دانلود ترجمه مقاله کسب دانش در مشارکت زنجیره تامین: نقش قدرت

7. Conclusions - The primary contribution of this paper to the literature is to show the differential impact of the two indicators of power on knowledge acquisition. Our research thus offers evidence that power is multifaceted and that each factor influences knowledge acquisition differently. This in turn may explain the inconsistent findings of previous studies examining the role played by power within supply chains (e.g., Beecham and Cordey-Hayes, 1998; Cox, 1999; Dyer and Nobeoka, 2000; Maloni and Benton, 2000). Actual power, in the shape of availability of alternatives, had a negative impact on knowledge acquisition. This supports the view that knowledge transfer is more likely to take place when one partner views another as irreplaceable. In other words, high interdependence is a catalyst for knowledge transfer. More importantly, it is the decision to exercise restraint in the use of power that positively influences knowledge acquisition. From a practical point of view this study suggests that factors under management control such as how much, and how to exercise, power have a significant influence on knowledge transfer and the overall performance of the supply chain. A key managerial implication of these findings is that management behaviour predicated on exploiting actual power is likely in the long term to be detrimental to improving performance. Instead, managers of supply chain actors in favourable positions of power are encour- aged to see beyond the short-term gains resulting from lower relative switching costs and both encourage and lead further development of the cooperative relationship. Our study further supports the view that knowledge transfer improves the performance of supply chain firms (e.g., Modi and Mabert, 2007; Lawson et al., 2009). This has important implica- tions for the design and operation of supply chain partnerships, suggesting that one of the main goals ought to be knowledge exchange and ensuring that effective channels are put in place to facilitate it. Our finding provides a further reminder to managers that knowledge sharing improves performance and that supply chains offer the potential to affect knowledge transfer. A key implication for managers is the need to identify the specific mechanisms, in the specific context of their supply chain partner- ship, that best facilitate closer communication and hence knowl- edge acquisition. Typical mechanisms are visits to partners’ premises, video-conferencing, and shared web-based communi- cation platforms. A second key implication is for managers to think carefully about what type of knowledge is mutually most beneficial in the partnership’s specific context, that is to say the content of knowledge transfer. To this end, Modi and Mabert (2007) suggest five categories of content: ‘production/manufac- turing related’, ‘problem solving assistance related’, ‘quality related’, ‘process control related’ and ‘other’ (e.g., timing and innovation). Perhaps most importantly, there is an important nexus between this latter implication and the aforementioned implication for managers to ensuring that effective channels for knowledge exchange are developed. There is an opportunity for managers to carefully match each of Modi and Mabert’s (2007) categories of ‘content’ of knowledge exchange to the existing communication channels and mechanisms in their partnership in order to maximise knowledge acquisition. Furthermore, such an exercise can identify where gaps exist and channel/mechanism improvement efforts can be prioritised. This finding also empha- sises the importance both of knowledge being exchanged and of what the knowledge is about. Clearly both are important. With this in mind, future research is encouraged to examine learning theory (e.g., Huber, 1991; Hult, 1998) with a view to extending the knowledge acquisition aspect in supply chain partnership design to cater for knowledge geared towards exploration and knowledge geared towards exploitation.