Estudio y análisis de las relaciones proveedor-cliente: el caso de la Denominación de Origen (D.O.) Somontano

El establecimiento, desarrollo y mantenimiento de relaciones duraderas entre proveedores y clientes es una tendencia que cuenta cada día con mayor número de defensores. Gran número de autores soportan esta idea y que apuestan por la gestión de relaciones en detrimento de las clásicas transacciones de intercambio. Y todavía más en el contexto de los mercados industriales, donde tanto proveedor como cliente pueden conseguir beneficios mutuos fruto de este contacto permanente. Nuestro trabajo analiza este tipo de relaciones comerciales en el contexto de la industria agroalimentaria. Más concretamente, estudiamos el caso de la Denominación de Origen (D.O.) del Somontano.The establishment, development and maintenance of lasting relationships between suppliers and customers is a trend that has an ever greater number of defenders. Large number of authors support this idea of relationship management to the detriment of classic exchange transactions. And even more in the context of industrial markets, where both ,supplier and customer, can get mutual benefits of this permanent contact. Our work takes this kind of trade relations in the context of the food industry. More specifically, we study the case of the Designation of Origin (DO) Somontano

Determining Factors Of Long-Term Orientation Of Firm-Supplier Relationships: An Empirical Analysis In The Context Of The Spanish Agro-Food Sector

In an increasingly competitive and dynamic economic environment, the establishment, development and maintenance of enduring relationships between suppliers and customers is critical for both agents, and represents an important source of competitive advantages for those companies able to manage them adequately. Taking as reference the perspective of the customer, we consider that it is important for them to always work with a group of suppliers that have demonstrated an ability to adapt to their specific needs and thereby to reduce the level of uncertainty associated with their supply function. The current work, which takes the Spanish agro-food sector as framework of reference, analyzes the importance of certain factors in the long-term orientation of these relationships

Looking For Good International Partnerships: Bodegas Pirineos Ltd., A Case Study Within The Spanish Context

In an economic context increasingly more dynamic, complex, and globalized, those companies which are able to find first-rate business partnerships and to manage efficient relationships with them have a greater guarantee of success and profitability in their activity. Their products will get the desired standards of quality and firms will be able to distribute and to sell these products adequately. For local and national markets firms use to have enough knowledge, but their position will be more complicated if they decide to expand their business abroad. Capability and unawareness of the market structures, language are some of the most important limits for international expansion. In this context firms must dedicate resources to look for capable partnerships. Although trust or partnership image could be understood as key-factor for election, decisions involve greater risk and uncertainty. If selection is satisfactory firms will desire to build relationships with these partnerships and cooperation and commitment will arise. In other case, firms will look for other alternatives, when available. Furthermore, the smallest firms have fewer resources than bigger firms and, therefore, the management these situations could be more complicated: power-dependence relationships are unfavorable. Now wine is a fashionable product. Once local and national markets are mature, international markets are fundamental for the wineries expansion. But international distribution seems pretty complicated. While production must be near vineyards, consumption could be localized wherever consumers are. Firms do not have enough resources to distribute their production directly, and peculiarities of each country or region must to be considered: legal aspects, languageBig international wine distribution use to be controlled by few and powerful enterprises in each country, while small and specialized distributors have fewer scope. Therefore, dependence relationships for wineries could arise. This paper, by analyzing a specific Spanish case, Bodega Pirineos Ltd., identifies those factors that a Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) company assesses when choosing and deciding on building up a relationship with a specific international partnership that distributes its products. Sometimes distributors are understood as suppliers of services. Image, trust, communication, and cooperation are considered as prior elements, while commitment arises when relationships are satisfactory. When partnerships do not satisfy our firm, new alternatives are looked for. But if there is no more alternatives and Bodega Pirineos depends on this partnership it uses to maintain the relationship hopping new options arise. Some implications for other wineries or other SMEs firms could be derived from this paper

Gestión estratégica de una cartera de clientes industriales en un contexto relacional

Este trabajo pretende mostrar la importancia que, en el contexto de los mercados industriales, tiene una buena gestión de la cartera de clientes. Las peculiaridades propias de estos mercados, así como la tendencia general de la disciplina del marketing, parecen recomendar la creación, desarrollo y mantenimiento de relaciones de intercambio estables y duraderas, ofreciendo soluciones individualizadas a las necesidades concretas de cada cliente. Sin embargo, las empresas también tienen clientes que no resultan interesantes desde el punto de vista de rentabilidad.KUTXA; Vicerrectorado de Campus de Gipuzkoa de la UPV/EH

Channel Habits and the Development of Successful Customer-Firm Relationships in Services

Technology advances have profoundly changed the way customers and service organizations interact, leading to a multitude of service channels. This study investigates consumer habits toward service channels in order to understand the influence of these channel habits on perceptions and intentions (perceived switching costs and attitudinal loyalty) and on consumer behavior (service usage and cross-buy). We empirically test the framework in the financial services industry, and the results reveal that physical store habit increases perceived switching costs and that acquired habits toward the physical store and self-service kiosks have a positive influence on attitudinal loyalty. Perceived switching costs positively affect service usage, and attitudinal loyalty positively influences cross-buy. In addition, habits in each channel lead to an increase in the number of services acquired (cross-buy), but online and self-service kiosks channel habits negatively impact service usage, as the lack of physical presence may increase customer uncertainty. Because habits are built on the frequency and stability of channel usage, firms can manage habits by encouraging frequent interactions under stable contexts. In addition, firms should stimulate customer habits toward the physical store as it is central to the promotion of loyalty and for increasing service usage

Are multichannel customers really more valuable? An analysis of banking services

Conventional wisdom suggests that multichannel customers are more profitable. With a focus on goods, Kushwaha and Shankar (2013) demonstrate that it depends on the type of product purchased. Our study looks at the profit implications of multichannel customers in services (banking). Our research shows that fully multichannel customers (using all channels available) are not the most profitable for service firms. We find that concentrating the interactions through high-margin channels as well as using specific dual-channel combinations produce improvements in profitability

Investigating the role of customers’ perceptions of employee effort and justice in service recovery

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is, first, to identify the relationship, if any, between customers’ perceptions of justice (functional element) and employee effort (symbolic element) and their effects on satisfaction and loyalty in the context of service recovery and, second, to determine the impact of cross-cultural differences on these relationships. Design/methodology/approach: Survey data from actual customers were gathered in three countries (n = 414) and analyzed using structural equation modeling to test the proposed hypotheses. Findings: The results demonstrate the role of the constructs of perceived employee effort and perceived justice in influencing post-recovery satisfaction and loyalty across cultures. While perceived justice is valued across cultures, customers from feminine (masculine) cultures require more (less) employee effort to influence post-recovery satisfaction positively. Customers from low (high) uncertainty cultures are more (less) willing to give the provider another chance after a service recovery. Research limitations/implications: The study shows that both functional and symbolic elements of service recovery are important determinants of customer satisfaction and loyalty and that their influence can be significant in a cross-cultural context. Practical implications: International service managers must consider the nature of cultural differences in their markets to develop and implement tailored recovery strategies that can result in satisfied customers. Originality/value: This study is the first to integrate the functional and symbolic elements of service recovery, their impact on customers’ behavioral responses and the influence of cultural variations

International entrepreneurship in SMEs: a study of influencing factors in the textile industry

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11365-012-0242-3International entrepreneurship is an incipient research area with a rapidly increasing body of knowledge and contributions. An important part of this literature has focused on the analysis of the contributing factors to IE development. From these studies, this work attempts to analyse and validate through an integrative model the effect on this construct in SME of some of the main factors proposed by the literature such as Skills and Competences, Attitude and Proactiveness, Creativity and Innovation, Networking, Employees and Activity. To proceed with this aim, we conducted an empirical research focused on 174 textile SME in Spain. The results obtained confirm a positive relationship between the studied factors and the IE development. In consequence, this work agrees with previous literature that point out the need to use multi-theoretical perspectives, combining multiple factors.Gil Pechuán, I.; Expósito Langa, M.; Tomas Miquel, JV. (2013). International entrepreneurship in SMEs: a study of influencing factors in the textile industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 9(1):45-57. doi:10.1007/s11365-012-0242-3S455791Akgün, A., Keskin, H., & Byrne, J. (2012). Organizational emotional memory. Management Decision, 50(1), 95–114.Andersén, J. (2011). Strategic resources and firm performance. Management Decision, 49(1), 87–98.Anderson, A. R., Dodd, S. D., & Jack, S. L. (2012). Entrepreneurship as connecting: some implications for theorising and practice. Management Decision, 50(5), 958–971.Appelbaum, S. H., Roy, M., & Gilliland, T. (2011). Globalization of performance appraisals: theory and applications. Management Decision, 49(4), 570–585.Arribas, I., Hernández, P., Urbano, A., & Vila, J. E. (2012). Are social and entrepreneurial attitudes compatible? A behavioral and self-perceptional analysis. Management Decision, 50(10), 1739–1757.Audretsch, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship research. Management Decision, 50(5), 755–764.Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 909–924.Bannon, L. (1998). Mattel plans to double sales abroad. Wall Street Journal, February 11, (A3 and A8).Battistella, C., Biotto, G., & De Toni, A. (2012). From design driven innovation to meaning strategy. Management Decision, 50(4), 718–743.Bell, J., McNaughton, J., Young, R., & Crick, D. (2003). Towards an integrative model of small firm internationalization. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 339–362.Bonzo, P., Valadares de Oliveira, P., & McCormarck. (2012). Planning, capabilities, and performance: an integrated value approach. Management Decision, 50(6), 1001–1021.Bossak, J., & Nagashima, S. (1997). Corporate strategies for a borderless world: sharpening your competitive edge. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization.Cambra-Fierro, J., Florin, J., Perez, L., & Whitelock, J. (2011). Inter-firm market orientation as antecedent of knowledge transfer, innovation and value creation in networks. Management Decision, 49(3), 444–467.Cantarello, S., Nosella, A., Petroni, G., & Venturini, K. (2011). External technology sourcing: evidence from design-driven innovation. Management Decision, 49(6), 962–983.Chang, Y. Y., Hughes, M., & Hotho, S. (2011). Internal and external antecedents of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity outcomes. Management Decision, 49(10), 1658–1676.Chaston, I., & Scott, G. J. (2012). Entrepreneurship and open innovation in an emerging economy. Management Decision, 50(7), 1161–1177.Coviello, N. E., & Jones, M. V. (2004). Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 485–508.Coviello, N. E., & McAuley, A. (1999). Internationalization and the smaller firm: a review of contemporary empirical research. Management International Review, 39, 223–256.Covin, J., & Slevin, D. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.Covin, J., & Slevin, D. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16, 7–25.Davis, D., Morris, M., & Allen, J. (1991). Perceived environmental turbulence and its effect on selected entrepreneurship, marketing, and organizational characteristics in industrial firms. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(1), 43–51.Dean, C. C., Thibodeaux, M. S., Beyerlein, M., Ebrahimi, B., & Molina, D. (1993). Corporate entrepreneurship and competitive aggressiveness. A comparison of U.S. firms operating in eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States with U.S. firms in other high-risk environments. Advances in International Comparative Management, 8, 31–54.Dess, G. G., & Robinson, R. B. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: the case of privately held firms and conglomerate business units. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 265–273.Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 677–695.Díaz-Casero, J. C., Díaz-Aunión, A., Sánchez-Escobedo, M. C., Coduras-Martinez, A., & Hernández-Mogollón, R. (2012). Economic freedom and entrepreneurial activity. Management Decision, 50(9), 1686–1711.Dimitratos, P., & Plakoyiannaki, E. (2003). Theoretical foundations of an international entrepreneurial culture. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 187–215.Dubini, P., & Aldrich, H. (1991). Personal and extended networks are central to the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 6, 305–313.Felício, J. A., Rodrigues, R., & Caldeirinha, V. R. (2012). The effect of intrapreneurship on corporate performance. Management Decision, 50(10), 1717–1738.Goktan, A. B., & Miles, G. (2011). Innovation speed and radicalness: are they inversely related? Management Decision, 49(4), 533–547.Gómez-Haro, S., Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Cordón-Pozo, E. (2011). Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship. Management Decision, 49(10), 1677–1693.Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, L. D. (2001). Strategic entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial strategies for wealth creation [Special Issue]. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6), 479–492.Hotho, S., & Champion, K. (2011). Small businesses in the new creative industries: innovation as a people management challenge. Management Decision, 49(1), 29–54.Hu, Y.-S. (1995). The international transferability of competitive advantage. California Management Review, 37(4), 73–88.Huarng, K. H., & Yu, T. H. K. (2011). Entrepreneurship, process innovation and value creation by a non-profit SME. Management Decision, 49(2), 284–296.Jones, M. V. (1999). The internationalization of small UK high technology based firms. Journal of International Marketing, 7, 15–41.Jones, M. V., & Coviello, N. E. (2005). Internationalization: conceptualising and entrepreneurial process of behaviour in time. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3):284–303.Khandwalla, P. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2004). Innovation, organization capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 124–141.Kropp, F., Lindsay, N. J., & Shoham, A. (2006). Entrepreneurial, market, and learning orientations and international entrepreneurial business venture performance in South African firms. International Marketing Review, 23(5), 504–523.Liebeskind, J. P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 93–107.Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (2000). International entrepreneurship: the intersection of two research paths. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 902–908.McDougall, P. P., Shane, S., & Oviatt, B. M. (1994). Explaining the formation of international new ventures: the limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, 469–487.McGrath, R. G., MacMillan, I. C., & Venkataraman, S. (1995). Global dimensions of new competencies. In S. Birley & I. C. MacMillan (Eds.), International entrepreneurship. New York: Routledge.McNaughton, R. B. (2001). The export mode decision-making process in small knowledge- intensive firms. Market Intelligence and Planning, 19, 12–20.McNaughton, R. B. (2003). The number of export markets that a firm serves: process models versus the born-global phenomenon. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 297–311.Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1984). Organizations: a quantum view. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Morrow, J. F. (1988). International entrepreneurship: a new growth opportunity. New Management, 3, 59–61.Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36, 15–23.Naman, J. L., & Slevin, D. P. (1993). Entrepreneurship and the concept of fit: a model and empirical tests. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 137–153.Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation or imitation? The role of organizational culture. Management Decision, 49(1), 55–72.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (1994). Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45–64.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (1999). A framework for understanding accelerated international entrepreneurship. In R. Wright (Ed.), Research in global strategic management (pp. 23–40). Stamford: JAI Press.Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). Defining international entrepreneurship and modeling the speed of internalization. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(5), 537–554.Peiris, I.K., Akoorie, M.E.M., & Sinha, P.N. (2012). International entrepreneurship: A critical analysis of studies in the past two decades and future directions for research. Journal of International Entrepreneurship. Article in press.Pinchot, G., III. (1985). Intrapreneuring: why you don’t have to leave the corporation to become entrepreneur. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. London: Collier-Macmillan.Renko, M., Shrader, R. C., & Simon, M. (2012). Perception of entrepreneurial opportunity: a general framework. Management Decision, 50(7), 1233–1251.Sandulli, F. D., Fernandez-Menendez, J., Rodriguez-Duarte, A., & Lopez-Sanchez, J. I. (2012). Testing the Schumpeterian hypotheses on an open innovation framework. Management Decision, 50(7), 1222–1232.Santos, F. J., Romero, I., & Fernández-Serrano, J. (2012). SMEs and entrepreneurial quality from a macroeconomic perspective. Management Decision, 50(8), 1382–1395.Shama, A. (1995). Entry strategies of U.S. firms to the former Soviet Bloc and Eastern Europe. California Management Review, 37(3), 90–109.Simon, H. (1996). Hidden champions: lessons from 500 of the world’s best unknown companies. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Singh, S., Darwish, T. K., Costa, A. C., & Anderson, N. (2012). Measuring HRM and organisational performance: concepts, issues, and framework. Management Decision, 50(4), 651–667.Smart, T. (1996). GE’s Welch: ‘Fighting like hell to be No. 1’. Business Week, July 8, 48.Snow, C., & Hrebiniak, L. (1980). Strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 317–336.Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 17–27.Styles, C., & Seymour, R. G. (2006). Opportunities for marketing researchers in international entrepreneurship. International Marketing Review, 23(2), 126–145.Turner, R., Ledwith, A., & Kelly, J. (2012). Project management in small to medium-sized enterprises: tailoring the practices to the size of company. Management Decision, 50(5), 942–957.Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11, 801–814.Vlasic, B. (1998). The little car that could carry Chrysler overseas. Business Week, 19, 39.Welbourne, T. M., Neck, H., & Meyer, G. D. (2012). The entrepreneurial growth ceiling: using people and innovation to mitigate risk and break through the growth ceiling in initial public offerings. Management Decision, 50(5), 778–796.Williamson, P. J. (1997). Asia’s new competitive game. Harvard Business Review, 75(5), 55–67.Yeoh, P. L. (2004). International learning: antecedents and performance implications among newly internationalizing companies in an exporting context. International Marketing Review, 21(4/5), 511–535.Zahra, S. A. (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship. An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(4), 259–285.Zahra, S. A. (1993a). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance. A taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4), 319–340.Zahra, S. A. (1993b). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior: a critique and extensión. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 17(4), 5–21.Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). International entrepreneurship: the current status of the field and future agenda. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: creating a new mindset. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Zahra, S. A., Jennings, D. F., & Kuratko, D. F. (1999). The antecedents and consequences of firm-level entrepreneurship: the state of the field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(2), 45–63.Zhou, L. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial proclivity and foreign market knowledge on early internationalization. Journal of World Business, 42(3), 281–293