Interpersonal and IT-enabled communication in platform transactions: the contingent role of contract completeness and technology usage

This paper assesses whether communication via interpersonal and IT channels accounts for short-term financial performance and long-term orientation and how these effects are influenced by contract completeness and technology usage in platform builder-platform participant relationships.,The conceptual model and hypotheses are validated through a moderated regression of 384 survey responses from platform participant.,The empirical results indicate that interpersonal and IT-enabled communication contribute to both short-term financial gains and long-term orientation. The coexistence of interpersonal communication and IT-enabled communication has a synergetic effect on long-term orientation. Contract completeness positively moderates the effect of interpersonal communication on short-term performance while negatively moderating its effect on long-term orientation. Furthermore, contract completeness undermines the effect of IT-enabled communication on short-term performance. Technology usage enhances the effectiveness of interpersonal communication in generating long-term orientation.,First, diverging from the extant research treating communication as a single dimension construct, this study differentiates communication on media channels and shows their separate and synergetic effects on short-term performance and long-term orientation. Second, our empirical findings indicate that the effects of communication are influenced by governance practices, which extends the communication literature. Third, previous studies have presented conflicting results concerning the role of governance mechanisms in inter-firm relationships. By showing that governance mechanisms also either support or suppress communication in generating performance for platform participants, this study extends the existing research on governance mechanisms. Finally, by regarding technology usage as a transactional governance mechanism, this study furthers our understanding of the role of technology in interfirm relationships.

[1]  Brian R. Murtha,et al.  The Joint Effects of Ex Ante Contractual Completeness and Ex Post Governance on Compliance in Franchised Marketing Channels , 2017 .

[2]  Rajiv Kohli,et al.  Performance Impacts of Information Technology: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link? , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[3]  Guijun Zhuang,et al.  Information technology-enabled interactions, mutual monitoring, and supplier-buyer cooperation: A network perspective. , 2017 .

[4]  Tingting Yan,et al.  Communication Intensity, Goal Congruence, and Uncertainty in Buyer-Supplier New Product Development , 2013 .

[5]  E. Erdfelder,et al.  Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[6]  Sven M. Laudien,et al.  Understanding platform business models: A mixed methods study of marketplaces , 2017, European Management Journal.

[7]  M. Cao,et al.  Exploring antecedents of supply chain collaboration: Effects of culture and interorganizational system appropriation , 2018 .

[8]  Kimmo Alajoutsijärvi,et al.  The role of communication in business relationships and networks , 2000 .

[9]  Micah Murphy,et al.  Communication, interactivity, and satisfaction in B2B relationships , 2018 .

[10]  Kevin J. Trainor,et al.  Social media technology usage and customer relationship performance: A capabilities-based examination of social CRM , 2014 .

[11]  I. Geyskens,et al.  The Formation of Buyer–Supplier Relationships: Detailed Contract Drafting and Close Partner Selection , 2005 .

[12]  Baofeng Huo,et al.  The Effects of Competitive Environment on Supply Chain Information Sharing and Performance: An Empirical Study in China , 2014 .

[13]  Yadong Luo,et al.  Governing buyer–supplier relationships through transactional and relational mechanisms: Evidence from China , 2009 .

[14]  James R. Brown,et al.  Do exchange hazards always foster relational governance? An empirical test of the role of communication , 2006 .

[15]  Kevin Zheng Zhou,et al.  Are relational ties always good for knowledge acquisition? Buyer–supplier exchanges in China , 2014 .

[16]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Interfirm IT Capability Profiles and Communications for Cocreating Relational Value: Evidence from the Logistics Industry , 2012, MIS Q..

[17]  Jakki J. Mohr,et al.  Collaborative Communication in Interfirm Relationships: Moderating Effects of Integration and Control , 1996 .

[18]  K. Zhou,et al.  Managing contracts for fairness in buyer-supplier exchanges , 2014 .

[19]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors , 2002 .

[20]  Yadong Luo,et al.  An Investigation of Interpersonal Ties in Interorganizational Exchanges in Emerging Markets , 2016 .

[21]  Per J. Agrell,et al.  Model specification , 2006 .

[22]  Xiande Zhao,et al.  Are logistics outsourcing partners more integrated in a more volatile environment , 2016 .

[23]  A. Joshi,et al.  Continuous Supplier Performance Improvement: Effects of Collaborative Communication and Control , 2009 .

[24]  Fei Wang,et al.  Collaborative innovation capability in IT-enabled inter-firm collaboration , 2017, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[25]  Zhiwei Li,et al.  Cooperative behavior between companies and contract farmers in Chinese agricultural supply chains: Relational antecedents and consequences , 2018, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[26]  Pino G. Audia,et al.  Less Likely to Fail: Low Performance, Firm Size, and Factory Expansion in the Shipbuilding Industry , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[27]  Henry Adobor,et al.  The role of personal relationships in inter-firm alliances: Benefits, dysfunctions, and some suggestions , 2006 .

[28]  Mohammad S. Rahman,et al.  Technology Usage and Online Sales: An Empirical Study , 2010, Manag. Sci..

[29]  Baofeng Huo,et al.  The impact of IT application on supply chain learning and service performance , 2019, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[30]  A. Tiwana.  Does technological modularity substitute for control? A study of alliance performance in software outsourcing , 2008 .

[31]  Danielle E. Warren,et al.  Is Guanxi Ethical? A Normative Analysis of Doing Business in China , 2001 .

[32]  Barbara B. Flynn,et al.  The impact of power and relationship commitment on the integration between manufacturers and customers in a supply chain , 2008 .

[33]  R. Narasimhan,et al.  Effect of supply chain integration on the relationship between diversification and performance: evidence from Japanese and Korean firms , 2002 .

[34]  Kineta H. Hung,et al.  When Does Guanxi Matter? Issues of Capitalization and Its Dark Sides: , 2008 .

[35]  Andrei Hagiu,et al.  Marketplace or Reseller? , 2014, Manag. Sci..

[36]  Hyunwoo Park,et al.  Two-sided platform competition with multihoming agents: An empirical study on the daily deals market , 2017, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[37]  V. Iglesias,et al.  Collaborative manufacturer-distributor relationships: the role of governance, information sharing and creativity , 2013 .

[38]  K. Zhou,et al.  How does technological diversity in supplier network drive buyer innovation? Relational process and contingencies , 2015 .

[39]  Gary L. Frazier,et al.  Distributor Sharing of Strategic Information with Suppliers , 2009 .

[40]  Kevin J. Trainor,et al.  Understanding the role of information communication in the buyer‐seller exchange process: antecedents and outcomes , 2009 .

[41]  Donald J. Schepker,et al.  The Many Futures of Contracts , 2014 .

[42]  Barbara L. Marcolin,et al.  Understanding IT-enabled interactivity in contemporary marketing , 2001 .

[43]  Eli Jones,et al.  High Touch Through High Tech: The Impact of Salesperson Technology Usage on Sales Performance via Mediating Mechanisms , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[44]  Augustine A. Lado,et al.  Inter‐organizational communication as a relational competency: Antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer–supplier relationships , 2008 .