Operationalizing Supply Chain vs. Supply Chain Competion

Competition is an immensely important area of study in economic theory, business and strategy. It is known to be vital in meeting consumers’ growing expectations, stimulating increase in the size of the market, pushing innovation, reducing cost and consequently generating better value for end users, among other things. Having said that, it is important to recognize that supply chains, as we know it, has changed the way companies deal with each other both in confrontational or conciliatory terms. As such, with the rise of global markets and outsourcing destinations, increased technological development in transportation, communication and telecommunications has meant that geographical barriers of distance with regards to competition are a thing of the past in an increasingly flat world. Even though the dominant articulation of competition within management and business literature rests mostly within economic competition theory, this thesis draws attention to the implicit shift in the recognition of other forms of competition in today’s business environment, especially those involving supply chain structures. Thus, there is popular agreement within a broad business arena that competition between companies is set to take place along their supply chains. Hence, management’s attention has been focused on how supply chains could become more aggressive making each firm in its supply chain more efficient. However, there is much disagreement on the mechanism through which such competition pitching supply chain against supply chain will take place. The purpose of this thesis therefore, is to develop and conceptualize the notion of supply chain vs. supply chain competition, within the discipline of supply chain management. The thesis proposes that competition between supply chains may be carried forward via the use of competition theories that emphasize interaction and dimensionality, hence, encountering friction from a number of sources in their search for critical resources and services. The thesis demonstrates how supply chain vs. supply chain competition may be carried out theoretically, using generated data for illustration, and practically using logistics centers as a way to provide a link between theory and corresponding practice of this evolving competition mode. The thesis concludes that supply chain vs. supply chain competition, no matter the conceptualization taken, is complex, novel and can be very easily distorted and abused. It therefore calls for the joint development of regulatory measures by practitioners and policymakers alike, to guide this developing mode of competition.

Towards Explaining the Tasks and Roles of the Boards of Directors

While previous research has helped to improve our understanding of corporate governance and boards of directors, less is known about the factors that affect boards’ tasks and roles and directors’ motivation and engagement. This requires knowledge of how board decisions are being made and the internal and external factors that affect the decision-making process. Large inferential leaps have been made from board demographics to firm performance with equivocal results. This thesis concentrates on how the institutional, behavioral and social identification factors impact the enactment of board roles and tasks. Data used in this thesis were collected in 2009 through a mailed survey to Finnish large and middle-sized corporations. The findings suggest that firstly, the national context of an organization is reflected in board roles and shapes how and for what reasons the board roles are carried out; secondly, the directors’ human and external social capital invariably impacts their engagement in board tasks and that conflicts among directors moderate those relationships; finally, directors’ identification with the organization, its shareholders and its customers affect the directors’ involvement in board tasks. By addressing the impact of organisational context, board-internal behaviour and social identification of board members on board roles and tasks, this thesis firstly complements the shareholder supremacy view as the only reason for the board’s involvement with specific tasks; secondly questions the existence of the board as separate from its institutional context; and thirdly questions the view that a board is a ‘black box’, subject to a selection of input demographic variables and producing quantifiable results. The thesis demonstrates that boards are complex organisational bodies, which involve much interaction among board members. Director behaviour and its influence on board decision making is an important determinant of board tasks and boards are likely subjected to inter-group tensions and are susceptible to the influence of internal and external social forces.