Collaborative Sustainable Management: A Psychological Perspective Of Supplier-Marketer Relationship
Supply chain sustainability has been of immense significance in the past decade in the industrial sphere and academic circles due to the demands of different stakeholders to assume a commitment to sustainability performances. Sustainable supply chains are a major constituent of sustainable growth where the employees and managers need to be engaged in the supply chain, while it is anticipated that competitiveness would be sustained through meeting client wants and associated economic standards (Attaran & Attaran 2007). These descriptions entail that organizations involved in sustainable supply chain management have to meet multiple and differing goals, for instance, maximizing returns while minimizing operating expenditures, minimizing the environmental effects and promoting the social welfare. Supply chain administrators have as well other obligations: handling multiple decision makers and evaluating the environmental effects and public benefits in a cooperative supply chain founded on an inter-agencies strategy and regarding various processes for scheming, acquiring, developing, and selling products in international markets.
Sustainable supply chain management has been defined as the administration of material and knowledge flows and collaboration among organizations along the supply chain while considering objectives from the various dimensions of supply chain management with the intention of maximizing the supply chain productivity while simultaneously reducing the operation costs and environmental impacts. Literature on the topic is largely concentrated on determining features of collaboration, determining relationships among the features, and analyzing the mutuality of gain (Bal 2009). A number of researchers have lately contended that even though Supply Chain Management has obtained immense attention in the literature since the late 1990s, the conception is still not principally well comprehended (Xue et al. 2013). For instance, the integration through supplier-marketer or supply chain relationships has not been well understood. Particularly, most present models tend to tackle the topic from a single viewpoint. Several diverse viewpoints have been taken in the literature, comprising authority, trust, and risk. Building on this viewpoint, a broader multi-dimensional study view has been proposed where a solitary helpful case studies from a variety of descriptive viewpoints. Additionally, it is believed that, in some instances, there are other significant aspects that have so far been inadequately studied in the Supply Chain literature (Cao et al. 2010).
Importance of Sustainability
Sustainable supply chain management, better economic returns and create a positive image for organizations and their products. As brand proprietors are searching for chances to win over different interest businesses, from curious consumers to choosy economic analysts, it is helpful for organizations to contemplate about their clients’, and suppliers’ sustainability wants together with fixed performance prerequisites (Sharma et al. 2010; Zdanyte & Neverauskas 2014). The capacity to offer a product that meets customers’ objectives and advances their bottom lines entails that those clients build confidence and rely on the organization for assistance in attaining their future sustainability targets (Soltani et al. 2011).
The financial benefits of enforcing sustainable supply chain practices are incontestable. The procedure for determining the perfect balance of resources spent against value to the customer is important to delivering the most cost-effective results in terms of returns yielded and organizational advantages delivered. A product’s worth proceeds far beyond its expenditure (Zhu, Sarkis & Lai 2012). Economizing resources and minimizing misuse while delivering strong outcomes is economically beneficial to managers in supply chain network. Apart from the economic gains, proactively establishing proper sustainable supply chain practices organizes a business for future administration requirements and customer demands associated with sustainability (Whipple & Russell, 2007). As opposed to investing and rushing to satisfy new supply chain obligations, organizations that are already corresponding to new prospects can apportion their economic and intellectual assets to sustainable innovation.
Importance of Employee Collaboration
The product lifecycle entails several steps and a number of related parties. This influences the way an organization deals with sustainability across a product’s lifecycle. The numerous concerned employees can be split up into three groups (Zhu, Sarkis & Lai 2012). The first group comprises those employees who have an express influence on the actual development of the product, the manufacturers. The other group comprises the personnel who interrelate with the product after it has been made: brand managers, retailers, customers, and associates. All of these groups place demands on businesses to not merely discuss the sustainability chat, but as well walk the talk. Due to the enhanced comprehension and swift communications channels, organizations are expected to deliver quantifiable results to fulfill these rising demands (Jagdev & Thoben, 2001; Vereecke & Muylle, 2006). This makes organizations generate sustainability progresses and acquire positive outcomes that can be confirmed using systematic principles.
Besides an improved appreciation of market wants, a distinct benefit of enhancing collaborations in departments is that numerous of these employees have considerable influence within the industry. Administrative institutions and may issue lists of favorite organizations and businesses that have verifiable dedications to sustainable supply chain management (Sharma et al. 2010). Improved collaboration between interdepartmental employees has other outcomes away from the recognition. Industry practitioners from organizations with firm sustainability systems open the access for publicity prospects. When a professional is requested to oversee an organization’s team and become a collaboration associate with another organization, this creates important and positive experience and direct business chances. Another advantage of a successful sustainability program has improved employee performance. Consistent with Sustainable organizations’ journal (Chan & Prakash 2012), organizations that manifest to workers how they implement sustainability, the attain expansion in earnings per share, nearly twice more than that of companies with lower commitment in the similar industry.
Problems, for instance, disagreements and variance are likely when company employees operate together on numerous departments. Therefore, a system is needed to resolve these difficulties. Additionally, collaborative benefits are difficult to realize if supply chain members chase their personal goals (Seidel, Recker & Vom Brocke 2013). Sustainable supply chain management assists in settling or handling matters, for instance, conflicts between colleagues, technical challenges, disagreements in daily business operations, and unpredicted catastrophes; therefore, joint problem settling is significant for the coalition and individual co-workers (Băleanu, Irimie & Ionică 2009). Logically, collaboration is a type of combined problem settling (Whipple & Russell, 2007) where two or more associates are required to resolve difficulties like expanding market share, being aggressive, and assuring timely delivery. It is as well significant for participating organizations to encourage performance, and assessment of collaboration fulfillment (Băleanu, Irimie & Ionică 2009). Assessing performance of the employee collaboration help to encourage proper conduct and facilitate successful collaboration (Liu, Low & Yang 2013). The assessment outcomes have been applied in functional processes and to advance personnel, and facilitate co-workers to identify matters to be dealt with, and to recognize finest practices and resolutions (Liu, Low & Yang 2013).
The most common way that parties in supply chain handle their relationship is through agreements. Most businesses place more importance on stipulated laws and guidelines steering the performance of channel relationship. Nevertheless, in the majority of cases unequivocal contracts are followed with inconsistencies and differences within the supply chain channel (Chan & Prakash 2012). Supplier assessment and selection has attained a wide attention in supply chain management because of rising interest by both professionals and intellectuals. The rapid development of the measures for supplier assessment and selection, as well as the differential performance assessment approaches, make it a complicated duty of the purchasing managers and the company altogether. Supplier assessment and choice is a key challenge in the perspective of supplier-marketer relationship (Bal et al. 2008). Identification and application of the specific relevant supplier evaluation and selection standard will change the level of negative outcomes experienced by businesses. However, matters of supplier choice and performance assessment for sustainable competitive advantage with regard to business values are yet at its earlier level within the business sector purchasing activities. Subjective data imply that a number of regulatory mechanisms have been researched in the literature, but little has been considered in spiritism identification in the business and to prudently apply using inadequate and insufficient resources (Cao et al. 2010; Ho 2014). Additionally, companies assess and choose suppliers that constantly comply with a practical degree of ethical performance.
The largest part of has concentrated on marketer performance and ignores supplier performance, which is believed to be the core competence in supplier-marketer association (Cheng, Lee & Chen 2014). Outsourcing has gradually become an indistinguishable necessary evil that either guarantees a continued competitive advantage and greater performance in the business setting or numerous adverse outcomes. The achievement or malfunction of outsourcing basically count on the possibility of making the correct sourcing decision and the capacity to perfect the choice of supplier that match to necessity (Xue et al. 2013). With the dawn of the international transformation in supply chain management network, in addition to conscious supplier appraisal and selection, inclinations by businesses are made for competitive advantage. Customers nowadays as well insist more inexpensive, high quality products, punctual delivery, and outstanding after-sale services (Cheng, Lee & Chen 2014).
Customer demands for improved service levels, which signify the rising importance to have the right product. The endless cycle of growing supply chain expenditures affects the outcome of all players concerned. Consistent with a study conducted in 2006, almost 40 percent of manufacturers, 45 percent of retailers, and 50 percent of the vendors named supply chain cost lessening as a vital issue to be tackled in the next decade (Wang, Chan & Pauleen 2010). Lack of mutual planning has a considerable effect on supply chain functioning. Supply chain associates mention advancement in estimate accuracy as a significant aspect of adopting collaborative performances. A latest research illustrates that supply chain collaboration can attach in so far as four percentage points to revenue margins for all forms of supply chain actors (Ho 2012). Several multinational companies have received considerable success in this regard. Using a joint program with P&G, termed as collaborative forecasting and replenishment, managers from both companies together project sales of their stores and plan replenishment plans (Clarke 2012). Early executions of inter-business electronic selling affiliations encompass the mechanization of transactions using electronic data interchange. The most business partnerships that majority of companies establishes entails information sharing and data interchange. To improve a buyer-seller relationship more, some business partners are shifting toward more collaborative associations (Cao et al. 2010). Companies organize an attempt to define a process that would connect clients demand with replacement needs through the whole supply chain. This results in a range of business procedures termed collaborative preparation, projecting, and replenishment that assists reduce demand and supply ambiguity through enhanced communications between supply chain associates. The Voluntary Interindustry Commerce Standards Association constituted a panel to recognize the best practices and plan principles for mutual supply chain estimating and planning (Wang, Chan & Pauleen 2010). Taking part in the project were prominent retailers, consumer products, producers and consulting and technology providers.
To increase the customers and suppliers inter-business trading associations, some business associates are shifting toward more collaborative dealings that facilitate them to operate together to achieve an improved comprehension of future demand and to do joint arrangement to satisfy it (Clarke & Fuller 2010). Customers and suppliers have developed into collaborators using various types of electronic-transactional information allocation, and mutual processes. Electronic data interchange has been applied to convey information, for instance, invoices, material issues, shipping acknowledgements, and electronic inquiries (Cao et al. 2010). The Collaborative scheduling, forecasting, and replenishment model signify voluntary principles intended for coordinating and leading supply chain associates in creating their association and processes. With the participation and reinforcement of Voluntary Interindustry Commerce Standards, more businesses are eager to partake in the corroboration and testing of the model. Consistent with a new survey of producers, merchants, distributors, and logistics suppliers performed in 2006; the model was among the most extensively used programs due to its extremely impressive statistic (Walker et al. 2013). The majority of corporations and industries, nevertheless, are way behind the managers. A survey conducted from more than 2,000 company managers by Ernest & Young indicated that 50 percent of the managers reported that their organizations did not have an official value chain approach (Chakraborty & Dobrzykowski 2014). Of those organizations with official value chain approaches, only 25 percent feel that their strategies are effective. These facts pointed that the majority of the companies have enormous chances of bettering their supply chain operation.
The initiative of building supportive instead of adversarial affiliation with suppliers made a manifestation in the literature a number of decades ago. Since then the concept has been reappeared under different names such as reverse marketing, supplier associations, and business outsourcing. Differences have as well emerged within the marketing field under the heading of relationship marketing and the strategic management domain as strategic coalitions. Simultaneously, the concept of cooperative connections has been expanded from direct suppliers to comprise the broader supply chain and in addition to concepts adopted from various industries such as the auto industry and lean production literature (Schniederjans, Cao & Ching Gu 2012). Researchers contend that most of the educational literature evolved from an absolute attack on the conventional, adversarial strategy to supplier affiliations with the supposition that collaboration and contracts are the results of flourishing supplier relationship management. Nevertheless, proof from many professionals is that the term partnership has been rather overused, frequently improperly where modest real adjustment has happened (Sayce, Cowling & Sundberg 2007). The conventional purchasing-based perspective of supply chain management was to power the supply chain to attain the least initial purchase prices while ensuring supply and was typified by manifold suppliers, supplier choice based largely on purchase price, liberal negotiations, official temporary agreements, and centralized purchasing. A more current perspective of supply chain, acclaimed by some as the new model, specifies supply chain management as a process for planning, formulating, and controlling the internal and external aspects of the supply system. It comprises of material supply, translating materials, and distributing finished products to buyers in line with general goals and strategies (Walker et al. 2013; Schniederjans, Cao & Ching Gu 2012).
The core of supply chain management is as a strategic tool to create a sustainable competitive edge by minimizing investment without foregoing customer satisfaction. Although managers have long recognized the significance of edging closer to their crucial buyers, the reason has now been expanded to the upstream supply chain so that close relationships with cardinal suppliers are as well considered as important. Sayce, Cowling, and Sundberg (2007) conceptualize the conversion from conventional open-market cooperations to collaboration as a field, observing that the support and harmonization stages are essential, but not adequate to reap the gains of sustainable collaboration. The majority of practitioners perceive collaboration as an integral aspect of a wider supply chain management strategy. This accepted view is not without its opponents and it is from an objective viewpoint to the work of the partnership (both supporters and opponents) that an image starts to form of what comprises the components of successful supply chain management (Dicke, Holwerda & Kontakos 2007). Most supporters view collaboration as an essential part of supply chain management remarking that, the road from liberal to partnership is a long one and should not by journeyed by each and every supplier-marketer relationship (Taticchi, Tonelli & Pasqualino 2013). The majority of authors have recommended a selection strategy for supplier relations management. Even as the current arm’s length strategy is now subject to disparagement due to its emphasis on short-range expenditure reduction, it is often suggested under specific circumstances. The aforementioned circumstances include product markets, with several suppliers, low-asset particularity, and little market confidence where the market serves as a regulator instrument to guarantee competitive prices (Morali & Searcy 2013).
Nevertheless, a great deal of business purchasing would not achieve these market features, and collaboration is typically demonstrated as the apparent option. Supply chain management demands a business conversion in which managers’ endeavors alleviate uncertainty and utilize the opportunity through the resourceful application of both suppliers and marketers by assessing who best supplies price and then leveraging that capacity through the whole supply chain (Schoenherr et al. 2012). However, such an endeavor demands sharing what once might have been perceived proprietary data, renouncing control to others in the supply chain and hoping that other supply chain partners will operate in the best interest. Trust obviously appears all through the literature as a major concern influencing the success or failure of supply chain collaboration attempts. Nevertheless, confidence is an uncertain and complicated occurrence (Mann et al. 2010). Relying upon their discipline and the difficulties they have been considering, several managers have focused on the different facets of trust and the process of dependence improvement. In a latest endeavor to bring together the elements most frequently quoted studies from different theoretical viewpoints, Rousseau noted that the recognition of common implication does not entail that all expressions of trust replicate the same thing. Hence, trust represents a psychological condition as opposed to conduct. Managers have as well acknowledged the unclear nature of trust: conviction and related values, reliability are illustrations of what a manager term as externalities (Taticchi, Tonelli & Pasqualino 2013; Sorooshian & Kamar 2013).
Therefore, due to the incessant and thorough procedures involved in supplier relationship between unscrupulous practices, the psychological agreement infringement, and supplier appraisal and choice, fundamental preferences of the managers are evident when trade-offs capitalize on value building and reduce cost. Competitive techniques and approaches are applied by contemporary, refined companies internationally, an evaluation of the literature discloses the reality that there have been constant attempts to assess sellers by formulating several methodologies and more than 50 percent of companies internationally occupied in official supplier assessment procedure (Mann et al. 2010). Supplier assessment plans tackled by the majority of companies is an efficient mechanism in improving buyer-supplier relations practices. Its achievement mainly relies on how suppliers demonstrates their level of assurance to companies in supporting collaborative long-standing relationships and poor supplier operation impacts the general supply chain (Sorooshian & Kamar 2013). Despite coalitions with the suppliers should not be scowled, instead interlocked with deliberation regarding the way to capitalize on the coordination expenditure in the information transfer platform. Successful supplier choice entails a decline in purchase expense and advances corporate profitability that will result in the best performances in general supply chain operation (Chakraborty & Dobrzykowski 2014). Thus, the most vital matter in the practice of supplier selection is incorporating appropriate measures for selecting the best supplier. Therefore, the choice of the supplier should be tackled methodically. However, it is projected that an interaction of specific aspects, for instance, reliability, dedication, education, and problem resolution, are among numerous aspects embraced by the buyer which improve supplier performance (Taticchi, Tonelli & Pasqualino 2013). Customers’ preferences of suppliers’ significant features represent an important significance for best and accurate assessment process.
Impact of Sustainable Collaboration to Organizations
With reference to how worker engagement is done to convert into improved business operation, the idea of the service-return chain is important. Under this framework, worker satisfaction is perceived as vital to stimulating the efficiency and service essential to secure business achievement and drive expansion and productivity. The supply chain starts with organizational performances that attain the objective of rendering workers with what they require to serve clients of the business (Iyer, Srivastava & Rawwas 2014). When workers get this form of assistance, they are more expected to be contented and, therefore, show trustworthiness to the business and enhanced efficiency. These improved levels of dedication and efficiency help to enlarge the value proposition of an organization’s services and goods to consumers, which itself builds customer contentment. Contented employees become devoted to the business and, ultimately, the devotion yielded by these employees drives general productivity and development (Hollos, Blome & Foerstl 2012). Recently, Dicke, Holwerda, and Kontakos (2007) further explained in the framework that depicted the procedure by which workers build value. Collaboration between employees is perceived to drive customer pleasure by attaining operational superiority regarding daily undertakings and inventing to maximize business prospects as they become accessible. Dicke, Holwerda, and Kontakos (2007) as well identify that collaboration provides cost efficiency, reduces cycle time and increase quality of the product. Nevertheless, employee attributes, potentialities, customer results, collaboration, and financial deliberations underlie the framework (Dicke, Holwerda & Kontakos 2007). Expanding the utilization of this extended framework to the perception of worker relationships, it is evident that the engagement is among a number of interrelated aspects that impact organizational performance. If the basis upon which the value-profit chain underlie are missing worker collaboration, even if they are engaged, will be incapable to influence their obligation and capabilities to control the outcome optimistically. Conceivably, the collaboration model presented by Durugbo and Riedel (2013) considers the numerous interfaces that can probably impact the development from an engaged labor force to superior organizational functioning and emphasizes the likelihood of multi-guiding reasons and impact. For instance, Durugbo and Riedel (2013) recognize employee attributes as comprising of proficiency and a demographic blend of workers required by the business, the dedicated employees feel to their company, and behavioral factors. These attributes are impacted by the activities of administrators and, consecutively, manipulate the core capacities of the organization and, in line with the study of Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler (2002), worker contentment levels. Therefore, engagement enables to impact different other elements of the framework as its impact move through the multiple connections within the organization’s departments. Hence, the multifaceted course that engagement takes before its ultimate impact on earnings and development is achieved starts being borne out.
Qualifications and Expectations for Supply and Marketing Employees
The concept of qualifications and expectations for supply and marketing employees is anchored in the social reciprocity theory and the exchange model (Bal 2009). The concept is that, when rendering another with benefits, this will generate a requirement with the intention that the beneficiary will return the favor received. Research indicates that marketing employees give back the investments made by the manager. When workers perceive that the marketing department is offering them some incentives that signify the completion of a responsibility, then they will respond in kind (Durugbo & Riedel 2013). Nevertheless, when workers consider that the manager failed to accomplish his commitments, they withdraw (Coyle-Shapiro & Kessler 2002). According to Durugbo & Riedel (2013) study, perceived responsibilities and the degree to which these responsibilities are satisfied signify the core of the psychological contract. Perceived duties relate to the substance of the exchange while the realization of obligations concentrates on actions within the interchange. Workers give back consistent with their opinions of whether duties are being satisfied or violated (Gold, Seuring & Beske 2010). Actually, failure to achieve the expectations of marketing workers has been connected to a higher emotional obligation and a condensed objective to quit the organization (Gold, Seuring & Beske 2010).
Among the major precursors of successful marketing employees is the human resource management. The messages that human resource management practices put out executive workers to consider the realization of specific organizational duties (Liu, Low & Yang 2013). Marketing employees’ expectations include features such as salary and benefits, education and skill improvement, motivating work to mention a few. When workers obtain these forms of incentives, workers may observe that their anticipations are fulfilled, implying that their manager has fulfilled his or her responsibilities toward them (Liu, Low & Yang 2013).
Employee education has been perceived as a critical attribute for marketing employees, and it is motivating when marketing employees’ skills are improved by constantly updating their skills. Psychological contract realization has been constant and constructive compared to the emotional, organizational promise in traditional engagement relationships (Coyle-Shapiro & Kessler 2002). Moreover, in the wider perspective of conditional engagement, some surveys have already concentrated on the results of an employee’s achievement and discovered a constructive connection with worker’s sentimental dedication to the company. Kumar and Banerjee (2012) contended that the standard of reciprocity is widespread in its requirements; managers should assist and not hurt those who work for them. Thus, the fundamental principle of the reciprocity theory is that the necessity to give back is widespread yet dependent upon the acceptance of gains. In a business perspective, researchers have broadly applied the rule of reciprocity within exchange associations as a model for comprehending worker attitudes and conduct. As explained by Fontinha, Chambel, and De Cuyper (2013), social reciprocity involves indefinite requirements; where a person extends a favor to another and anticipates some form of return in the future. The anticipated future return is anchored on a person believing the other party to fulfill their duties reasonably over time (Kumar & Banerjee 2012).
Another important attribute for marketing employees is the attribute of job passion. The idea of passion at work has drawn enhanced attention in the past two decades, with an increase in the number of articles emphasizing the importance of being zealous towards a person’s job, and the way organizations can gain from engaging passionate workers (Zdanyte & Neverauskas 2014). Simultaneously, though, companies are discovering that their marketing employees are more and more unpassionate and uninterested in what they do. A study by Reade and McKenna (2013) showed that only 30 percent of the United States marketing employees show passion for the jobs to do. In reaction to this rising business fear, researchers have begun to study the theory of passion in the place of work, and qualitative facts from consultations with marketing managers, scholars, and workers. The studies imply that marketing employees can have enthusiasm for their jobs, and such excitement brings success to what they do (Ho, Wong & Lee 2011; Reade & McKenna 2013). In spite of this rising attention in job enthusiasm, nonetheless, the formulations of job passion presented in earlier studies have been vague, mismatched, or completely wanting. Job enthusiasm has been diversely explained as loving a person’s job as undergoing individual meaning from the job. It is uncertain whether it is a sentimental, emotional, or behavioral concept. Due to the lack of official formulations of, and agreement on, what job passion actually involves, it is not easy for investigators to create the literature in job enthusiasm, and to develop and expand research on the subject.
Therefore, tighter and more thorough description, formulation, and operationalization of the job enthusiasm concept are required to progress the study in this field. Additionally, an implied perception in the present literature indicates that job passion is an important aspect that businesses should endeavor to develop among workers and that it is eventually imperative to the performance of a worker’s occupation. Nevertheless, apart from the subjective and tentative accounts that passion can play a task in an individual’s job, methodical studies that connect job passion to real performance ratings or other decisive work results are missing. Until now, a previous study has only correlated passion for non-work actions to emotional and intellectual results as opposed to active activities. Moreover, only one research in the working framework has established a connection between job passion and workers’ emotional adjustment (Zdanyte & Neverauskas 2014). Therefore, the study to ascertain whether having job passion can as well be helpful to workers’ job performance (possibly the most significant worker outcome in companies).
To tackle the aforementioned gaps in the study on job passion, Liu, Low & Yang (2013) research contributed to existing literature in several ways. Initially, they enlarged previous social-psychological study on passion into a business perspective and presented a broad formulation of job passion as a mindset that encompasses both emotional and intellectual aspects that can be discerned. Even though they share definite similarities, the two types of passion are, however dissimilar and are anticipated to result in either positive or negative results. Second, the researchers examined the connection between the two types of job passion and manager-rated job performance. They established that based on the form of passion workers have, they may or may not automatically have performance benefits. This strengthens earlier conflicts by both investigators and practitioners that job passion is unmistakably important and worthy of refining in workers (Kim & Rhee 2012). This approach is also significant from a realistic viewpoint, because it can enlighten organizational decisions concerning the appointment of new workers. For instance, to the level that a specific type of passion is significant to worker performance, managers, when making staffing decisions, should consider not only employees’ talents and abilities, but as well their passion for performing their jobs. Moreover, comprehending the connection between passion and performance is valuable in formulating approaches to inspire working employees, for instance, activities where executives can foster and uphold workers’ passion for their work (Harms, Hansen & Schaltegger 2012). Lastly, the researchers’ third contribution comprised demonstrating the connection between passion and performance. Researchers built on earlier studies, hypothesized, and demonstrated that intellectual engagement is the mediating system through which this connection happens. This informs the existing study in passion by explaining the intellectual process that links the approach of passion to the behavioral effect of job performance, and in general, the suggested framework presents a more profound and inclusive comprehension of the interrelations between passion, employment, and job performance.
In conclusion, the existing literature points to the fundamental forces which encourage organizations to team up, and the connections of conceptual aspects in collaborative relationships. Nevertheless, an inclusive focus on the levels and aspects of collaboration is missing from the available literature on supply chain management. The major academic input of this review of the literature is the development of partnership as a hierarchical philosophical aspect. Additionally, the literature review has explored significant implications for supply chain managers and practitioners. The existing literature has explored joint planning and resource distribution components of collaboration in relation to in-house and external-oriented operational areas which are fundamental to attaining a competitive edge over opponents (Hall, Matos & Silvestre 2012). The paper assesses various facets of collaboration and ranks their significance from organizational viewpoints. These notions convey an understandable appreciation on collaboration. The existing literature supports the proposed framework. This review should act as a catalyst for managers and investigators by concentrating on various features of collaborati
Attaran, M & Attaran, S 2007, ‘Collaborative supply chain management: the most promising practice for building efficient and sustainable supply chains’, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 390-404.
Bal, M 2009, Age and psychological contract breach in relation to work outcomes, Rozenberg Publishers, New York.
Bal, M, De Lange, H, Jansen, G & Van Der Velde, M 2008, ‘A meta-analysis of aging, tenure, the psychological contract, and work-related outcomes’, Psychological Contracts and Age, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 143-158.
Băleanu, V, Irimie, S & Ionică, A 2009, ‘Supply Chain Management: A New Frontier of Managerial Thought and Practice’, Annals of the University of Petroşani Economics, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 43-51.
Cao, M, Vonderembse, M, Zhang, Q & Ragu-Nathan, S 2010, ‘Supply chain collaboration: conceptualisation and instrument development’, International Journal of Production Research, vol. 48, no. 22, pp. 6613-6635.
Chakraborty, S & Dobrzykowski, D 2014, ‘Examining Value Co-Creation in Healthcare Purchasing: a Supply Chain View’, Business: Theory and Practice, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 179-190.
Chan, T & Prakash, A 2012, ‘Inventory management in a lateral collaborative manufacturing supply chain: A simulation study’, International Journal of Production Research, vol. 50, no. 16, pp. 4670-4685.
Cheng, H, Lee, M & Chen, P 2014, ‘Assessing Inter-organizational Performance in Supply Chain-Corporate Social Responsibility as a Mediator’, Asia Pacific Management Review, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 61-79.
Clarke, A 2012, ‘Key structural features for collaborative strategy implementation: a study of sustainable development/local agenda 21 collaborations’, Management & Avenir, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 153-171.
Clarke, A. & Fuller, M 2010, ‘Collaborative strategic management: Strategy formulation and implementation by multi-organizational cross-sector social partnerships’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 85-101.
Coyle-Shapiro, J & Kessler, I 2002, ‘Exploring reciprocity through the lens of the psychological contract: Employee and employer perspectives’, European journal of work and organizational psychology, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-18.
Dicke, C, Holwerda, J & Kontakos, M 2007, Employee Engagement: What Do We Really Know? What Do We Need to Know to Take Action? Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies, New York.
Durugbo, C & Riedel, J 2013, ‘Readiness assessment of collaborative networked organisations for integrated product and s