Institutions and opportunism in buyer–supplier exchanges: the moderated mediating effects of contractual and relational governance

The marketing channel literature has paid limited attention to institutional environments that constrain buyer–supplier exchanges, though such institutions are fundamental determinants of transaction costs, and thus of the occurrence of opportunism in the buyer–supplier dyads. Drawing on transaction...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Guo, Z. (Author), Li, J.J (Author), Sheng, S. (Author), Zhou, K.Z (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer New York LLC 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 02261nam a2200277Ia 4500
001 10.1007-s11747-018-0582-9
008 220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 00920703 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Institutions and opportunism in buyer–supplier exchanges: the moderated mediating effects of contractual and relational governance 
260 0 |b Springer New York LLC  |c 2018 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0582-9 
520 3 |a The marketing channel literature has paid limited attention to institutional environments that constrain buyer–supplier exchanges, though such institutions are fundamental determinants of transaction costs, and thus of the occurrence of opportunism in the buyer–supplier dyads. Drawing on transaction cost economics and institutional theory, this study uncovers the critical influence of formal and informal institutions (i.e., legal effectiveness and networking expenditure) on the use of governance in deterring opportunism, as well as the moderating role of government support on the efficacy of governance mechanism. The findings from a buyer–supplier dyadic survey and 2 secondary datasets reveal that legal effectiveness mitigates opportunism through increased use of both contractual and relational governance; in contrast, networking expenditure reduces opportunism through relational governance, yet increases opportunism via lowering contractual governance. In addition, contractual governance is more efficient in constraining opportunism when government support is high, whereas relational governance deters opportunism more when government support is low. These findings offer important implications for academic research and managerial practice. © 2018, Academy of Marketing Science. 
650 0 4 |a Buyer–supplier exchanges 
650 0 4 |a China 
650 0 4 |a Contractual governance 
650 0 4 |a Government support 
650 0 4 |a Institutional theory 
650 0 4 |a Legal effectiveness 
650 0 4 |a Networking expenditure 
650 0 4 |a Opportunism 
650 0 4 |a Relational governance 
700 1 |a Guo, Z.  |e author 
700 1 |a Li, J.J.  |e author 
700 1 |a Sheng, S.  |e author 
700 1 |a Zhou, K.Z.  |e author 
773 |t Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science