The Causes of Conflict and the Effect of Control Mechanisms on Conflict Resolution between Manufacturer and Supplier

제조-공급자간 갈등 원인과 거래조정 방식의 갈등관리 효과

I. Introduction Developing the relationships between companies is very important issue to ensure a competitive advantage in today's business environment (Bleeke & Ernst 1991; Mohr & Spekman 1994; Powell 1990). Partnerships between companies are based on having same goals, pursuing mutual understanding, and having a professional level of interdependence. By having such a partnerships and cooperative efforts between companies, they will achieve efficiency and effectiveness of their business (Mohr and Spekman, 1994). However, it is difficult to expect these ideal results only in the B2B corporate transaction. According to agency theory which is the well-accepted theory in various fields of business strategy, organization, and marketing, the two independent companies have fundamentally different corporate purposes. Also there is a higher chance of developing opportunism and conflict due to natures of human(organization), such as self-interest, bounded rationality, risk aversion, and environment factor as imbalance of information (Eisenhardt 1989). That is, especially partnerships between principal(or buyer) and agent(or supplier) of companies within supply chain, the business contract itself will not provide competitive advantage. But managing partnership between companies is the key to success. Therefore, managing partnership between manufacturer and supplier, and finding causes of conflict are essential to improve B2B performance. In conclusion, based on prior researches and Agency theory, this study will clarify how business hazards cause conflicts on supply chain and then identify how developed conflicts have been managed by two control mechanisms. II. Research model III. Method In order to validate our research model, this study gathered questionnaires from small and medium sized enterprises(SMEs). In Korea, SMEs mean the firms whose employee is under 300 and capital is under 8 billion won(about 7.2 million dollar). We asked the manufacturer's perception about the relationship with the biggest supplier, and our key informants are denied to a person responsible for buying(ex)CEO, executives, managers of purchasing department, and so on). In detail, we contact by telephone to our initial sample(about 1,200 firms) and introduce our research motivation and send our questionnaires by e-mail, mail, and direct survey. Finally we received 361 data and eliminate 32 inappropriate questionnaires. We use 329 manufactures' data on analysis. The purpose of this study is to identify the anticipant role of business hazard (environmental dynamism, asset specificity) and investigate the moderating effect of control mechanism(formal control, social control) on conflict-performance relationship. To find out moderating effect of control methods, we need to compare the regression weight between low versus. high group(about level of exercised control methods). Therefore we choose the structural equation modeling method that is proper to do multi-group analysis. The data analysis is performed by AMOS 17.0 software, and model fits are good statically (CMIN/DF=1.982, p<.000, CFI=.936, IFI=.937, RMSEA=.056). IV. Result V. Discussion Results show that the higher environmental dynamism and asset specificity(on particular supplier) buyer(manufacturer) has, the more B2B conflict exists. And this conflict affect relationship quality and financial outcomes negatively. In addition, social control and formal control could weaken the negative effect of conflict on relationship quality significantly. However, unlikely to assure conflict resolution effect of control mechanisms on relationship quality, financial outcomes are changed by neither social control nor formal control. We could explain this results with the characteristics of our sample, SMEs(Small and Medium sized Enterprises). Financial outcomes of these SMEs(manufacturer or principal) are affected by their customer(usually major company) more easily than their supplier(or agent). And, in recent few years, most of companies have suffered from financial problems because of global economic recession. It means that it is hard to evaluate the contribution of supplier(agent). Therefore we also support the suggestion of Gladstein(1984), Poppo & Zenger(2002) that relational performance variable can capture the focal outcomes of relationship(exchange) better than financial performance variable. This study has some implications that it tests the sources of conflict and investigates the effect of resolution methods of B2B conflict empirically. And, especially, it finds out the significant moderating effect of formal control which past B2B management studies have ignored in Korea.

다른 기업과 거래관계를 형성하고 유지하는 것은 빠르게 변화하는 치열한 환경에서 대부분의 기업에게 불가피한 전략적 선택이다. 유통망 안의 모든 기업들도 결국 독립적 기업 간의 이러한 거래 계약으로 맺어져 있다. 하지만 모든 기업 간의 거래가 하나의 목표를 가지고 공동의 이익 창출을 위해 노력하여, 모두 효과적이고 효율적인 성과만을 낼 수는 없다. 대리인 이론에 따르면, 기업들은 모두 독립적 주체로서 각자의 이해를 추구하고, 위험을 회피하려하며, 제한된 합리성을 가지고 불충분한 정보를 처리하게 된다. 즉, 기업 간 거래관계는 그 속에서 신뢰와 협력을 기대하는 동시에, 갈등과 기회주의적 행위도 예측해야 한다. 이에 본 연구는 기업 간 거래의 갈등 원인을 확인하고, 실제 기업이 주로 활용하는 거래조정 방식의 갈등관리 효과를 밝히고자 한다. 이를 위해 관련된 기존 연구와 대리인 이론을 활용하여, 제조업자와 공급업자 간 갈등이 관계성과에 미치는 영향과 거래 위험요인(환경동태성, 자산특유화 수준)의 갈등 유발 효과, 그리고 국내 기업거래 연구에서 잘 다루어지지 않은 거래 조정방식의 갈등관리 효과를 가정하였다. 더불어 국내 중소기업 데이터 329개를 대상으로 연구모델을 검증하였다. 연구 결과, 구매기업(제조업자)의 환경 동태성과 자산 특유화 수준이 높을수록 더 큰 갈등이 유발되었으며, 이러한 B2B 갈등은 기업 간 관계질과 재무성과에 부정적 영향을 끼쳤다. 또한 사회적 조정방식과 법적 조정방식은 갈등의 관계질에 대한 부정적 영향을 매우 유의한 수준에서 완화시키는 조절효과가 검증되었다. 이러한 결과를 바탕으로 본 연구는 B2B갈등의 원인과 관리기법에 대하여 실증적으로 확인하였다는 의의가 있으며, 특히 국내 거래관리 연구에서 소홀히 다루어졌던 법적 계약 방식의 긍정적이고 유의한 효과를 확인하였다는 의의가 있다.