A perspective for supply chain management: Building a conceptual framework

Jraisat, Luai E. Article A perspective for supply chain management: Building a conceptual framework International Journal of Business Science & Applied Management (IJBSAM) Provided in Cooperation with: International Journal of Business Science & Applied Management (IJBSAM) Suggested Citation: Jraisat, Luai E. (2011) : A perspective for supply chain management: Building a conceptual framework, International Journal of Business Science & Applied Management (IJBSAM), ISSN 1753-0296, International Journal of Business Science & Applied Management, s.l., Vol. 6, Iss. 3, pp. 1-14 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/190626 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/uk/ Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 6, Issue 3, 2011 A Perspective for Supply Chain Management: Building a Conceptual Framework Luai E. Jraisat Faculty of Business and Finance, American University of Madaba (AUM), Jordan P.O. Box 2777, Amman 11821, Jordan Telephone: +962 6 55 48 230/32 Email: [email protected] Abstract Supply chain relationships play a significant role in supply chain management to respond to dynamic export market changes. If the dyadic exporter-producer relationships are still weak, they impede the emergence of a high performance supply chain within an export market. This paper develops a conceptual framework for understanding how exporter-producer relationships include not only the relationship system but also network and transaction systems; and thus introduces a more integrated way of looking at supply chain management based on information sharing as a key process between exporters and producers. To achieve this aim, supply chain relationships are reviewed from the perspectives of relationship marketing theory, network theory and transaction cost theory. Findings from previous research are discussed to provide a better understanding of how these relationships have evolved. A conceptual framework is built by offering a central proposition that specific dimensions of relationships, networks and transactions are the key antecedents of information sharing, which in turn influences export performance in supply chain management. Keywords: supply chain management, marketing, exporter-producer relationship, information sharing Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org 2 1 INTRODUCTION To date, there have been a number of studies that have tended to concentrate on the background and phenomena of supply chain management as well as the supply chain relationships. However, conceptually the management of supply chains is not particularly fully understood, and many authors have highlighted the necessity of clear concepts and conceptual frameworks on supply chain management (e.g. Harland, 1996; Wilson, 1996; Croom et al., 2000; Svensson, 2002; Williamson, 2008). Most of the discussions were about supply chain relationships, information and product flow, networks and transactions (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994; Ritter 1999; Toften and Olsen, 2003; Parker et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2008). Little research (e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al, 2000) has claimed and confirmed that buyer-seller relationships, networks and transactions are highly related to supply chain management. Some studies (e.g. Wilson, 1996; Moberg et al., 2002; Hsu et al., 2008) have suggested that information sharing is one of the most important aspects of supply chain management for better understanding of supply chain relationships and performance. Nevertheless, the impact of relationship, network and transaction perspectives on supply chain management has not been examined in any depth. There has been a lack of conceptual and empirical research on information sharing, which limits the understanding of the dyadic business relationship and there has been no theoretical framework analysing export supply chain relationships. Thus, this paper attempts to present a review of the existing approaches to supply chain management that is associated with business involving export markets. This is with the purpose of identifying important issues and research gaps for further research and providing an initial conceptual framework. To do so, this research identifies four perspectives: supply chain management (e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al, 2000; Lambert and Cooper, 2000) relationship marketing theory (e.g. Wilson, 1995; Veludo et al., 2004; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006), network theory (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994; Lazzarini, 2001; Ritter, 2004) and transaction cost theory (e.g. Riordan and Williamson, 1985; Williamson, 2008). Amongst these perspectives, the researcher argues that supply chain management is used as the main theoretical background and thus has an ability to accommodate the three other perspectives. The paper is structured as follows: the importance of supply chain management is explained, key theoretical perspectives (relationship, network, and transaction theories) and export performance in the literature are reviewed and propositions are formed; the methodology is illustrated, a discussion of the results follows; and the final section concludes. 2 SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT Supply chain management can be defined as the management of upstream and downstream relationships with buyers and sellers in order to create value in the final market at less cost to the supply chain as a whole (Christopher, 1998). Most of the studies on supply chain management (Croom et al., 2000; Lazzarini, 2001; Svensoon, 2002) have concluded that the lack of a universal definition of supply chain management is in part due to the approach of different researchers in developing the concept of supply chains. Such a multidisciplinary origin is reflected in the lack of holistic conceptual frameworks for the development of a perspective on supply chain management (Harland, 1996; Leonidou et al., 2006). As a consequence, the schemes of interpretation of supply chain management are mostly partial with relatively poor findings that empirically validate the framework explaining the key themes and form of supply chain management, its buyer-seller relationships and its information sharing. The academic literature underlines a more varied rationale as several studies link supply chain management to key perspectives such as relationship marketing theory (e.g. Wilson, 1995; Veludo et al., 2004; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006), network theory (e.g. Anderson et al., 1994; Lazzarini, 2001; Ritter, 2004), and transaction cost theory (e.g. Riordan and Williamson, 1985; Williamson, 2008). The literature suggests that the concept of supply chain management brings different focuses (e.g. Harland, 1996; Croom et al, 2000; Lazzarini, 2001; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006). For example, researchers may think of the relationship framework, which is built based on the dyadic relationship as the main unit to manage the flow of products and information. Others may link business relationships to networks. This issue refers to the set of relationships where a single relationship cannot work alone without connecting with other relationships. Another important notion is the focus on the transactions of the relationship that are grouped in one supply chain. Wilson (1996) argues that information sharing is one of the important aspects of supply chains for increasing profits and reducing costs, and must be investigated in more detail. Consequently, there is a demand for building a strong buyer-seller relationship to encourage the improvement of modern chains (Duffy et al., 2008). Supply chain management framework has become an important approach within management in developed countries since the 1990s. In the mid-1980s, transactions depended on arms-length agreements, whereas agreements in chain relationships were built on cooperation and information sharing in the 1990s (Hoyt and Huq, 2000). Consequently, the monetary value gained from the export of fresh fruit and vegetables to the European Union by developing countries increased by 24% between 2001 and 2005 (Jaffee, 2005). This is Luai E. Jraisat 3 indicative of how the export supply chain plays a key role in managing flows of produce and information between buyers and sellers who are concerned with information sharing. More importantly, information sharing is a key strategy (Piercy et al., 1997; Leonidou et al., 2006), helping its members to make better decisions about strategic issues for better performance (Huang et al., 2003). The main problem motivating this research is that developing countries (e.g. Jordan) supply very limited fruit and vegetable exports to the European Union, where there are high profits and business continuities. The Jordanian exporter-producer relationships are unable to manage a high performance export chain. Retrospectively, there is a need to recommend and inform private and government sectors working in the export industry of fresh fruit and vegetables by understanding this issue from a holistic viewpoint. The novel focus is on an understanding of information sharing between the exporters and the producers in their relationships in order to improve the supply chain management from Jordan to the European Union. In developing countries, the producers and exporters realise the importance of information sharing in supplying fresh fruit and vegetables to the European Union successfully. Modern fresh food-export supply chains can motivate the producers and the exporters to organise themselves in marketing groups. This is in order to develop sufficient volume for the necessary quality based on production, logistics and marketing information and connections with markets to access export markets with high profits. The researcher argues that supply chain management for export is built on the objectives of delivering products and services to the right customer, in the right quantity and at the right time in the export chain. Therefore, the researcher defines the concept of supply chain management as follows: Supply chain management is a framework for creating relationships among the chain members, mainly the exporters and producers, who consider information sharing at the three levels of relationship, network and transaction dimensions, to reach the right customer, in the right quantity, and at the right time for better export performance. Having discussed the above, however, previous research has not covered all the issues related to supply chain management, its concept and its export supply chain relationships, and information sharing has not been explored in detail. The previous research has not provided a holistic integration between relationships, networks and transaction in order to show supply chain management as a major approach. The previous research has not focused on agri-food export supply chain in detail. Therefore, this paper focuses on studying the exporterproducer relationship including key dimensions, along with exploring information sharing as being the main dimension. The main theoretical perspectives identified are the relationship, network and transaction perspectives, which are associated with information sharing in the context of export supply chain relationships in the fresh fruit and vegetable industry. 3 RELATIONSHIP MARKETING THEORY Relationship marketing theory is a useful perspective offering explanations of several processes or dimensions (e.g. commitment and cooperation) that are significant in studying the interrelationships between certain phenomena of the buyer-seller relationship (Wilson, 1995), such as information sharing in supply chain management (Toften and Olsen, 2003). This theory can explain the exporter-producer relationship and its information sharing, offering explanations for the several streams in relationships, the dimensions in relationships, such as the rationale for, process of and structure of relationships. Conceptual and empirical models often focus on different components of the relationship but use similar key theoretical dimensions to explain relationships (Wilson, 1995; Dash et al., 2007). These dimensions include trust, commitment, communication, cooperation, collaboration, and information sharing. Tomkins (2001) explains that trust leads to increased information between firms in business. Trust and information sharing have a functional association that is more likely to be characterised over the life cycle of a positive relationship (Tomkins, 2001). Wilson (1995) defines commitment as the desire to continue the relationship. Commitment is developed in the more mature stage of relationships after trust is developed in the early stage (Wilson, 1995). Cooperation is a key dimension to forming partnerships in order to ensure that both parties can gain benefits (Wilson, 1995). Cooperative ways enable both parties to supply fruit and vegetables in the required quantities and of the required quality to the target markets (Shaw and Gibbs, 1995). Collaboration is when two or more chain members work together to create a competitive advantage (Simatupang and Sridharan, 2002). Communication is a necessary human activity, which supports relationships between parties (Veludo et al., 2004;) for creating rich knowledge. Information sharing encourages commitment and cooperation and helps the buyer and seller through the adaptation of processes (Kalafatis, 2000; Andersen, 2006). Furthermore, providing the right information between chain parties gives them the opportunity to review the credibility of the other party (Dash et al., 2007). Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org 4 Generally, most of the studies’ authors (e.g. Wilson 1995; Piercy et al., 1997; Eiriz and Wilson, 2006; Hsu et al., 2008) use these dimensions to form different views on the relationship perspective. In most of the studies, the definitions explain a relationship as a link of benefits and processes for both individuals and firms engaging in several streams such as networks, exchange, governance, exporting and supply chain management to improve relationships and performance. These dimensions are processes in the relationship, which work as conditions to create better achievements and sharing of information for the firms. Based on the explanations above, the business relationship is considered as a key unit in the export supply chain. Therefore, the researcher defines the relationship concept as the following: A relationship is a set of processes (e.g. commitment and information sharing) between an exporter and a producer who share a rationale for the relationship and networks in order to improve export performance in the transactional export supply chain. Table 1 summarises previous studies that have applied the relationship perspective. The previous research has not covered all the issues related to relationships, and information sharing has not been explored in detail. A few studies (e.g. Kwon and Suh, 2004; Leonidou et al., 2006) have explored important dimensions such as information sharing in the supply chain relationship but these studies have also failed to empirically contribute to examining information sharing in an advanced way. Most of the empirical studies (e.g. Dorsch et al., 1998; Wu et al., 2004) have provided key findings that contribute to understanding how the different dimensions affect each other but few of them have examined the impact of these dimensions on export performance. A few studies (e.g. Parker et al., 2006; Hsu et al., 2008) have investigated the association between the different relationship dimensions, information sharing and export performance to understand the supply chain relationship in the context of supply chain management. However, these studies have not empirically provided a holistic view related to information sharing and the interrelationships were indirect in the association. Most of the previous research has analysed one side of the dyadic supply chain relationships, which limited the fullunderstanding of relationship research. A few of the studies (e.g. Parker et al., 2006) have examined both sides but they have not provided detailed empirical work related to relationships. In fact, the above discussion on buyer-seller relationships leads to a key research question: “How do key relationship dimensions have impacts on information sharing in the export supply chain relationship?” This research attempts to provide insights into the high-order dimensions (e.g. trust and commitment), focusing on information sharing. Therefore, the researcher suggests the following proposition: Proposition 1: Relationship dimensions (e.g. trust, commitment, cooperation, collaboration and communication) between the dyadic actors (exporter and producer) have an impact on information sharing in the exporter-producer relationship. Table 1: Key Previous Research Related to Relationship Marketing Theory Author Type of Research Key Factors (Dimensions) and Concepts Key findings Wilson (1995) Conceptual research Trust, commitment, bonds, cooperation, quality, mutual goals, satisfaction and technology adoption. A relationship concept definition was improved and operationalized and the study described development processes. Toften & Olsen (2003) Conceptual research Export information, export performance, and business success. Export information use and export performance are influenced by knowledge and learning factors. Information use has positive impact on firm success. Wu et al. (2004) Empirical research Trust, commitment, power, investment, dependence, continuity, and chain integration The level of investment, dependence, trust, power and continuity to supply chain partners will enhance commitment and, consequently, the integration of the supply chain management. Lages et al. (2005) Empirical research Relationship quality, long-term relationship, information sharing, commitment, satisfaction, and export performance. A better relationship quality results in a greater amount of information sharing, commitment, orientation, and satisfaction with the exporterimporter relationship in the UK. Parker et al. (2006) Empirical research Information sharing, commitment application, quality, and decisionmaking. Perceived equality, continuous supply, quality, control and commitment are benefits in dealing directly in relationships. Information sharing importance for decision making in fresh products. Luai E. Jraisat 5 4 NETWORK THEORY Network theory provides a useful framework for analysis of a business situation, and it adds a new level of complexity to understanding the relationship perspective (Jarillo, 1988; Möller and Halinen, 1999; Croom et al, 2000). Network relations create information sharing that enables buyers and sellers to have access to resources and knowledge beyond their abilities, leading to long-term relationships (Mikkola, 2008). This approach is a structure formed by the main dimensions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) that connect a set of relationships. Therefore, alongside information sharing, the network perspective will also be studied as it enables the analysis of export chain relationships. A business network is a set of relationships that are connected, showing firms’ identity, process and functions that contribute to explaining a dyadic relationship (Anderson et al., 1994; Ritter, 2004). Actors is an essential function within relationships that are required to form meaningful network structures, in which the network must have activities and the resources required to carry out those activities (McLoughlin and Horan, 2002). In the export business, actors connect with each other socially to bring various beneficial types of producers, retailers and consumers together within regional fruit and vegetable networks (Lazzarini et al., 2001; Koops et al., 2002) and establish a network position (Turnbull et al., 1996). Activities and resources are two strategic relationship functions in a network (Anderson et al., 1994). These functions are meaningful in the conceptualisation of the marketing network, which is an important value in analysing a business (Möller and Halinen, 1999). However, actors control activities that are built by relationships with other parties in the network and are influenced by resources, which are exchanged to coordinate chain activities. Anderson et al. (1994) state that functions carried out within relationships must be viewed as part of a network. They also state that relationships are connected to establish networks, which have direct and indirect connections with other relationships. Most of the previous studies state that relationship functions such as activities, resources and processes must be managed in a network in order to establish interactions for better benefits and long-term relationships. This is where networks are a set of relationships among constellations of actors (Jarillo, 1988; Bardach, 1994; Jarzo, 2000; Ritter, 2004) and these relationships make connections with each other to provide the functions of benefits and exchange processes of their business and others' for better performance. The researcher provides a definition of the network concept: A network is a set of relationships among firms aiming to establish connections based on relationship functions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) to support information sharing for better performance in the export supply chain. Table 2 summarises the previous studies that have applied the network perspective. Most of the studies have not covered all the issues related to networks’ impact on dyadic relationships, and information sharing has not been explored as an important concept. A few studies (e.g. Halinen et al., 1999) have examined information sharing in the supply chain relationship, but their empirical work was not in-depth. Most of the empirical studies (e.g. Ritter, 1999; Wilkinson and Young, 2002) have provided findings that contribute to understanding how the network dimensions affect each other but few of them have investigated the dimensions’ impact on export performance. Most of the previous research has not examined the two sides of the relationship in network research, which limits the full understanding of the relationship work in the network. Consequently, this paper highlights a research question, which is “How do key network dimensions have impacts on information sharing in the dyadic relationship?” The researcher seeks to examine the effects of networks in business relationships and identifies the factors (e.g. activities, resources and actor position) that influence the relationships, focusing on information sharing. Proposition 2: Network dimensions (e.g. activities, resources and actors) between the dyadic actors (exporter and producer) and the network actors have an impact on information sharing in the exporter-producer relationship. Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org 6 Table 2: Key Previous Research Related to Network Theory Author Type of Research Key Factors (Dimensions) and Concepts Key findings Ritter (1999) Empirical research Network competences, resource availability, human resource management, activities, communication structure and culture Network competence is embedded within the whole company. Resource availability is a precondition for the development of competence. Network orientation of human resources, communication structure and corporate culture are positively associated with competence. Möller & Halinen (1999) Empirical research Network, actor and buyer-seller relationship. A network theory provides well-developed conceptual tools for analyzing the networks and network management issues. Koops et al. (2002) Empirical research Resources, change processes, strategic changes and collaboration. Resources have an effect on the product and process in food industry. Supplier and customer collaboration were not found to have any moderating effects. Wilkinson & Young (2002) Empirical research Network, actor, firm performance, complexity, planning and strategies. A network perspective leads to the identification of additional causal factors explaining firm and relationship behaviour and performance. Mikkola (2008) Empirical research Market relations, power, economic activities, actors, network relations, and coordination. A coordinative structural mode of socially overlaid networks is identified for fresh product chains. 5 TRANSACTION COST THEORY Transaction cost theory’s basic premise is that the cost of doing transactions could be too high under certain conditions (Grover and Malhotra, 2003). Transaction cost theory is an economic approach (Williamson, 2008) and reflects different types of transaction costs (e.g. coordination, contracting deals and information sharing) (Eiriz and Wilson, 2006). Thus, this economic perspective needs to take into account the economic rationality of supply chain relationships. This perspective provides explanations for transaction dimensions (e.g. asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency) between firms and their relationships (Williamson, 1995; Spraakman, 1997). Transaction cost theory explains how information advantage in a relationship is enjoyable and beneficial for firms (Williamson, 1995) and information sharing in business is a transaction cost (Eiriz and Wilson, 2006). Transaction cost theory contributes to the study of supply chain relationships and networks, and the efficiency of economic activities. In transaction cost theory, the unit of analysis is the transaction used to describe the economic activity and the governance structures in business relationships (Riordan and Williamson, 1985). Transaction cost theory explains that transaction costs include coordination, monitoring, contracting deals, opportunistic behaviour risk and information sharing (Williamson, 1995). Williamson (1988b) defines a transaction as a basic unit of analysis in organisational structure rather than production, one where the main dimensions of transaction cost theory are asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency. The behavioural assumptions are bounded rationality and opportunism, which forces firms to make self-enforcing promises to behave responsibly in terms of increasing their profit (Williamson, 1995). Bounded rationality is accepting the limits of the human ability to process information comprehensively (Williamson, 1988b). Transaction cost theory views bounded rationality as a problem under conditions of uncertainty, which make it difficult to fully specify the conditions surrounding an exchange, thereby causing an economic problem (Grover and Malhotra, 2003). Opportunism is defined as “selfinterest seeking with guile” by a human actor in business relationships (Williamson, 1985, 255). “This does not imply that all those involved in transactions act opportunistically all of the time, rather, it recognizes that the risk of opportunism is often present” (Hobbs, 1996, p.17). In his subsequent work, Williamson (1985, p. 47) describes guile as “lying, stealing, cheating, and calculated efforts to mislead, distort, disguise, obfuscate, or otherwise confuse.” Three dimensions describe a transaction: asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency (Williamson, 1985). Asset specificity is a basic unit of analysis, which is the most important dimension in the transaction (Riordan and Williamson, 1985). “Asset specificity arises when one partner to an exchange of a firm has invested resources specific to that exchange which have little or no value in an alternative use” (Hobbs, 1996, p17). This dimension is a transactional factor of special interest (Williamson, 1981) and refers to the transferability of assets that support a given transaction cost, which are mainly in the form of human specificity (e.g. employee training) or physical specificity (e.g. investment in equipment) (Williamson 1985). Williamson (1985) describes two other types of asset specificity: site specificity (parties’ relationships to minimise transportation and Luai E. Jraisat 7 inventory costs), and dedicated assets (referring to substantial investments that would not have been made outside a particular transaction). Uncertainty is linked to economic reasons and transacting behaviour are the two reasons related to uncertainty and both result in extra costs between parties (Bourlakis and Bourlakis, 2005). The existence of uncertainty makes writing and contracts complicated since the environment shifts in unforeseen ways (Spraakman, 1997). In the food supply chain, the transaction costs are because of uncertainty due to limited information, opportunism, frequency of transactions and incompleteness of contracts (Poole et al., 1998). Under conditions of uncertainty, information cannot be derived regarding future states, where probabilistically generated information and interpretive ambiguity will exist in business. Frequency could be called large-scale production, and setup costs and reputation effects are two aspects of frequency (Williamson, 2008). Only when the potential demand is large is it worthwhile to invest in specialised assets and have frequent transactions. If markets were small, such investments would not be worthwhile. According to Bourlakis and Bourlakis (2005), this relates to the frequency with which transactions between the firms occur, and whether high asset specificity firms should contract out. This perspective works, depending on its basic unit of analysis, with the following features (Williamson, 1985, 1995): a) the basic unit of analysis is the transaction, b) asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency are the critical dimensions of transaction cost theory, which are essential for transactions, and c) the governance structure, such as relationships and the market that each structure has, differs for both cost and competence. The importance of the transaction role is shown in various studies, and it becomes more important when it is studied for business transactions of a business relationship in a network for better information sharing and achievement. Thus, the researcher defines the transaction concept as: A transaction is a basic unit of analysis in a relationship, whose dimensions (e.g. asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency) affect actors’ relationships, changing costs and information sharing for better export performance in their export supply chain. In Table 3, there is much previous research related to the transaction perspective that is important to understand the transaction between the chain members. In the previous research, most of the studies have been theoretical or conceptual research and few studies (e.g. Williamson, 1988a; Ruben et al., 2007) have considered empirical work. In the present research, there is a need to understand this perspective in more depth in order to describe transactions between firms and their relationships, and the dimensions that affect transactions, including information sharing and export performance. The researcher argues in favour of studying transaction cost theory as a complementary perspective to the other two perspectives above. This is an attempt to explore the supply chain relationship from different approaches whose dimensions can have important influences on the buyers and the sellers sharing different benefits and information. In fact, there have been conceptual overlaps between the different dimensions of the three perspectives and previous research has not linked these dimensions to their perspectives. Therefore, this paper raises a third question, which is “How do key transaction dimensions have impacts on information sharing in the export supply chain relationship?” Hence, the following proposition is suggested: Proposition 3: Transaction dimensions (e.g. asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency) in the export supply chain have an impact on information sharing in the exporter-producer relationship. Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org 8 Table 3: Key Previous Research Related to Transaction Cost Theory Research Method Key Factors (Dimensions) and Concepts Key findings Williamson (1971) Theoretical research Vertical integration, contract, information exchange and risks Integration requires powers of internal organization. Firms resort to internalization because of economies of information exchange. Williamson (1988a) Empirical research Contracts, opportunism, bonds, asset specificity, uncertainty, frequency, organization process and analysis, and innovation. The transaction is the basic unit of analysis. The critical dimensions are asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency with respect to which transactions differ. Poole et al. (1998) Empirical research Marketing orientation, transaction costs, contracts, uncertainty and information sources. Producers can be grouped according to their marketing orientation. -Marketing factors and the negotiated price are determinants of the terms of the transaction. Information sources are very important to fresh product suppliers. Schmitz (2006) Empirical research Symmetric information and information gathering. Parties always agree on collaboration if symmetric information is available. information gathering is not always a purely strategic activity. Williamson (2008) Conceptual research Contracting; transaction costs, human actors, outsourcing, organization and supply chain management The study describes the contract approach to economic organization, the operationalization of transaction perspective, outsourcing levels, and qualifications to the foregoing. 6 EXPORT PERFORMANCE Considerable attention has been paid to the export performance (e.g. Aksoy and Kaynak, 1993; Katsikeas et al., 2000; Katsikeas et al., 2008). However, despite the previous research efforts in understanding the importance of export performance, this paper is characterised by helping in developing a new approach to supply chain management for export. It is an attempt to link supply and demand sides based on the influence of information sharing on export performance. As a result, this research claims that export performance is a process by which it is possible to evaluate the overall business of both the buyer and the seller in their relationship. A variety of financial and non-financial criteria are important in providing the information necessary for decision makers to plan, control and direct the activities of the firm (Cousins et al., 2008). Exporting fresh fruit and vegetables with a successful supply export chain is important for the exporterproducer relationships in Jordan, where only a few exporters are able to implement high quality standards and delivery requirements to the European Union. According to Cousins et al. (2008, p.242), “the buyer-seller relationship must be evaluated, not just the dimensions of performance, but financial dimensions as well”. The following table illustrates two types of performance criteria that are indicated in the literature: Table 4: Performance Criteria of Buyer-Seller Relationship Financial criteria of performance are export sales growth, export profitability, export sales intensity and market share (Styles and Ambler, 1994; Ambler et al., 1999; Katsikeas et al., 2008) in addition to costs (Dyer, 1996; Hsu et al., 2008). Robertson and Chetty (2000) suggest that export intensity, growth and profitability are Criteria Representative Research Financial Performance -Profitability -Costs -Sales growth -Market share -Return on investment -Styles &Ambler (1994); Dyer (1996); Zou & Stan (1998); Katsikeas et al. (2008) - Dyer (1996); Hsu et al. (2008); Trienekens et al. (2008) -Ambler et al. (1999); Matanda & Schroder (2002); Trienekens et al. (2008) -Styles & Ambler (1994); Robertson & Chetty (2000); Hsu et al. (2008) -Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008) Non-Financial Performance -Satisfaction -Relationship quality -Continuation -Market diversification -Wilson (1995); Batt (2003); Leonidou et al. (2006); Dash et al. (2007). -Dyer (1996); Dorsch et al. (1998); Roy et al. (2004); Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008) -Fontenot & Wilson (1997); Lages et al. (2005); Trienekens et al. (2008); Hsu et al. (2008) -Aksoy & Kaynak (1993); Robertson & Chetty (2000)