SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 2

Relative Deprivation and Resilience in Supply Networks

Dilek Yılmaz BÖREKÇİ
Ülkü Aslıhan ÖZKAN
Pages
13–26
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, resilience of dealers appears to be an essential attribute leading to positive reactions to deprivation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Dealers may experience and perceive varying levels of beneficiary exchange relations in a manufacturer s network.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Low-benefit perceiving dealers may experience relative deprivation as compared to their significant others such as better-off dealers of that manufacturer, better-off dealers of a competitor or better-off itself in previous periods, and demonstrate positive or negative reactions to that deprivation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, resilience of dealers appears to be an essential attribute leading to positive reactions to deprivation.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Dealers may experience and perceive varying levels of beneficiary exchange relations in a manufacturer s network. Low-benefit perceiving dealers may experience relative deprivation as compared to their significant others such as better-off dealers of that manufacturer, better-off dealers of a competitor or better-off itself in previous periods, and demonstrate positive or negative reactions to that deprivation. Although manufacturer-dealer exchange (MDX) relations have been studied previously, research on relative deprivation in those relations is nonexistent. Thus, to fill this gap, this study analyzes dealers relative deprivation in MDX relations with perceived benefits as antecedents and reactions to deprivation as consequences. A multiple-design case approach has been conducted on two manufacturers and their dealers from the Turkish drapery industry. By analyzing dealers in MDX relations from the automotive industry, validation analyzes have been performed. This study has highlighted the importance of dealers relative deprivation as an issue to be handled in MDX relations. In addition, resilience of dealers appears to be an essential attribute leading to positive reactions to deprivation.

🔖

Cite This Article

BÖREKÇİ, D. Y., ÖZKAN, Ü. A. (2022). Relative Deprivation and Resilience in Supply Networks. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 2, 13–26. https://ajindex.com/articles/553973

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Adams, J. S. (1963).
  2. Toward an understanding of inequity, The Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 67(5), 422-436.
  3. Ates, A. and Bititci, U. (2011). Change process: a key enabler for building resilient SMEs, International Journal of Production Research, 49(18), 5601-5618.
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Engelwood, NJ. Benton, W. C. and Maloni, M. (2005). The influence of power driven buyer/supplier relationships on supply chain function, Journal of Operations Management, 23, 1-22.
  5. Bolino, M. C. and Turnley, W. H. (2009). Relative deprivation among employees in lower-quality leader-member exchange relationships, The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 276−286. Burnard, K. and Bhamra, R. (2011). Organizational resilience: development of a conceptual framework for organizational responses, International Journal of Production Research, 49 (18), 5581-5599.
  6. Cannon, J. P. and Perreault Jr., W. D. (1999). Buyer-seller relationships in business markets, Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 439-460.
  7. Chan, J. W. K. (2011). Enhancing organizational resilience: application of a viable system model and MCDA in a small Hong Kong company, International Journal of Production Research, 49 (18), 5545-5563.
  8. Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistical relative deprivation, Psychological Review, 83, 85-113.
  9. Crosby, F. (1979). Relative deprivation revisited: A response to Miller, Bolce and Halligan, The American Political Science Review, 73(1), 103-112.
  10. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532- 550. Eisenhardt, K. M. and Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges, Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
  11. Essig, M. and Amann, M. (2009). Supplier satisfaction: Conceptual basics and explorative findings, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 15, 103-113.
  12. Feldman, D. C., Leana, C. R. and Bolino, M. C. (2002). Underemployment and relative deprivation among reemployed executives, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 453−471. Feldman, D. C. and Turnley, W. H. (2004). Contingent employment in academic careers: Relative deprivation among adjunct faculty, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 284−307. Garengo, P. and Bernardi, G. (2007). Organizational capability in SMEs: performance measurement as a key system in supporting company development, International Journal of Productivity and Perfo