Developing the Concept of Transparency for Use in Supply Relationships
| Date | 01 December 2004 |
| Author | Nigel Caldwell,Richard Lamming,Deborah Harrison |
| Published date | 01 December 2004 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2004.00420.x |
Developing the Concept of Transparency
for Use in Supply Relationships
Richard Lamming, Nigel Caldwell
*
and Deborah Harrisonw
School of Management, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton S017 IBJ, UK
*
Centre for Research in Strategic Purchasing and Supply, School of Management, University of Bath, UK
and wGreat Western Enterprise, Trowbridge, UK
Corresponding author email: r.c.lamming@soton.ac.uk
Management concern surrounding the supply of goods and services from business to
business, and the related attempts to understand the phenomena observed therein,
appears to rest upon a broad range of incompatible perspectives, from political science
(often limited to considerations of power) to the logistical (akin to manipulation of a
great, benign but dynamic jigsaw puzzle). It appears that all perspectives abrade against
the difficulties of exchanging information, knowledge and innovation within the
relationships between buying and selling organizations and the apparent chronic
systemic inefficiency that transactions often represent in this context. This article
addresses these concerns, exploring the concept of transparency and the developments
necessary for it to be useful in exchanging sensitive information and tacit knowledge in
supply relationships. Our central concern is how the understanding of transparency and
its commercial importance may change when it is expressed as a manageable element of
the relationship between two organizations rather than as a general property of a
broader system (e.g. a supply network, industrial sub-sector, geographical cluster) and
what utility this differentiation might hold for managers. The conclusion to the article,
and the implication for managers, is that transparency might indeed be created and
usefully managed within supply relationships but that it would differ fundamentally in
meaning from previously posited concepts, with the same name, in different contexts.
Introduction
The business system represented by a series or
network of interorganizational relationships, set
up to support the buying and selling of goods and
services, has come to be known as the supply
chain. The term ‘chain’ is an insufficient meta-
phor, given the complexity of such systems but
this poor terminology does not invalidate discus-
sion of supply relationships themselves nor
reduce the importance of trying to identify an
interorganizational context for them. Within a
supply relationship, the operational effects of
each organization’s strategies and policies natu-
rally interact, providing a complex space within
which neither party can dictate absolute practice
but both must maintain an interest in effective
business processes. The problem is thus how to
employ operating methods that sustain the
relationship while protecting the sovereignty of
the buying and selling organizations.
Much of the extensive debate (Cousins, 2002;
Ford et al., 1998; Hakansson and Snehota, 1995;
Womack et al., 1990) on the nature of buyer–
supplier, interorganizational relationships has
focused upon the strategic-level issues and the
transfer of product and process technologies.
Models for strategic planning in this context are
now plentiful (e.g. Carr and Smeltzer, 1997;
Cousins, 2002; Kraljic, 1983; Reck and Long,
1988).
1
In practice, however, it appears that such
planning often founders on the vagaries of
individuals and factors in local organizational
1
For a review of supply strategy, see Harland, Lamming
and Cousins, 1999.
British Journal of Management, Vol. 15, 291–302 (2004)
r2004 British Academy of Management
To continue reading
Request your trial