Buyer perceptions of supply disruption risk: A behavioral view and empirical assessment
Scott C. Ellis
Clemson University, Department of Management, 123D Sirrine Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-1305, United States
Search for more papers by this authorRaymond M. Henry
Clemson University, Department of Management, 107 Sirrine Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-1305, United States
Search for more papers by this authorJeff Shockley
Radford University, Department of Management 130 Whitt Hall, Radford, VA 24142, United States
Search for more papers by this authorScott C. Ellis
Clemson University, Department of Management, 123D Sirrine Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-1305, United States
Search for more papers by this authorRaymond M. Henry
Clemson University, Department of Management, 107 Sirrine Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-1305, United States
Search for more papers by this authorJeff Shockley
Radford University, Department of Management 130 Whitt Hall, Radford, VA 24142, United States
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
As supply chains become more complex, firms face increasing risks of supply disruptions. The process through which buyers make decisions in the face of these risks, however, has not been explored. Despite research highlighting the importance of behavioral approaches to risk, there is limited research that applies these views of risk in the supply chain literature. This paper addresses this gap by drawing on behavioral risk theory to investigate the causal relationships amongst situation, representations of risk, and decision-making within the purchasing domain. We operationalize and explore the relationship between three representations of supply disruption risk: magnitude of supply disruption, probability of supply disruption, and overall supply disruption risk. Additionally, we draw on exchange theories to identify product and market factors that impact buyers’ perceptions of the probability and magnitude of supply disruption. Finally, we look at how representations of risk affect the decision to seek alternative sources of supply. We test our model using data collected from 223 purchasing managers and buyers of direct materials. Our results show that both the probability and the magnitude of supply disruption are important to buyers’ overall perceptions of supply disruption risk. We also find that product and market situational factors impact perceptions of risk, but they are best understood through their impact on perceptions of probability and magnitude. Finally, we find that decisions are based on assessments of overall risk. These findings provide insight into the decision-making process and show that all three representations of risk are necessary for fully understanding risky decision-making with respect to supply disruptions.
References
- E. Anderson, B. Weitz. Determinants of continuity in conventional industrial channel dyads. Marketing Science. 1989; 8(4): 310–323.
- J.S. Armstrong, T.S. Overton. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research. 1977; 14(3): 396–402.
- E.R. Auster. The relationship of industry evolution to patterns of technological linkages, joint ventures, and direct investment between U.S. and Japanese firms. Management Science. 1992; 17(3): 1–25.
- I.S. Baird, H. Thomas. Toward a contingency model of strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Review. 1985; 10(2): 230–243.
10.5465/amr.1985.4278108 Google Scholar
- M. Bensaou, E. Anderson. Buyer–supplier relations in industrial markets: when do buyers risk making idiosyncratic investments. Organizational Science. 1999; 10(4): 460–481.
- K.A. Bollen. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley. 1989.
10.1002/9781118619179 Google Scholar
- B.M. Byrne. Structural Equation Modeling with EQS. 2nd ed.. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 2006.
- J.P. Cannon, W.D. Perreault. Buyer–seller relationships in business markets. Journal of Marketing Research. 1999; 36(4): 439–460.
- T.Y. Choi, D.R. Krause. The supply base and its complexity: implications for transaction cost, risks, responsiveness, and innovation. Journal of Operations Management. 2006; 24(5): 637–652.
10.1016/j.jom.2005.07.002 Google Scholar
- G.A. ChurchillJr.. Measure and construct validity studies. Journal of Marketing Research. 1979; 16(1): 64–73.
- K.B. Clark, T. Fujimoto. The power of product integrity. Harvard Business Review. 1990; (November–December): 107–118.
- M.J. Cooper, K.L. Wakefield, J.F. Tanner. Industrial buyers’ risk aversion and channel selection. Journal of Business Research. 2006; 59(6): 653–661.
10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.11.002 Google Scholar
- E.R. Corey. Procurement management, strategy, organization and decision-making. Boston: CBI Publishing Company. 1978.
- D.F. Cox, S.U. Rich. Perceived risk and consumer decision-making—the case of telephone shopping. Journal of Marketing Research. 1964; 1(4): 32–39.
- C.W. Craighead, J. Blackhurst, M.J. Rungtusanatham, R.B. Handfield. The severity of supply chain disruptions: design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sciences. 2007; 38(1): 131–156.
- S.M. Cunningham. The Major Determinants of Perceived Risk. Boston: Harvard University. 1967.
- J.F. Dash, L.G. Schiffman, C. Berenson. Risk- and personality-related dimensions of store choice. Journal of Marketing. 1976; 40(1): 32–39.
- G.R. Dowling, R. Staelin. A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research. 1994; 21(1): 119–134.
10.1086/209386 Google Scholar
- J.H. Dyer, H. Singh. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review. 1998; 23(4): 660–679.
- B. Fischhoff. Risk taking: a developmental perspective. In J.F. Yates, ed.. Risk-taking Behaviour. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1992, 133–162.
- C. Fornell, D.F. Larcker. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research. 1981; 18(1): 39–50.
- J.B. Gassenheimer, C. Monolis. The influence of product customization and supplier selection on future intentions: the mediating effects of salesperson and organizational trust. Journal of Managerial Issues. 2001; 13(4): 418–435.
- V. Grover, M.K. Malhotra. Transaction cost framework in operations and supply chain management research: theory and measurement. Journal of Operations Management. 2003; 21(4): 457–473.
- C.K. Hahn, K.H. Kim, J.S. Kim. Costs of competition: implications for purchasing strategy. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management. 1986; 22(3): 2–7.
10.1111/j.1745-493X.1986.tb00161.x Google Scholar
- L. Hallen, J. Johanson, N. Seyed-Mohamed. Inter-firm adaptation in business relationships. Journal of Marketing. 1991; 55(2): 29–37.
- V.G. Hegde, S. Kekre, S. Rajiv, P.R. Tadikamalla. Customization: impact on product and process performance. Production and Operations Management. 2005; 14(4): 388–399.
10.1111/j.1937-5956.2005.tb00228.x Google Scholar
- K.B. Hendricks, V.R. Singhal. The effect of supply chain glitches on shareholder wealth. Journal of Operations Management. 2003; 21(5): 501–522.
- K.B. Hendricks, V.R. Singhal. Supply chain glitches and operating performance. Management Science. 2005; 51(5): 695–711.
- K.B. Hendricks, V.R. Singhal. An empirical analysis of the effect of supply chain disruptions on long-run stock price performance and equity risk of the firm. Production and Operations Management. 2005; 14(1): 35–52.
10.1111/j.1937-5956.2005.tb00008.x Google Scholar
- L.T. Hu, P.M. Bentler. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods. 1998; 3(4): 424–453.
- L.T. Hu, P.M. Bentler. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999; 6(1): 1–55.
- W.J. Johnston, J.E. Lewin. Organizational buying behavior: toward an integrative framework. Journal of Business Research. 1996; 35: 1–15.
- U. Juttner. Supply chain risk management: understanding the business requirements from a practitioner perspective. The International Journal of Logistics Management. 2005; 16(1): 120–141.
10.1108/09574090510617385 Google Scholar
- D. Kahneman, A. Tversky. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica. 1979; 47(2): 263–291.
- S. Kaplan, B.J. Garrick. On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis. 1981; 1(1): 11–27.
- L.B. Kaplan, G.J. Szybillo, J. Jacoby. Components of perceived risk in product purchase. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1974; 59(3): 287–291.
- H. Kaynak, J.L. Hartley. Using replication research for just-in-time purchasing construct development. Journal of Operations Management. 2006; 24(6): 868–892.
10.1016/j.jom.2005.11.006 Google Scholar
- S.K. Kim, T. Yamada, H. Kim. Search for alternatives and collaboration with incumbents: two-sided sourcing behavior in business markets. Decision Sciences. 2008; 39(1): 85–114.
10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00183.x Google Scholar
- P. Kleindorfer, G. Saad. Managing disruption risks in supply chains. Production and Operations Management. 2005; 14(1): 53–68.
- N. Kogan, M.A. Wallach. Risk Taking: A Study in Cognition and Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1964.
- P. Kraljic. Purchasing must become supply management. Harvard Business Review. 1983; (September–October): 109–117.
- D.R. Krause. The antecedents of buying firms’ efforts to improve suppliers. Journal of Operations Management. 1999; 17(2): 205–224.
10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00038-2 Google Scholar
- T. Kull, D. Closs. The risk of second-tier supplier failures in serial supply chains: implications for order policies and distributor autonomy. European Journal of Operational Research. 2008; 186(3): 1158–1174.
10.1016/j.ejor.2007.02.028 Google Scholar
- S.G. Lazzarini, D.P. Claro, L.F. Mesquita. Buyer–supplier and supplier–supplier alliances: do they reinforce or undermine one another?. Journal of Management Studies. 2008; 45(3): 561–584.
10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00748.x Google Scholar
- L.L. Lopes. Between hope and fear: the psychology of risk. In L. Berkowitz, ed.. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press. 1987, 255–295 vol. 20.
- J.C.T. Mao. Survey of capital budgeting: theory and practice. Journal of Finance. 1970; 25(2): 349–360.
10.1111/j.1540-6261.1970.tb00513.x Google Scholar
- G. McNamara, P. Bromiley. Risk and return in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal. 1999; 42(3): 330–339.
- J.G. March, Z. Shapira. Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking. Management Science. 1987; 33(11): 1404–1418.
- H. Mintzberg. Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science. 1978; 24(9): 934–948.
- V.-W. Mitchell. Consumer risk perception: conceptualizations and models. European Journal of Marketing. 1999; 33(1/2): 163–195.
10.1108/03090569910249229 Google Scholar
- Neiger, D., Rotaru, K., Churilov, L., in press. Supply chain risk identification with value-focused process engineering. Journal of Operations Management, 1–15.
- B.C. Perdue, J.O. Summers. Purchasing agents’ use of negotiation strategies. Journal of Marketing Research. 1991; 28(2): 175–189.
- J.P. Peter, M.J. Ryan. An investigation of perceived risk at the brand level. Journal of Marketing Research. 1976; 13(2): 184–188.
10.1177/002224377601300210 Google Scholar
- K.J. Petersen, R.B. Handfield, G.L. Ragatz. A model of supplier integration into new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2003; 20: 284–299.
- K.J. Petersen, R.B. Handfield, G.L. Ragatz. Supplier integration into new product development: coordinating product, process and supply chain design. Journal of Operations Management. 2005; 23(3–4): 371–388.
- J. Pfeffer, G.R. Salancik. The External Control of Organizations. New York: Harper and Row. 1978.
- P.M. Podsakoff, D.W. Organ. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management. 1986; 12(4): 531–544.
- W.J. Qualls, C.P. Puto. Organizational climate and decision framing: an integrated approach to analyzing industrial buying decisions. Journal of Marketing Research. 1989; 26(May): 179–192.
- D.F. ScottJr., J.W. Petty. Capital budgeting practices in large American firms: a retrospective analysis and synthesis. Financial Review. 1984; 19(1): 111–123.
10.1111/j.1540-6288.1984.tb01089.x Google Scholar
- Z. Shapira. Risk Taking: A Managerial Perspective. New York: Russel Sage Foundation. 1995.
- Y. Sheffi, J. RiceJr.. A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review. 2005; 47(1): 41–48.
- S.B. Sitkin, A.L. Pablo. Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. The Academy of Management Review. 1992; 17(1): 9–38.
- P. Slovic. Perception of risk. Science. 1987; 236: 280–285.
- L.R. Smeltzer, S.P. Siferd. Proactive supply chain management: the management of risk. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management. 1998; (Winter): 38–45.
10.1111/j.1745-493X.1998.tb00040.x Google Scholar
- R.E. Spekman, E.W. Davis. Risky business: expanding the discussion on risk and the extended enterprise. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management. 2004; 34(5): 414–433.
10.1108/09600030410545454 Google Scholar
- I. Stuart, P. Decker, D. McCutcheon, R. Kunst. A leveraged learning network. Sloan Management Review. 1998; 39(4): 81–92.
- R.L. Stump, G.A. Athaide, A.W. Joshi. Managing seller–buyer new product development relationships for customized products: a contingency model based on transaction cost analysis and empirical test. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2002; 19(6): 439–454.
- R.L. Stump, J.B. Heide. Controlling supplier opportunism in industrial relationships. Journal of Marketing Research. 1996; 33(4): 431–441.
- K. Sullivan, T. Kida. The effect of multiple reference points and prior gains and losses on managers’ risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1995; 64(1): 76–83.
10.1006/obhd.1995.1091 Google Scholar
- S. Talluri, R. Narasimhan, A. Nair. Vendor performance with supply risk: a chance-constrained DEA approach. International Journal of Production Economics. 2006; 100(2): 212–222.
10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.11.012 Google Scholar
- M. Treleven, S.B. Schweikhart. A risk/benefit analysis of sourcing strategies: single vs. multiple sourcing. Journal of Operations Management. 1988; 7(4): 93–114.
10.1016/0272-6963(81)90007-3 Google Scholar
- D. Ulrich, J.B. Barney. Perspectives in organizations: resource dependence, efficiency, and population. Academy of Management Review. 1984; 9(3): 471–481.
10.5465/amr.1984.4279680 Google Scholar
- K.T. Ulrich, D.J. Ellison. Holistic customer requirement and the design-select decision. Management Science. 1999; 45(5): 641–658.
- S.M. Wagner, J.L. Johnson. Configuring and managing strategic supplier portfolios. Industrial Marketing Management. 2004; 33: 717–730.
- O.E. Williamson. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press. 1985.
- O.E. Williamson. Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1991; 36(2): 269–296.
- J.F. Yates. Judgment and Decision Making. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs. 1990.
- J.F. Yates, E.R. Stone. The risk construct. In J.F. Yates, ed.. Risk-taking Behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1992, 1–25.
- J.F. Yates, E.R. Stone. Risk appraisal. In J.F. Yates, ed.. Risk-taking Behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1992, 49–85.
- J.F. Yates, E.R. Stone, A.M. Parker. Risk communication: absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1994; 60: 387–408.
10.1006/obhd.1994.1091 Google Scholar
- Y. Yeh. Identification of factors affecting continuity of cooperative electronic supply chain relationships: empirical case of the Taiwanese motor industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. 2005; 10(4): 327–335.
10.1108/13598540510612802 Google Scholar
- G.A. Zsidisin. A grounded definition of supply risk. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. 2003; 9: 217–224.
10.1016/j.pursup.2003.07.002 Google Scholar
- G.A. Zsidisin, M.F. Smith. Managing supply risk with early supplier involvement: a case study and research propositions. Journal of Supply Chain Management. 2005; 41(4): 44–57.
10.1111/j.1745-493X.2005.04104005.x Google Scholar