Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 6, Issue 3, 2011
A Perspective for Supply Chain Management: Building a
Conceptual Framework
Luai E. Jraisat
Faculty of Business and Finance, American University of Madaba (AUM), Jordan
P.O. Box 2777, Amman 11821, Jordan
Telephone: +962 6 55 48 230/32
Email: l.jraisat@aum.edu.jo
Abstract
Supply chain relationships play a significant role in supply chain management to respond to dynamic export
market changes. If the dyadic exporter-producer relationships are still weak, they impede the emergence of a
high performance supply chain within an export market. This paper develops a conceptual framework for
understanding how exporter-producer relationships include not only the relationship system but also network
and transaction systems; and thus introduces a more integrated way of looking at supply chain management
based on information sharing as a key process between exporters and producers. To achieve this aim, supply
chain relationships are reviewed from the perspectives of relationship marketing theory, network theory and
transaction cost theory. Findings from previous research are discussed to provide a better understanding of how
these relationships have evolved. A conceptual framework is built by offering a central proposition that specific
dimensions of relationships, networks and transactions are the key antecedents of information sharing, which in
turn influences export performance in supply chain management.
Keywords: supply chain management, marketing, exporter-producer relationship, information sharing
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
2
1 INTRODUCTION
To date, there have been a number of studies that have tended to concentrate on the background and
phenomena of supply chain management as well as the supply chain relationships. However, conceptually the
management of supply chains is not particularly fully understood, and many authors have highlighted the
necessity of clear concepts and conceptual frameworks on supply chain management (e.g. Harland, 1996;
Wilson, 1996; Croom et al., 2000; Svensson, 2002; Williamson, 2008). Most of the discussions were about
supply chain relationships, information and product flow, networks and transactions (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994;
Ritter 1999; Toften and Olsen, 2003; Parker et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2008). Little research (e.g. Harland, 1996;
Croom et al, 2000) has claimed and confirmed that buyer-seller relationships, networks and transactions are
highly related to supply chain management. Some studies (e.g. Wilson, 1996; Moberg et al., 2002; Hsu et al.,
2008) have suggested that information sharing is one of the most important aspects of supply chain management
for better understanding of supply chain relationships and performance.
Nevertheless, the impact of relationship, network and transaction perspectives on supply chain
management has not been examined in any depth. There has been a lack of conceptual and empirical research on
information sharing, which limits the understanding of the dyadic business relationship and there has been no
theoretical framework analysing export supply chain relationships. Thus, this paper attempts to present a review
of the existing approaches to supply chain management that is associated with business involving export
markets. This is with the purpose of identifying important issues and research gaps for further research and
providing an initial conceptual framework. To do so, this research identifies four perspectives: supply chain
management (e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al, 2000; Lambert and Cooper, 2000) relationship marketing theory
(e.g. Wilson, 1995; Veludo et al., 2004; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006), network theory (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994;
Lazzarini, 2001; Ritter, 2004) and transaction cost theory (e.g. Riordan and Williamson, 1985; Williamson,
2008). Amongst these perspectives, the researcher argues that supply chain management is used as the main
theoretical background and thus has an ability to accommodate the three other perspectives.
The paper is structured as follows: the importance of supply chain management is explained, key
theoretical perspectives (relationship, network, and transaction theories) and export performance in the literature
are reviewed and propositions are formed; the methodology is illustrated, a discussion of the results follows; and
the final section concludes.
2 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Supply chain management can be defined as the management of upstream and downstream relationships
with buyers and sellers in order to create value in the final market at less cost to the supply chain as a whole
(Christopher, 1998). Most of the studies on supply chain management (Croom et al., 2000; Lazzarini, 2001;
Svensoon, 2002) have concluded that the lack of a universal definition of supply chain management is in part
due to the approach of different researchers in developing the concept of supply chains. Such a multidisciplinary
origin is reflected in the lack of holistic conceptual frameworks for the development of a perspective on supply
chain management (Harland, 1996; Leonidou et al., 2006). As a consequence, the schemes of interpretation of
supply chain management are mostly partial with relatively poor findings that empirically validate the
framework explaining the key themes and form of supply chain management, its buyer-seller relationships and
its information sharing.
The academic literature underlines a more varied rationale as several studies link supply chain management
to key perspectives such as relationship marketing theory (e.g. Wilson, 1995; Veludo et al., 2004; Eiriz and
Wilson, 2006), network theory (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994; Lazzarini, 2001; Ritter, 2004), and transaction cost
theory (e.g. Riordan and Williamson, 1985; Williamson, 2008). The literature suggests that the concept of
supply chain management brings different focuses (e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al, 2000; Lazzarini, 2001;
Eiriz and Wilson, 2006). For example, researchers may think of the relationship framework, which is built based
on the dyadic relationship as the main unit to manage the flow of products and information. Others may link
business relationships to networks. This issue refers to the set of relationships where a single relationship cannot
work alone without connecting with other relationships. Another important notion is the focus on the
transactions of the relationship that are grouped in one supply chain. Wilson (1996) argues that information
sharing is one of the important aspects of supply chains for increasing profits and reducing costs, and must be
investigated in more detail. Consequently, there is a demand for building a strong buyer-seller relationship to
encourage the improvement of modern chains (Duffy et al., 2008).
Supply chain management framework has become an important approach within management in developed
countries since the 1990s. In the mid-1980s, transactions depended on arms-length agreements, whereas
agreements in chain relationships were built on cooperation and information sharing in the 1990s (Hoyt and
Huq, 2000). Consequently, the monetary value gained from the export of fresh fruit and vegetables to the
European Union by developing countries increased by 24% between 2001 and 2005 (Jaffee, 2005). This is
Luai E. Jraisat
3
indicative of how the export supply chain plays a key role in managing flows of produce and information
between buyers and sellers who are concerned with information sharing. More importantly, information sharing
is a key strategy (Piercy et al., 1997; Leonidou et al., 2006), helping its members to make better decisions about
strategic issues for better performance (Huang et al., 2003).
The main problem motivating this research is that developing countries (e.g. Jordan) supply very limited
fruit and vegetable exports to the European Union, where there are high profits and business continuities. The
Jordanian exporter-producer relationships are unable to manage a high performance export chain.
Retrospectively, there is a need to recommend and inform private and government sectors working in the export
industry of fresh fruit and vegetables by understanding this issue from a holistic viewpoint. The novel focus is
on an understanding of information sharing between the exporters and the producers in their relationships in
order to improve the supply chain management from Jordan to the European Union.
In developing countries, the producers and exporters realise the importance of information sharing in
supplying fresh fruit and vegetables to the European Union successfully. Modern fresh food-export supply
chains can motivate the producers and the exporters to organise themselves in marketing groups. This is in order
to develop sufficient volume for the necessary quality based on production, logistics and marketing information
and connections with markets to access export markets with high profits. The researcher argues that supply
chain management for export is built on the objectives of delivering products and services to the right customer,
in the right quantity and at the right time in the export chain. Therefore, the researcher defines the concept of
supply chain management as follows:
Supply chain management is a framework for creating relationships among the chain members, mainly the
exporters and producers, who consider information sharing at the three levels of relationship, network and
transaction dimensions, to reach the right customer, in the right quantity, and at the right time for better export
performance.
Having discussed the above, however, previous research has not covered all the issues related to supply
chain management, its concept and its export supply chain relationships, and information sharing has not been
explored in detail. The previous research has not provided a holistic integration between relationships, networks
and transaction in order to show supply chain management as a major approach. The previous research has not
focused on agri-food export supply chain in detail. Therefore, this paper focuses on studying the exporter-
producer relationship including key dimensions, along with exploring information sharing as being the main
dimension. The main theoretical perspectives identified are the relationship, network and transaction
perspectives, which are associated with information sharing in the context of export supply chain relationships
in the fresh fruit and vegetable industry.
3 RELATIONSHIP MARKETING THEORY
Relationship marketing theory is a useful perspective offering explanations of several processes or
dimensions (e.g. commitment and cooperation) that are significant in studying the interrelationships between
certain phenomena of the buyer-seller relationship (Wilson, 1995), such as information sharing in supply chain
management (Toften and Olsen, 2003). This theory can explain the exporter-producer relationship and its
information sharing, offering explanations for the several streams in relationships, the dimensions in
relationships, such as the rationale for, process of and structure of relationships.
Conceptual and empirical models often focus on different components of the relationship but use similar
key theoretical dimensions to explain relationships (Wilson, 1995; Dash et al., 2007). These dimensions include
trust, commitment, communication, cooperation, collaboration, and information sharing. Tomkins (2001)
explains that trust leads to increased information between firms in business. Trust and information sharing have
a functional association that is more likely to be characterised over the life cycle of a positive relationship
(Tomkins, 2001). Wilson (1995) defines commitment as the desire to continue the relationship. Commitment is
developed in the more mature stage of relationships after trust is developed in the early stage (Wilson, 1995).
Cooperation is a key dimension to forming partnerships in order to ensure that both parties can gain
benefits (Wilson, 1995). Cooperative ways enable both parties to supply fruit and vegetables in the required
quantities and of the required quality to the target markets (Shaw and Gibbs, 1995). Collaboration is when two
or more chain members work together to create a competitive advantage (Simatupang and Sridharan, 2002).
Communication is a necessary human activity, which supports relationships between parties (Veludo et al.,
2004;) for creating rich knowledge. Information sharing encourages commitment and cooperation and helps the
buyer and seller through the adaptation of processes (Kalafatis, 2000; Andersen, 2006). Furthermore, providing
the right information between chain parties gives them the opportunity to review the credibility of the other
party (Dash et al., 2007).
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
4
Generally, most of the studies’ authors (e.g. Wilson 1995; Piercy et al., 1997; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006; Hsu
et al., 2008) use these dimensions to form different views on the relationship perspective. In most of the studies,
the definitions explain a relationship as a link of benefits and processes for both individuals and firms engaging
in several streams such as networks, exchange, governance, exporting and supply chain management to improve
relationships and performance. These dimensions are processes in the relationship, which work as conditions to
create better achievements and sharing of information for the firms. Based on the explanations above, the
business relationship is considered as a key unit in the export supply chain. Therefore, the researcher defines the
relationship concept as the following:
A relationship is a set of processes (e.g. commitment and information sharing) between an exporter and a
producer who share a rationale for the relationship and networks in order to improve export performance in the
transactional export supply chain.
Table 1 summarises previous studies that have applied the relationship perspective. The previous research
has not covered all the issues related to relationships, and information sharing has not been explored in detail. A
few studies (e.g. Kwon and Suh, 2004; Leonidou et al., 2006) have explored important dimensions such as
information sharing in the supply chain relationship but these studies have also failed to empirically contribute
to examining information sharing in an advanced way. Most of the empirical studies (e.g. Dorsch et al., 1998;
Wu et al., 2004) have provided key findings that contribute to understanding how the different dimensions
affect each other but few of them have examined the impact of these dimensions on export performance. A few
studies (e.g. Parker et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2008) have investigated the association between the different
relationship dimensions, information sharing and export performance to understand the supply chain
relationship in the context of supply chain management. However, these studies have not empirically provided a
holistic view related to information sharing and the interrelationships were indirect in the association. Most of
the previous research has analysed one side of the dyadic supply chain relationships, which limited the full-
understanding of relationship research. A few of the studies (e.g. Parker et al., 2006) have examined both sides
but they have not provided detailed empirical work related to relationships.
In fact, the above discussion on buyer-seller relationships leads to a key research question: “How do key
relationship dimensions have impacts on information sharing in the export supply chain relationship?” This
research attempts to provide insights into the high-order dimensions (e.g. trust and commitment), focusing on
information sharing. Therefore, the researcher suggests the following proposition:
Proposition 1: Relationship dimensions (e.g. trust, commitment, cooperation, collaboration and
communication) between the dyadic actors (exporter and producer) have an impact on information sharing in the
exporter-producer relationship.
Table 1: Key Previous Research Related to Relationship Marketing Theory
Author
Type of
Research
Key Factors (Dimensions)
and Concepts
Key findings
Wilson
(1995)
Conceptual
research
Trust, commitment, bonds,
cooperation, quality, mutual goals,
satisfaction and technology adoption.
A relationship concept definition was improved
and operationalized and the study described
development processes.
Toften &
Olsen (2003)
Conceptual
research
Export information, export
performance, and business success.
Export information use and export performance are
influenced by knowledge and learning factors.
Information use has positive impact on firm
success.
Wu et al.
(2004)
Empirical
research
Trust, commitment, power,
investment, dependence, continuity,
and chain integration
The level of investment, dependence, trust, power
and continuity to supply chain partners will
enhance commitment and, consequently, the
integration of the supply chain management.
Lages et al.
(2005)
Empirical
research
Relationship quality, long-term
relationship, information sharing,
commitment, satisfaction, and export
performance.
A better relationship quality results in a greater
amount of information sharing, commitment,
orientation, and satisfaction with the exporter-
importer relationship in the UK.
Parker et al.
(2006)
Empirical
research
Information sharing, commitment
application, quality, and decision-
making.
Perceived equality, continuous supply, quality,
control and commitment are benefits in dealing
directly in relationships. Information sharing
importance for decision making in fresh products.
Luai E. Jraisat
5
4 NETWORK THEORY
Network theory provides a useful framework for analysis of a business situation, and it adds a new level of
complexity to understanding the relationship perspective (Jarillo, 1988; Möller and Halinen, 1999; Croom et al,
2000). Network relations create information sharing that enables buyers and sellers to have access to resources
and knowledge beyond their abilities, leading to long-term relationships (Mikkola, 2008). This approach is a
structure formed by the main dimensions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) that connect a set of relationships.
Therefore, alongside information sharing, the network perspective will also be studied as it enables the analysis
of export chain relationships. A business network is a set of relationships that are connected, showing firms’
identity, process and functions that contribute to explaining a dyadic relationship (Anderson et al., 1994; Ritter,
2004).
Actors is an essential function within relationships that are required to form meaningful network structures,
in which the network must have activities and the resources required to carry out those activities (McLoughlin
and Horan, 2002). In the export business, actors connect with each other socially to bring various beneficial
types of producers, retailers and consumers together within regional fruit and vegetable networks (Lazzarini et
al., 2001; Koops et al., 2002) and establish a network position (Turnbull et al., 1996). Activities and resources
are two strategic relationship functions in a network (Anderson et al., 1994). These functions are meaningful in
the conceptualisation of the marketing network, which is an important value in analysing a business (Möller and
Halinen, 1999). However, actors control activities that are built by relationships with other parties in the
network and are influenced by resources, which are exchanged to coordinate chain activities.
Anderson et al. (1994) state that functions carried out within relationships must be viewed as part of a
network. They also state that relationships are connected to establish networks, which have direct and indirect
connections with other relationships. Most of the previous studies state that relationship functions such as
activities, resources and processes must be managed in a network in order to establish interactions for better
benefits and long-term relationships. This is where networks are a set of relationships among constellations of
actors (Jarillo, 1988; Bardach, 1994; Jarzo, 2000; Ritter, 2004) and these relationships make connections with
each other to provide the functions of benefits and exchange processes of their business and others' for better
performance. The researcher provides a definition of the network concept:
A network is a set of relationships among firms aiming to establish connections based on relationship
functions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) to support information sharing for better performance in the
export supply chain.
Table 2 summarises the previous studies that have applied the network perspective. Most of the studies
have not covered all the issues related to networks’ impact on dyadic relationships, and information sharing has
not been explored as an important concept. A few studies (e.g. Halinen et al., 1999) have examined information
sharing in the supply chain relationship, but their empirical work was not in-depth. Most of the empirical studies
(e.g. Ritter, 1999; Wilkinson and Young, 2002) have provided findings that contribute to understanding how
the network dimensions affect each other but few of them have investigated the dimensions’ impact on export
performance. Most of the previous research has not examined the two sides of the relationship in network
research, which limits the full understanding of the relationship work in the network. Consequently, this paper
highlights a research question, which is “How do key network dimensions have impacts on information sharing
in the dyadic relationship?” The researcher seeks to examine the effects of networks in business relationships
and identifies the factors (e.g. activities, resources and actor position) that influence the relationships, focusing
on information sharing.
Proposition 2: Network dimensions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) between the dyadic actors
(exporter and producer) and the network actors have an impact on information sharing in the exporter-producer
relationship.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
6
Table 2: Key Previous Research Related to Network Theory
Author
Type of
Research
Key Factors (Dimensions)
and Concepts
Ritter
(1999)
Empirical
research
Network competences, resource
availability, human resource
management, activities,
communication structure and
culture
Möller &
Halinen
(1999)
Empirical
research
Network, actor and buyer-seller
relationship.
Koops et al.
(2002)
Empirical
research
Resources, change processes,
strategic changes and
collaboration.
Wilkinson
& Young
(2002)
Empirical
research
Network, actor, firm
performance, complexity,
planning and strategies.
Mikkola
(2008)
Empirical
research
Market relations, power,
economic activities, actors,
network relations, and
coordination.
5 TRANSACTION COST THEORY
Transaction cost theory’s basic premise is that the cost of doing transactions could be too high under
certain conditions (Grover and Malhotra, 2003). Transaction cost theory is an economic approach (Williamson,
2008) and reflects different types of transaction costs (e.g. coordination, contracting deals and information
sharing) (Eiriz and Wilson, 2006). Thus, this economic perspective needs to take into account the economic
rationality of supply chain relationships. This perspective provides explanations for transaction dimensions (e.g.
asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency) between firms and their relationships (Williamson, 1995;
Spraakman, 1997). Transaction cost theory explains how information advantage in a relationship is enjoyable
and beneficial for firms (Williamson, 1995) and information sharing in business is a transaction cost (Eiriz and
Wilson, 2006). Transaction cost theory contributes to the study of supply chain relationships and networks, and
the efficiency of economic activities.
In transaction cost theory, the unit of analysis is the transaction used to describe the economic activity and
the governance structures in business relationships (Riordan and Williamson, 1985). Transaction cost theory
explains that transaction costs include coordination, monitoring, contracting deals, opportunistic behaviour risk
and information sharing (Williamson, 1995). Williamson (1988b) defines a transaction as a basic unit of
analysis in organisational structure rather than production, one where the main dimensions of transaction cost
theory are asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency. The behavioural assumptions are bounded rationality and
opportunism, which forces firms to make self-enforcing promises to behave responsibly in terms of increasing
their profit (Williamson, 1995). Bounded rationality is accepting the limits of the human ability to process
information comprehensively (Williamson, 1988b). Transaction cost theory views bounded rationality as a
problem under conditions of uncertainty, which make it difficult to fully specify the conditions surrounding an
exchange, thereby causing an economic problem (Grover and Malhotra, 2003). Opportunism is defined as “self-
interest seeking with guile” by a human actor in business relationships (Williamson, 1985, 255). “This does not
imply that all those involved in transactions act opportunistically all of the time, rather, it recognizes that the
risk of opportunism is often present” (Hobbs, 1996, p.17). In his subsequent work, Williamson (1985, p. 47)
describes guile as “lying, stealing, cheating, and calculated efforts to mislead, distort, disguise, obfuscate, or
otherwise confuse.”
Three dimensions describe a transaction: asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency (Williamson, 1985).
Asset specificity is a basic unit of analysis, which is the most important dimension in the transaction (Riordan
and Williamson, 1985). “Asset specificity arises when one partner to an exchange of a firm has invested
resources specific to that exchange which have little or no value in an alternative use” (Hobbs, 1996, p17). This
dimension is a transactional factor of special interest (Williamson, 1981) and refers to the transferability of
assets that support a given transaction cost, which are mainly in the form of human specificity (e.g. employee
training) or physical specificity (e.g. investment in equipment) (Williamson 1985). Williamson (1985) describes
two other types of asset specificity: site specificity (parties’ relationships to minimise transportation and
Luai E. Jraisat
7
inventory costs), and dedicated assets (referring to substantial investments that would not have been made
outside a particular transaction).
Uncertainty is linked to economic reasons and transacting behaviour are the two reasons related to
uncertainty and both result in extra costs between parties (Bourlakis and Bourlakis, 2005). The existence of
uncertainty makes writing and contracts complicated since the environment shifts in unforeseen ways
(Spraakman, 1997). In the food supply chain, the transaction costs are because of uncertainty due to limited
information, opportunism, frequency of transactions and incompleteness of contracts (Poole et al., 1998). Under
conditions of uncertainty, information cannot be derived regarding future states, where probabilistically
generated information and interpretive ambiguity will exist in business.
Frequency could be called large-scale production, and setup costs and reputation effects are two aspects of
frequency (Williamson, 2008). Only when the potential demand is large is it worthwhile to invest in specialised
assets and have frequent transactions. If markets were small, such investments would not be worthwhile.
According to Bourlakis and Bourlakis (2005), this relates to the frequency with which transactions between the
firms occur, and whether high asset specificity firms should contract out.
This perspective works, depending on its basic unit of analysis, with the following features (Williamson,
1985, 1995): a) the basic unit of analysis is the transaction, b) asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency are the
critical dimensions of transaction cost theory, which are essential for transactions, and c) the governance
structure, such as relationships and the market that each structure has, differs for both cost and competence. The
importance of the transaction role is shown in various studies, and it becomes more important when it is studied
for business transactions of a business relationship in a network for better information sharing and achievement.
Thus, the researcher defines the transaction concept as:
A transaction is a basic unit of analysis in a relationship, whose dimensions (e.g. asset specificity,
uncertainty and frequency) affect actors’ relationships, changing costs and information sharing for better
export performance in their export supply chain.
In Table 3, there is much previous research related to the transaction perspective that is important to
understand the transaction between the chain members. In the previous research, most of the studies have been
theoretical or conceptual research and few studies (e.g. Williamson, 1988a; Ruben et al., 2007) have considered
empirical work. In the present research, there is a need to understand this perspective in more depth in order to
describe transactions between firms and their relationships, and the dimensions that affect transactions,
including information sharing and export performance. The researcher argues in favour of studying transaction
cost theory as a complementary perspective to the other two perspectives above. This is an attempt to explore
the supply chain relationship from different approaches whose dimensions can have important influences on the
buyers and the sellers sharing different benefits and information. In fact, there have been conceptual overlaps
between the different dimensions of the three perspectives and previous research has not linked these
dimensions to their perspectives. Therefore, this paper raises a third question, which is “How do key transaction
dimensions have impacts on information sharing in the export supply chain relationship?” Hence, the following
proposition is suggested:
Proposition 3: Transaction dimensions (e.g. asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency) in the export
supply chain have an impact on information sharing in the exporter-producer relationship.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
8
Table 3: Key Previous Research Related to Transaction Cost Theory
Research
Method
Key Factors (Dimensions)
and Concepts
Key findings
Williamson
(1971)
Theoretical
research
Vertical integration, contract,
information exchange and risks
Integration requires powers of internal
organization. Firms resort to internalization
because of economies of information exchange.
Williamson
(1988a)
Empirical
research
Contracts, opportunism, bonds,
asset specificity, uncertainty,
frequency, organization process and
analysis, and innovation.
The transaction is the basic unit of analysis. The
critical dimensions are asset specificity,
uncertainty and frequency with respect to which
transactions differ.
Poole et al.
(1998)
Empirical
research
Marketing orientation, transaction
costs, contracts, uncertainty and
information sources.
Producers can be grouped according to their
marketing orientation. -Marketing factors and
the negotiated price are determinants of the
terms of the transaction. Information sources are
very important to fresh product suppliers.
Schmitz
(2006)
Empirical
research
Symmetric information and
information gathering.
Parties always agree on collaboration if
symmetric information is available. information
gathering is not always a purely strategic
activity.
Williamson
(2008)
Conceptual
research
Contracting; transaction costs,
human actors, outsourcing,
organization and supply chain
management
The study describes the contract approach to
economic organization, the operationalization of
transaction perspective, outsourcing levels, and
qualifications to the foregoing.
6 EXPORT PERFORMANCE
Considerable attention has been paid to the export performance (e.g. Aksoy and Kaynak, 1993; Katsikeas
et al., 2000; Katsikeas et al., 2008). However, despite the previous research efforts in understanding the
importance of export performance, this paper is characterised by helping in developing a new approach to
supply chain management for export. It is an attempt to link supply and demand sides based on the influence of
information sharing on export performance. As a result, this research claims that export performance is a
process by which it is possible to evaluate the overall business of both the buyer and the seller in their
relationship. A variety of financial and non-financial criteria are important in providing the information
necessary for decision makers to plan, control and direct the activities of the firm (Cousins et al., 2008).
Exporting fresh fruit and vegetables with a successful supply export chain is important for the exporter-
producer relationships in Jordan, where only a few exporters are able to implement high quality standards and
delivery requirements to the European Union. According to Cousins et al. (2008, p.242), “the buyer-seller
relationship must be evaluated, not just the dimensions of performance, but financial dimensions as well”. The
following table illustrates two types of performance criteria that are indicated in the literature:
Table 4: Performance Criteria of Buyer-Seller Relationship
Financial criteria of performance are export sales growth, export profitability, export sales intensity and
market share (Styles and Ambler, 1994; Ambler et al., 1999; Katsikeas et al., 2008) in addition to costs (Dyer,
1996; Hsu et al., 2008). Robertson and Chetty (2000) suggest that export intensity, growth and profitability are
Criteria
Representative Research
Financial Performance
-Profitability
-Costs
-Sales growth
-Market share
-Return on investment
-Styles &Ambler (1994); Dyer (1996); Zou & Stan (1998); Katsikeas et al. (2008)
- Dyer (1996); Hsu et al. (2008); Trienekens et al. (2008)
-Ambler et al. (1999); Matanda & Schroder (2002); Trienekens et al. (2008)
-Styles & Ambler (1994); Robertson & Chetty (2000); Hsu et al. (2008)
-Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008)
Non-Financial
Performance
-Satisfaction
-Relationship quality
-Continuation
-Market diversification
-Wilson (1995); Batt (2003); Leonidou et al. (2006); Dash et al. (2007).
-Dyer (1996); Dorsch et al. (1998); Roy et al. (2004); Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008)
-Fontenot & Wilson (1997); Lages et al. (2005); Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008)
-Aksoy & Kaynak (1993); Robertson & Chetty (2000)
Luai E. Jraisat
9
three economic factors that measure performance. Trienekens et al. (2008) argue that the economic measures of
performance for the fresh products business are efficiency (profitability and logistics costs), return on
investment, return on sales. Zou and Stan (1998) argue that export sales and profits are probably the most
frequently used financial factor.
Non-financial criteria of performance are: satisfaction (Wilson, 1995; Fontenot and Wilson, 1997; Batt,
2003; Dash et al., 2007), relationship continuation (Lages et al., 2005), relationship quality (Roy et al., 2004;
Lages et al., 2005), market diversification (Robertson and Chetty, 2000) and the rate of new product
introduction. Robertson and Chetty (2000) also include non-financial measures such as the firm’s perception of
overall performance derived from past and current events and future projected progression.
Having discussed the export performance, this research provides some scope for supply chain relationship
associated information sharing in order to explore and understand the possible association between information
sharing and export performance in detail. The financial and non-financial performance criteria identified are
general factors and basis and they need to be refined further in future research. This leads to a research question
that should be considered in this research. This question is “How does information sharing have an impact on
export performance in the export supply chain relationship?” Therefore, the researcher proposes the following:
Proposition 4: Information sharing in the exporter-producer relationship has an impact on export
performance of the dyadic actors in the export supply chain.
7 METHODOLOGY
This research follows a phenomenological approach to conceptual framework building. The use of this
approach depends on analyzing theories and combining their dimensions to build up the highlighted conceptual
framework. This is based on the rationale that supply chain relationships include not only relationship theory but
also network and transaction theories; it thus offers a more integrated way of looking at the research problem
(e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al., 2000; Lazzarini, 2001; Moberg et al., 2002; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006; Duffy et
al., 2008). This contribution will offer a distinctive and valuable understanding of the dyadic exporter-producer
relationships with a holistic view and analysis.
The review and analysis of existing literature resulted in a conceptual framework to model the dyadic
producer-exporter relationship. The researcher addresses the key gaps identified in the previous research and the
key propositions suggested in the sections above for this research. The gaps are expressed as broad and open
research issues (Yin, 1994, p. 21), and the propositions reflecting these gaps will be used as a guide in the data
collection and analysis, focusing on the research phenomenon (Perry, 1998, p.791). The main focus is on
identifying these gaps, and therefore future research will attempt to contribute to solving them.
In summary, there has been a lack of conceptual and empirical research on information sharing, which
limits the understanding of the dyadic business relationship, and offers no conceptual framework. In contrast,
for phenomenon-driven research questions, the researcher has to frame the study in terms of the importance of
the phenomenon and the lack of plausible existing theory (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007, p.26).
8 TOWARDS A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Drawing on the different arguments and discussion above, the current research provides the initial
conceptual framework of supply chain management and links it to the propositions (Figure 1). This is in order to
support the data collection and analysis in future research. Whilst higher level dimensions have been given great
consideration within the context of the supply chain, there are many other factors that influence the exporter-
producer relationship, the most important of which is information sharing. This paper presents a possible
association of these factors for both sides of the export-producer relationship in the supply chain management
and identifies factors that could be important in distinguishing the best relationships.
Therefore, a number of substantive, theoretical and methodological issues are still opportunities that remain
for future research. This paper highlights them for future research in order to attempt contributing to solving
them. These propositions are suggested to bring a focus on future empirical work related to three themes:
relationship, network and transaction dimensions; information sharing; and export performance. It is argued that
there is a need to establish a theoretical link between the three themes. There was a conceptual overlap between
many of the dimensions of the three relevant perspectives (relationship marketing theory, network theory and
transaction cost theory), to be used in a unified empirical study. Because many factors have impacts on the
determination of information sharing, attempts to identify associations with any single factor, such as the
cooperation dimension, may not have been totally successful. Therefore, to avoid this problem and to establish
possible credible links between the three themes, key dimensions of the three perspectives are newly combined
to introduce antecedents for information sharing, which affects export performance in supply chain
management.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
10
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of Supply Chain Management
9 CONCLUSION AND CONTRIBUTION
The paper has reviewed the key empirical studies related to the factors of the supply chain relationship
within supply chain management. Previous research related to supply chain management and marketing research
and relationships, networks and transactions has been reviewed and then classified based on the use of three
theoretical perspectives. This is in order to have a pre-developed (initial) conceptual framework for supply chain
management associated with the information sharing phenomenon to guide future research. The research needs
to identify a set of key factors and attempts to clarify them in order to develop a unified empirical study.
Therefore, this paper has sought to establish possible credible links between the three themes: dimensions
of the three perspectives; information sharing; export performance in supply chain management. The researcher
argues that combining the three perspectives will allow the development of a theoretical framework for supply
chain management as the main perspective, in order to understand the dyadic exporter-producer relationship.
This framework can work as an appropriate approach for analysing the totality of the relationship. This is based
on the rationale that supply chain relationships include not only the relationship system but also network and
transaction systems; it thus makes possible a more integrated way of looking at research supply chain
management (e.g. Harland, 1996; Fontenot &Wilson, 1997; Croom et al., 2000; Lazzarini, 2001; Moberg et al.,
2002; Leonidou et al., 2006; Eiriz & Wilson, 2006; Duffy et al., 2008). This contribution will offer a distinctive
understanding of the dyadic exporter-producer relationships with a holistic view. This research also encourages
policy makers to be more aware of the importance of business relationships in export supply chain management.
This paper provides policy makers with a unique conceptual framework that captures the processes needed to
reach an improved export supply chain management based on a link between the different relationship, network
and transaction dimensions; information sharing; and export performance as a strategic agri-food policy.
Information
Sharing
(P1-4)
Export
Performance
(P 4)
Luai E. Jraisat
11
Present theory has been extended by offering a central proposition that specific dimensions of relationships,
networks and transactions are the key antecedents of information sharing, which in turn influences export
performance in supply chain management. Future research should attempt to answer three research questions.
First, how do the relationship, network and transaction dimensions have an impact on information sharing?
Second, how is information sharing evaluated in the dyadic relationship? Third, how does information sharing
have an impact on export performance? It is the aim to examine and validate a conceptual framework for export
supply chain management that can offer fruitful insights and contributions for supply chain management and its
buyer-seller relationships.
REFERENCES
Ambler, T. and Styles, C. (2000) ‘The future of relational research in international marketing: constructs and
conduits’, International Marketing Review, 17 (6), pp. 492-508.
Ambler, T., Styles, C. and Xiucun, W. (1999) ‘The effect of channel relationships and guanxi on the
performance of inter-province export ventures in the people’s republic of China’, International. Journal of
Research in Marketing,16, pp.75–87.
Anderson, J.C., Hakansson, H. and Johanson, J. (1994) ‘Dyadic business relationships within a business
network context’, Journal of marketing, 58 (4), pp.1-15.
Archer, N. P. (2006) ‘Supply chains and the enterprise’, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 19
(3), pp. 241-245
Ballou, R.H., Gilbert, S.M. and Mukherjee, A. (2000) ‘New managerial challenges from supply chain
opportunities’, Industrial Marketing Management, 29, pp.7-18.
Bardach, E. (1994) ‘Can Network Theory Illuminate Interagency Collaboration?’, Workshop on Network
Analysis and Innovations in Public Programs, Sept. 29-Oct. 1, 1994: held at LaFollette Institute of Public
Affairs, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Batt, P.J. (2003) ‘Building trust between growers and market agents’, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, 8 (1), pp.65-78.
Bradley F., Meyer R. and Gao, Y. (2006) ‘Use of supplier-customer relationships by SMEs to enter foreign
markets’, Industrial Marketing Management, 35, pp.652 – 665.
Brennan, R., and Turnbull, P.W., (1999) ‘Adaptive behavior in buyer–supplier relationships’, Industrial
Marketing Management, 28, pp. 481–495.
Cadilhon, J.J., Fearne, A.P., Moustier, P. and Poole, N.D. (2003), ‘Modelling vegetable marketing systems in
south east asia: phenomenological insights from vietnam’, Supply chain Management: An International
Journal Volume, 8 (5), pp. 427-441.
Christopher, M. (1998) Logistics and supply chain management: strategies for reducing cost and improving
service. 2nd edn. London: Financial Times Publishing.
Cousins, P.D., Lawson, B. and Squire, B. (2008) ‘Performance measurement in strategic buyer-supplier
relationships: the mediating role of socialization mechanisms’, International journal of Operations &
Production Management, 28 (3), pp. 238-258.
Croom, S., Romano P. and Giannakis M. (2000) ‘Supply chain management: an analytical framework for
critical literature review’, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 6, pp.67 – 83.
Dash, S., Bruning, E.D. and Guin, K.K. (2007) ‘Antecedents of long-term buyer-seller relationships: a cross
cultural integration’, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 11, pp. 1-28.
Dorsch, M.J., Swanson, S.R. and Kelley, S.W. (1998) ‘The role of relationship quality in the stratification of
vendors as perceived by customers’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26 (2), pp. 128-142
Duffy R. S. (2008) ‘Towards a better understanding of partnership attributes: an exploratory analysis of
relationship type classification’, Industrial Marketing Management, 37, pp.228 – 244.
Dyer, J. H. (1997) ‘Effective inter-firm collaboration: how firms minimize transaction cost and maximize
transaction value’, Strategic Management Journal, 18, pp.553 – 556.
Eisenhardt, K. and Graebner, M. (2007) ‘Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges’, Academy
of Management Journal, 50 (1), pp. 25-32.
Eiriz V. and Wilson D. (2006) ‘Research in relationship marketing: antecedents, traditions and integration’,
European Journal of Marketing, 40 (3/4), pp. 275-291.
Grover, V. and Malhotra, M.K. (2003) ‘Transaction cost framework in operations and supply chain management
research: theory and measurement’, Journal of Operations Management, 21, pp.457–473.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
12
Hadaya, P. and Cassivi, L. (2007) ‘The role of joint collaboration planning actions in a demand-driven supply
chain’, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107 (7), pp. 954-978.
Halinen, A, Salmi, A. And Havila, V. (1999) ‘From dyadic change to changing business networks: an analytical
framework’, Journal of Management Studies, 36 (6), pp. 779-794.
Harland C. M. (1996) ‘Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks’, British Journal of
Management, 7, Special Issue.
Hoyt, J. and Huq, F. (2000) ‘From arms length to collaborative relationships in the supply chain: An
evolutionary process’, International journal of physical distribution and logistics management, 30, (9), p.
750-764.
Hsu, C.C., Kannan, V.R., Tan, K.C. and Leong, K.C. (2008) ‘Information sharing, buyer-supplier relationships,
and firm performance A multi-region analysis’, International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics
Management, 38, (4) pp. 296-310.
Humphrey, J. and Schmitz, H. (2001) ‘Governance in Global Value Chains’, IDS Working Paper, 32 (3), pp.1-
35.
Humphrey, J. (2005) Shaping Value Chains for Development: Global Value Chains in Agribusiness. Paper
Commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation and Development.pp.1-70.
Jarillo, J.C. (1988) ‘On strategic networks’, Strategic Management Journal, 9 (1), pp. 31-41.
Jarosz, L. (2000) ‘Understanding agri-food networks as social relations’, Agriculture and Human Values,17, pp.
279–283.
Katsikeas , C.S., Piercy, N.F. and Ioannidis, C. (1996) ‘Determinants of export performance in a European
context’, European Journal of Marketing, 30 (4), pp. 6-35.
Katsikeas, C.S., Leonidou, L.C. and Morgan, N.A. (2000) ‘Firm-level export performance assessment: review,
evaluation, and development’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28, pp. 493 -511.
Koops, S., Mollenkopf, D. and Zwart, T. (2002) ‘Food supply chains: are efficiency and responsiveness
mutually exclusive?’, Chain and network science, 2 (1), pp. 7-17.
Kwon, I.W.G. and Suh, T. (2004) ‘Factors affecting the level of trust and commitment in supply chain
relationships’, The Journal of Supply Chain Management: A Global Review of Purchasing and Supply, pp.
4-14.
Lazzarini S. G., Chaddad F. R. and Cook M. L. (2001) ‘Integrating supply chain and network analysis: the study
of netchains’, Journal on Chain and Network Science, 1 (1), pp.7 – 22.
Lages, C., Lages, C.R. and Lages, L.F. (2005) ‘The RELQUAL scale: a measure of relationship quality in
export market ventures’, Journal of Business Research, 58, pp.1040– 1048.
Lambert, D.M. and Cooper, M.C. (2000) ‘Issues in supply chain management’, Industrial Marketing
Management, 29, pp. 65-83.
Lau, H.C.W. and Lee, W.B. (2000) ‘On a responsive supply chain information system’, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 30 (7/8), pp. 598-610.
Leonidou, L.C, Palihawadana, D. and Theodosiou, M. (2006) ‘An integrated model of the behavioural
dimensions of industrial buyer-seller relationships’, European Journal of Marketing, 40 (1/2), pp. 145-173.
McLoughlin, D. and Horan, C. (2002) ‘Markets-as-networks: notes on a unique understanding’, Journal of
Business Research, 55(7), pp. 535-43.
Mikkola. M. (2008) ‘Coordinative structures and development of food supply chains’, British Food Journal,
110 (2) pp. 189-205.
Moberg, C.R., Cutler, B.D., Gross, A., Speh, T.W. (2002) ‘Identifying antecedents of information exchange
within supply chains’, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 32 (9),
pp.755-70.
Möller, K.K. and Halinen, A. (1999) ‘Business relationships and networks: managerial challenge of network
era’, Industrial Marketing Management, 28, p. 413–427.
Narayandas, D. and Rangan, V.K. (2004) ‘Building and sustaining buyer–seller relationships in mature
industrial markets, Journal of Marketing, 68, pp.63–77.
Perry C. (1998), “Processes of a case study methodology for postgraduate research in marketing”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol.32 No.9/10, pp.785 – 802.
Piercy N. F., Katsikeas C. S. and Cravens D. W. (1997) ‘Examining the role of buyer-seller relationships in
export performance’, Journal of World Business, 23 (1), pp.73 – 86
Luai E. Jraisat
13
Poole N. D., Del Campo Gomis F. J., Igual J. F. J. and Giménez F.V. (1998) ‘Formal contracts in fresh produce
markets’, Food Policy, 23, pp.131 – 142
Riordan, M., and Williamson, O. (1985) ‘Asset specificity and economic organization’, International Journal of
Industrial Organization, 3,pp. 365-78.
Ritter, T. (1999) ‘The networking company antecedents for coping with relationships and networks effectively’
Industrial Marketing Management, 28, pp. 467–479.
Ritter, T., Wilkinson, I.F. and Johnston, W.J. (2004) ‘Managing in complex business networks’, Industrial
Marketing Management, 33, pp.175– 183.
Ritter T. and Gemünden H. G. (2004) ‘The impact of a company's business strategy on its technological
competence, network competence and innovation success’, Journal of Business Research, 57 (5), pp.548 –
556.
Robertson, C. and Chetty, S.K. (2000) ‘A contingency-based approach to understanding export performance’,
International Business Review, 9, pp. 211–235.
Roy, S. K., Sivakumar, and Wilkinson, I.F. (2004) ‘Innovation generation in supply chain relationships: a
conceptual model and research propositions’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (1), pp 61-
79.
Ruben, R., Boselie, D.M. and Lu, H. (2007) ‘Vegetables procurement by Asian supermarkets: a transaction cost
approach’, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 12 (1), pp. 60-8.
Sanzo, M. J., Santos, M. L.,Va´zquez, R., A ´ lvarez, L. I. (2003) ‘The effect of market orientation on buyer–
seller relationship satisfaction’, Industrial Marketing Management, 32, pp. 327– 345
Schmitz, P. W. (2006) ‘Information gathering and the property rights approach’, The American Economic
Review, 96(1), pp.422-434.
Shaw, S.A. and Gibbs, J. (1995) ‘Retailer-supplier relationships and the evolution of marketing: two food
industry case studies’, International journal of retail and distribution management’, 23, (7), p.7-16.
Simatupang, T.S. and Sridharan, R. (2005) ‘The collaboration index: a measure for supply chain collaboration’,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(1), pp. 44-62.
Styles C. and Ambler T. (1994) ‘Successful export practice: the UK experience’, International Marketing
Review, 11 (6), pp. 23 – 47
Spraakman, G. (1997) ‘Transaction cost economics: a theory for internal audit’, Managerial Auditing Journal,
12 (7), pp.323-330.
Svensson, G. (2002) ‘The theoretical foundation of supply chain management. A functionalist theory of
marketing’, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 32 (9), pp.734–54.
Toften K. and Olsen S. O. (2003) ‘Export market information use, organizational knowledge and firm
performance: a conceptual framework’, Industrial Marketing Review, 20 (1), pp.95–110.
Tomkins, C. (2001) ‘Interdependencies, trust and information in relationships, alliances and networks’,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26 (2),pp.161−191.
Turnbull, P., Ford, D. and Cunningham, M. (1996) ‘Interaction, relationships and networks in business markets:
an evolving perspective’, Journal of business and industrial marketing, 11 (3/4), pp. 44–62.
Van-Der-Vorst, J. G.A.J., Carlos A. da Silva, C. A. and Trienekens, J. H. (2007) Agro-industrial supply chain
management: concepts and applications. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
Rome, Italy, ISBN 978-92-5-105831-2, pp.1–55.
Veludo, M., Macbeth, D.K. and Purchase, S. (2004) ‘Partnering and relationships within an international
network context’, International Marketing Review, 21, (2), pp. 142–157.
Wilson, D.T. (1995) ‘An Integrated Model of Buyer-Seller Relationships’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science,23 (4), pp.335-345.
Wilson N. (1996) ‘The supply chains of perishable products in northern Europe’, British Food Journal, 98 (6),
pp.9 – 15.
Wilkinson, I. And Young, L. (2002) ‘On cooperating firms, relations and networks’, Journal of Business
Research, 55, pp. 123– 132.
Williamson, O. E. (2008) ‘Outsourcing transaction cost and supply chain management’, Journal of Supply
Chain Management, 44 (2), pp.5 – 15.
Williamson, O.E. (2002) ‘The theory of the firm as governance structure: from choice to contract’, Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 16, pp. 171-195.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
14
Williamson, O. E. (2000) ‘The new institutional economics: taking stock, looking ahead’, Journal of Economic
Literature, 38(3), pp. 595–613.
Williamson, O.E. (1999) ‘Strategy research: governance and competence perspectives’, Strategic Management
Journal, 20, pp.1087–1108.
Williamson, O.E. (1998) ‘The institutions of governance’, The American Economic Review, 88 (2), pp.75-79.
Williamson, O.E. (1995) ‘Hierarchies, markets and power in the economy strategy’, Industrial and Corporate
Chang, 4 (1), pp.21–49.
Williamson, O. E. (1988a) ‘Corporate finance and corporate governance’, Journal of Finance, 43, pp.567 – 91.
Williamson, O. E. (1988b) ‘The logic of economic organization’, Jouknal of Law, Economics, and
Organization, 4 (l), pp.65-98.
Williamson, O. E. (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1981) ‘The economics of organization: the transaction cost approach’, American Journal of
Sociology, 87, pp.548 – 77.
Williamson, O. E. (1971) ‘The vertical integration of production: market failure considerations’, American
Economic Review, 61 (2), pp.112 – 23.
Wu, W-Y., Chiag, C-Y.,Wu, Y-J. and Tu, H-J. (2004) ‘The influencing factors of commitment and business
integration on supply chain management’, Industrial Management and Data Systems,104 (4), pp.322 –
333.
Zou, S. and Stan, S. (1998) ‘The determinants of export performance: a review of the empirical literature
between 1987 and 1997’, International Marketing Review, 15,(5), pp. 333-356.
Yin, R. (1994), Case study research: Design and methods, (2nd.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.