. and Shelby D. Hunt. 1994. “The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 58 (3): 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukhopadhyay, Tridas, Surendra Rajiv, and Kannan Srinivasan. 1997. “Information Technology Impact on Process Output and Quality.”Management Science 43 (12): 1645–1659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, Michael E. and Victor E. Millar. 1985. “How Information Gives You Competitive Advantage.”Harvard Business Review 63 (4): 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, Thomas C. and Anne Dent-Micallef. 1997. “Information Technology as Competitive Advantage: The Role of Human, Business, and Technology Resources.”Strategic Management Journal 18 (5): 375–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Bob and Mike Mackay. 1998. “IT Supporting Supplier Relationships: The Role of Electronic Commerce.”European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 4 (2/3): 175–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Dale S., Patricia J. Daugherty, and Theodore P. Stank. 1993. “Enhancing Service Responsiveness: The Strategic Potential of EDI.”Logistics Information Management 6 (3): 27–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, MB, Raj Echambadi, and Jeffrey S. Harrison. 2001. “Alliance En-trepreneurship and Firm Market Performance.”Strategic Management Journal 22 (6/7): 701–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stank, Theodore, Michael Crum, and Miren Arango. 1999. “Benefits of Interfirm Coordination in Food Industry Supply Chains.”Journal of Business Logistics 20 (2): 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, E. Burton. 1994. “Information Systems Innovation Among Organizations.”Management Science 40 (9): 1069–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Neil C. Ramiller. 1997. “The Organizing Vision in Information Systems Innovation.”Organization Science 8 (5): 458–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, David A. 2003. “Supply Chain vs. Supply Chain.”Computer-world 37 (November 10): 44–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truman, Gregory E. 2000. “Integration in Electronic Exchange Environments.”Journal of Management Information Systems 17 (1): 209–244.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florida State University, Florida, USA

    Daekwan Kim

  2. Michagan State University, Michigan, USA

    S. Tamer Cavusgil & Roger J. Calantone

Authors
  1. Daekwan Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Tamer Cavusgil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roger J. Calantone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Daekwan Kim (dkim@cob.fsu.edu) is an assistant professor of marketing and international business in the College of Business at Florida State University. He received his Ph.D. from Michigan State University. His research interests include the impact of information technology on channel relationships and marketing strategies, role of information technology in global supply chain management, channel relationships, global brand management, and family conglomerates in emerging markets.

S. Tamer Cavusgil (cavusgil@msu.edu) is University Distinguished Faculty and the John W. Byington Endowed Chair in Global Marketing, the Eli Broad Graduate School of Management, Michigan State University. His research interests include international marketing strategy, coordination in the global company, and emerging markets. He is the founding editor ofAdvances in International Marketing and a governor of the Academy of Marketing Science.

Roger J. Calantone (rogercal@msu.edu) is the Eli Broad Chaired University Professor of Business and is University Distinguished Faculty at Michigan State University. He is program director of the university specialization program in Information Technology Management and is also adjunct professor of economics. His publications and research are mostly in the areas of product design and development processes, decision support systems, and organization process metrics and control.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, D., Cavusgil, S.T. & Calantone, R.J. Information system innovations and supply chain management: Channel relationships and firm performance. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 34, 40–54 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305281619

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305281619

Keywords

Search

Navigation