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)
-
- Journal of Distribution Research
- /
- v.17 no.4
- /
- pp.55-80
- /
- 2012
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.
This study researches the effects of common features on a no-choice option with respect to regulatory focus theory. The primary interest is in three factors and their interrelationship: common features, no-choice option, and regulatory focus. Prior studies have compiled vast body of research in these areas. First, the "common features effect" has been observed bymany noted marketing researchers. Tversky (1972) proposed the seminal theory, the EBA model: elimination by aspect. According to this theory, consumers are prone to focus only on unique features during comparison processing, thereby dismissing any common features as redundant information. Recently, however, more provocative ideas have attacked the EBA model by asserting that common features really do affect consumer judgment. Chernev (1997) first reported that adding common features mitigates the choice gap because of the increasing perception of similarity among alternatives. Later, however, Chernev (2001) published a critically developed study against his prior perspective with the proposition that common features may be a cognitive load to consumers, and thus consumers are possible that they are prone to prefer the heuristic processing to the systematic processing. This tends to bring one question to the forefront: Do "common features" affect consumer choice? If so, what are the concrete effects? This study tries to answer the question with respect to the "no-choice" option and regulatory focus. Second, some researchers hold that the no-choice option is another best alternative of consumers, who are likely to avoid having to choose in the context of knotty trade-off settings or mental conflicts. Hope for the future also may increase the no-choice option in the context of optimism or the expectancy of a more satisfactory alternative appearing later. Other issues reported in this domain are time pressure, consumer confidence, and alternative numbers (Dhar and Nowlis 1999; Lin and Wu 2005; Zakay and Tsal 1993). This study casts the no-choice option in yet another perspective: the interactive effects between common features and regulatory focus. Third, "regulatory focus theory" is a very popular theme in recent marketing research. It suggests that consumers have two focal goals facing each other: promotion vs. prevention. A promotion focus deals with the concepts of hope, inspiration, achievement, or gain, whereas prevention focus involves duty, responsibility, safety, or loss-aversion. Thus, while consumers with a promotion focus tend to take risks for gain, the same does not hold true for a prevention focus. Regulatory focus theory predicts consumers' emotions, creativity, attitudes, memory, performance, and judgment, as documented in a vast field of marketing and psychology articles. The perspective of the current study in exploring consumer choice and common features is a somewhat creative viewpoint in the area of regulatory focus. These reviews inspire this study of the interaction possibility between regulatory focus and common features with a no-choice option. Specifically, adding common features rather than omitting them may increase the no-choice option ratio in the choice setting only to prevention-focused consumers, but vice versa to promotion-focused consumers. The reasoning is that when prevention-focused consumers come in contact with common features, they may perceive higher similarity among the alternatives. This conflict among similar options would increase the no-choice ratio. Promotion-focused consumers, however, are possible that they perceive common features as a cue of confirmation bias. And thus their confirmation processing would make their prior preference more robust, then the no-choice ratio may shrink. This logic is verified in two experiments. The first is a
The paintings Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion were recently donated to the National Museum of Korea and unveiled to the public for the first time at the 2019 special exhibition "Through the Eyes of Joseon Painters: Real Scenery Landscapes of Korea." These two paintings carry significant implications for understanding Joseon art history. Because the fact that they were components of a folding screen produced after a sightseeing tour of the Gwandong regions in 1557 has led to a broadening of our understanding of sixteenth-century landscape painting. This paper explores the art historical meanings of Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion by examining the contents in the two paintings, dating them, analyzing their stylistic characteristics, and comparing them with other works. The production background of Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion can be found in the colophon of Chongseokjeong Pavilion. According to this writing, Sangsanilro, who is presumed to be Park Chung-gan (?-1601) in this paper, and Hong Yeon(?~?) went sightseeing around Geumgangsan Mountain (or Pungaksan Mountain) and the Gwandong region in the spring of 1557, wrote a travelogue, and after some time produced a folding screen depicting several famous scenic spots that they visited. Hong Yeon, whose courtesy name was Deokwon, passed the special civil examination in 1551 and has a record of being active until 1584. Park Chung-gan, whose pen name was Namae, reported the treason of Jeong Yeo-rip in 1589. In recognition of this meritorious deed, he was promoted to the position of Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Punishments, rewarded with the title of first-grade pyeongnan gongsin(meritorious subject who resolved difficulties), and raised to Lord of Sangsan. Based on the colophon to Chongseokjeong Pavilion, I suggest that the two paintings Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion were painted in the late sixteenth century, more specifically after 1557 when Park Chung-gan and Hong Yeon went on their sightseeing trip and after 1571 when Park, who wrote the colophon, was in his 50s or over. The painting style used in depicting the landscapes corresponds to that of the late sixteenth century. The colophon further states that Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion were two paintings of a folding screen. Chongseokjeong Pavilion with its colophon is thought to have been the final panel of this screen. The composition of Gyeongpodae Pavilion recalls the onesided three-layered composition often used in early Joseon landscape paintings in the style of An Gyeon. However, unlike such landscape paintings in the An Gyeon style, Gyeongpodae Pavilion positions and depicts the scenery in a realistic manner. Moreover, diverse perspectives, including a diagonal bird's-eye perspective and frontal perspective, are employed in Gyeongpodae Pavilion to effectively depict the relations among several natural features and the characteristics of the real scenery around Gyeongpodae Pavilion. The shapes of the mountains and the use of moss dots can be also found in Welcoming an Imperial Edict from China and Chinese Envoys at Uisungwan Lodge painted in 1557 and currently housed in the Kyujanggak Institute for Korean Studies at Seoul National University. Furthermore, the application of "cloud-head" texture strokes as well as the texture strokes with short lines and dots used in paintings in the An Gyeon style are transformed into a sense of realism. Compared to the composition of Gyeongpodae Pavilion, which recalls that of traditional Joseon early landscape painting, the composition of Chongseokjeong Pavilion is remarkably unconventional. Stone pillars lined up in layers with the tallest in the center form a triangle. A sense of space is created by dividing the painting into three planes(foreground, middle-ground, and background) and placing the stone pillars in the foreground, Saseonbong Peaks in the middle-ground, and Saseonjeong Pavilion on the cliff in the background. The Saseonbong Peaks in the center occupy an overwhelming proportion of the picture plane. However, the vertical stone pillars fail to form an organic relation and are segmented and flat. The painter of Chongseokjeong Pavilion had not yet developed a three-dimensional or natural spatial perception. The white lower and dark upper portions of the stone pillars emphasize their loftiness. The textures and cracks of the dense stone pillars were rendered by first applying light ink to the surfaces and then adding fine lines in dark ink. Here, the tip of the brush is pressed at an oblique angle and pulled down vertically, which shows an early stage of the development of axe-cut texture strokes. The contrast of black and white and use of vertical texture strokes signal the forthcoming trend toward the Zhe School painting style. Each and every contour and crack on the stone pillars is unique, which indicates an effort to accentuate their actual characteristics. The birds sitting above the stone pillars, waves, and the foam of breaking waves are all vividly described, not simply in repeated brushstrokes. The configuration of natural features shown in the above-mentioned Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion changes in other later paintings of the two scenic spots. In the Gyeongpodae Pavilion, Jukdo Island is depicted in the foreground, Gyeongpoho Lake in the middle-ground, and Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Odaesan Mountain in the background. This composition differs from the typical configuration of other Gyeongpodae Pavilion paintings from the eighteenth century that place Gyeongpodae Pavilion in the foreground and the sea in the upper section. In Chongseokjeong Pavilion, stone pillars are illustrated using a perspective viewing them from the sea, while other paintings depict them while facing upward toward the sea. These changes resulted from the established patterns of compositions used in Jeong Seon(1676~1759) and Kim Hong-do(1745~ after 1806)'s paintings of Gwandong regions. However, the configuration of the sixteenth-century Gyeongpodae Pavilion, which seemed to have no longer been used, was employed again in late Joseon folk paintings such as Gyeongpodae Pavilion in Gangneung. Famous scenic spots in the Gwandong region were painted from early on. According to historical records, they were created by several painters, including Kim Saeng(711~?) from the Goryeo Dynasty and An Gyeon(act. 15th C.) from the early Joseon period, either on a single scroll or over several panels of a folding screen or several leaves of an album. Although many records mention the production of paintings depicting sites around the Gwandong region, there are no other extant examples from this era beyond the paintings of Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion discussed in this paper. These two paintings are thought to be the earliest works depicting the Gwandong regions thus far. Moreover, they hold art historical significance in that they present information on the tradition of producing folding screens on the Gwandong region. In particular, based on the contents of the colophon written for Chongseokjeong Pavilion, the original folding screen is presumed to have consisted of eight panels. This proves that the convention of painting eight views of Gwangdong had been established by the late sixteenth century. All of the existing works mentioned as examples of sixteenth-century real scenery landscape painting show only partial elements of real scenery landscape painting since they were created as depictions of notable social gatherings or as a documentary painting for practical and/or official purposes. However, a primary objective of the paintings of Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion was to portray the ever-changing and striking nature of this real scenery. Moreover, Park Chung-gan wrote a colophon and added a poem on his admiration of the scenery he witnessed during his trip and ruminated over the true character of nature. Thus, unlike other previously known real-scenery landscape paintings, these two are of great significance as examples of real-scenery landscape paintings produced for the simple appreciation of nature. Gyeongpodae Pavilion and Chongseokjeong Pavilion are noteworthy in that they are the earliest remaining examples of the historical tradition of reflecting a sightseeing trip in painting accompanied by poetry. Furthermore, and most importantly, they broaden the understanding of Korean real-scenery landscape painting by presenting varied forms, compositions, and perspectives from sixteenth-century real-scenery landscape paintings that had formerly been unfound.