The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Supply management orientation and supplier/buyer performance
Abstract
Academics and practitioners agree that excellence in supply management results in better quality, customer service, and channel performance. Yet, most of these studies are either conceptual in nature or actual case studies. The primary objective of this research is to test the impact of a supply management orientation (SMO) on the suppliers' operational performance and buyers' competitive priorities (cost, quality, delivery, flexibility). Three major research hypotheses associated with SMO, Supplier Performance (SP), and Buyer Performance (BP) are tested using a confirmatory structural equation modeling approach. The results of this research support the conclusion that an improvement (increase) in the SMO improves both the suppliers' and buyers' performance (i.e., a win–win situation for the supply chain). In addition, the influence of SMO on delivery‐ and quality‐related performance is more statistically significant than on cost or flexibility performance. In fact, when volume and process flexibility are top competitive priorities, a supply chain management orientation may not be an effective way to achieve the desired flexibility. The article ends by discussing other conclusions and suggests directions for future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005 · Cited by 27,200
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Cited by
Internal lean practices and performance: The role of technological turbulence
Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jacobs, M., Fynes, B., Wiengarten, F., & Lecuna, A. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.10.005 · Cited by 200
Shin, H., Lee, J.-N., Kim, D., & Rhim, H. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.06.015 · Cited by 199
Self-citationWong, C. W. Y., Lai, K.-H., Cheng, T. C. E., & Lun, Y. H. V. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.02.019 · Cited by 150
Kumar, R., Singh, R. K., & Shankar, R. (2015) · IIMB Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2015.03.001 · Cited by 141
Customization and real time information access in integrated eBusiness supply chain relationships
Klein, R. (2007) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.03.001 · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Shin, H., Collier, D. A., & Wilson, D. D.
- Venue
- Journal of Operations Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-03-27
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 317-333
- ISSN
- 0272-6963 (ISSN-L)
- 1873-1317
- OpenAlex
- W2003681287
- Cited by
- 816
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 17.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Supply management orientation and supplier/buyer performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0272-6963(99)00031-5
- The paper
- Shin, H., Collier, D. A., & Wilson, D. D. (2000). Supply management orientation and supplier/buyer performance. Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(99)00031-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
