Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:00:35.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collaborative planning and its antecedents: An assessment in supply chain relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Hannes Guenter  and
Gudela Grote
Hannes Guenter
Affiliation:
Department of Organization and Strategy, Maastricht University School of Business and Economics, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Gudela Grote
Affiliation:
Department of Management, Technology, and Economics, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the interactive effects of individual work autonomy and interdependence on collaborative planning, building on the distinction of task and outcome interdependence. Using a questionnaire study, we assess collaborative planning and its antecedents in supply chain relationships, incorporating the forestry and timber industry. While no interactive effects hold for task interdependence, outcome interdependence only facilitates collaborative planning for individuals with low work autonomy. Individuals with high autonomy always invest in collaborative planning. This study provides a picture of supply chain reality more complete than that sketched in studies that have assessed interdependence as a one-dimensional construct and alludes to the importance, often overlooked, of work autonomy in supply chain relationships.

Keywords

collaborative planningtask interdependenceoutcome interdependencework autonomysupply chain relationshipfield study
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 2012 , pp. 36 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Artz, K. W. (1999). Buyer-supplier performance: The role of asset specificity, reciprocal investments and relational exchange. British Journal of Management, 10, 113–126.Google Scholar
Bachrach, D. G., Powell, B. C., Bendoly, E., & Richey, R. G. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior and performance evaluations: Exploring the impact of task interdependence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 193–201.Google Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological research – Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Google Scholar
Barratt, M. (2004). Unveiling enablers and inhibitors of collaborative planning. International Journal of Logistics Management, 15, 73–90.Google Scholar
Barratt, M., & Oliveira, A. (2001). Exploring the experiences of collaborative planning initiatives. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 31, 266–289.Google Scholar
Bendoly, E., Donohue, K., & Schultz, K. L. (2006). Behavior in operations management: Assessing recent findings and revisiting old assumptions. Journal of Operations Management, 24, 737–752.Google Scholar
Bendoly, E., & Hur, D. (2007). Bipolarity in reactions to operational ‘constraints’: OM bugs under an OB lens. Journal of Operations Management, 25, 1–13.Google Scholar
Breaugh, J. A. (1985). The measurement of work autonomy. Human Relations, 38, 551–570.Google Scholar
Breaugh, J. A. (1998). The development of a new measure of global work autonomy. Educational and Psychology Measurement, 58, 119–128.Google Scholar
Breaugh, J. A. (1999). Further investigation of the work autonomy scales: Two studies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 357–373.Google Scholar
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823–850.Google Scholar
Cannon, J. P., Doney, P. M., Mullen, M. R., & Petersen, K. J. (2010). Building long-term orientation in buyer-supplier relationships: The moderating role of culture. Journal of Operations Management, 28, 506–521.Google Scholar
Chen, I. J., & Paulraj, A. (2004). Understanding supply chain management: Critical research and a theoretical framework. International Journal of Production Research, 42, 131–163.Google Scholar
Christopher, M. (1998). Logistics and supply chain management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Cleavenger, D., Gardner, W. L., & Mhatre, K. (2007). Help-seeking: Testing the effects of task interdependence and normativeness on employees' propensity to seek help. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21, 331–359.Google Scholar
Clegg, C., & Spencer, C. (2007). A circular and dynamic model of the process of job design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 321–339.Google Scholar
Clements, M. D. J., Dean, D. L., & Cohen, D. A. (2007). Proposing an operational classification scheme for embryonic cooperative relationships. Journal of Management & Organization, 13(1), 51–64.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., West, S. G., Aiken, L., & Cohen, P. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis – Practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 147–168.Google Scholar
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9.Google Scholar
Cousins, P. D., & Lawson, B. (2007). Sourcing strategy, supplier relationships and firm performance: An empirical investigation of UK organizations. British Journal of Management, 18, 123–137.Google Scholar
Croson, R., & Donohue, K. (2003). Impact of POS data sharing on supply chain management: An experimental study. Production and Operations Management, 12, 1–11.Google Scholar
Day, A. L., Sibley, A., Scott, N., Tallon, J. M., & Ackroyd-Stolarz, S. (2009). Workplace risks and stressors as predictors of burnout: The moderating impact of job control and team efficacy. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 26, 7–22.Google Scholar
De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 628–637.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The” what” and” why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.Google Scholar
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31, 659–669.Google Scholar
Dubois, A., Hulthén, K., & Pedersen, A.-C. (2004). Supply chains and interdependence: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 10, 3–9.Google Scholar
Dyer, J. H., & Chu, W. (2000). The determinants of trust in supplier-automaker relationships in the US, Japan, and Korea. Journal of International Business Studies, 31, 259–285.Google Scholar
Enders, C. K. (2003). Using the expectation maximization algorithm to estimate coefficient alpha for scales with item-level missing data. Psychological Methods, 8, 322–337.Google Scholar
Etherington, L., & Tjosvold, D. (1998). Managing budget conflicts: Contribution of goal interdependence and interaction. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 15, 142–151.Google Scholar
Evans, B. K., & Fischer, D. G. (1992). A hierarchical model of participatory decision-making, job autonomy, and perceived control. Human Relations, 45, 1169–1189.Google Scholar
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299.Google Scholar
Fan, E. T., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (1998). When needs outweigh desires: The effects of resource interdependence and reward interdependence on group problem solving. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20, 45–56.Google Scholar
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115–134.Google Scholar
Galaskiewicz, J. (1985). Interorganizational relations. Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 281–304.Google Scholar
Gellatly, I. R., & Irving, P. G. (2001). Personality, autonomy, and contextual performance of managers. Human Performance, 14, 231–245.Google Scholar
Gevers, J. M. P., van Eerde, W., & Rutte, C. G. (2001). Time pressure, potency, and progress in project groups. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 205–221.Google Scholar
Gino, F., & Pisano, G. (2008). Toward a theory of behavioral operations. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 10, 676–691.Google Scholar
Gittell, J. H., Weinberg, D., Pfefferle, S., & Bishop, C. (2008). Impact of relational coordination on job satisfaction and quality outcomes: A study of nursing homes. Human Resource Management Journal, 18, 154–170.Google Scholar
Grote, G. (1997). Autonomie und Kontrolle. Zur Gestaltung automatisierter und risikoreicher Systeme. Zürich: vdf Hochschulverlag an der ETH Zürich.Google Scholar
Grote, G. (2004). Uncertainty management at the core of system design. Annual Reviews in Control, 28, 267–274.Google Scholar
Gulati, R., & Sytch, M. (2007). Dependence asymmetry and joint dependence in interorganizational relationships: Effects of embeddedness on a manufacturer's performance in procurement relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 32–69.Google Scholar
Handfield, R. B., & Bechtel, C. (2002). The role of trust and relationship structure in improving supply chain responsiveness. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 367–382.Google Scholar
Handfield, R. B., & Nichols, E. L. (1999). Introduction to supply chain management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Harland, C. (1996). International comparisons of supply-chain relationships. Logistics Information Management, 9, 35–38.Google Scholar
Harland, C. M., Zheng, J. R., Johnsen, T., & Lamming, R. (2004). A conceptual model for researching the creation and operation of supply networks. British Journal of Management, 15, 1–21.Google Scholar
Harmon, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayes-Roth, B., & Hayes-Roth, F. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3, 275–310.Google Scholar
Hayton, J. C., & Kelley, D. J. (2006). A competency-based framework for promoting corporate entre-preneurship. Human Resource Management, 45, 407–427.Google Scholar
Heide, J. B., & Miner, A. S. (1992). The shadow of the future: Effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buyer-seller cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 265–291.Google Scholar
Hertel, G., Konradt, U., & Orlikowski, B. (2004). Managing distance by interdependence: Goal setting, task interdependence, and team-based rewards in virtual teams. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13, 1–28.Google Scholar
Hollenbeck, J. R., & Klein, H. J. (1987). Goal commitment and the goal-setting process: Problems, prospects, and proposals for future research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 212–220.Google Scholar
Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen, D. J., & Slater, S. F. (2004). Information processing, knowledge development, and strategic supply chain performance. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 241–253.Google Scholar
Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356.Google Scholar
Hurley, A. E., Scandura, T. A., Schriesheim, C. A., Brannick, M. T., Seers, A., Vandenberg, R. J., et al. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Guidelines, issues, and alternatives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 667–683.Google Scholar
Jahre, M., & Fabbe-Costes, N. (2005). Adaptation and adaptability in logistics networks. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 8, 143–157.Google Scholar
Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50, 877–904.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence theory. Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues, 4, 9–36.Google Scholar
Katz, F. E. (1965). Explaining informal work groups in complex organizations: The case for autonomy in structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10, 204–223.Google Scholar
Kidwell, R. E., & Bennett, N. (1993). Employee propensity to withhold effort: A conceptual model to intersect three avenues of research. Academy of Management Review, 18, 429–456.Google Scholar
Korten, S., & Kaul, C. (2008). Application of RFID (radio frequency identification) in the timber supply chain. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 29, 85–94.Google Scholar
Langfred, C. W. (2004). Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 385–399.Google Scholar
Langfred, C. W. (2005). Autonomy and performance in teams: The multilevel moderating effect of task interdependence. Journal of Management, 31, 513–529.Google Scholar
Langfred, C. W., & Moye, N. A. (2004). Effects of task autonomy on performance: An extended model considering motivational, informational, and structural mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 934–945.Google Scholar
Larson, P. D., & Halldorsson, A. (2004). Logistics versus supply chain management: An international survey. International Journal of Logistics, 7, 17–31.Google Scholar
Leana, C., Appelbaum, E., & Shevchuk, I. (2009). Work process and quality of care in early childhood education: The role of job crafting. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 1169–1192.Google Scholar
Lejeune, M. A., & Yakova, N. (2005). On characterizing the 4 C's in supply chain management. Journal of Operations Management, 23, 81–100.Google Scholar
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Bradway, L. (1997). Task interdependence as a moderator of the relation between group control and performance. Human Relations, 50, 169–181.Google Scholar
Loch, C. H., & Terwiesch, C. (2005). Rush and be wrong or wait and be late? A model of information in collaborative processes. Production and Operations Management, 14, 331–343.Google Scholar
Lynn, M., Sturman, M., Ganley, C., Adams, E., Douglas, M., & McNeil, J. (2008). Consumer racial discrimination in tipping: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1045–1060.Google Scholar
Man, D. C., & Lam, S. S. K. (2003). The effects of job complexity and autonomy on cohesiveness in collectivistic and individualistic work groups: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 979–1001.Google Scholar
Marchington, M. (2005). Fragmenting work: Blurring organizational boundaries and disordering hierarchies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356–376.Google Scholar
Mathieu, J. E., & Schulze, W. (2006). The influence of team knowledge and formal plans on episodic team processes-performance relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 605–619.Google Scholar
McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376–376.Google Scholar
Michaels, D., & Lunsford, J. L. (2008, 08 08). Lack of seats, galleys delays Boeing, Airbus. Wall Street Journal, B1.Google Scholar
Min, S., Mentzer, J. T., & Ladd, R. T. (2007). A market orientation in supply chain management. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 507–522.Google Scholar
Mitchell, V., & Nault, B. R. (2007). Cooperative planning, uncertainty, & managerial control in concurrent design. Management Science, 53, 375–389.Google Scholar
Molleman, E. (2005). Diversity in demographic characteristics, abilities and personality traits: Do faultlines affect team functioning? Group Decision and Negotiation, 14, 173–193.Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P., Delaney-Klinger, K., & Hemingway, M. A. (2005). The importance of job autonomy, cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 399–406.Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The work design questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1321–1339.Google Scholar
Newman, D. A. (2003). Longitudinal modeling with randomly and systematically missing data: A simulation of ad hoc, maximum likelihood, and multiple imputation techniques. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 328–362.Google Scholar
Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of interorganizational relationships: Integration and future directions. Academy of Management Review, 15, 241–265.Google Scholar
Oliver, C. (1991). Network relations and loss of organizational autonomy. Human Relations, 44, 943–961.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W. (1971). Linking pins between organizations and environment. Business Horizons, 14, 73–80.Google Scholar
Osborn, R. N., & Hunt, J. G. (1974). Environment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative. Science Quarterly, 19, 231–246.Google Scholar
Parker, S. K., & Axtell, C. M. (2001). Seeing another view point: Antecedents and outcomes of employee perspective taking activity. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1085–1101.Google Scholar
Patterson, M. G., West, M. A., Shackleton, V. J., Dawson, J. F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S., et al. (2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 379–408.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. A. (2005). Supplier integration into new product development: Coordinating product, process and supply chain design. Journal of Operations Management, 23, 371–388.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations. A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Powell, G. N., & Johnson, G. A. (1980). An expectancy-equity model of productive system performance. Journal of Operations Management, 1, 47–56.Google Scholar
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448.Google Scholar
Ramamoorthy, N., & Flood, P. C. (2004). Individualism/collectivism, perceived task interdependence and teamwork attitudes among Irish blue-collar employees: A test of the main and moderating effects. Human Relations, 57, 347–366.Google Scholar
Redman, T., & Snape, E. (2005). Exchange ideology and member-union relationships: An evaluation of moderation effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 765–773.Google Scholar
Roper, S., & Crone, M. (2003). Knowledge complementarity and coordination in the local supply chain: Some empirical evidence. British Journal of Management, 14, 339–355.Google Scholar
Rubin, J. Z., Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (1994). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.Google Scholar
Schultze, U., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2004). A practice perspective on technology-mediated network relations: The use of Internet-based self-serve technologies. Information Systems Research, 15, 87–106.Google Scholar
Sethi, R. (2000). Superordinate identity in cross-functional product development teams: Its antecedents and effect on new product performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28, 330–344.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. D., Duffy, M. K., & Stark, E. M. (2000). Interdependence and preference for group work: Main and congruence effects on the satisfaction and performance of group members. Journal of Management, 26, 259–279.Google Scholar
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Suseno, Y., & Ratten, V. (2007). A theoretical framework of alliance performance: The role of trust, social capital and knowledge development. Journal of Management & Organization, 13(1), 4–23.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Terwiesch, C., Ren, Z. J., Ho, T. H., & Cohen, M. A. (2005). An empirical analysis of forecast sharing in the semiconductor equipment supply chain. Management Science, 51, 208–220.Google Scholar
Tjosvold, D. (1986). The dynamics of interdependence in organizations. Human Relations, 39, 517–540.Google Scholar
Upson, J. W., Ketchen, D. J., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing employee stress: A key to the effectiveness of strategic supply chain management. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 78–92.Google Scholar
Van der Vegt, G., Emans, B. J. M., & Van de Vliert, E. (2001). Patterns of interdependence in work teams: A two-level investigation of the relations with job and team satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 54, 51–69.Google Scholar
Van der Vegt, G., & Van de Vliert, E. (2002). Intragroup interdependence and effectiveness: Review and proposed directions for theory and practice. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17, 50–67.Google Scholar
Van der Vegt, G., & Van de Vliert, E. (2005). Effects of perceived skill dissimilarity and task interdependence on helping in work teams. Journal of Management, 31, 73–89.Google Scholar
Van der Vegt, G., Van de Vliert, E., & Oosterhof, A. (2003). Informational dissimilarity and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of intrateam interdependence and team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 715–727.Google Scholar
van Prooijen, J. W. (2009). Procedural justice as autonomy regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1166–1180.Google Scholar
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145–180.Google Scholar
Wageman, R., & Baker, G. (1997). Incentives and cooperation: The joint effects of task and reward interdependence on group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 139–158.Google Scholar
Weingart, L. R. (1992). Impact of group goals, task component complexity, effort, and planning on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 682–693.Google Scholar
Weldon, E., & Weingart, L. R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 307–334.Google Scholar
Windischer, A., Grote, G., Mathier, F., Meunier, M. S., & Glardon, R. (2009). Characteristics and organizational constraints of collaborative planning. Cognition, Technology and Work, 11, 87–101.Google Scholar
Wong, A., Tjosvold, D., & Zhang, P. Z. (2005). Developing relationships in strategic alliances: Commitment to quality and cooperative interdependence. Industrial Marketing Management, 34, 722–731.Google Scholar
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26, 179–201.Google Scholar