7/29/2019 jscm3240

1/20

THE ROLE OF PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS INFACILITATING SUPPLY CHAIN COMMUNICATIONS:

A QUALITATIVE STUDY

DAVID M. GLIGOR AND CHAD W. AUTRYThe University of Tennessee

While the importance of communication between companies within thesupply chain has been well established in the literature, a number of gapsremain pertaining to how individuallevel employee relationships influ-ence firmtofirm communications. One such gap in the literature repre-sents the focus of the current study; little research has addressed the roleof nonwork focused personal relationships (i.e., friendships) formedbetween employees of supply chain partner firms, and specifically how

such relationships impact businessrelated communication processes.

Because research in this area is limited, and qualitative methods are con-sidered most appropriate to assess emergent research phenomena,grounded theory building (Strauss and Corbin 1990) via semistructuredinterviews was undertaken. The results reveal that interpersonal relation-ships facilitate business communications through four emergent processthemes. Our analysis thus allows us to develop initial theory related tohow two different personal social network layers personal relationshipsand interorganizational communications relate within supply chain set-tings. Implications for future research are also considered.

Keywords: behavioral supply chain management; partnering; supplier management;

qualitative data analysis; grounded theory building

INTRODUCTIONThe key role communications play in enabling inter-

organizational processes has long been recognized.

Well before supply chain management (SCM)

emerged as a distinct scholarly field, Forresters (1958)

marketing treatise introduced a seminal theory of dis-

tribution management that cited communications

between members of different companies as a critical

predictor of overall channel performance. In sub-sequent marketing work, Mohr and Nevin (1990)

described crossorganizational communications as the

glue that holds a channel together: communication

allows firms to transmit persuasive information

between themselves (Frazier and Summers 1984),

foster participative cooperative decisionmaking

(Anderson and Weitz 1992), coordinate joint pro-

grams (Guiltinan, Rejab, and Rodgers 1980), better

know customers and suppliers (Lusch 2011), and gain

partner commitment and loyalty (Mohr and Nevin

1990), among other positive aspects. In contemporary

SCM research, mutual information sharing among

employees of supply chain partner organizations is

regarded as a requirement for successfully implement-

ing a SCM philosophy (Mentzer, DeWitt, Keebler,

Min, Nix, Smith, and Zacharia 2001; Min and Ment-

zer 2004), with frequent information updating among

the chain members often cited as a condition for

effective SCM outcomes (e.g., Ellram and Cooper

1990; Cooper, Lambert, and Pagh 1997). Accordingly,

interorganizational communication is now theorized

as a key relational competency that can generate sus-tainable strategic advantage for supply chain partners

(Paulraj, Lado, and Chen 2008); related research sug-

gests that more intense, frequent and diverse commu-

nication between supply chain partners employees is

associated with buyersupplier relationship survival

and prosperity (Kenis and Knoke 2002; Lai, Li, and

Wang 2008).

While the importance of employeetoemployee

communication within the supply chain is thus well

established, a number of gaps remain in the literature

pertaining to its efficacy across contexts and units of

analysis. One such gap represents the focus of the

Volume 48, Number 14

7/29/2019 jscm3240

2/20

7/29/2019 jscm3240

3/20

satisfaction (Mohr and Spekman 1994; Mohr, Fisher,

and Nevin 1996) for the parties to the relationship. In

brief summary, frequent and high quality communica-

tion that leads to effective knowledge exchange has

come to be considered the backbone of effective SCM

(Bechtel and Jayaram 1997; Autry and Griffis 2008).

In general, researchers have operationalized inter-organizational communications as though two entire

firms were speaking or communicating with one

another, with insufficient consideration given to the

fact that it is the employees of the firms, not the firms

themselves that are communicating. Most of this liter-

ature has appeared in marketing and strategic manage-

ment publications, and the work seeks to understand

exactly how whole firms gain competitive benefit

based on information sharing with others (i.e., Zajac

and Olsen 1993; Schreiner et al. 2009). However, the

recognition that business communications between

supply chain firm employees takes place on an indi-vidual basis has long existed, often using alternate

terminologies. For example, interorganizational com-

munications are of critical importance in the sales and

purchasing literatures, with multiple articles address-

ing subjects such as adaptive selling (Franke and Park

2006; Roman and Iacobucci 2010) and buyerseller

negotiations (Min and LaTour 1995); these studies

have attempted to specify how and in what format

businessoriented communications should occur

between employees of different firms. Unfortunately,

virtually all of the interorganizational communi-

cations literature has ignored the influence of

personal, nonbusinessrelated relationships in the

businesstobusiness communications context.

PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS IN BUSINESSWe focus here on how business communications

between employees of supply chain exchange partners

are influenced by the personal relationships held

between persons working at those firms. In conduct-

ing such an assessment, it is first important to

acknowledge the various manifestations of relation-

ships that develop between individuals. In the holistic

sense, Berscheid and Pelau (1983) posit that personsare connected by a relationship if they have an

impact on each other . . . if they are interdependent

in the sense that a change in one person causes a

change in the other, and vice versa (p. 12). However,

as mentioned above, we must discriminate between

the similar but distinct notions of business relation-

ships and personal relationships/friendships, as each

of these relationship types has its own unique impact

on relationshipspecific outcomes.

Prior research allows us to frame this distinction in

terms of six defining characteristics. First, personal

relationships are usually expressive (emotion based,

intrinsic) whereas business relationships are instru-

mental (focused on substance or task) (Fournier,

Dobscha, and Mick 1998; Grayson 2007). Second,

personal relationships are based on voluntary inter-

actions, whereas business relationships tend to be

involuntary (Fischer 1982; Allan 1989). That is,

friends are expected to seek each others company vol-untarily. Third, the roles played by individuals within

personal relationships are expected to be informal,

versus the formal roles often expected in business rela-

tionships (Price and Arnould 1999). Fourth, personal

relationships are motivated by a communal orienta-

tion versus a reciprocal orientation expected in busi-

ness relationships (Silver 1990). Here, a communal

orientation refers to the fact that one partner can give

or receive benefits within the relationship without

creating a feeling of obligation or entitlement by the

other party. Fifth, personal relationships are expected

to lead to development of increasingly intimate socialconnections, whereas the armslength connections

developed in business relationships may never

increase in closeness for economic reasons. Friends

share personal knowledge and open up one to

another (Fischer 1982). Sixth and finally, personal

relationships are personal in nature while business

relationships are designed to be impersonal (Silver

1990). In a business relationship one of the parties

involved can be replaced by an economic or social

equivalent (in the sociological sense) and the focal

activity can continue without disruption, while in a

friendship none of the parties can be substituted with-

out emotional or cognitive loss.

Based partly or wholly on this framework, a number

of studies have examined the results of combining

personal and business relationships, with many of

them suggesting that the interaction effects should be

positive (Haytko 2004; Johnson and Selnes 2004; Lian

and Laing 2007). For example, one study conducted

across a variety of industries provided evidence that

both personal and business relationships are critical

to building and enhancing interorganizational rela-

tionship strength (Mavondo and Rodrigo 2001).

Other research suggests anecdotally that failure to use

close personal relationships to deliver commercialbenefits leaves suppliers vulnerable (Gedeon, Fearne,

and Poole 2009), and Hutt, Stafford, Walker, and

Reingen (2000) observed that a failure to nurture per-

sonal relationships often has negative consequences

on the firmtofirm relationship. Moreover, there is

substantial support for the notion that friends are

more trustworthy, loyal and committed business part-

ners (Price and Arnould 1999; Johnson and Selnes

2004; Adobor 2006), which can indirectly impact

their business relationship in positive ways.

Yet despite this positive evidence, other researchers

have observed that combining friendships and busi-

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

6

7/29/2019 jscm3240

4/20

ness relationships can create agencyrelated conflict

for related organizations, when employees are trapped

between individual interests of friends and firmlevel

interests of their employers (Price and Arnould 1999;

Heide and Wathne 2006), and therefore may begin to

practice firm level information hoarding in order to

augment the friendship (Burt 1992). Thus, the priorresearch is yet unclear as to the valence of personal

relationships in the supply chain with respect to inter-

organizational communications different studies

exhibit supporting evidence for both positive and neg-

ative potential outcomes on firm communications.

While personal relationships have sometimes been

shown to have a positive effect on business outcomes,

the conflict between some individuallevel friendship

role expectations and business role expectations may

negatively influence interorganizational communi-

cations, thereby diminishing the benefits of firms

working together (Grayson 2007). In order to furtherinform the SCM discipline on this issue, we briefly

turn to the emergent literature on applied social

network theory, particularly social capital, as an

explanatory mechanism addressing interorganizational

communication dynamics.

INTERORGANIZATIONAL SOCIAL CAPITALTHEORY

The rapidly evolving theorization related to interor-

ganizational social capital allows for a potential expla-

nation of why business actors should be interested in

developing both business and personal relationships

with members of supply chain partner firms, based on

theoretically derived advantages associated with the

formation of social ties (Payne, Moore, Griffis, and

Autry 2011). Modern social capital theory argues that

actors (individuals, teams, groups) willing to invest in

relationships with other actors will enjoy positive

economic and psychic returns through their capability

to leverage the relationship to gain access to needed

resources (Lin 2001) including the building of com-

munication bridges through which valuable informa-

tion may pass (Seibert, Kraimer, and Liden 2001;

Adler and Kwon 2002; Anderson 2008). Social capitalhas thus been defined as the benefits that actors

derive from their social relationships (Coleman 1990;

Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998; Oh, Chung, and

LaBianca 2006).

The notion of embeddedness is central to contempo-

rary social capital theory. Actors embedded within a

favorable social network can gain certain benefits

(Coleman 1988; 1990; Granovetter 1985). In the past

literature, two types of embeddedness are suggested as

being relevant to interorganizational information

exchange: the embeddedness of the actor within the

overall structure of a network (structural embedded-

ness), and embeddedness associated with relation-

ships, which implies actors bonding to each other

(relational embeddedness) (Uzzi 1997; Moran 2005).

We suggest for the purposes of this research that the

formation of personal relationships with members of

supply chain partner firms will lead to the creation of

social capital manifested as relational embeddedness,though we recognize that structural artifacts (i.e., struc-

tural holes in the network, or very dense structures that

allow for parallel information flows) may influence

the efficacy of these communicationbased relations to

some extent (Koka and Prescott 2002; Lawson, Tyler,

and Cousins 2008). Personal relationships are consid-

ered as the soft type of ties within a network (Borgat-

ti and Li 2009) as social networks often exist among

individuals who are boundary spanners within an in-

terorganizational network (Galaskiewicz 2011).

The social capital literature postulates that during

social exchanges actors do not behave with perfecteconomic rationality because of their embeddedness

in social networks with other actors who can provide

greater access to (among other things) information

that otherwise would not be available (Granovetter

1973; 1985). This theorization is consistent with the

findings of the previously reviewed studies exploring

the role of personal relationships in business (i.e.,

Haytko 2004; Johnson and Selnes 2004; Lian and

Laing 2007). Based on the relational social capital lit-

erature, we believe that managers embeddedness in

personal relationships will impact the communication

processes between them. Specifically, social capital in

the form of communication flows is thought to be

derived from such personal relationships, and can be

uniquely differentiated from that expected from regu-

lar businessoriented relations. Unfortunately, the

interorganizational social capital literature to date fails

to fully explain exactly how and which communi-

cation flows will be altered, as well as what types of

associated benefits might be expected, as the result of

personal relationships in the supply chain. In order to

further understand the role of personal relationships

as a social capital generating mechanism, a qualitative

field study was undertaken.

METHODOLOGYThe choice of a research method should flow

directly from the nature and content of the phenome-

non to be studied. Our research question of interest

deals with dynamic human behavior, and addresses a

subject that is relatively unstudied in the current liter-

ature, such that initial theory building is needed. A

grounded theory building approach is recommended

for generating depth and understanding when little is

known about a topic (Schouten 1991; Celsi, Rose,

and Leigh 1993), as is the case with the role of

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

5/20

personal relationships within the supply chain.

Grounded theory building is also a recommended

methodology for building theory on problematic,

dynamic social processes (Flint, Larsson, Gammelg-

aard, and Mentzer 2005). Furthermore, our use of this

technique responds to recent calls for increased use of

qualitative methodologies within the logistics disci-pline when studying phenomena with complex behav-

ioral dimensions (Mello and Flint 2009).

The context of the research is the dyadic logistics

outsourcing relationship; specifically, the relationships

that exist between the supply chain firm and a third-

party service provider that assumes some of the focal

firms logistics responsibilities (e.g., Busse 2010;

Anderson, Coltman, Devinney, and Keating 2011).

Although Mentzer et al. (2001) defined supply chains

as consisting of three or more companies, a buyer

seller dyad is a component of that larger supply chain

that is useful for an introductory level investigation ofrelational phenomena (cf., Fugate, Sahin, and Mentzer

2006), and therefore our unit of analysis in this study

is a dyadic relationship. It is common in the opera-

tions management and logistics literatures to capture

supply chain relationships by studying dyadic rela-

tionships as they reflect microcosmic supply chains

(Sahin and Robinson 2002; Fugateet al. 2006).

Dyadic Data CollectionFollowing the previous logic, it was deemed neces-

sary to collect dyadic data. Our goal was to rigorously

build theory in the area of personal relationships

within buyerseller structures, and since such relation-

ships have been shown to develop differently based

on their industrial context, it was also considered

important to include managers from multiple indus-

tries to facilitate generalizable theory building. The

buyers of logistics services interviewed in this study

belonged to the organizations in a variety of indus-

tries: a global steamship line, an international manu-

facturer of pet products, a global manufacturer of

paper products, and a global manufacturer of contact

lenses. Completing the buyerseller dyads, the sellers

of logistics services interviewed in this study belonged

to the following organizations: the same global steam-ship line, two trucking companies, two logistics bro-

kers, and a freight forwarder. Because the steamship

line was both a buyer and seller of logistics services,

different managers within this company were inter-

viewed when constructing personal relationship dyads

for analysis.

Following McCrackens (1988) guidelines for con-

ducting indepth interviews, we relied on the perspec-

tives of logistics managers representing these

companies to investigate and analyze the pheno-

menon. The interviews were conducted in the respon-

dents offices (21) and over the phone (5). While most

of the managers were located in the southeast United

States, a number of them were located on the West

Coast (5) which led to phone interviews in those

instances. The interviews were openended and discov-

eryoriented, and typically lasted about one hour. Each

interview was initiated with a grand tour technique

(McCracken 1988) and was designed to be open

ended. Specifically, managers were first asked to

describe a personal relationship that they have devel-

oped with another manager from a supply chain part-

ner firm, and through laddering questions we explored

the role of personal relationships in the communica-

tion process between the two parties. An example of

the interview guide is provided in the appendix. All

interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed verba-

tim by the members of the research team.

Data Coding and Analysis

Analyses were conducted after each interview tofacilitate theoretical sampling using grounded theory

procedures (Strauss 1987; Strauss and Corbin 1990).

Three different types of coding are suggested in

Strauss coding paradigm and used in this study: open

coding, axial coding, and selective coding. The inter-

view transcripts were analyzed on a sentence-by-

sentence basis and coded for conceptual content by

each analyst. Initially, during open coding, the ana-

lysts independently broke down the data into discrete

incidents, ideas, events, and acts, and assigned a

name/code to represent these. Once each analyst inde-

pendently coded the interview transcripts available at

the time, the analysts met to compare codes. To facili-

tate this task of achieving intercoder reliability, quali-

tative research computer software (QDA Miner) was

used. This software allowed the analysts to indepen-

dently code transcripts and, when finished, merge the

files into one document to compare codes. QDA

Miner overlaps the analysts codes and allows for easy

comparison of intercoder reliability. Where the codes

were different, the analysts reviewed the specific sec-

tions to determine the causes of discrepancy and seek

consensus. In order to facilitate intercoder reliability

each analyst kept detailed theoretical memos (the

researchers record of analysis, thoughts, interpreta-tions, questions, and directions for future data collec-

tion). When coding discrepancies existed, the analysts

read each others theoretical memos for explanations

of why certain concepts were coded and interpreted a

certain way. This not only assured that the coding

process was consistent across analysts, but also veri-

fied that the resultant interpretations of the analysts

emerged from logical and unbiased thought processes.

This iterative process of individually coding transcripts

followed by working together to assure coding and

interpretation consistency was followed as additional

interviews were conducted and transcripts became

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

8

7/29/2019 jscm3240

6/20

available. The coding process was not considered

complete until the analysts reached consensus on each

code. The process resulted in 100 percent intercoder

reliability between analysts and also provided a check

on either authors individual biases. Following the

described process 172 open codes were generated.

As we continued with data analysis, when we cameacross another object, event, act, or happening that we

identified as sharing some common characteristics with

an object or a happening, we placed it under the same

code. Concomitantly, comparative analysis was

employed; this is an essential feature of the grounded

theory methodology (Strauss and Corbin 1990). In this

process, each incident was compared with other inci-

dents at the property (general or specific characteristic

of a category which allows a category to be defined and

given meaning) or dimensional (range along which

properties of a category vary; used to provide parame-

ters for the purpose of comparison between categories)level for similarities and differences and placed into a

category. Following this dynamic reiterative process we

grouped concepts into categories (e.g., message convey-

ance, message integrity) for content analysis.

Once categories emerged through open coding,

intense content analysis was done around each cate-

gory, one at a time. This is known as axial coding. The

purpose of axial coding is to begin the process of reas-

sembling data that were fractured during open coding.

During this stage categories were related to each other

to form more precise and complete explanations about

phenomena focusing on how categories crosscut and

link. Data were linked at the property and dimensional

levels in order to form dense, welldeveloped and

related categories. In axial coding, as in open coding,

we continued to make constant and theoretical com-

parisons and make use of the analytic tools described

previously. It is important to specify that while axial

coding differs in purpose from open coding, these are

not necessarily sequential analytical steps. Therefore,

the analysts iterated between open and axial coding.

As the final type of coding performed, selective cod-

ing is the process of integrating and refining revealed

categories. This was performed in order to delimit

coding to only those variables that relate to the corevariables of interest that have emerged from the study.

In summary, during open coding the analysts were

concerned with generating categories and their proper-

ties and sought to determine how these concepts vary

dimensionally. In the axial coding phase, categories

were systematically developed and linked, and finally,

during the selective coding stage the process of inte-

grating core categories took place.

Notes on Theoretical SamplingIn the grounded theory process, it is important to

use a data collection procedure known as theoretical

sampling. In theoretical sampling the data collection

process is determined by the emergent theory.

Theoretical sampling played a key role in this study,

whereby the researchers jointly collect, code, and ana-

lyze the interview data, and then progressively decide

which participants to interview next in order to

develop the theory as it emerges (Strauss and Corbin1990; Mello and Flint 2009). Researchers conducting

theoretical sampling cease to collect data when a pre-

ponderance of redundant information suggests that

the full complexity of the concepts has been captured

(Flint, Woodruff, and Gardial 2002). This identifica-

tion is essential as it serves to facilitate construct

comprehensiveness and theory development (Maxwell

1996).

In this study, we sampled only managers who had

developed personal relationships within the context of

buying and selling logistics services. Participants were

senior managers directly involved in the process of buy-ing or selling logistics services. In order to gain a dyadic

perspective on the relationships, at end of each inter-

view we asked the respondent if we could contact the

other party involved in the relationship, i.e., a modified

snowball technique meant to elicit a dyadic relation-

ship. Thus, in selecting who to interview the following

process was used: first we would use theoretical

sampling to identify a buyer, and based on the buyers

recommendation we would interview the seller

involved in that specific personal relationship; second

we would use theoretical sampling to identify a seller

and based on the sellers recommendation we would

interview the buyer involved in that specific personal

relationship. The final sample consisted of 26 partici-

pants from nine different companies (12 buyers and 14

sellers). The 26 interviews were paired and yielded a

total of 16 usable dyads (six actors were involved in

multiple dyads within the study). At the end of the 26

interviews we had attained theoretical saturation, that

is, each incremental interview yielded no additional

information. Based on this fact, and in consideration of

standards set forth in previous research, 26 interviews

were deemed sufficient for the current purposes (it is

common to interview eight or fewer informants to

reach saturation, per McCracken 1988). Table 1 depictsthe study participants and their personal relational ties.

Analysis of Research TrustworthinessAs suggested by Flint et al. (2002), trustworthiness

of the research in interpretive studies should be

assessed by applying two overlapping sets of criteria.

Earlier social sciences research focused primarily in

marketing recommends that credibility, transferability,

dependability, confirmability, and integrity should be

the first area of focus (e.g., Lincoln and Guba 1985;

Hirschman 1986; Wallendorf and Belk 1989). These

criteria were evaluated holistically and thoroughly. To

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

7/20

be specific, we (a) provided a summary of initial

interpretations to participants for feedback (credibility),

(b) used theoretical sampling (transferability), (c)

strictly followed guidelines for data collection and

interpretation (dependability), and (d) used an auditor

to confirm interpretations before journal submission

(confirmability), and assured participants of anonymity

(integrity).

Second, the criteria of generality, understanding,

control, and fit emerged from the grounded theory

literature itself (Strauss and Corbin 1990). These crite-

ria were assessed as follows: interviews were lengthy to

allow for different aspects of the phenomenon to

emerge (generality); executive summaries were pro-

vided to participants and asked if it reflected their

stories (understanding); participants did have somecontrol over certain variables (control); and lastly, the

criteria of fit was addressed through the methods men-

tioned earlier to control for credibility, dependability,

and confirmability (see Table 2 for a summary).

ResultsBased on the theoretical sampling and content anal-

ysis, personal relationships were found to facilitate

communication, with four major themes/categories

emerging that encapsulate the impact of personal rela-

tionships on the communication process between

buyers and sellers of logistics services. Respondents

stories revealed that personal relationships facilitate

the communication process, with respondents describ-

ing the communication as open, good, easier,

and better, to name just a few of the in vivo attri-

butes mentioned pertaining to personal relationship

development within the interorganizational communi-

cations process. The four emergent themes are mes-

sage conveyance, message integrity, environmental

interaction and communication performance. Further-

more, managers also reported superior business per-

formance as a result of the enhanced communication

process yielded by personal relationships. The social

capital theory base supports our interpretation of per-

sonal relationships as communication facilitators. The

closure view of social capital in particular shows how

communication flows (known sometimes as exchangeof information) can be facilitated through density of

personal relationships. According to Walter, Lechner,

and Kellermann (2007, p. 700), densely embedded

networks with strong and cohesive social ties . . . facili-

tate exchange of information, creation of obligations

and expectations, and imposition of sanctions on

those who fail to meet their obligations; in addition,

closure fosters mutual trust among actors in a net-

work. Existing literature also supports our interpreta-

tion that enhanced communication can lead to

superior business performance (Prahinski and Benton

2004; Paulraj et al. 2008; Joshi 2009).

TABLE 1

Study Sample

Firms Buying Logistics Services Firms Selling Logistics Services

Firm Participant Title Firm Participant Title

B1 Phillip Logistics Manager S1 Selena Customer Service ManagerCharles Intermodal Manager Barbara Customer Service ManagerBrad Export Manager S2 Rob VP OperationsRon Equipment Manager John Operations Manager

B2 Sean Port Ops. Manager S3 Richard Customer Service ManagerGlenda Logistics Manager Bobbie Account ManagerPaul Port Ops. Manager S4 Alison Logistics Broker

B3 Blake Inventory Ops. Manager Travis Operations ManagerTony Operations Manager S5 Wayne Transportation Manager

B4 Brian B Global Accounts Manager Dwight Sales ManagerKenji Import Manager Jeff PresidentKarina Export Supervisor B1 Brian T. Sales Manager

Craig Import SupervisorKamila Sales Manager

Notes:Firm B1 is both a buyer and seller of logistics services.Personal relationships examined in the study are as follows: [PhillipBarbara], [PhillipJohn], [CharlesSelena], [BradRob], [RonJohn], [SeanRichard], [GlendaBobbie], [PaulBobbie], [BlakeTravis], [TonyAlison], [Brian BWayne], [Brian BBrian T], [KenjiDwight], [KenjiJeff], [KarinaCraig], [KarinaKamila].

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

0

7/29/2019 jscm3240

8/20

Based on indepth content analysis and comparison

of researcher coding, the four emergent themes were

determined to be multidimensional constructs. A

number of properties were identified for each theme

to help describe the communication benefits associ-

ated with the development of personal relationships

between buyers and sellers of logistics services. The

revealed themes, along with their accompanying prop-

erties are described below.

Theme 1: Message ConveyancePersonal relationships were found to yield a series

of message conveyance benefits, as displayed in Table 3.

By message conveyance we refer to the process of trans-

mitting information by a sender to a receiver. A num-ber of properties for the message conveyance theme

emerged to describe the specific communication bene-

fits attributed to personal relationships. Specifically,

managers reported that personal relationships

impacted the ease of communication (92% of partici-

pants), the frequency of communication (70%), the

accuracy of interpretation (62%), the ease of contact

(58%), the channel of communication (46%), and

the level of communication (27%).

Property 1: Ease of Communication. The first prop-

erty ofmessage conveyance is ease of communication. Ease

of communication is conceptualized as a measure of

how comfortable the managers are to openly

exchange information. Respondents stories revealed

that managers were a lot more comfortable communi-

cating with someone they had a personal relationship

with as opposed to someone they did not share a per-

sonal relationship with. For example, as some of the

respondents noted, You can be more open when you

talk to that person and you feel like youre friends.

She opens herself up to me (Karina), and The per-

sonal relationship with that person allows for easier

communication (Dwight).

Managers also consistently reported superior busi-

ness performance as a result of the enhanced commu-

nication process. As a result of having open/easier

communication, managers also reported being morelikely to exchange business ideas and attributed the

generation of many business ideas to casual conversa-

tions. Consider what Travis had to say:

Travis: I have business relationships right now that

dont even scratch the surface of a personal rela-

tionship . . . Im thinking of one individual in a dif-

ferent company that Im dealing with . . . this

fellow has a concrete wall around him, always

strictly business, never personal, and its really

uncomfortable. Theres not a casual conversation

taking place where ideas can be openly shared back

TABLE 2

Data Trustworthiness and Methods of Assurance

Trustworthiness Criteria Method of Assurance in This Study

Credibility: Extent to which the results seem

to be acceptable representations of the data

Provided a summary of initial interpretations to

participants for feedbackTransferability: Extent to which findings in acontext have applicability in other contexts

Theoretical sampling

Dependability: Extent to which the studyfindings would be the same if the study wererepeated with similar subjects and context

Guidelines for data collection and interpretationwere strictly followed (McCracken 1988;Strauss and Corbin 1990)

Confirmability: Extent to which the findingsare attributable to the subjects and contextrather than the researchers bias and motives

Use of auditor to confirm interpretations priorto journal submission

Integrity: Extent to which the findings areinfluenced by participant misinformation

Participants were assured of anonymity andeach interview lasted one hour or more,giving respondents time to open up

Fit: Extent to which the findings fit withsubstantive area under investigation Addressed through credibility, confirmability,and dependency measuresUnderstanding: Extent to which theparticipants believe the results arerepresentations of their world

Provided executive summaries to participantsand asked if these were reflective of theirstories

Generality: Extent to which the findingsdiscover multiple aspects of the phenomena

Interviews were lengthy to allow time for multipleaspects of supply chain relationships to emerge

Control: Extent to which organizations caninfluence aspects of the theory

Participants did have control over some of thefocal variables

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

9/20

and forth, so for that reason theres a ton of lost

opportunities. To be quite honest with you, I dont

want to jeopardize any business relationship but

. . . there might be times when I have a great idea

and I just dont share it with him because I know

hes not going to listen to it, I know hes not going

to put in the time to even have a conversation

about it. Its so uncomfortable to even talk to these

people sometimes that . . . you sort of want to

jump on and off the phone, you just want to deal

with what has to be dealt with. All of those non

required communication opportunities have been

responsible for a lot of new ideas and brainstorm-ing sessions.

Travis suggested in his interview that not only do

personal relationships positively impact the communi-

cation process between managers, but also that the

absence of personal relationships can negatively

impact the communication process. He further

emphasized how a lack of personal relationships can

make it uncomfortable for managers to communicate

and as a result managers only communicate when

required in order to conduct business. Communicat-

ing only when required can limit the generation of

innovative business ideas as well as the identification

of synergy opportunities.

Property 2: Frequency. A second property of the

process of message conveyance is frequency. Communi-

cation frequency has been defined as the amount

and/or the duration of contact between actors (Mohr

and Nevin 1990). At a firm level, it has been recog-

nized that in a collaborative relationship, the buyer

and supplier engage in frequent communication (Li

and Choi 2009). This study revealed similar findings

at the individual level. During the interviews, manag-

ers reported communicating more frequently with

suppliers that they had developed a personal relation-ship with and linked the frequency of communication

to the potential outcome of the business relationship.

To illustrate, during her interview Selena confirmed

that because of the relationship she was likely to com-

municate more frequently with the customer: Ill

communicate a little bit more frequently with some-

body that I have a personal relationship with. This

perspective was supported by other stories as well.

Phillip (buyer) believed and expected that a better

personal relationship with his supplier would result in

more frequent communication and consequently

better service:

TABLE 3

Message Conveyance Theme

Properties Number/Percentage ofParticipants Discussing

the Property

Additional Sample Quotes

Ease ofcommunication

Participants: 24 The personal relationship makes it more open towhere you talk every day and know each otherssituation . . . youre at ease and I think that makes itmore open. (Phillip)

Percentage: 92 percent

Frequency Participants: 18 When you have a personal relationship withsomebody you invariably communicate more.(Wayne)

Percentage: 70 percent

Channel Participants: 12 With friendship comes trust and communication ismuch easier you can call my cell phone number.I gave them my cell phone number where theycould get ahold of me. (Dwight)

Percentage: 46 percent

Ease of contact Participants: 15 Of course Im more likely to take a phone call fromsomeone I have a better personal relationshipwith! (Kenji)

Percentage: 58 percent

Level Participants: 7 It allows you [personal relationship] to pick up thephone and call someone that you normally didnthave access to. (John)

Percentage: 27 percent

Accuracy ofinterpretation

Participants: 16 When you develop that personal relationship, youlearn their personalities and therefore youunderstand when something is wrong you cantell sorrow, you can tell when something gotscrewed up or missed. (Ron)

Percentage: 62 percent

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

2

7/29/2019 jscm3240

10/20

Phillip: Do I think it helps out that I talk to some

people more often? Yes, Id like to think that

maybe because we have a better relationship and I

talk to the guy every day, that its going to get me

maybe just a little bit better scenario. I feel that sit-

uations are probably addressed a little bit better,

with a little more responsiveness because he has abetter relationship with me.

Phillips suggestion that more frequent communi-

cation results in increased performance is well

supported by existing literature. Frequent exchange of

information can foster greater confidence, build

cooperation and trust, reduce conflict and generate

relational rents (Anderson and Narus 1990; Anderson

and Weitz 1992; Mohret al. 1996) to name just a few

of the benefits associated with frequent communica-

tion. These benefits can be explained by the psycho-

logical theory of communication (Krone, Jablin, andPutnam 1987), which suggests that the sender can

decrease the receivers distortion and inaccuracy by

increasing the message repetition (Guetzkow 1965).

Property 3: Channel. Channel emerged as a third

property of the process of message conveyance, as par-

ticipants consistently credited the personal relation-

ships for generating additional means of contacting

each other. We refer to channel of communication as

the method of communication used (facetoface,

email, phone, fax, social media, etc.). During his

interview, Charles described how the personal rela-

tionship he had with Jeff added a new channel of

communication to the business relationship and

therefore an additional tool to conduct business. To

emphasize his point, he contrasted the additional

means of communication brought in by the personal

relationship to the lack of additional means of com-

munication when a personal relationship was not

present:

Charles: Jeff is on vacation this week; he gave me

his wifes cell phone number and said that if I have

any problem that I cant get handled in the office to

call her. The reason he wanted me to call her was

because he turned off his cell phone since truckerscall him all the time. If we didnt have the personal

relationship that we have he probably wouldnt give

me his wifes cell phone number. The other suppli-

ers wouldnt give me their cell phone numbers if

they went on vacation . . . they wouldnt care.

As a result of the personal relationships, respon-

dents also revealed how they started communicating

using online social media tools, a communication

method that they would not use unless a personal

relationship was in place. Managers also emphasized

the growing importance of this type of communica-

tion in the world of business. Brians story is a good

illustration:

Brian: We live in an age of social media, which is a

very powerful tool. We have Facebook, we have

Twitter, and being able to connect with customers

and others outside of our place gives everyone avery voyeuristic look into our lives. As a result you

are able to build stronger relationships because

people can go online and see hey Brian loves

soccer, and I love soccer too! You can also see the

different ways that we as people tend to have simi-

larities and that becomes a very powerful thing in

my opinion. Being able to say, hey I know this

person went to see their family this past weekend,

hey how was it, I saw the pictures online becomes

a very powerful medium in relationship building

and it gives you a better sense of familiarity. It

enables you to know your customers and whoyoure dealing with a lot better.

Brians story is not only a good example of the

specific ways in which personal relationships add

more channels to the communication process but also

a good illustration of the impact of evolving technol-

ogy on how managers with personal relationships

exchange information. Furthermore, considering that

the type of communication channel employed has

been previously found to lead to interpersonal trust

formation (Huang, Gattiker, and Schwarz 2008), add-

ing more communication channels to the relationship

can potentially increase the level of trust.

Property 4: Ease of Contact. Ease of contact was

identified as a fourth key property of the process of

message conveyance. In order to communicate indivi-

duals have to initiate contact and throughout the

interviews managers reported having an easier time

contacting managers that they had a personal relation-

ship with. Consider Barbaras story:

Barbara: Accessibility, accessibility! Like I said with

my friend in Savannah, hes going to take my call,

whereas he doesnt take many calls. If I call hesgoing to take that call and were going to be able

to get it done whatever needs to be done. I

know hell come out of the box and make it

happen!

Other respondents such as Jeff reported screening

calls from suppliers who were asking for more busi-

ness and being more likely to call back managers with

whom he had a personal relationship. He contrasts a

personal relationship to a strictly business relationship

in order to emphasize the role that personal relation-

ships can play in the communication process. In his

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

11/20

story he tells how managers who are caught up in

their business and do not acknowledge the impor-

tance of developing personal relationships can have a

hard time establishing good lines of communication:

Jeff: A symptom of a good relationship is commu-

nication, but remember that without trust you canthave communication because nobody wants to talk

to someone they dont trust. I never call back some

of those suppliers because I know they only want

one thing: more business! But Id call back some-

one who was looking out for my best interest and

cares, someone I have a better personal relation-

ship with. A lot of people dont see that because

theyre so caught up in their business and therefore

fail to develop personal relationships! Now, you

dont have to put up a bulls eye, this is what Im

going to do today to build personal relationships.

It just happens that I develop personal relation-ships with some people.

Jeffs interview also revealed the affective side of the

relationship. Because of the personal relationships he

believed his counterpart was looking out for his best

interest and therefore he trusted him. As a result of

that Jeff made himself more accessible to that specific

manager.

Property 5: Level. In their stories managers revealed

how the personal relationships allowed them to contact

managers that they would normally not be able to con-

tact because of a significant difference in job title/rank

within their respective organizations. Phillip reported

how developing a personal relationship with the VP of

sales allowed him to call him directly when he had a

problem, and how normally he would not be able to

call somebody at that level directly:

Phillip: There are different tiers we are general

operations managers. Theres a director level, VP,

president. I think its a benefit for me to have a

personal relationship with somebody like that

because if I have an issue I can just call him up

and say, hey, were obviously having a problem, I

need you to address this immediately. However, ifI didnt know him, or if I didnt fish with him I

could not do this.

Sean had a similar story and described how his per-

sonal relationship with the Coast Guard port captain

allowed him to avoid having to go through the chain

of command and contact someone directly. He fur-

ther described how he believed his competitors do

not have the same opportunity for communication

because of a lack of personal relationships, and there-

fore the personal relationship gave him a competitive

advantage:

Sean: Another thing I try to do is a have a personal

relationship with the director of customs and the

Coast Guard port captain so I can approach them

directly with issues instead of having to go through

their chain of command. If theres an issue that

doesnt involve me per se, my colleagues know that

they can call me because I have a direct line to thehead of customs and the coast guard who I see on

a regular basis. I dont think many steamship lines

get that opportunity.

In summary, as a result of personal relationships

facilitating the ability to communicate with managers

on different levels, respondents further associated

increased business performance with those relation-

ships development.

Property 6: Interpretation Accuracy. Personal rela-

tionships also facilitate the message conveyance pro-

cess by improving the accuracy of interpretation. By

accuracy of interpretation we refer to the degree to

which the receiver of the message interprets the

meaning of the message as intended by the sender.

For example, in her interview Barbara described how

through personal relationships managers get to know

each other better, and therefore are less likely to

misinterpret communication: You get to know their

personality, their humor, their wit and youre less

likely to take something in a negative way. You can

say, Barb is just that way, its her dry sense of

humor. Dwight offered a good example of a situa-

tion where the customer did not know his personal-

ity and was offended by something he said. Later inthe interview he described how over time he was

able to establish a personal relationship with that

specific customer, which helped eliminate mis-

communication:

Dwight: He cancelled an order and I said what-

ever. Well, thats something you dont say to a

customer. It was taken out of context, and maybe I

could have chosen a better word, but at the time

everything was hectic. He was very defensive about

it and thought I insulted him. I was really sorry for

having said that, for him taking it the wrong way. I

think it was our differences, demographic perhaps.

He was in a different area than I was, he was south

of me in Atlanta, a much bigger city than where

Im from. I apologized for the incident, for my

words, and I think he understood that it was a sin-

cere apology, from the heart. It definitely devel-

oped into a personal relationship because there

were times when we would just call each other out

of the blue, just to talk about general topics. I still

speak with this gentleman, maybe once or twice a

year. Im familiar with his wife, I met him in per-

son, I still have this relationship.

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

4

7/29/2019 jscm3240

12/20

Dwights story is also a good example of how per-

sonal relationships can help mitigate the impact of

demographic differences on the communication pro-

cess and therefore reduce miscommunication.

Table 3 summarizes the findings from this initial

theme, and presents additional quotes supporting our

interpretations.

Theme 2: Message IntegrityRespondents also reported several message integrity

benefits as a second communicationsrelated outcome

of personal relationships. The word integrity stems

from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete),

and similarly, we conceptualize message integrity as a

measure of the messages completeness. Two proper-

ties for the message integrity theme emerged to

describe specific communication benefits attributed to

personal relationships. Specifically, managers stories

revealed that personal relationships impact the hon-esty of the communication process (74 percent of par-

ticipants) and the related level of sensitivity of the

information exchanged (42 percent). Table 4 summa-

rizes this section and presents additional quotes sup-

porting our interpretations.

Property 1: Honesty. Honestywas the first identified

property of message integrity. Managers stories revealed

that the personal relationships allowed for honest

communication by eliminating the fear of repercus-

sions. Dwights story is a good example: He describes

how he felt like due to the friendship he could be hon-

est and tell his customer the true reason behind his

firms service failures: Hes being honest, hes telling

me that his drivers are lazy! Theyre all taking vaca-

tions, I dont know what it is [laughs]. Friendship puts

them at ease, it allows you to be honest.

Sean had a similar story and he described how sup-

pliers were more likely to be more honest with him if

a personal relationship was present:

Sean: Theyre more honest with me because they

know Im not going to overreact when failures hap-

pen, its more a collaborative effort. So yes, as a

result of having a personal relationship they come

to me a lot sooner with issues and I like for them

to be able to pick up the phone and call me.

When asked to think about his worse relationship

with a supplier, Charles story revealed the alternativeperspective on honesty, which is deceit: Well, I dont

have anyone I dislike personally. I do have a supplier

that seems to (deceive us). You talk to one person (at

that company) about an issue youre having, then you

talk to somebody else and you get two different stories

. . . so you kind of shy away from those suppliers.

Property 2: Sensitivity. Sensitivity is the second

property of message integrity. Sensitivity is a measure of

the confidentiality of the information exchanged.

Throughout the interviews managers described how

within the confines of the personal relationships they

were exchanging business information that theywould normally not share with people they didnt

have a personal relationship with, information

deemed to be confidential. The personal relationships

allowed for exchange of confidential information that

benefited both parties. Consider Glendas story:

Glenda: Im going tell you something I dont tell

all my other customers [here, Glenda is paraphras-

ing her supplier], that were having cutbacks here

and its going to affect this and our cost will go

up. Theyd let me know things that they wouldnt

dare tell anyone else. I was the first one to know a

lot of things, inside sales and things like that. Itwas from building that rapport with each other. It

does create trust.

Richard had a similar story. While contrasting a

business relationship where a personal relationship

was absent, with a business relationship where a per-

sonal relationship was present, he revealed how

within the confines of the personal relationship his

customer trusted him with confidential information,

which increased their joint business performance:

TABLE 4

Message Integrity Theme

Properties Number/Percentage ofParticipants Discussing

the Property

Additional Sample Quotes

Honesty Participants: 19 As a result you can be more honest. It allowsyou to present yourself as you are and acknowledgemistakes. (Barbara)

Percentage: 74 percent

Sensitivity Participants: 11 With friendship comes trust. I can tell him business-related things I wouldnt tell my othercustomers. (Selena)

Percentage: 42 percent

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

13/20

Richard: . . . Sean on the other hand, we trust each

other. He might be able to tell me something

about his business thats not even for public con-

sumption yet so that I can start digesting that infor-

mation behind the scenes and already be thinking

and planning. He can share it with me in advance

and trust that its safe with me, and we can workon our plan so that when its time to go were

ready, were not just starting to plan at that point.

A summary of properties and related quotations for

the message integrity theme is shown in Table 4.

Theme 3: Environmental Interaction. Based on the

content analysis, environmental interaction is conceptu-

alized as the environment in which actors interact to

exchange information. The managers stories revealed

that personal relationships impact the level of tension

(58 percent of participants) and the level of censor-

ship (46 percent) of the environment in which actors

communicated, as depicted in Table 5.

Property 1: Censorship. Censorship was identified as

the first property of environmental interaction. Consis-

tent with existing definitions, we conceptualize censor-

ship as the suppression of communication that might

be considered sensitive or inconvenient to the recipi-

ent of the communication message. Thus, censorship

should be considered as a dimension that is negatively

related to the communication facilitating process. That

is, respondents revealed how the personal relation-

ships allowed for uncensored communication.

In their daily interactions both firm and LSP manag-

ers spoke of the need to be politically correct; how-ever, they felt like within the confines of a personal

relationship they could communicate without having

to sugarcoat details. Consider the following stories:

Tony and I have a great relationship, where its cut

and dried. Hes like, You shoot me straight and Ill

shoot you straight. Theres a few customers that I

have to sugarcoat but those close personal relation-

ships allow for less censored communication (Sele-

na). Blake has a similar story and described how

personal relationships allow for completely uncen-

sored communication. Johns story reveals an

extreme example of how the personal relationship can

facilitate uncensored communication:

John: Ive got some of my best friends in the world

that are my customers. Sometimes when we have a

business conversation we have to close the door

and I have to shove rags under the door because ofthe words and language that we use. But at the end

of the conversation were like, Hey, do you wanna

go fishing this evening? Weve solved the worlds

problems, weve got the issues addressed and we

move on!

Johns story further reveals how uncensored commu-

nication can allow managers to better address busi-

ness issues via personal relationships.

Property 2: Tension. Another role of personal rela-

tionships that emerged as a subtheme of environmental

interaction throughout the respondents stories was thatof reducing tension during business exchanges. Again

consistent with social capital theory, personal relation-

ships performed the role of a social lubricant within the

communications process, which in turned allowed man-

agers to better conduct business. Managers described

how personal relationships allowed them to separate

the person from the business decision and therefore

helped avoid conflict when communicating, especially

when unpleasant information was exchanged:

Sean: Because you know these people you can ask

them nonbusinessrelated questions first and then

you can gently go into business, versus going

straight into business; youre more abrupt and you

risk being offensive. So I think it serves that pur-

pose. In particular, in Charleston, typically in a

meeting you get all the small talk out of the way

and then its a more relaxed atmosphere. Then you

can bring up more topics and youre not afraid to

take a firm stance on your position because you

know its business: I know your children, I know

what your children do, but when it comes down to

business, its what my company wants.

TABLE 5

Environmental Interaction Theme

Properties Number/Percentage ofParticipants Discussing

the Property

Additional Sample Quotes

Censorship Participants: 12 I dont have to be politically correct anymore,or at least not as much. (Rob)Percentage: 46 percent

Tension Participants: 15 As a broker I have low margins.The relationship facilitates for negotiationsto take place in a less tense environment. (Alison)

Percentage: 58 percent

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

6

7/29/2019 jscm3240

14/20

Kenji had a similar story that emphasized the

importance of personal relationships in mediating

tension in the buyerseller communication process:

Having good personal relationships with customers

where I can just talk to them about anything, like per-

sonal stuff, helps ease tension. It makes it better when

I have to tell them that we have an extra charge thismonth, or theres a rate increase.

Blake called the process by which personal relation-

ships help mitigate conflict keeping grounded:

Blake: The personal relationship helps us keep

grounded. What I mean by that is there may be a

fire burning that day that we need to work quickly

to put out but we can also take a step back and

look at the big picture and recognize what a fantas-

tic job our teams are collectively doing together. So

maybe one mishap today, but 1) we know we can

do it, and 2) if that doesnt come together as wellas it could we know where that relates in the big

picture for our business and life in general.

Overall, the respondents stories revealed that per-

sonal relationships were found to play a key in reduc-

ing tension during business interactions and therefore

creating an environment conducive to open commu-

nication, and furthermore, enhanced business perfor-

mance. We summarize the properties and provide

additional examples of environmental interaction in

Table 5.

Theme 4: Communication PerformanceAs a fourth and final theme, personal relationships

were found to increase the performance of the com-

munication process by increasing its effectiveness (69

percent of participants) and efficiency (58 percent).

Table 6 depicts the findings from this section and

introduces additional quotes supporting our interpre-

tations.

Property 1: Efficiency. While personal relationships

were found to increase the frequency of communica-

tion, they were also found to increase the efficiency of

communication and therefore eliminate unnecessary

communication. Consider Travis story:

Travis: I think the personal relationship eliminates

unnecessary communication. For instance, if Im

going to present something to Blake I know I donthave to make any changes because I know Blake

and I know how he wants it. I have a feeling for

when hes going to need it. I can get it right the

first time, so were not having unnecessary commu-

nication about the same thing over and over.

Travis perspective was later confirmed by Blake in

his interview. Blake emphasized that as a result of the

personal relationship that theyve developed: Travis

can read between the lines, analyze and digest our

expectations so well . . . The excerpts from Blakes

and Travis interviews are also a good example of thebenefits of conducting dyadic research. Revealing the

perspectives of all the parties involved in a relation-

ship allowed us to gain a deeper understanding of the

relationships studied and also develop a better inter-

pretation of the data collected.

Property 2: Effectiveness. Respondents also associ-

ated personal relationships with more effective com-

munication. Managers described how through the

personal relationships their counterparts learned what

type of information they needed to successfully per-

form their job and made it available to them. Phillips

story is a good description of this process. He

described how through the personal relationship his

counterpart learned he was fairly new in the industry

and therefore he was offering him information that

he knew Phillip really needed to be successful:

Phillip: Ive only been working in this operations

department for two years now. I know that theres

a lot out there that I dont know. So, someone

who I have a personal relationship with under-

stands where Im coming from. They understand

TABLE 6

Communication Performance Theme

Properties Number/Percentage ofParticipants Discussing

the Property

Additional Sample Quotes

Efficiency Participants: 15 The relationship eliminates unnecessarycommunication, especially when dealingwith routine tasks. (Glenda)

Percentage: 58 percent

Effectiveness Participants: 18 He knows by the tone of my voice if itsurgent or not. As a result our communicationis more effective. (Paul)

Percentage: 69 percent

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

15/20

Im new so theyre always offering information I

need. They offer information like Hey, if you

dont realize this its probably going to take a little

bit longer to make this delivery because not only is

it 400 miles away but as we get there we have to

go through some scales that might cause problems,

we understand you dont know that but we let youknow now upfront. They look out for my best

interest, and theirs as well.

Blake provided us with a similar story in his discus-

sion on the impact of personal relationships on the

communication process. He emphasized how commu-

nication effectiveness was increased as a result of

managers developing a deeper understanding of each

others personalities and communication styles:

When you have that personal relationship and know

the person very well, they understand your tone in

email . . . they know whats urgent and whats not.

Blakes and Phillips stories serve as good representa-

tions as respondents consistently attributed an

increase in communication effectiveness to the devel-

opment of personal relationships.

Table 6 further illustrates the efficiency and effective-

ness benefits related to personal relationships in sup-

ply chain communications.

PROPOSED MODELAll the interviews in this study consisted of narra-

tives about events that occurred at various points in

participants lives and career lifecycles. This temporalvariety of personal stories enables us to develop an

initial causal model depicting the role of personal

relationships in the communication process (Flint

et al. 2002). As illustrated in Figure 1, the content anal-

ysis of the transcripts indicates that personal relation-

ships can lead to enhanced communication processes

between supply chain members. As noted, personal

relationships were found to enhance communication

processes along four distinct constructs: message integ-

rity, message conveyance, environmental interactionand communication performance. Furthermore,

respondents directly linked enhanced communication

processes to superior business performance and sug-

gested that the absence of personal relationships can

negatively impact buyerseller communication and

therefore business performance. Thus, we hypothesize a

research model as pictorialized in Figure 1.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO KNOWLEDGE ANDFUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS

While the importance of interorganizational com-munication has long been recognized in the supply

chain literature, most studies simply describe the

function communication plays in the management of

supply chain relationships, without first considering

the factors that foster communication between buyers

and suppliers. Additionally, no known prior study

has addressed the role of personal relationships in the

communication processes between buyers and sellers

of logistics services. Therefore, the purpose of this

study was to understand more about how social rela-

tionships formed at the interpersonal level influence

workfocused communications between managers as

they act in the role of supply chain partners. Upon

pursuing this goal, we find that personal relationships

are more than just a simple social enabler for the suc-

cessful completion of the interorganizational business

EnhancedCommunicaons

BusinessPersonal

Relaonships Performance

Processes

Message Conveyance

Message Integrity

Environmental Interacon

Communicaon Performance

*Frequency

*Channel*Level

*Ease of Communicaons

*Ease of Contact

*Accuracy of Interpretaon

*Honesty

*Sensivity

*Censorship

*Tension

*Efficiency

*Effecveness

FIGURE 1Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

8

7/29/2019 jscm3240

16/20

interactions. Rather, personal relationships were

found to facilitate the communication between buyers

and sellers of logistics services in four distinctive

ways. Furthermore, the respondents stories also

allowed for the inference that the enhanced commu-

nication process achieved as a result of developing

personal relationships leads to superior business per-formance for the relational members. These findings

are consistent with existing literature on buyersup-

plier relationships that recognizes the fundamental

role of communication in establishing and maintain-

ing successful supply chain relationships (Mohr and

Nevin 1990; Morris, Brunyee, and Page 1998) and

achieving enhanced business performance (Prahinski

and Benton 2004; Paulraj et al. 2008; Joshi 2009),

but provide much greater specification than the previ-

ous studies with respect to the role of individual level

relationships.

As it relates to the purpose of this paper, perhaps thekey contribution of this research is the identification of

the specific avenues through which personal relation-

ships facilitate the communication process. Four dis-

tinct themes emerged to describe the communication

aspects impacted by personal relationships. The spe-

cific properties of each theme were also revealed in

order to further describe the communication benefits

associated with the presence of personal relationships.

Specifically, it was found that personal relationships

(1) enhance the message integrityby increasing the hon-

esty of the message transmitted and facilitating the

exchange of sensitive information, (2) enhance the

message conveyance process by increasing the ease of

communication, the ease of contact, the accuracy of

interpretation, and the frequency of communication,

and by adding new channels and levels of communi-

cation, (3) enhance the environmental interaction by

reducing tension when communicating and allowing

for uncensored communication, and (4) enhance

communication performance by increasing communi-

cation efficiency and increasing communication

effectiveness.

Based on this developed typology of benefits, we

suggest that the results of this study have direct mana-

gerial implications as well. The findings should indi-cate to managers the importance of developing

personal relationships with logistics managers across

companies. Personal relationships were found to

impact how managers communicated and, as a conse-

quence, the managers business performance. Respon-

dents consistently linked personal relationships to

enhanced communication that in turn is linked to

increased business performance. This suggests that

managers who develop personal relationships with

their counterparts are likely to experience enhanced

communication and superior business performance as

compared with managers who fail to develop personal

relationships with their counterparts. As potential ave-

nues, throughout the interviews respondents suggested

several approaches to developing personal relation-

ships, such as finding common hobbies, organizing a

social outing (e.g., lunch, sports event), or simply

putting in the time and effort to get to know the other

manager better.It is important to emphasize that we are not suggest-

ing unless a manager develops personal relationships

with his counterpart s/he will not have a good com-

munication process or that s/he will not achieve the

desired level of business performance. Instead, what

we propose is that personal relationships have the

potential to enhance the communication process,

which in turn can positively impact the business per-

formance of the relational parties. The qualitative

results suggest that managers looking for ways to

improve the communication process with their coun-

terparts could consider the development of personalrelationships as a feasible avenue. Furthermore, we

recognize that it could also be the case that the man-

ager(s) might have done everything possible from a

strict business perspective to improve the communica-

tion process with a business counterpart, but may

have inadvertently or purposefully ignored the per-

sonal side of such relationships. This research should

signal to those managers the need to reevaluate those

relationships and determine whether an appropriate

personal relationship has been developed with that

manager. If not, perhaps managers should consider

developing such a relationship as a way to improve

the communication process.

There are a number of potential avenues for future

research that are worthy of consideration. First, future

research can empirically validate the model put forth

in this study as well as the generalizability of the con-

structs that emerged via the grounded theory process.

This is an important sequential step in building the-

ory on the foundation laid in this study. Second,

future studies could and should explore the potential

conflicts supply chain members might experience as a

result of developing personal relationships. Third,

future research could explore how each party experi-

ences the personal relationships and the pressuresthey are faced with (e.g., our respondents stories

indicated that buyers are typically discouraged from

developing personal relationships, whereas sellers are

encouraged by their upper management to develop

personal relationships). Finally, it would also be inter-

esting for future research to explore the role of social

media in how members of a supply chain interact on

a personal level. A large number of managers

indicated how evolving technology (e.g., Facebook,

Twitter) impacts how they communicate with each

other during both business and nonbusinessrelated

interactions.

January 2012

Personal Relationships and Supply Chain Communications

7/29/2019 jscm3240

17/20

Considering the importance of communication in

the management of supply chain relationships, addi-

tional research is needed to better understand how

the communication process between supply chain

members can be improved. Ultimately, within any

supply chain it is individuals that communicate, not

firms. Therefore, we conclude by emphasizing theneed for more microindividual level studies that ana-

lyze supply chain communication processes consider-

ing the manager as the focus of analysis.

REFERENCESAdler, P.S. and S. Kwon. Social Capital: Prospects for

a New Concept, Academy of Management Review,(27:1), 2002, pp. 1740.

Adobor, H. The Role of Personal Relationships inInterfirm Alliances: Benefits, Dysfunctions, andSome Suggestions, Business Horizons, (49:6),

2006, pp. 473486.

Allan, G.A. Friendship: Developing a Sociological Perspec-tive, Harvester Wheatsheaf, London, 1989.

Anderson, M.H. Social Networks and the CognitiveMotivation to Realize Network Opportunities: AStudy of Managers Information Gathering Behav-iors, Journal of Organizational Behavior, (29:1),2008, pp. 5178.

Anderson, E. and B. Weitz. The Use of Pledges toBuild and Sustain Commitment in DistributionChannels, Journal of Marketing Research, (29:1),1992, pp. 1834.

Anderson, E.J., T. Coltman, T. Devinney and B. Keat-

ing. What Drives the Choice of a Third-PartyLogistics Provider?, Journal of Supply Chain Man-agement, (47:2), 2011, pp. 97115.

Anderson, J.C. and J.A. Narus. A Model of Distribu-tor Firm and Manufacturing Firm Working Part-nerships, Journal of Marketing, (54:1), 1990, pp.4258.

Autry, C.W. and S.E. Griffis. Supply Chain Capital:The Impact of Structural and Relational Linkageson Firm Execution and Innovation, Journal ofBusiness Logistics, (29:1), 2008, pp. 157173.

Bechtel, C. and J. Jayaram. Supply Chain Manage-ment: A Strategic Perspective, International Jour-nal of Logistics Management, (8:1), 1997, pp. 15

34.Berscheid, E.G. and L.A. Pelau. The Emerging Science

of Relationships, W.H. Freeman, New York, NY,1983.

Borgatti, S. and X. Li. On Social Network Analysis ina Supply Chain Context, Journal of Supply ChainManagement, (45:2), 2009, pp. 522.

Burt, R.S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Com-petition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,1992.

Busse, C. A Procedure for Secondary Data Analysis:Innovation by Logistics Service Providers, Journalof Supply Chain Management, (46:4), 2010, pp. 44

48.

Celsi, R.L., L.R. Rose and T.W. Leigh. An Explorationof High Leisure Consumption Through Skydiv-ing, Journal of Consumer Research, (20:1), 1993,pp. 123.

Claycomb, C. and G.L. Frankwick. A ContingencyPerspective of Communication, Conflict Resolu-

tion and Buyer Search Effort in Buyer

SupplierRelationships, Journal of Supply Chain Manage-ment, (40:1), 2004, pp. 1834.

Coleman, J.S. Social Capital in the Creation ofHuman Capital, American Journal of Sociology,(94:1), 1988, pp. 95120.

Coleman, J.S. Foundations of Social Theory, Ed. BelknapPress of Harvard University Press, Cambridge,MA, 1990.

Cooper, M.C., D.M. Lambert and J.D. Pagh. SupplyChain Management: More than a New Name forLogistics, International Journal of Logistics Manage-ment, (8:1), 1997, pp. 114.

Christopher, M. Logistics and Supply Chain Manage-

ment, Pitman, London, 1992.Das, T.K. and B.S. Teng. Between Trust and Control:

Developing Confidence in Partner Cooperation inAlliances, Academy of Management Review, (23:3),1998, pp. 491512.

Dyer, J.H. Effective Interorganizational Collaboration:How Transactors Minimize Transaction Costs andMaximize Transaction Value, Strategic Manage-ment Journal, (18:7), 1997, pp. 535556.

Ellram, L.M. and M.C. Cooper. Supply Chain Man-agement, Partnerships, and the ShipperThirdParty Relationship, International Journal of Logis-tics Management, (1:2), 1990, pp. 110.

Fischer, C.S. What Do We Mean by Friend? AnIntroductive Study, Social Networks, (3:4), 1982,pp. 287306.

Flint, D.J., E. Larsson, B. Gammelgaard and J.T. Ment-zer. Logistics Innovation: A Customer ValueOri-ented Social Process, Journal of Business Logistics,(26:1), 2005, pp. 113147.

Flint, D.J., R. Woodruff and S.F. Gardial. Exploringthe Phenomenon of Customers Desired ValueChange in a BusinesstoBusiness Context, Jour-nal of Marketing, (66:4), 2002, pp. 102117.

Forrester, J.W. Industrial Dynamics: A Major Break-through for Decision Makers, Harvard BusinessReview, (38:4), 1958, pp. 3766.

Fournier, S., S. Dobscha and D.G. Mick. Preventingthe Premature Death of Relationship Marketing,Harvard Business Review, (76:1), 1998, pp. 4251.

Franke, G.R. and J. Park. Salesperson Adaptive SellingBehavior and Customer Orientation: A MetaAnal-ysis, Journal of Marketing Research, (43:4), 2006,pp. 693702.

Frazier, G.L. and J. Summers. InterorganizationalInfluence Strategies and Their Applications withinDistribution Channels, Journal of Marketing,(48:3), 1984, pp. 4355.

Fugate, B., F. Sahin and J.T. Mentzer. Supply ChainManagement Coordination Mechanisms, Journal

of Business Logistics, (27:2), 2006, pp. 129

161.

Volume 48, Number 1

Journal of Supply Chain Management

0

7/29/2019 jscm3240

18/20

Galaskiewicz, J. Studying Supply Chains From aSocial Network Perspective, Journal of SupplyChain Management, (47:1), 2011, pp. 48.

Gedeon, I.M., A. Fearne and N. Poole. The Role ofInterPersonal Relationships in the Dissolution ofBusiness Relationships, Journal of Business and

Industrial Marketing, (24:3), 2009, pp. 218

226.Granovetter, M. The Strength of Weak Ties, Ameri-can Journal of Sociology, (78:6), 1973, pp. 13601380.

Granovetter, M. Economic Action and Social Struc-ture: The Problem of Embeddedness, AmericanJournal of Sociology, (91:3), 1985, pp. 481510.

Grant, R.M. Prospering in DynamicallyCompetitiveEnvironments: Organizational Capability asKnowledge Integration, Organization Science,(7:4), 1996, pp. 375387.

Grayson, K. Friendship Versus Business in MarketingRelationships, Journal of Marketing, (71:4), 2007,pp. 121139.

Guetzkow, H. Communication in Organizations. InJ.G. March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations, RandMcNally, Chicago, 1965.

Guiltinan, J.P., I.B. Rejab and W.C. Rodgers. FactorsInfluencing Coordination in a Franchise Chan-nel, Journal of Retailing, (56:3), 1980, pp. 4159.

Haytko, D.L. FirmtoFirm and Personal Relation-ships: Perspectives From Advertising AgencyAccount Managers, Journal of the Academy of Mar-keting Science, (32:3), 2004, pp. 312328.

Heide, J.B. and K.H. Wathne. Friends, Businesspeo-ple, and Relationship Roles: A Conceptual Frame-work and a Research Agenda, Journal of

Marketing, (70:3), 2006, pp. 90

103.Hirschman, E.C. Humanistic Inquiry in MarketingResearch: Philosophy, Method, and Criteria, Jour-nal of Marketing Research, (23:3), 1986, pp. 237249.

Huang, X., T. Gattiker and J. Schwarz. InterpersonalTrust Formation During The Supplier SelectionProcess: The Role of the Communication Chan-nel, Journal of Supply Chain Management, (44:3),2008, pp. 5375.

Hutt, M.D., E. Stafford, B. Walker and P. Reingen.Defining the Social Network of a Strategic Alli-ance, Sloan Management Review, (41:2), 2000, pp.5162.

Johnson, M.D. and F. Selnes. Customer PortfolioManagement: Toward a Dynamic Theory ofExchange Relationships, Journal of Marketing,(68:1), 2004, pp. 117.

Joshi, A.W. Continuous Supplier PerformanceImprovement: Effects of Collaborative Communi-cation and Control, Journal of Marketing, (73:1),2009, pp. 133150.

Kenis, P. and D. Knoke. How Organizational FieldNetworks Shape Interorganizational TieForma-tion Rates, Academy of Management Review,(27:2), 2002, pp. 275293.

Koka, B.R. and J.E. Prescott. Strategic Alliances as

Social Capital: A Multidimensional View, Strate-

gic Management Journal, (23:9), 2002, pp. 795816.

Knobloch, L.K. and D.H. Solomon. InformationSeeking Beyond Initial Interaction, HumanCommunication Research, (28:2), 2002, pp. 243258.

Kogut, B. and U. Zander. Knowledge of the Firm,Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication ofTechnology, Organization Science, (3:3), 1992,pp. 383397.

Kotabe, M., M. Xavier and D. Hiroshi. Gaining FromVertical Partnerships: Knowledge Transfer, Rela-tionship Duration and Supplier PerformanceImprovement in the U.S. and Japanese Automo-tive Industries, Strategic Management Journal,(24:4), 2003, pp. 293317.

Krone, K.J., F.M. Jablin and L.L. Putnam. Communi-cation Theory and Organizational Communica-tion: Multiple Perspectives. In F.M. Jablin, L.L.Putnam, K.H. Roberts and L.W. Porter (Eds.),

Handbook of Organizational Communication, Sage,Newbury Park, CA, 1987.

Lai, F., D. Li and Q. Wang. The Information Technol-ogy Capability of ThirdParty Logistics Providers:A ResourceBased View and Empirical EvidenceFrom China, Journal of Supply Chain Management,(44:3), 2008, pp. 2238.

Lawson, B., B.B. Tyler and P.D. Cousins. Antecedentsand Consequences of Social Capital on Buyer Per-formance Improvement, Journal of OperationsManagement, (26:3), 2008, pp. 446460.

Li, M. and T.Y. Choi. Triads in Services Outsourcing:Bridge, Bridge Decay and Bridge Transfer, Journal

of Supply Chain Management, (45:3), 2009, pp. 27

39.Lian, P.C.S. and A.W. Laing. Relationships in the

Purchasing o