situation might have been different.More specifically, SCM and production
process resources and capabilities came forth both in buyer and
supplier interviews as important drivers of attractiveness, as illustrated
by the following quote:
“Contr Man is able to gather a lot of manufacturing capacity from different
parts of the world and can do it considerably faster than we
could ourselves.” (Category Group Manager, MobInfra)
Overall, resource-based attractiveness seemed to be more essential
to buyers than to suppliers. For buyers, suppliers' R&D resources and capabilities
also played a very important role in some dyads, as the following
answer to the question “What makes this supplier attractive?”
illustrates:
“Technology. The supplier has R&D resources and capabilities that
MobInfra may utilize in developing more cost competitive products
and gaining a competitive advantage.” (Supplier manager,
MobInfra)
Company size was mentioned frequently by both buyers and suppliers
as a driver of attractiveness, but it played a different role for suppliers
than for buyers. Suppliers found buyer size to be a driver of
economic attractiveness; large buyers provide opportunities for bigger
sales. Buyers, in turn, demanded that suppliers be large enough to
own the resources to fulfill all their needs but not so large that the
buyers are not able to influence the supplier. For buyers, supplier size
was thus a driver of resource-based attractiveness. For all firms, the
most important consideration was suitability rather than large size.
Both buyer and supplier company interviewees deemed ideal buyer
size to depend on particular strategies.
4.2.4. Bridging-based attractiveness
The fourth category of attractiveness — bridging — denotes that the
buyer/supplier is seen as a conduit to a larger value network.We identified
three common drivers of bridging attractiveness for both buyers
and suppliers, one driver specifically affecting buyer attractiveness,
and one driver affecting specifically supplier attractiveness (Table 8).
The first common driver of bridging attractiveness is the geographical
presence of the other party, which plays a different role for buyers
and suppliers. Buyers found suppliers located close to important resources
(e.g., cheap labor) a conduit to a network of valuable partners,
shaping a supplier's attractiveness. Suppliers, in turn, valued buyers located
in importantmarket areas, acting as a conduit to a network of end
customers.
Both buyer and supplier respondents found information intermediation
and access to new partners to shape the other partner's attractiveness,
but very few had high expectations in this respect. All firms had
many sources of getting information about procurement and customer
markets, so it was not crucial to obtain information from a certain
buyer or supplier. However, market information and contacts with relevant
third parties were valued, as illustrated by the following quotes:
“In this business, we need many third parties because it is a complicated
ecosystem, and all new contacts are valuable.” (Category manager,
MobInfra)