Skip to main content

Inter-organizational Supply Chain Performance: How the Relationship Factors Influence the Australian Beef Industry?

  • Conference paper
The Customer is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientationsin a Dynamic Business World

Abstract

This study examines supply chain structures and inter-organizational relationship factors that influence the supply chain performance in the Australian beef industry. It investigated the extent to which aggregated relationship strength is a source of supply chain performance for the industry. The effect of antecedent factors such as vertical coordination, negotiation power and the use of IOS in the relationship strength were also investigated. Data were collected through a telephone survey in 315 firms including input suppliers, producers, processors and retailers in the beef industry of Western Australia and Queensland. The results support both the direction of theoretical underpinnings from RBV and TCE in the beef industry, that durable buyer-supplier relationships in the supply chain are developed from the level of commitment and trust, interdependence and mutual investment and can be a strategic economic resource to by-pass the cost of traditional market transactions. Results suggest the following key success factors for the beef industry in Australia: (a) the operational adoption of a lean supply chain between producer and processors or processors and retailers; (b) a transparent interdependent relationship with a strong consolidation/integration of business activities; and (c) synchronized information flows for greater compliance with carcass specifications in the supply chain.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alavi, M. and D.E. Leidner. 2001. “Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: conceptual foundations and research issues.” MIS Quarterly 25 (1): 107-136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali, M., S. Kurnia and R.B. Johnston. 2007. “Interorganizational system (IOS) adoption maturity: a model and propositions.” In Proceedings of European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2007 (EMCIS2007), June 24-26, Polytechnic University of Valencia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barclay, D., C. Higgins and R. Thompson. 1995. “The Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach to Causal Modelling: Personal Computer Adoption and Use as an Illustration.” Technology Studies 2: 285–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. 2002. Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall; Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borman, M. 2006. Developing and testing a theoretical framework for inter-organizational systems (IOS) as infrastructure to aid future IOS design. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W. W. 1998. “Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modelling.” MIS Quarterly, 22: vii-xvi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, B. G., J. I. Reid, and N. M. Shadbolt. 2005. “Supply Base Relationships in the New Zealand Red Meat Industry: A Case Study.” In Proceedings of the IAMA Fifth International Conference on Chain and Network Management in Agribusiness and the Food Industry. Wageningen: Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox A. and D. Chicksand. 2008. “Rethinking Policy Options for Industry: Appropriateness in Policies for Industry and UK Farming and Food.” Public Administration 86 (3): 813-836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golicic, S. L., J. H. Foggin and J. T. Mentzer. 2003. “Relationship magnitude and its role in interorganizational relationship structure.” Journal of Business Logistics 24 (1): 57-75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, J. E. and L.M. Young. 2000. “Closer Vertical Coordination in Agri-food Supply Chains: A Conceptual Framework and Some Preliminary Evidence.” Supply Chain Management 5 (3): 131-142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J., G. Grimes and M. Hayenga. 1998. Production and marketing characteristics of U.S. pork producers, 1997- 1998. Iowa State University and University of Missouri.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloni, M. and W.C. Benton. 2000. “Power influences in the supply chain.” Journal of Business Logistics 21 (1): 49-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keeffe, M. 1998. “Establishing supply chain partnerships: lessons from Australian agribusiness.” Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 3 (1): 5-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, H. C. and A. Wysocki. 1997. “The Vertical Coordination Continuum and the Determinants of Firm-Level Coordination Strategy.” Staff Paper, No. 97-64, Michigan State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, T. C. and A. 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 

  • Premkumar, G.P. 2000. “Interorganization systems and supply chain management: An information processing perspective”, Information Systems Management 17(3): 56-69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rai, A., R. Patnayakuni and N. Seth, 2006. “Firm performance impacts of digitally enabled supply chain integration capabilities,” MIS Quarterly 30 (2): 225-246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Revell, B. J. and X. Liu. 2007. “Chain Management Challenges and Market Power in the Chinese Fresh Produce Sector”. In: International Agri-food Chains and Networks: Management and Organisations. Eds Bijman J., O. Omta, J. Trienekene, J. Wijnands and E. F. M. Wubben, Wegeningen Academic, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, M. N., M. Quaddus and N. Islam. 2010. “Knowledge asset and inter-organizational relationship in the performance of Australian beef supply chain”, In Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information systems (PACIS), July 2010: 725- 737.

    Google Scholar 

  • WAFarmers. 2009. Supply Chain Analysis for Retail Competitiveness. a Submission presented by the Pastoralists and Graziers Association of Western Australia and the Western Australian Farmers Federation on behalf of the Livestock Industry of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wafarmers.org.au/contact/default.asp

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and Hierarchies. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WY & Associate. 2009. Objective Assessment of the West Australian Beef Industry Supply Chain: Report 1-Issue paper, Prepared for WA Beef Industry Stock take Committee, Warwick Yates & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Academy of Marketing Science

About this paper

Cite this paper

Uddin, M.N., Quaddus, M., Islam, N. (2017). Inter-organizational Supply Chain Performance: How the Relationship Factors Influence the Australian Beef Industry?. In: Campbell, C.L. (eds) The Customer is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientationsin a Dynamic Business World. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50008-9_124

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics