1199

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

Impact of in the Supply Chain Relationship on Implementing Supply Chain Integration Minkyun Kim#1, Sangmi Chai*2 *Ewha School of Business, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea #Sogang Business School, Sogang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea [email protected] [email protected]

Abstract— This research investigates the impact of supply chain, various antecedents are required to procedural, distributive, and in improve buyer–supplier relationships, such as supplier relationships on implementing supply chain commitment, cooperation, collaboration, and trust integration. This paper attempts to explain how [41]. More importantly, whereas firms attempt to justice in a supply chain relationship, relationship manage supply chain relationships to obtain commitment to suppliers, and supply chain competitive advantages, transactions in supply socialization affect a firm’s intention to implement supply chain integration. After collecting 254 survey chain relationships need to be beneficial to responses from supply and purchasing managers in partners. Because of these transactions, the stake the manufacturing industry, data analysis is based on justice is generated in the supply chain conducted using the partial least squares technique. [49]. Therefore, justice in supply chain Our research results indicate that relationship relationships has emerged as an important issue in commitment to suppliers and supply chain supply chains and operations management in both socialization have a positive impact on justice in a academia and industry. Previous studies pointed supply chain relationship. Justice in a supply chain out the important role of justice in supply chain relationship and relationship commitment to relationships. Justice plays a significant role in suppliers positively affect intention to implement supply chain integration; however, supply chain improving supply chain relationship performance, socialization does not have a significant relationship and failure to maintain justice toward suppliers with intention to implement supply chain integration. leads to poor relationship performance in supply In addition, intention to implement supply chain chains [2] [12]. integration leads to the actual behavior of implementing supply chain integration. Our research The concept of justice has been discussed in provides significant contributions to academia and organizational research for a long time and has industry by filling a gap in the literature that been applied in economic and social exchanges in relational factors in supply chain makes a positive relationships. Although the concept of justice has impact on intention on implementing supply chain been applied in different contexts, this study integration as well as actual implementation. defines justice as fairness in exchanging economic Keywords— Justice, relationship commitment, supply and social values in supply chain relationships chain socialization, supply chain integration (SCI) through three dimensions: , , and interactional justice [44]. 1. Introduction This study is based on three dimensions of Intensified competition is causing firms to look for justice—procedural justice, distributive justice, and competitive advantages to survive in dynamic interactional justice because the concepts of markets. In , maintaining interpersonal justice and informational justice are good relationships is considered a key ability for matched with the concept of interactional justice. being competitive in the market [32]. Similar to the Whereas justice is considered one of the most relationship between Dell and Microsoft and important factors in maintaining strong supply between Proctor & Gamble and Wal-Mart, a strong chain relationships that result in improved relationship in a supply chain generates a positive performance, supply chain integration (SCI) has impact and synergy effects on both buyers and been heavily discussed as one of the best supply suppliers. To establish a strong relationship in a chain practices to improve performance [25], [59]. ______International Journal of Supply Chain Management IJSCM, ISSN: 2050-7399 (Online), 2051-3771 (Print) Copyright © ExcelingTech Pub, UK (http://excelingtech.co.uk/)

1200

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

In this paper, SCI is defined as the degree of investment, as well as relationship performance in strategic collaboration between manufacturers and an indirect manner [39]. Therefore, previous their supply chain partners, and collaborative studies emphasized the important role of justice in management on the operational processes of intra- establishing and maintaining a good supply chain and inter- [25]. Following their SCI relationship and improving performance. Using the positive perception of justice in a supply chain definition and the research of [59], SCI in this relationship, this research expands and attempts to paper is composed of three dimensions: internal examine the role of justice in implementing SCI. integration, supplier integration, and customer integration. Using the definition of SCI that Prior studies established three dimensions of justice emphasizes strategic collaboration in supply chains, [17], [40], [44]. First, procedural justice is defined this research investigates how justice in supply as the degree of fairness in the decision making of chain relationships affects the enhancement of governance related to exchanging values in the strategic collaboration in supply chains by relationship [44]. Procedural justice focuses on implementing SCI. how people react to the process of solving disputes and allocating outcomes [39]. Second, distributive This study attempts to determine the antecedents, justice is defined as fair rewards based on efforts made in a relationship [44]. Finally, interactional including justice, to encouraging the justice is defined as the degree of openness in implementation of SCI and to explain how supply communications regarding information related to chain practices affect firms’ intentions and actual managing conflicts in supply chain relationships implementations of SCI on the basis of managers’ [44]. decision making. To identify drivers of the actual implementation behavior of SCI, this research 2.2 Relationship commitment and considers relationship commitment to suppliers as supply chain socialization attitude toward SCI, justice as a subjective norm, and supply chain socialization as perceived Relationship commitment is defined as a party’s behavioral control and behavioral intention as the willingness to maintain a relationship using intention to implement SCI. Therefore, this financial investments and physical resources [64], research examines the impact of supply chain [65]. In supply chain management, supply chain practices to maintain a good supply chain members’ will and attitude develop and maintain relationship, including relationship commitment, long-term and steady relationships [42] [65]. justice, and supply chain socialization, on intention Relationship commitment in supply chains brings to implement SCI. In addition, this study also the benefit of facilitating the effectiveness of future investigates the associations between behavioral exchanges, leading to the motivation of intention of SCI implementation and the actual maintaining a long-term-oriented relationship based behavior of SCI implementation. on shared values among supply chain partners [65]. Relationship commitment is divided into two 2. Literature review categories: normative and instrumental [9]. This 2.1 Justice in supply chain relationship research focuses on the relationship commitment between manufacturers and suppliers to investigate Justice is considered a concept of fairness in its impact on justice and SCI based on buyers’ exchanging social and economic values between organizations [31]. In the context of inter- perspective. organizations, justice is receiving significant Supply chain socialization is defined as the degree attention from researchers, who are examining its of interaction and communication between buyers role in supply chain relationships. In supply chain and suppliers in assisting the establishment of relationships, justice enhances the development of familiarity, frequent communication, and solutions a relationship by positively affecting the long-term to problems in supply chains [16]. Socialization is orientation of the supply chain relationship and divided into lateral and vertical socialization relational behavior [32]. Justice is particularly depending on whether transfers and flows occur significant in a long-term supply chain relationship between peer subsidiaries or between headquarters to gain competitiveness in achieving mutual goals. and subsidiaries [29]. The mechanisms of Thus, the perception of justice in supply chain socialization in the supply chain were applied to relationships has a positive impact on knowledge sharing, continuous commitment, and relationship enhance inter-organizational relationships, such as 1201

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 social events, joint workshops, teams, conferences, Supplier integration is based on cooperative and onsite visits [16]. This research examines the relationships and information and participation in role of the intensity of supply chain socialization on supply chain decision making, leading to strong justice in supply chain relationships and SCI linkages between suppliers and buyers [22]. implementation. Both internal and external integration, such as supplier and customer integration and the multi- 2.3 Supply chain integration dimensions of SCI, enable supply chain networks implementation to operate all processes as a single and to provide the maximum values to customers [25]. The SCI is heavily discussed by scholars and is one This research applies SCI as a dimension of of the most popular topics in the literature on internal, supplier, and customer integration [25], supply chain and operations management. SCI has [59]. been defined as the multiple dimensions of constructs, such as internal integration and external 3. Research model and hypothesis integration, which are composed of supplier and customer integration [63]. Using previous studies, The Regarding the establishment and maintenance the research of [25] summarized the definition of of a good supply chain relationship, Daugherty [19] SCI as the strategic collaboration between buyers summarized critical success factors from both and suppliers on both inter- and intra- buyers’ and suppliers’ perspectives. She organizational processes in supply chains. Prior highlighted trust, top management support, studies highlighted the significance of strategic performance capability, clear goals, and partner integration in the supply chain based on the internal compatibility as traditional antecedents and added integration of organizations [35], [37]. In supply collaboration as an important factor in supply chain chains, strategic integration emerged as a main relationships. Among the significant antecedents to focus to achieve and maintain the effective flow of maintaining a good relationship in the supply chain, materials, services, capital, and information at this research considers relationship commitment, minimum cost that fulfilled a high level of justice, and supply chain socialization as affecting customer satisfaction [18], [33]. Therefore, this SCI that promotes collaboration. research focuses on multi-dimensions and the As an attitude toward the behavior of SCI strategic importance of SCI following the definition implementation, relationship commitment is of [25]. considered a determinant for buyers’ attitudes in The concept of SCI has been established in engaging with suppliers regarding collaboration different dimensions depending on the place and a long-term relationship. More importantly, perspective, such as internal and external relationship commitment is described as the highest integration [7], [30]. Internal integration generated stage of bonding that leads to positive relational numerous benefits for organizations and supply outcomes, such as cooperation and long-term links chains, such as improved process efficiency, in supply chain relationships [1]. demand, material management, and schedule Relationship commitment also makes exchange alignment [63]. Integration with customers— partners consider an ongoing relationship as very external integration—establishes information important; thus, they spend maximum efforts to sharing and strategic collaborations with customers maintain the relationship, providing the benefits of by improving visibility and quick responses on the reliability and long-term exchanges in the supply basis of deep understandings of the market [59]. chain [20]. Regarding the maintenance of a good One of the most important functions of customer supply chain relationship, relationship commitment integration is considered improvements in the is considered a critical relationship element [4] and product design process, production planning provides various benefits in the supply chain. inventory reductions, and responsiveness toward Relationship commitment to suppliers in a supply the market using more accurate information on chain enables buyers and suppliers to share customer demands and preferences [62]. Supplier information based on communication willingness, integration—external integration—is composed of such that all partners reduce their opportunistic syncretized collaboration between suppliers and behaviors in business transactions [65]. purchasing constituencies of manufacturers [18]. Relationship commitment helps suppliers and 1202

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 buyers establish justice in business transactions in a suppliers and buyers. Supply chain socialization supply chain. Thus, we hypothesize a positive assists in establishing a good relationship and relationship between relationship commitment to provides the opportunity to understand each other suppliers and justice in a supply chain relationship. through frequent communications and interactions In the context of SCI, relationship commitment is between buyers and suppliers. Thus, we posit the considered one of the most important drivers of following positive impact of supply chain implementing SCI [5]. The research of [61] socialization on justice in the supplier relationship. empirically confirmed that supply chain management commitment, which is composed of H3. Supply chain socialization has a positive affective, continuance, and normative commitment impact on justice in supplier relationships. toward supply chain partners, is positively In the context of supply chain integration, supply associated with SCM business process integration. chain socialization facilitates bonds and ties that Relationship commitment strengthens ties between can assist in the exchange of information and ideas, supply chain members to achieve common goals leading to the establishment of a mutual and to integrate business processes between supply commitment to the culture of the supply chain [16]. chain members [10]. Applying suppliers’ More importantly, through socialization perspective in the context of relationship mechanisms in the supply chain, supply chain commitment, the study of [64] determined that partners can establish knowledge-sharing routines suppliers’ normative relationship commitment is based on strong and improved information sharing positively related to the degree of integration and relationship management [16]. Formal and between a supplier and a customer. The research of informal socialization in the supply chain positively [65] also provided empirical evidence that influence knowledge sharing in product relationship commitment to customers and development in the buyer–supplier relationship relationship commitment to suppliers both have a [38]. Socialization mechanisms in the supply chain positive impact on supplier integration. Thus, we have a significant relationship with the level of posit positive associations between relationship supplier integration in product development and commitment with suppliers and intention to with collaboration outcomes of product implement SCI and propose following research development in a positive manner [15]. If buyers hypotheses using the previous discussions on intensively use social mechanisms, then supplier relationship commitment. integration outcomes increase, such as the degree H1. Relationship commitment to suppliers of strategic partnership and information exchange positively affects justice in a supplier relationship. with suppliers [45]. Supply chain socialization facilitates frequent information sharing and H2. Relationship commitment to suppliers communications, resulting in collaboration in the positively affects intention to implement supply supply chain. Therefore, we formulate the chain integration. following hypothesis.

In the context of supply chain relationships, supply H4. Supply chain socialization has a positive chain socialization has been considered one of the impact on intention to implement supply chain important antecedents in establishing a close integration. relationship between buyers and suppliers. According to the study of [14], the combination of Justice has received significant attention in inter- formal and informal socialization mechanisms has organizational relationships in the supply chain a positive impact on relationship capital, such as [39], [40], [43]. More importantly, justice in supply mutual trust, respect, and interaction among chain relationships assists in not only establishing partners. In addition, relationship capital is also long-term and strong relationships but also in positively associated with supplier relationship improving performance. The research of [32] outcomes, such as improved product and process provides empirical evidence that procedural and design and reductions in lead times. The research distributive justice in supply chain relationships are of [45] empirically supported the concept that positively associated with long-term orientations in increasing social mechanisms lead to higher levels the relationship and relational behavior. To of created relational capital, such as trust between establish a strategic supply chain because of a trust 1203

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 and/or power climate and cultural competiveness, enterprise resource planning systems and the actual maintaining justice in the inter-organizational implementation of such systems in organizations. relationship is proposed as a critical antecedent Given these discussions, this research predicts a [36]. The enactment of maintaining justice in positive relationship between behavioral intention supply chain relationships stimulates the norm of and actual behavior toward SCI implementation. reciprocity between buyers and suppliers, leading Hence, we propose the following hypothesis. to long-term relationships [43]. Mutual justice perceptions, including distributive, procedural, H6. Intention to implement supply chain interpersonal, and informational justice, positively integration positively influences supply chain affect mutual coupling behavior [39]. Thus, justice integration implementation. in buyer–supplier relationships enables supply Figure 1 describes our research model. chain members to establish a good and long-term linkage.

In the context of U.K. supermarkets, the study of [24] found that adoption of good practices, such as maintaining procedural and distributive justice between suppliers and supermarkets. In the marketing channel relationship, distributive justice generates more satisfaction and fewer conflicts with respect to economic benefits [8]. Distributive justice has a positive impact on suppliers’ engagement with customer relationship management [23]. The research of [44] provides empirical evidence that justice in supply chain relationships improves the buyer’s performance. Because maintaining justice in supply chain relationships assists in establishing a long-term Figure 1. Research model relationship and improving performance—sharing the same objectives as implementing SCI—we 4. Methodology posit a positive relationship between justice in 4.1 Instrument and Development supply chain relationships and intention to implement SCI as follows. To examine the hypotheses of the research model using data, our research developed survey H5. Justice in supplier relationships positively questionnaires by reviewing previous studies. All influences intention to implement supply chain measurement items in the survey questionnaires integration. were revised for the supply chain management context. Justice in a supplier relationship is Prior studies attempted to find associations between measured using three dimensions in 10 items: behavioral intention and actual behavior. The study procedural justice (fairness in governance decision of [6] found a positive association between in exchange relationships), distributive justice intention to participate in a web survey and actual (fairness of the rewards in a relationship based on participation in the web survey. [60] provided efforts), and interactional justice (openness in empirical evidence that intention to use expert communicating relationships related to information decision support systems results in actual use of and conflicts). Relationship commitment to such systems. Behavioral intention to use Internet suppliers is measured in four items as attitude or banking also leads to actual usage of Internet willingness of supply chain partners to maintain a banking [47]. The positive relationship between long-term relationship. Supply chain socialization behavioral intention to use information technology is measured in five items using the frequency of in organizations and actual usage behavior of using holding various social events for suppliers. information technology is confirmed [48]. The Intention to implement SCI is measured in 12 items study of [3] also empirically validated the positive as managers’ intention to implement SCI in their relationship between intention to implement firms and the supply chain through three 1204

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

dimensions: internal integration, integration with Table 1. Measurement items with customers, and integration with suppliers. SCI reliability implementation is measured in 12 items as the Constru Measurement items Cro Ave Co actual behavior of implementing SCI (internal ct nba rag mp ch’s e integration, integration with customers and osit Alp Extr e suppliers) in firms and supply chains. Detailed ha acte Reli descriptions of all measurement items with their d abil Var ity references to the survey questions are presented in ianc (CR Table 1. e ) (AV E) After completing the first version of the survey, this research conducted intensive interviews with Procedur We are fair in our dealings 0.85 0.75 0.83 al, with our suppliers. 7 3 1 supply and purchasing executives from distributi organizations in various manufacturing industries, ve, and We fully explain the interacti decision-making criteria to to receive feedback on the measurement items and onal our suppliers. our survey. To ensure reliability and content justice in We apply consistent validity in the measurement items, our research supply decision-making criteria chain when dealing with our executed a pilot study with a different group of 33 relations suppliers. supply, purchasing, and supply chain managers, hips [32] [40], Our suppliers contribute a including supply and purchasing executives, using [44] lot to engagements with us. a modified survey that reflected the feedback from Our suppliers receive high the interviews. The statistical results of the pilot outcomes or rewards from study on reliability were adequate enough that our engagements with us. research does not need to eliminate any We receive high outcomes or rewards from measurement items. Our research finalized the engagements with our survey by reflecting all feedback provided by the suppliers. supply, purchasing, and supply chain managers, We agree on what is including supply and purchasing executives, on all important in engagements with our suppliers. aspects of the survey such as content, length, We quickly resolve any wording, and scale. Our study used a seven-point disagreements. Likert scale and the partial least squares (PLS) We exchange information technique to conduct confirmatory factor analysis. in a timely manner. Table 2 presents factor loadings and the factor We keep each other analysis results in this study. informed of any changes that may affect the other party. Relation We are very committed to 0.89 0.81 0.86 ship the relationships that my 5 6 4 Commit firm has with my suppliers. ment to Supplier My firm intends to s indefinitely maintain the relationships that it has [27], with my suppliers. [28], [65] The relationship that my firm has with my suppliers deserves our maximum effort to maintain. For our organization to maintain our relationships with our suppliers is very important.

Supply Hold frequent social events 0.89 0.75 0.80 Chain with suppliers 2 1 3 Socializa tion Hold regular joint workshops with suppliers [13], Frequent supplier onsite 1205

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

[16] visits activities. Hold regular suppliers’ When problems occur, we conferences have formal and face-to- face meetings among Team building exercises various teams and with suppliers, particularly departments. for new product development Our customers give us feedback on quality and Intention When solving problems, 0.88 0.74 0.90 delivery performance. to we have an intention to use 5 5 5 Impleme cross-functional teams. Our customers frequently nt share demand information Supply Our firm has an intention with our firm. Chain to emphasize the flow of information and materials Our customers are actively Integrati involved in our new on [7], among all teams and departments. product development [25], process. [59] Our firm pays attention to ensuring real-time We share our production integration on all internal plan and inventory levels functional activities. with our customers. When problems occur, we We share our inventory intend to have formal and levels with our suppliers. face-to-face meetings We communicate with our among various teams and suppliers regarding departments. important issues through Our customers intend to high-level corporate give us feedback on quality communication. and delivery performance. We work with our Our customers intend to suppliers to seamlessly frequently share demand integrate our inter-firm information with our firm. processes. Our customers intend to be We jointly develop new actively involved in our products with our new product development suppliers. process. We intend to share our production plan and inventory levels with our customers.

We intend to share our inventory levels with our suppliers. We intend to communicate with our suppliers on important issues through high-level corporate communication. We intend to work with our suppliers to seamlessly integrate our inter-firm processes. We intend to jointly develop new products with our suppliers.

Supply When solving problems, 0.89 0.77 0.91 Chain we use cross-functional 9 2 5 Integrati teams. on Impleme Our firm emphasizes the ntation flow of information and [7], [25], materials among all teams [59] and departments. Our firm engages in real- time integration on all internal functional 1206

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

Table 2. All factor loadings with factor ISCIh 0.172 0.127 0.126 0.860 0.428 analysis

JUS RC SCS ISCI SCII ISCIi 0.328 0.420 0.318 0.765 0.437

JUSa 0.828 0.304 0.409 0.430 0.411 ISCIj 0.540 0.481 0.421 0.716 0.460

JUSb 0.808 0.422 0.332 0.341 0.399 ISCIk 0.390 0.473 0.296 0.832 0.509

JUSc 0.740 0.328 0.508 0.418 0.334 ISCIl 0.447 0.337 0.397 0.862 0.583

JUSd 0.835 0.359 0.544 0.478 0.429 SCIIa 0.451 0.150 0.445 0.593 0.734

JUSe 0.750 0.461 0.383 0.517 0.325 SCIIb 0.403 0.220 0.160 0.476 0.863

JUSf 0.706 0.199 0.424 0.286 0.308 SCIIc 0.390 0.372 0.200 0.494 0.833

RCa 0.267 0.879 0.200 0.337 0.150 SCIId 0.441 0.211 0.375 0.461 0.816

RCb 0.259 0.797 0.158 0.335 0.347 SCIIe 0.302 0.227 0.182 0.492 0.782

RCc 0.530 0.951 0.337 0.407 0.262 SCIIf 0.272 0.177 0.060 0.382 0.737

RCd 0.488 0.903 0.328 0.485 0.365 SCIIg 0.330 0.143 0.193 0.437 0.867

SCSa 0.393 0.125 0.744 0.241 0.170 SCIIh 0.394 0.125 0.221 0.421 0.874

SCSb 0.492 0.287 0.796 0.245 0.189 SCIIi 0.244 0.288 0.168 0.378 0.876

SCSc 0.373 0.281 0.769 0.455 0.301 SCIIj 0.443 0.382 0.411 0.566 0.860

SCSd 0.445 0.148 0.798 0.362 0.394 SCIIk 0.328 0.337 0.214 0.532 0.809

SCSe 0.470 0.297 0.837 0.322 0.194 SCIIl 0.440 0.312 0.347 0.599 0.886

ISCIa 0.364 0.294 0.422 0.783 0.500 4.2 Study Sample ISCIb 0.496 0.391 0.321 0.797 0.492 The subjects who answered our surveys were mainly supply and purchasing executives including ISCIc 0.477 0.366 0.356 0.826 0.463 supply, purchasing, and supply chain managers in manufacturing firms in Korea. The same unit ISCId 0.466 0.282 0.367 0.831 0.463 depends on the firm level. The main products of manufacturing firms on which this research ISCIe 0.480 0.333 0.354 0.790 0.536 collected data were electronic products and components, such as smartphones, TVs, appliances, ISCIf 0.317 0.275 0.209 0.799 0.415 personal computers, clothing, heavy materials equipment, automobiles and their components, ISCIg 0.426 0.218 0.266 0.740 0.487 chemicals, healthcare equipment, and consumable goods. The number of employees is used to 1207

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 measure firm size. The number of firms with fewer constructs in the measurements [11]. In Table 1, all than 100 employees accounted for 20.01% of all CR and AVE values revealed solid convergent firms; firms with 100 to 1,000 employees validity. Finally, to assess the discriminant validity represented 15.75% of all firms; firms with 1,000 of our construct measurement, this research to 5,000 employees accounted for 16.14% of all calculated the square roots of the AVE values and firms; firms with 5,000 to 10,000 employees compared those numbers with the correlations of accounted for 15.35% of all firms; firms with each construct variable, following the study of [26]. 10,000 to 20,000 employees accounted for 16.93% In Table 3, our research showed that the diagonal of all firms; and firms with more than 20,000 values computed from the square roots of the AVEs employees accounted for 15.75% of all firms. are larger than the numbers of the non-diagonal features coming from the correlation values among One thousand survey questionnaires were randomly all construct variables in our research [26], [34]. distributed to supply, purchasing, and supply chain managers, including supply and purchasing Table 3. Correlation Matrix: Discriminant validity executives in manufacturing firms of Korea. Two hundred and fifty-eight responses were collected Varia JUS RC SCS ISCI SCII for a response rate of 25.8%. However, four bles surveys were incomplete, resulting in 254 completed responses for the data analysis. One JUS 0.868 respondent for each manufacturing company per RC 0.222 0.903 supply chain was supposed to complete one survey. This research conducted the Harman’s single factor SCS 0.351 0.345 0.867 test to determine the existence of common method ISCI 0.225 0.110 0.292 0.863 bias. Following the research of [21], and [46], this study checked all eigenvalues using an unrotated SCII 0.148 0.264 0.379 0.121 0.879 factor analysis. The result specifies that no single factor, including no first factor, offered a value JUS = Justice in supplier relationship; RC = greater than 20% of the variances in our research Relationship commitment to suppliers; SCS = Supply chain socialization; ISCI = Intention to data. Therefore, the data for our research do not implement supply chain integration; SCII = Supply create a common method bias. chain integration implementation 5. Methodology *The number in bold is the square root of the AVE 5.1 Measurement

Using PLS, a confirmatory factor analysis was 5.2 Structural model conducted, and the results are presented in Table 2. By engaging in a bootstrapping procedure in PLS, Our research also established our measurement our research established the structural model. Our model and examined Cronbach’s alpha and factor research results empirically support hypothesis 1: loading values to assess the reliability of all Relationship commitment to suppliers positively constructs used. All factor loadings for the affects justice in supply chain relationships. These construct measurements are greater than 0.7 [26], results provide statistical evidence on a significant as presented in Table 2. The Cronbach’s alphas for relationship between relationship commitment to all constructs in the measurement items were also suppliers and justice in supply chain relationships, larger than 0.7 in Table 1. Therefore, all with a path coefficient of 0.338 and t-score of 4.86 measurements of our constructs indicated strong at the 0.01 significance level. Therefore, the reliability in our measurement model. To examine relationship commitment to suppliers improves the convergent validity, this research investigated both justice in relationships with suppliers. Hypothesis composite reliability (CR) and average variance 2: Supply chain socialization has a positive impact extracted (AVE). According to [34], CR values on justice in supply chain relationships, was also must be larger than 0.7 to validate the internal supported by our research results. Statistically, we consistency of the construct measurements. found a significant relationship between supply Additionally, the AVE values should be greater chain socialization and justice in supplier than 0.5 to confirm the internal consistency of the 1208

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 relationships. The path coefficient was 0.434 and .Discussion the t-score was 6.95 at the 0.01 significance level. Frequent socialization with suppliers enhances the justice in supply chain relationships. This research offers useful implications for both academics and the practical world. This research Our research results provide empirical evidence for applied the TPB in the context of SCI and hypothesis 3: Justice in supply chain relationships established a conceptual model of the impact of positively influences the intention to implement justice in the implementation of SCI. We examined SCI. The statistical results of the data analysis the linkage between the factors that affect supply support a significant and positive relationship chain relationships, including justice, relationship between justice in supplier relationships and commitment to suppliers, and supply chain intention to implement SCI. Justice in supply chain socialization and behavioral intention of SCI. We relationships is considered a driver of intending to considered justice, relationship commitment to implement SCI, with a path coefficient of 0.400 suppliers, and supply chain socialization that and t-score of 3.28 at the 0.01 significance level. solidifies the supply chain relationship as a driver Our data analysis results also empirically supported of implementing SCI using the TPB. More Hypothesis 4: Relationship commitment to importantly, this research filled a gap in the suppliers positively affects intention to implement literature on operations management by applying SCI. The path coefficient was 0.251 and the t-score the TPB approach to validate the relationship was 2.434 at the 0.01 significance level. between supply chain relationship factors and Relationship commitment to suppliers plays an intention to implement SCI. This study identified important role in having an intention to implement antecedents of supply chain relationships and SCI. explained the impact on predicting behavior regarding SCI implementation in the supply chain However, our research results do not support depending on the TPB, adding a significant hypothesis 5: Supply chain socialization has a contribution to supply chain and operations positive impact on intention to implement SCI. We management academia. Therefore, this study used found no significant statistical relationship between empirical evidence to provide a comprehensive supply chain socialization and intention to research framework for justice, relationship implement SCI. Finally, our research results commitment to suppliers, and supply chain empirically confirm hypothesis 6: Intention to socialization in supply chain relationships implement SCI positively influences SCI regarding their impact on implementing SCI. implementation. The path coefficient was 0.522 This research filled the gap in the literature by and the t-score was 8.13 at a 0.01 significance investigating the impact of relationship level. Our research indicates that intention to commitment to suppliers on justice and on implement SCI leads to actual implementation of intention to implement SCI. From a buyer’s SCI. Figure 2 summarizes our research results. perspective, establishing relationship commitment with suppliers facilitates and enhances collaborations with these suppliers in a long-term relationship. Thus, relationship commitment drives manufacturers’ positive intention to implement SCI, whereas the research of [65] confirmed that relationship commitment to suppliers positively affects integration with suppliers. More importantly, this research added to the literature by confirming that relationship commitment to suppliers has a positive impact on integration with suppliers, internal integration, and integration with customers. Although no study investigated the relationship between relationship commitment and justice in supply chain management, relationship Figure 2. Research results commitment to suppliers has a positive impact on 1209

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 maintaining justice in supply chain relationships. The dimension of interactional justice is a perfect Whereas buyers intend to establish a long-term fit for the supply chain relationship context. relationship with suppliers based on relationship Therefore, this study summarized the multi- commitment, they attempt to maintain justice in dimensions of justice in supply chain relationships business transactions with their partners and and offered the managerial implication that suppliers, leading to a win–win situation for both managers must consider three aspects of justice in buyers and suppliers in supply chain relationships. business transactions with supply chain partners. Our research provided evocative insights for Prior studies determined the role of justice in managers regarding the significance of buyers’ improving performance. As a research result, they commitment to relationships with suppliers because empirically confirmed that maintaining justice in relationship commitment to suppliers assists in supply chains improves performance [39], [44]. establishing justice in the supply chain relationship, This research filled the gap in the literature on thus motivating the intention to implement SCI. operations management by providing empirical Therefore, when supply and purchasing managers evidence that maintaining justice in supply chain consider implementing SCI, they need to make a relationships positively affects intention and the relationship commitment to suppliers a priority. actual implementation of SCI. Establishing and This study emphasized the importance of a maintaining justice become very critical in the proactive approach for managers in establishing a supply chain relationship. Adding to the positive strong relationship with suppliers, the starting point role of justice in establishing and maintaining a of collaboration with suppliers. Relationship good relationship with suppliers, this research commitment to suppliers assists in establishing highlighted the driving role of justice toward SCI justice in supply chain relationships, enabling long- facilitating collaborations and improving term relationships in the supply chain, and creating performance in supply chains. Therefore, when intention and fueling the actual implementation of managers consider applying SCI, they need to SCI. Additionally, for successful implementation of establish a good relationship with suppliers by SCI, strong relationships with suppliers are maintaining justice in business transactions. This necessary as a basis in the supply chain. study also provided the managerial implication that These research results also confirmed the positive strategic collaborations in supply chains, such as associations between supply chain socialization and SCI, are based on good and long-term relationships justice in supply chain relationships. Supply chain with suppliers that result from justice. socialization facilitates frequent interactions Previous studies that applied in the TPB proved the between buyers and suppliers. Through frequent relationship between behavioral intention and interactions, such socialization increases the flow actual behavior in various contexts [3], [6], [47], of open communications and information in the [48], [60]. This study also found positive supply chain, leading to opportunities to solve associations between these two constructs, and that problems with suppliers. We provide managers intention to implement SCI leads to actual with meaningful implications on supply chain implementation of SCI. Thus, in the process of socialization, which creates opportunities and managers’ making decisions toward SCI, positive places for shared interactions with suppliers. Such and negative inputs such as barriers to interactions allow buyers and suppliers to work implementing SCI must be evaluated before they together to solve issues in the supply chain, can establish their intention to implement SCI. In resulting in maintaining justice in the supply chain other words, all analyses regarding the cost and relationship. Thus, managers need to be more benefit of SCI implementation must be completed involved in creating additional mechanisms and before intention because intention leads to action. channels to escalate supply chain socialization to This research highlighted that managers need to maximize the effects of interactions from such complete all analysis regarding SCI before they socialization. In contrast, we could not find establish an intention. statistical significance for the relationship between supply chain socialization and intention to 6. Conclusion implement SCI. The concept of justice in the supply chain has This research must address some limitations established a multi-dimensional aspect [39], [44]. because of the characteristics of empirical studies. First, this study depended on a manufacturer’s 1210

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019 perspective in the supply chain as a focal firm, [7] Braunscheidel, M.J., & Suresh, N. C. (2009). indicating that we collected survey responses from The organizational antecedents of a firm’s buyers—manufacturing companies in the supply supply chain agility for risk mitigation and chain. To overcome this limitation, executives in response. Journal of Operations Management, supply and purchasing departments of 27(2), 119-140. manufacturing companies who were able to [8] Brown, J.R., Cobb, A. T., & Lusch, R. F. knowledgably answer all questions on the survey (2006). The roles played by were used as subjects of this study. Second, this interorganizational contracts and justice in research model was applied only to the marketing channel relationships. Journal of manufacturing industry. Further studies could be Business Research, 59 (2), 166-175. expanded in the context of service industries. [9] Brown, J.R., Lusch, R. F., & Nicholson, C. Y. Third, our samples have a limitation because the (1996). Power and relationship commitment: responses were collected from Korean their impact on marketing channel member manufacturing firms. Although justice has been performance. Journal of Retailing, 71(4), 363- receiving a lot of attentions due to Korean’s special 392. economic structure, that is governed by large and [10] Chen, I.J., & Paulraj, A. (2004). manufacturing corporations, this geographical Understanding supply chain management: limitation indicates that a generalization to the critical research and a theoretical framework. international manufacturing industry is not International Journal of Production Research, possible. Although this research has some 42(1), 131-163. limitations, it is the first study to investigate the [11] Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares relationship factors including justice, supply chain approach to structural equation modeling. socialization and relationship commitment on Modern Methods for Business Research, intention on implementing supply chain integration 295(2), 295-336. as well as actual implementation. It provides [12] Choi, T.Y., & Wu, Z. (2009). Triads in supply meaningful managerial insights that they need to networks: theorizing buyer–supplier–supplier consider relationship factors when implementing relationships. Journal of Supply Chain supply chain integration. Management, 45(1), 8-25. [13] Chung, S.A., Singh, H., & Lee, K. (2000). References Complementarity, status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 1-22. [1] Abdul-Muhmin, A.G. (2002). Effects of [14] Cousins, P. D., Handfield, R. B., Lawson, B., suppliers' marketing program variables on & Petersen, K.J. (2006). Creating supply industrial buyers' relationship satisfaction and chain relational capital: the impact of formal commitment. Journal of Business & Industrial and informal socialization processes. Journal Marketing, 17 (7), 637-651. of Operations Management, 24(6), 851-863. [2] Anderson, E., & Jap, S. D. (2005). The dark [15] Cousins, P. D., & Lawson, B. (2007). The side of close relationships. MIT Sloan effect of socialization mechanisms and Management Review, 46 (3), 75-82. performance measurement on supplier [3] Bagchi, S., Kanungo, S., & Dasgupta, S. integration in new product development. (2003). Modeling use of enterprise resource British Journal of Management, 18(3), 311- planning systems: a path analytic study. 326. European Journal of Information Systems, [16] Cousins, P. D., & Menguc, B. (2006). The 12(2), 142-158. implications of socialization and integration in [4] Benton, W., & Maloni, M. (2005). The supply chain management. Journal of influence of power driven buyer/seller Operations Management, 24(5), 604-620. relationships on supply chain satisfaction. [17] Cropanzana, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. Journal of Operations Management, 23(1), 1- W. (2007). The management of organizational 22. justice. The Academy of Management [5] Beth, S., Burt, D. N., Copacino, W., Gopal, C., Perspectives, 21(4), 34-48. Lee, H. L., Lynch, R. P., & Morris, S. (2003). [18] Das, A., Narasimhan, R., & Talluri, S. (2006). Supply chain challenges. building Supplier integration—finding an optimal relationships. Harvard business review, 81(7), configuration. Journal of Operations 64-73. Management, 24(5), 563-582. [6] Bosnjak, M., Tuten, T. L., & Wittmann, W. [19] Daugherty, P.J. (2011). Review of logistics W. (2005). Unit (non)response in Web-based and supply chain relationship literature and access panel surveys: An extended planned- suggested research agenda. International behavior approach. Psychology and Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Marketing, 22(6), 489-505. Management, 41(1), 16-31. 1211

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

[20] Daugherty, P.J., Myers, M. B., & Richey, R. Workplace: Approaching Fairness in Human G. (2002). Information support for reverse Resource Management. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, logistics: the influence of relationship NJ. commitment. Journal of Business Logistics, [32] Griffith, D.A., Harvey, M. G., & Lusch, R. F. 23(1), 85-106. (2006). Social exchange in supply chain rela- [21] Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1998). Common tionships: the resulting benefits of procedural methods bias: does common methods variance and distributive justice. Journal of Operations really bias results? Organizational Research Management, 24(1): 85-98. Methods, 1(4), 374-406. [33] He, Y., & Lai, K. K. (2012). Supply chain [22] Droge, C., Vickery, S. K., & Jacobs, M. A. integration and service oriented (2012). Does supply chain integration mediate transformation: Evidence from Chinese the relationships between product/process equipment manufacturers. International strategy and service performance? An Journal of Production Economics, 135(2): empirical study. International Journal of 791-799. Production Economics, 137(2), 250-262. [34] Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares [23] Duffy, R., Fearne, A., Hornibrook, S., (PLS) in strategic management research: A Hutchinson, K., & Reid, A. (2013). Engaging review of four recent studies. Strategic suppliers in CRM: The role of justice in Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204. buyer–supplier relationships. International [35] Huo, B. (2012). The impact of supply chain Journal of Information Management, 33(1), integration on company performance: an 20-27. organizational capability perspective. Supply [24] Fearne, A., Duffy, R, & Hornibrook, S. Chain Management: An International (2005). Justice in UK supermarket buyer- Journal, 17(6), 596-610. supplier relationships: an empirical analysis. [36] Ireland, R.D., & Webb, J. W. (2007). A multi- International Journal of Retail & Distribution theoretic perspective on trust and power in Management, 33(8), 570-582. strategic supply chains. Journal of Operations [25] Flynn, B. B., Huo, B., & Zhao, X. (2010). The Management, 25(2), 482-497. impact of supply chain integration on [37] Jonsson, P., Andersson, D., Boon-itt, S., & performance: A contingency and Yew Wong, C. (2011). The moderating configuration approach. Journal of effects of technological and demand Operations Management, 28(1), 58-71. uncertainties on the relationship between [26] Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F., (1981). supply chain integration and customer Evaluating structural equation models with delivery performance. International Journal unobservable variables and measurement of Physical Distribution & Logistics error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): Management, 41(3), 253-276. 39-50. [38] Lawson, B., Petersen, K. J., Cousins, P. D., & [27] Fynes, B., & Voss, C. (2002). The moderating Handfield, R. B. (2009). Knowledge sharing effect of buyer-supplier relationships on in interorganizational product development quality practices and performance. teams: the effect of formal and informal International Journal of Operations & socialization mechanisms. Journal of Product Production Management, 22(6), 589-613. Innovation Management, 26(2), 156-172. [28] Fynes, B., Voss, C., & de Búrca, S. (2005). [39] Liu, Y., Huang, Y., Luo, Y., & Zhao, Y. The impact of supply chain relationship (2012). How does justice matter in achieving quality on quality performance. International buyer–supplier relationship performance? Journal of Production Economics, 96(3): 339- Journal of Operations Management, 30(5), 354. 355-367. [29] Ghoshal, S., Korine, H., & Szulanski, G. [40] Luo, Y. (2007). The independent and (1994). Interunit communication in interactive roles of procedural, distributive, multinational corporations. Management and interactional justice in strategic alliances. Science, 40(1), 96-110. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 644- [30] Gimenez, C., van der Vaart, T., & Pieter van 664. Donk, D. (2012). Supply chain integration and [41] McIvor, R. (2009). How the transaction cost performance: the moderating effect of supply and resource-based theories of the firm inform complexity. International Journal of outsourcing evaluation. Journal of Operations Operations & Production Management, 32(5), Management, 27(1), 45-63. 583-610. [42] Moore, K.R. (1998). Trust and relationship [31] Greenberg, J. (1993). The Social side of commitment in logistics alliances: a buyer fairness: interpersonal and informational perspective. International Journal of classes of organizational justice. In Purchasing and Materials Management, Cropanzano, R. (Eds) Justice in the 34(4), 24-37. 1212

Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 6, December, 2019

[43] Narasimhan, R., Nair, A., Griffith, D. A., between supply chain integration and Arlbjørn, J. S., & Bendoly, E. (2009). Lock-in operational performance. Journal of situations in supply chains: A social exchange Operations Management, 29(6), 604-615. theoretic study of sourcing arrangements in [60] Workman, M. (2005). Expert decision support buyer–supplier relationships. Journal of system use, disuse, and misuse: a study using Operations Management, 27(5), 374-389. the theory of planned behavior. Computers in [44] Narasimhan, R., Narayanan, S., & Srinivasan, Human Behavior, 21(2), 211-231. R. (2013). An investigation of justice in [61] Wu, W.-Y., Chiag, C.-Y., Wu, Y.-J., & Tu, supply chain relationships and their H.-J. (2004). The influencing factors of performance impact. Journal of Operations commitment and business integration on Management, 31(5), 236-247. supply chain management. Industrial [45] Petersen, K.J., Handfield, R. B., Lawson, B., Management & Data Systems, 104(4), 322- & Cousins, P.D. (2008). Buyer dependency 333. and relational capital formation: the mediating [62] Zhang, M., & Huo, B. (2013). The impact of effects of socialization processes and supplier dependence and trust on supply chain integration. Journal of Supply Chain integration. International Journal of Physical Management, 44(4), 53-65. Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(7), [46] Podsakoff, P.M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self- 544-563. reports in organizational research: Problems [63] Zhao, L., Huo, B., Sun, L., & Zhao, X. (2013). and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), The impact of supply chain risk on supply 531-544. chain integration and company performance: a [47] Shih, Y.-Y., & Fang, K. (2004). The use of a global investigation. Supply Chain decomposed theory of planned behavior to Management: An International Journal, study Internet banking in Taiwan. Internet 18(2), 115-131. Research, 14(3), 213-223. [64] Zhao, X., Huo, B., Flynn, B. B., & Yeung, J. [48] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & H. Y. (2008). The impact of power and Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of relationship commitment on the integration information technology: Toward a unified between manufacturers and customers in a view. MIS quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. supply chain. Journal of Operations [49] Waddock, S.A. (2002). Leading corporate Management, 26(3), 368-388. citizens: Vision, values, value added. Boston, [65] Zhao, X., Huo, B., Selen, W., & Yeung, J. MA: McGraw-Hill. H.Y. (2011). The impact of internal [59] Wong, C.Y., Boon-Itt, S., & Wong, C. W. integration and relationship commitment on (2011). The contingency effects of external integration. Journal of Operations environmental uncertainty on the relationship Management, 29(1), 17-32.