The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm

QUALITY PAPER

Supply chain quality management

Supply chain
quality
management

An inter-organizational learning perspective

Mahour Mellat-Parast
North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
Abstract

511
Received 12 March 2011
Revised 11 April 2012
Accepted 21 November 2012

Purpose This paper aims to develop a theoretical base for supply chain quality from the learning
perspective. Through utilizing the relational view of inter-organizational competitive advantage, the
paper identifies learning-driven practices that influence buyer-supplier performance outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach A review of the literature in quality management, supply chain
management and strategic management is conducted to develop key practices associated with quality
management in a supply chain environment.
Findings The findings suggest that quality management facilitates cooperative learning and
improves inter-organizational learning processes. At the supply chain level, it enhances supply chain
satisfaction and supply chain performance.
Originality/value The study contributes to our understanding of quality management practices
within a supply chain environment from an inter-organizational learning perspective. It extends the
concept of quality to the supply chain through focusing on key practices that influence the quality of
supply chain relationships.
Keywords Supply chain quality, Supply chain management, Quality management,
Organizational learning
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The trend towards globalization along with higher rate of innovation and change has led
to the development of networks of firms. Supply chain management (SCM) has been
regarded as a major inter-organizational practice for gaining competitive advantage
particularly for alliances and networks with suppliers and customers
(Rungtusanatham et al., 2003; Janvier-James, 2012). SCM emphasizes interdependence
among organizations, working collaboratively to achieve efficiency in supply chain
activities (Shin et al., 2000; Narasimhan and Kim, 2002). Successful design and
implementation of supply chains reduces cost, improves flexibility, enhances quality, and
ensures customer satisfaction; therefore it would be a valuable way to maintain
competitive advantage (Li et al., 2006). Researchers and scholars are interested to
determine the factors that are critical to design and maintain effective supply chains
(Childerhouse et al., 2002; Vonderembse et al., 2006; Stevenson and Spring, 2009). In that
regards, understanding quality issues at the supply chain is critical to the success of the
firm and supply chain performance (Sila et al., 2006).
Despite the importance of supply chains and their role in enhancing competitive
position of the organizations, little attention has been given to quality issues in supply
chains. Recent product recalls and the vulnerability of supply chains to risk and
disruptions indicates that quality issues have not been fully implemented across
supply chains (Zhang et al., 2011). While at the firm level quality management

International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management
Vol. 30 No. 5, 2013
pp. 511-529
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0265-671X
DOI 10.1108/02656711311315495

IJQRM
30,5

512

is defined in terms of practices such as leadership commitment, customer satisfaction

and employee involvement, our understanding about quality practices at the supply
chain level is limited. This calls for more research to address the concept of quality
within supply chains, i.e. to move beyond the scope of an organization and address
quality within a network of firms (Sitkin et al., 1994; Ross, 1998; Foster, 2008;
Foster et al., 2011). Our understanding of quality issues at the supply chain level
is further complicated due to the challenges of coordination and cooperation across
organizations. Therefore, the purpose this paper is to extend previous work in this area
by providing a new definition and perspective towards quality.
This paper looks at supply chain quality from a learning perspective[1]. It seeks to
develop a theoretical base for buyer-supplier quality through the lenses of
inter-organizational learning utilizing the knowledge-based view (KBV) of competitive
advantage. To do so, a learning perspective of quality management has been utilized to
define and develop supply chain quality management practices. Accordingly, the paper
contributes to our understanding of quality practices across the supply chain from the
KBV of inter-organizational learning.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, the theoretical
framework of the paper, the differences between quality management and supply chain
quality, and the scholarly literature on supply chain quality are discussed. Based on
the review of the literature on supply chain and quality management, several
propositions that address the effect of buyer-supplier quality on firm performance are
developed. Next, by utilizing the learning perspective of quality management, the
learning aspect of quality was used to define supply chain quality management
practices.
2. Theoretical background
To address the concept of quality in the supply chain, a KBV of competitive advantage
has been used. As an extension to the resource-based view (RBV), the KBV asserts that
knowledge could be a source of competitive advantage which is socially constructed and
is usually difficult to imitate (Kogut and Zander, 1992; Osterloh and Frey, 2000).
The KBV posits that inter-firm resources and routines (e.g. knowledge sharing routines)
can be sources of competitive advantage (Dyer and Singh, 1998). In this perspective a
network of firms is the critical unit of analysis for understanding firm level
organizational learning and knowledge creation. Through their linkages to other
partners in a network, organizations would be able to learn by collaborating with other
firms which helps them observe their practice and improve their own internal processes
(Dyer and Nobeoka, 2000). As such, effective relationship with partners and
development of knowledge creation mechanisms are key determinants of
inter-organizational learning.
Utilizing the KBV of inter-organizational relationship enables us to address the
development and dynamics of learning in the supply chain by emphasizing practices
that are specific to knowledge creation in a network. In the development of supply
chain quality, the objective is to define quality practices that facilitate knowledge
creation across the supply chain. In that regards, supply chain quality is defined as a
set of practices that emphasize continuous process improvement among partners
(firms) in the supply chain in order to enhance performance and achieve customer
satisfaction through emphasis on learning.

3. Quality: from the firm to the supply chain

Several issues should be addressed and emphasized as we move from the firm to the
supply chain. Here a comparison of quality characteristic at the firm-level and supply
chain level is provided.
Level of analysis. The traditional view towards quality has limited its scope to the
boundary of the firm, identifying and addressing quality practices that enhance firm
performance (Sousa and Voss, 2002). Within this tradition, top management is the agent
of change, who is responsible to initiate and lead quality programs (Kaynak, 2003).
However, as we move toward collaboration with suppliers, the traditional view of quality
has limited capability to address inter-firm processes and routines. This is primarily due
to the change in the level of analysis from a single organization to multiple organizations.
View toward quality. The traditional view towards quality emphasizes quality
practices that improve organizational performance. Sousa and Voss (2002) conclude
that quality management practices have a significant effect on quality and operational
performance, but the impact of quality management on business performance is not
always significant. This finding may suggest that higher level of business performance
may not be achieved through improving internal processes; rather, it is intertwined
with the inter-organizational processes and practices. While in the traditional view
toward quality a product and/or service approach is utilized, in the supply chain
setting improving inter-organizational processes should be the focus of quality
(Trent, 2001; Robinson and Malhotra, 2005). This suggests that there should be a shift
in quality from the product and/or service to the process.
Decision making. Previous studies have shown that top management is the major
driver of quality who leads the quality initiative (Flynn et al., 1994; Wilson and Collier,
2000; Kaynak, 2003). This phenomenon is well explained through emphasizing top
management role on leading organizational change (Boeker, 1997a, b). In the
inter-organizations setting, the network perspective emphasizes the importance of an
organizations social context and its position within the network (Burns and Wholey, 1993;
Majumdar and Venkataraman, 1998). Therefore, in the supply chain, decision regarding
quality is not driven by the top management; rather it is influenced by the network.
Theoretical lenses. The RBV argues that superior firm performance is the result of
the ability of firms to accumulate resources and capabilities that are rare, valuable, and
difficult to imitate (Rumelt, 1984; Barney, 1991). In this view, RBV focuses on a firm as
the unit of analysis. Several scholars have argued that the RBV of the firm overlooks
the importance of resources that are embedded in a network of an organization
(Barney, 1991; Black and Boal, 1994; Dyer and Singh, 1998; Doh, 2000). Alternatively,
the relational view of competitive advantage claims that inter-firm linkages may be
a source of competitive advantage. This view suggests that a firms critical resources
may span firm boundaries and may be embedded in inter-organizational resources and
routines (Dyer and Singh, 1998). As we move across and beyond the scope of the firm,
the sources of competitive advantage are embedded in the network. This requires
looking at quality from the relational view. Table I provides a summary of different
characteristics of quality management and supply chain quality.
To this end, it is apparent that there are conceptual and theoretical differences between
traditional approaches towards quality and supply chain quality. To fully address the
notion of quality in the supply chain, the paper focuses on strategic supply chains.
Working with a few high quality suppliers and developing close strategic planning

Supply chain
quality
management
513

IJQRM
30,5

processes are the main characteristics of strategic supply chains (Chen et al., 2004; Yeung,
2008). In addition, due to their emphasis on quality and process improvement,
organizations developing strategic supply chain systems can maintain their
competitiveness through emphasizing supply chain quality (Krause, 1999; Liker and
Choi, 2004). Therefore, understanding quality issues in strategic supply chains is critical
to the success of the firm and the sustainability of the partnership.

514
3.1 The relationship between quality and SCM
There is evidence in the literature that a firms quality management approaches and
SCM practices complement each other and need to be integrated to achieve superior
financial and business performance (Kannan and Tan, 2005; Yeung et al., 2006; Kaynak
and Hartley, 2008; Terziovski and Hermel, 2011). Quality-related tools and practices
appear to be compatible with supply chain activities. Quality control techniques such as
failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) or Six Sigma could be extended and redesigned
in order to be effectively used across the supply chain (Teng et al., 2006; Aboelmaged,
2010). Practices such as supplier relationship and information sharing facilitate the
integration of quality management and SCM (Tan et al., 1998; Sanders et al., 2011).
In addition, the implementation of quality management supports the formation and
development of inter-firm trust (Yeung et al., 2006). Inter-firm trust is the most critical
element in the initiation, development, and success of any inter-firm network such as
supply chains (Cai et al., 2010; Fawcett et al., 2012). Buyer-supplier relationship is
improved when parties involved both emphasize quality practices (Yang et al., 2009).
This suggests that implementation of quality management at the firm level facilitates
the formation trust thereby ensures the success of supply chain relationship.
Empirical studies suggest that competitive advantage is achieved when quality
approaches and supply chain practices are implemented concurrently (Tan et al., 1998,
1999). Research shows that supplier quality practices have significant effect of quality
performance of the firm (Forker, 1997); this emphasizes the importance of managing
quality across the supply chain (Fynes and Voss, 2002). According to Sila et al. (2007)
effective SCM requires high level of quality management implementation within
individual firms and efficient communication among the supply chain members.
Previous studies indicate that the dual focus on internal (intra-organization) and
external (inter-organization) quality performance is a key strategy for achieving
competitive differentiation (Tan et al., 1998). Despite the importance of supply chain
quality practices, there is not much discussion on quality practices aimed at improving
supply chain quality management. Most of the studies in supply chain quality have
examined the extension of the firm-level quality management practices to the supply
chain environment. For example, Kaynak and Hartley (2008) have extended quality
management practices to the supply chain environment through emphasizing supplier

Table I.
Comparative analysis of
quality management and
supply chain quality

Characteristic

Quality management

Supply chain quality

Level of analysis
View towards quality
Decision making
Theoretical perspective

Firm level
Product and/or service
Improving internal processes
Resource-based view

Inter-firm level
Inter-firm processes
Improving external processes
Knowledge-based view

quality management and customer focus. Therefore, more scholarly work is needed to
shape our understanding of quality practices that are specific to the supply chain.
3.2 Supply chain quality
Traditionally, research on quality management has been focused on improving
organizational processes while taking into account the view of the external customer
(Foster, 2008). By reviewing the literature in quality and SCM, Robinson and Malhotra
(2005) proposed certain practices for supply chain quality including communication
and partnership activities, process integration and management, management and
leadership, strategy, and best practices. Robinson and Malhotra (2005, p. 319) defined
supply chain quality management as a:
[. . .] formal coordination and integration of business processes involving all partner
organizations in the supply channel to measure, analyze and continually improve products,
services, and processes in order to create value and achieve satisfaction of intermediate and
final customers in the marketplace.

Ross (1998) defined supply chain quality as:

[. . .] the participation of all members of a supply channel network in the continuous and
synchronized improvement of all processes, products, services, and work cultures focused on
generating sources of productivity and competitive differentiation through the active promotion
of market winning product and service solutions that provide total customer value and
satisfaction.

From the above definitions it could be inferred that two important aspects of the
supply chain quality are continuous improvement and customer satisfaction. As such,
in this paper supply chain quality is defined as:
[. . .] the coordination and integration of inter-firm processes involving all partners (firms) in the
supply chain through continuous improvement of inter-organizational processes to enhance
performance and achieve customer satisfaction through emphasis on cooperative learning[2].

The above definition employs a process perspective toward supply chain quality an
approach that has been recommended by Robinson and Malhotra (2005). The process
approach is critical for understanding quality from a learning perspective.
Several authors have addressed supply chain quality and have defined and proposed
practices to improve the quality of supply chain. Fynes et al. (2005) studied the role of
supply chain relationships on quality relationships and performance, and
conceptualized supply chain relational quality in terms of communication, trust,
adaptation, commitment and cooperation. Lai et al. (2005) studied the effect of
relationship stability in the supply chain on quality performance, and found that
long-term relationships with the suppliers ensured their commitment to quality. Lo et al.
(2007) addressed the role of quality management practices in supply chain performance.
Their findings indicated that customer focus, continuous improvement and total
involvement of suppliers would improve supply chain performance. Kaynak and
Hartley (2008) investigated the effect of quality management practices on supply chain
quality. They argued that supplier quality management and customer focus are two
practices that extend quality management into the supply chain. Their findings suggest
that communication, collaboration, and integration with suppliers and customers are
important to the firm performance. The overall findings of previous studies suggest that

Supply chain
quality
management
515

IJQRM
30,5

516

quality management practices (at the firm level) are a prerequisite for supply chain
quality. Based on the above discussion on quality management and supply chain, it is
proposed that:
P1.

Suppliers quality management practices have a positive effect on firms

satisfaction (supply chain satisfaction).

P2.

Suppliers quality management practices have a positive effect on firms

performance (supply chain performance).

Sila et al. (2007) reported that supply chain quality has not been effectively practiced by
organizations despite the fact that organizations acknowledge the importance of
supply chain quality. There are two possible explanations for this:
(1) the complexity of the supply chain or the large number of firms involved in the
supply chain; and
(2) lack of emphasis on inter-organizational learning practices.
The literature suggests a link between collaboration and inter-organizational learning
where collaboration efforts in the supply chain could be developed and maintained to
improve collective learning (Simatupang and Sridharan, 2002; Li et al., 2011). Quality
management principles and practices also emphasize internal/external cooperation,
learning, and continuous improvement (Anderson et al., 1994). As such, the learning
perceptive of quality could be used to address supply chain quality management practices.
4. Quality management and organizational learning
Quality management practices that result in knowledge creation enhances
organizational performance (Linderman et al., 2004). Quality management literature
characterizes quality in two dimensions: control and learning (Sitkin et al., 1994).
Effective implementation of quality management is contingent upon a balance between
control and learning, achieving conflicting goals of stability and reliability with those
of exploration and innovation. The effectiveness of quality management relies on the
coexistence of these two incompatible approaches to quality (Leonard-Barton, 1992).
To the extent that a balance between control and learning has been maintained
a sustainable quality strategy will be achieved.
Several scholars have pointed to the link between quality and process improvement
(Fine, 1986; Fine and Porteus, 1989; Marcellus and Dada, 1991; Li and Rajagopalan,
1998). One of the first studies that related quality and learning was conducted by Fine
(1986). He found that over time the organization optimal quality level increases due to
the learning effect. In another study, Fine and Porteus (1989) argued that decreasing
the uncertainty of the process (making the potential improvements more predictable)
has a desirable effect on process improvement. Li and Rajagopalan (1998) analytically
showed that quality improved over time, while process improvement effort and quality
assurance effort decreased over time.
Deming (1982) argued that knowledge and learning are crucial mechanisms for
sustaining a competitive advantage, especially during periods of rapid change.
Through focus on learning, knowledge creation, and processes innovation, the quality
movement was able to address the adaptability of the organization in highly uncertain
and changing environments (Sitkin et al., 1994). In fact, in highly uncertain contexts,

quality management needs to focus on experimentation (learning) more than

decreasing error rates (control). According to Sitkin et al. (1994, p. 546) in uncertain
environments quality management:
[. . .] stresses improvement in learning capability which includes effectively identifying new
skills and resources to pursue, the ability to explore these new areas, and the capacity to learn
from that exploration.

Previous research on quality management argues that the goal of quality management
needs to be balanced depending upon the context. Due to the complexity and
uncertainty in supply chain relationships, effective management of quality in a supply
chain environment requires understanding, development and enhancing
inter-organizational learning. Accordingly, it is proposed that:
P3.

Suppliers quality management practices have a positive effect on

inter-organizational learning in the supply chain.

P4.

Buyers quality management practices have a positive effect on

inter-organizational learning in the supply chain.

4.1 Learning perspective of quality management in the supply chain

In the context of a network of firms, learning has been defined as the process of acquisition
and exploitation of new knowledge, skills, and competencies by the organization
(Argyris and Schon, 1978; Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Muthusamy and White, 2005).
While the level of learning within a network of firms depends upon the learning capability
(absorptive capacity) of partners, the success of the collective learning effort is determined
by the cooperative learning among partners (Muthusamy and White, 2005). The ability of
an organization to learn is the pre-requisite for inter-organizational learning (Holmqvist,
2003). Organizational learning theorists argue that learning is developed and maintained
by existing standard operating procedures, practices, and rules (Starbuck et al., 1978;
Hedberg, 1981). As such, the implementation of quality management programs that
prescribe specific policies and procedures (e.g. total quality management, ISO-9000, lean
systems and Six Sigma) facilitates the development of learning processes.
There is a link between learning and quality management. Garvin (1993) pointed out
that organizations which were committed to quality management would be uniquely
prepared for learning. According to Crossan and Inkpen (1995), the ability to learn is
critical to the success of strategic partnership. The literature on knowledge management
and learning identifies four modes of knowledge creation and learning in organizations:
socialization, articulation, combination, and internalization (Nonaka, 1991).
The importance of socialization and exchange of the knowledge through interactive
social processes and within a cooperative environment has been emphasized in the
literature. Socialization is important since it enables individuals and firms to learn and
develop tacit knowledge, the kind of knowledge that is highly personal, context specific,
and difficult to codify (Janz and Prasarnphanich, 2003). An effective supply chain
system requires good relationship among supply chain members where it facilitates
communication and socialization.
The above discussions clearly underline the link between relationship management,
quality and leaning in a supply chain. Socialization and collaboration among members
of the supply chain can be intensified through relationship management. As supply

Supply chain
quality
management
517

IJQRM
30,5

chain members socialize, they develop procedures to interact and communicate thereby
facilitate the development of inter-organizational processes that enhance
inter-organizational learning. Therefore, supply chain quality management practices
should emphasize two complementary practices: first, they need to enhance
relationship management, collaboration and cooperation. Second, they should be able
to develop processes that improve inter-organizational learning.

518
5. Supply chain quality practices
In this section, several practices are introduced in order to address the learning
perspective of supply chain quality. At the firm level, these practices address core quality
management principles that emphasize continuous improvement. At the supply chain
level, the emphasis is on relationship management and inter-organizational learning.
Relationship management and effective buyer-supplier collaboration facilitate the
development of inter-organizational processes and inter-organizational learning in the
supply chain.
Trust
Ring and Van de Ven (1994) defined trust as an individuals confidence in the good will
of the others in a given group and belief the others will make efforts consistent with the
groups goal. Wicks (2001) argued that trust was a critical facilitator of cooperation and
a vital ingredient of quality management. Trust is one of the most frequently cited
dimensions of supply chain relationships (Fynes et al., 2005). Management literature
acknowledges the critical role of trust on inter-organizational relationship and its
performance (Volery and Mensik, 1998; Morton et al., 2006; De Cannie`re et al., 2009).
Research shows that trust is an important aspect of business practice which has
significant effect on many organizational and inter-organizational activities such
as cooperation (Axelrod, 1984), communication (Roberts and OReilly, 1974), information
sharing (Fox and Huang, 2005; Muller and Sonja, 2011), reputation (Sampath et al., 2006),
and performance (Earley, 1986). In addition, trust is critical to the success of cooperative
and inter-organizational relationships (Johnston et al., 2004) and supply chain
performance (Ha et al., 2011).
Governance
The role of leaders in the success of interfirm networks has been addressed by
Smith et al. (1995). Leaders play an essential role in facilitating the learning process
in a network of firms (Inkpen, 2005) and can enhance the effectiveness of supply chain
partnership (Wong, 2001). The support from the management provides the foundation
for initiating, developing and maintaining quality-related efforts (Flynn et al., 1994;
Ahire et al., 1996). Effective leadership enhances relationships with suppliers (Kaynak
and Hartley, 2008). Previous studies suggest that appropriate governance mechanisms
should be implemented when manufacturer-supplier relationship is innovation-based
(Araujo et al., 1999; Choi and Krause, 2005).
Information integration
Jones and George (1998) argued that learning is achieved through sharing information
and knowledge. As evidenced by McCarter et al. (2005, p. 202) Getting people to share
what they know best can help instill a quest for learning. Xu (2011) have emphasized

the role of information systems and their ability in providing real time information
across supply chain. Wong et al. (2011) have also discussed the importance and value
of internal and external information integration in SCM. Inter-firm information flow
enhances integration among supply chain members (Vanpoucke et al., 2009).
Process integration
Process integration is defined as a set of continuous restructuring activities aimed at
seamlessly linking business processes and reducing redundant or unnecessary
processes within and across firms (Chen et al., 2009). Activities such as joint-planning,
joint-decision making and development of inter-organizational processes facilitate
process integration in supply chains. Several authors have emphasized the importance
of process integration in design and development of successful supply chains
(Hammer, 2001; Stock, 2002; Lambert et al., 2005).

Supply chain
quality
management
519

Cooperative learning
The term cooperative learning refers to the ability of supply chain members in sharing
knowledge, information and resources (Morrison and Mezentseff, 1997). Organizations
develop cooperative relationship through creating a learning environment so that they
can facilitate mutual learning. Cooperative learning emphasizes the role of cooperation
in a network of firms (Morrison and Mezentseff, 1997). This happens in a supply chain as
well, where firms develop and maintain effective learning processes (Hult et al., 2003).

Supply Chain level

quality practices

Firm level
quality practices

6. Proposed conceptual model of supply chain quality

Based on the review of the literature and the above discussion several practices
associated with supply chain quality management have been identified. Figure 1
shows the conceptual model for supply chain quality practices.
With reference to the buyer-supplier quality model two sets of quality practices are
identified: one set is firm-level quality practices, practices that are traditionally
Top management support
Information systems
Employee involvement
Process improvement
Product/service design
Customer satisfaction

Trust
Governance
Information integration
Process integration
Cooperative learning

Buyer-Supplier
Satisfaction

Buyer-Supplier
Performance

Figure 1.
Supply chain quality
management practices

IJQRM
30,5

520

associated with the quality management within a firm (e.g. top management support,
training, employee involvement, and customer satisfaction). With reference to P1 and
P2, there is a positive link between firm-level quality practices with two performance
outcomes (supply chain satisfaction and performance). In addition, we realize that
buyer-supplier quality practices also enhance performance. The process perspective of
quality is critical to the implementation of buyer-supplier level quality practices. To the
extent that learning is emphasized and a process approach towards quality is utilized,
these practices enable firms to improve their inter-organizational processes and
practices. Learning is emphasized through socialization, cooperation and collaboration.
Supply chain level quality emphasizes these practices through trust, governance,
information integration and process integration. The inter-organizational learning
literature underline the effect of collaboration on the learning capability of the firm
through institutionalizing the experiences created in inter-organizational learning
processes (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998; Larsson et al., 1998).
An important aspect of the proposed model is the relationship between firm-level and
supply chain level quality practices. The two-sided arrow indicates that firm-level
and supply chain level quality practices influence each other. This suggests that
improvement in buyer-supplier quality practices enhances firm-level practices.
Additionally, firm-level quality improvement has a positive effect on buyer-supplier
quality practices. Organizations need to emphasize both sets of practices so that they can
maintain their competitive edge through emphasizing quality.
7. Summary and findings
With reference to the existing literature on quality and SCM, the propositions and the
conceptual model for supply chain quality are the primary contributions of the paper.
The paper makes several important contributions to the literature in quality and SCM.
First, the paper addresses the effect of firm-level and supply chain level quality practices
on the success of the supply chain. In that regard, the proposed framework extends our
insight to design, develop, and maintain quality practices across the supply chain.
Second, the study proposes a learning perspective of supply chain quality. Several firm
level practices (e.g. process improvement) and supply chain level practices
(e.g. information integration and process integration) were identified and introduced in
order to support the development of inter-firm processes and routines and ensure
inter-organizational learning. Third, the proposed model also acknowledges the influence
and significance of risk management in the supply chain where it recognizes
development of trust as an important practice that can minimize risk in buyer-supplier
relationship. It is generally believed that trust reduces risk, uncertainty and opportunistic
behaviors thereby improves the quality of the relationship (Nyaga and Whipple, 2011).
Finally, the proposed model emphasizes integration and collaboration across supply
chain by proposing two practices: information integration and process integration.
7.1 Limitations and future research
The paper identified two outcomes for supply chain quality: buyer-supplier performance
and buyer-supplier satisfaction. Through emphasizing buyer-supplier relationship and
inter-organizational learning practices firms would be able to enhance their
performance, improve the quality of their relationship and maintain a completive
edge. The paper also identified firm level and supply chain level quality practices.

Nevertheless, empirical research is needed to determine the applicability of the proposed

framework. Due to the complexity of inter-firm processes and inter-organizational
learning, qualitative approach (e.g. case study) can provide deeper insight on the
evolution of supply chain quality. In addition, it should be noted that the proposed list of
supply chain quality practices is not exhaustive; supply chain quality could be
influenced by other institutional and contextual factors such as strategic intent
(Hamel and Parahalad, 1994; Chen et al., 2004), top management support (Chen and
Paulraj, 2004), and organizational culture (Smith et al., 1995). Future studies should
address these factors as well.
In this paper, supply chain satisfaction was defined as the level of satisfaction of the
supply chain members (i.e. buyer-supplier) with their partnership. This definition
views members/partners as customers. It excludes the viewpoint of the end customer,
the customers who are using the final product and/or service. Kumar (2001) argues that
the success of a firm depends on how well the entire chain is able to provide value to the
final customer. From this perspective, one of the main goals of the supply chain should
be addressing customer satisfaction for the final customer. While customer satisfaction
for the final customer has not been directly assessed, it can be argued that customer
satisfaction would be emphasized in two ways:
(1) One of the partners/members of the supply chain is in direct contact with the
customer; therefore, customer satisfaction is addressed through traditional
approaches to quality (i.e. product/service quality).
(2) The partner in the supply chain in direct contact with the customer is not happy
with the level of quality of the supply chain, and has come to the understanding
that poor customer satisfaction is the result of inefficient supply chain and poor
quality practices at the supply chain level.
In this situation, the level of customer satisfaction would be reflected in supply chain
satisfaction. Regardless of the validity of the above arguments, satisfaction of the final
customer should be addressed in future studies.
With respect to quality management practices and premises, the issue of human
resource management in the supply chain environment has not been adequately
addressed in the literature. While quality management emphasizes human resource
management through practices such as employee training and employee involvement
(Ahire et al., 1996; Flynn and Flynn, 2005; Sila and Ebrahimpour, 2005; Nair, 2006) the
role of human resource management in the supply chain has been loosely addressed
(Koulikoff-Souviron and Harrison, 2007). As quality practices are being extended and
implemented beyond the scope of an organization, the issue of human resource
management practices would be significant. This becomes more complicated when
members of the supply chain with different organizational cultures and management
systems try to establish human resource management practices within the supply
chain (McCarter et al., 2005). Looking at human resource management practices from
the learning perspective could be an interesting and promising research study,
especially practices that enhance inter-organizational learning in the supply chain.
It would be also interesting to look at supply chain quality from the resource
dependency theory (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). In contrast to the organizational ecology
paradigm where the survival of a network of firms is achieved through collaboration
(Benson, 1975), the resource dependency theory argues that organizations are

Supply chain
quality
management
521

IJQRM
30,5

522

interdependent on one another. Due to the reliance of organizations to each others

resources, each firm seeks to control and influence the behavior of the other firms in order
to maximize its own benefit. According to Mohr and Nevin (1990) the level of dependence
relationship has important implications for interaction among partners. Furthermore, the
adaptation of control mechanisms in the buyer-supplier relationship has direct effect on
the relationship quality which may have implications for the level of trust in the supply
chain (Yi et al., 2010). The proposed model in this study has developed based on
the existence of interdependence relationship, assuming that none of the organizations
in the supply chain (e.g. buyer or supplier) controls the actions and/or the activities across
the supply chain. While it has been empirically shown that interdependence is a key factor
of effective supply chain relationships, it will be interesting to see the dynamics and
evolution of supply chain quality from the recourse dependency theory.
8. Conclusion
The importance of supply chain quality practices and its relevance to management
practices has received more attention in the literature in recent years. The conceptualization
of buyer-supplier quality practices is the first step to develop supply chain level quality
practices that enable both the buyer and the supplier to improve their quality practices.
The learning perspective of quality management was used to address
buyer-supplier quality practices. With respect to the learning perceptive of quality,
several firm level and supply chain level practices have been identified in order to
enhance supply chain quality, leading to higher level of performance and satisfaction
of the supply chain. The propositions provide the basis for testable hypotheses which
can be empirically tested and validated. Appropriately testing the hypotheses should
add to our understanding of the relationships between buyer-supplier quality
practices, and their effect on supply chain satisfaction and performance.
Notes
1. In this paper supply chain quality and buyer-supplier quality have been used
interchangeably. Since some of the statements refer to the supply chain, supply chain
quality was used since it encompasses buyer-supplier quality practices as well.
2. In this paper cooperative learning has been used as a special case of inter-organizational
learning which addresses learning within strategic supply chains. Working with a few high
quality suppliers and developing close strategic planning processes are the main
characteristics of strategic supply chains (Chen et al., 2004; Yeung et al., 2006).
References
Aboelmaged, M.G. (2010), Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future
research, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 No. 3,
pp. 269-318.
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y. and Waller, M.A. (1996), Development and validation of TQM
implementation constructs, Decision Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 23-56.
Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanatham, M. and Schroeder, R.G. (1994), A theory of quality
management underlying the Deming management method, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 472-509.
Araujo, L., Dubois, A. and Gadde, L.E. (1999), Managing interfaces with suppliers, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 497-506.

Argyris, C. and Schon, D.A. (1978), Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective,
Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
Axelrod, R. (1984), The Evolution of Cooperation, Basic Books, New York, NY.
Barney, J.B. (1991), Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of
Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Benson, J.K. (1975), The inter-organizational network as a political economy, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 229-249.
Black, J.A. and Boal, K.B. (1994), Strategic resources: traits, configurations and paths to
sustainable competitive advantage, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, S2,
pp. 131-148.
Boeker, W. (1997a), Executive migration and strategic change: the effect of top manager
movement on product-market entry, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 213-236.
Boeker, W. (1997b), Strategic change: the influence of managerial characteristics and
organizational growth, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 152-170.
Burns, L.R. and Wholey, D.R. (1993), Adoption and abandonment of matrix management
programs: effects of organizational characteristics and interorganizational networks,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 106-138.
Cai, S., Jun, M. and Yang, Z. (2010), Implementing supply chain information integration in
China: the role of institutional forces and trust, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 28
No. 3, pp. 257-268.
Chen, H., Daugherty, P.J. and Landry, T.D. (2009), Supply chain process integration: a theoretical
framework, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 27-46.
Chen, I.J. and Paulraj, A. (2004), Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs
and measurements, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 119-150.
Chen, I.J., Paulraj, A. and Lado, A.A. (2004), Strategic purchasing, supply management, and firm
performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 505-523.
Childerhouse, P., Aitken, J. and Towill, D.R. (2002), Analysis and design of focused demand
chains, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 675-689.
Choi, T.Y. and Krause, D.R. (2005), The supply base and its complexity: implications for
transaction costs, risks, responsiveness, and innovation, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 637-652.
Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990), Absorptive capacity: a new perceptive on learning and
innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 128-152.
Crossan, M. and Inkpen, A. (1995), The subtle art of learning through alliances, Business
Quarterly, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 68-78.
De Cannie`re, M.H., De Pelsmacker, P. and Geuens, M. (2009), Relationship quality and the theory
of planned behavior models of behavioral intentions and purchase behavior, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 82-92.
Deming, W.E. (1982), Quality, Productivity, and Competitive Position, Center for Advanced
Engineering Study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Doh, J. (2000), Entrepreneurial privatization strategies: order of entry and local partner
collaboration as sources of competitive advantage, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 551-571.

Supply chain
quality
management
523

IJQRM
30,5

524

Dyer, J.H. and Nobeoka, K. (2000), Creating and managing a high-performance

knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21
No. 3, pp. 345-367.
Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H. (1998), The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of
interorganizational competitive advantage, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23
No. 4, pp. 660-679.
Earley, P.C. (1986), Trust, perceived importance of praise and criticism, and work performance:
an examination of feedback in the United States and England, Journal of Management,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 457-473.
Fawcett, S.E., Jones, S.L. and Fawcett, A.M. (2012), Supply chain trust: the catalyst for
collaborative innovation, Business Horizons, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 163-178.
Fine, C.H. (1986), Quality improvement and learning in productive systems, Management
Science, Vol. 32 No. 10, pp. 1301-1315.
Fine, C.H. and Porteus, E.L. (1989), Dynamic process improvement, Operations Research,
Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 580-591.
Flynn, B.B. and Flynn, E.J. (2005), Synergies between supply chain management and quality
management: emerging implications, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 16
No. 15, pp. 3421-3463.
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakakibara, S. (1994), A framework for quality management
research and an associated instrument, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 339-366.
Forker, L.B. (1997), Factors affecting supplier quality performance, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 243-269.
Foster, S.T. (2008), Towards an understanding of supply chain quality management, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 461-467.
Foster, S.T., Wallin, C. and Ogden, J. (2011), Towards a better understanding of supply chain
quality management practices, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 8,
pp. 2285-2300.
Fox, M.S. and Huang, J. (2005), Knowledge provenance in enterprise information, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 43 No. 20, pp. 4471-4492.
Fynes, B. and Voss, C. (2002), The moderating effect of buyer-supplier relationships on quality
practices and performance, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 589-613.
Fynes, B., Voss, C. and de Burca, S. (2005), The impact of supply chain relationship quality on
quality performance, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 96 No. 3,
pp. 339-354.
Garvin, D. (1993), Building a learning organization, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71 No. 4,
pp. 78-91.
Ha, B., Park, Y. and Cho, S. (2011), Suppliers affective trust and trust in competency in buyers:
its effect on collaboration and logistics efficiency, International Journal of Operations
& Production Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 56-77.
Hamel, G. and Parahalad, C.K. (1994), Competing for the Future, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Hammer, M. (2001), The superefficient company, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 79 No. 8,
pp. 82-91.
Hedberg, B. (1981), How organizations learn and unlearn, in Nystrom, P.C. and
Starbuck, W.H. (Eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp. 3-27.

Holmqvist, M. (2003), A dynamic model of intra- and interorganizational learning,

Organization Studies, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 95-123.
Hult, G.T., Ketchen, D.J. and Nicholas, E.L. Jr. (2003), Organizational learning as a strategic
resource in supply chain management, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 5,
pp. 541-556.
Inkpen, A.C. (2005), Learning through alliances: General Motors and NUMMI, California
Management Review, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 114-136.
Janvier-James, A.M. (2012), A new introduction to supply chains and supply chain management:
definitions and theories perspective, International Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 1,
pp. 194-207.
Janz, B.D. and Prasarnphanich, P. (2003), Understanding the antecedents of effective knowledge
management: the importance of knowledge-centered culture, Decision Sciences, Vol. 34
No. 2, pp. 351-384.
Johnston, D.A., McCutcheon, D.M., Stuart, F.I. and Kerwood, H. (2004), Effect of supplier trust on
performance of cooperative supplier relationship, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 23-38.
Jones, G.R. and George, J.M. (1998), The experience and evolution of trust: implications for
cooperation and teamwork, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 531-546.
Kannan, V.R. and Tan, K.C. (2005), Just in time, total quality management, and supply chain
management: understanding their linkages and impact on business performance, Omega,
Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 153-162.
Kaynak, H. and Hartley, J.L. (2008), A replication and extension of quality management into the
supply chain, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 468-489.
Kaynak, K. (2003), The relationship between total quality management practices and their
effects on firm performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 4,
pp. 405-435.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992), Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
replication of technology, Organization Science, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 383-397.
Koulikoff-Souviron, M. and Harrison, A. (2007), The pervasive human resource picture in
interdependent supply relationships, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 8-27.
Krause, D.R. (1999), The antecedents of buying firms efforts to improve suppliers, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 205-225.
Kumar, K. (2001), Technology for supporting supply chain management, Communications of
the ACM, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 58-61.
Lai, K., Cheng, T.C.E., A, C.L. and Yeung, A.C.L. (2005), Relationship stability and supplier
commitment to quality, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 96 No. 3,
pp. 397-410.
Lambert, D.M., Garcia-Dastugue, S. and Croxtion, K. (2005), An evaluation of process oriented
supply chain management frameworks, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1,
pp. 25-51.
Lane, P. and Lubatkin, M. (1998), Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational
learning, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 461-477.
Larsson, R., Bengtsson, L., Henriksson, K. and Sparks, J. (1998), The interorganizational
learning dilemma: collective knowledge development in strategic alliances, Organization
Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 285-305.

Supply chain
quality
management
525

IJQRM
30,5

526

Leonard-Barton, D. (1992), The factory as a learning laboratory, Sloan Management Review,

Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 23-38.
Li, G. and Rajagopalan, S. (1998), Process improvement, quality and learning effects,
Management Science, Vol. 44 No. 11, pp. 1517-1532.
Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T.S. and Subba Rao, S. (2006), The impact of supply chain
management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance,
Omega, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 107-124.
Li, Y., Wang, L. and Liu, Y. (2011), Organizational learning, product quality and performance:
the moderating effect of social ties in Chinese cross-border outsourcing, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 159-182.
Liker, J.K. and Choi, T.Y. (2004), Building deep supplier relationships, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 82 No. 12, pp. 104-113.
Linderman, K., Schroeder, R.G., Zaheer, S., Liedtke, C. and Choo, A.S. (2004), Integrating quality
management practices with knowledge creation processes, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 589-607.
Lo, V.H.Y., Yeung, A.H.W. and Yeung, A.C.L. (2007), How supply quality management
improves an organizations quality performance: a study of Chinese manufacturing firms,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 10, pp. 2219-2243.
McCarter, M.W., Fawcett, S.E. and Magnan, G.M. (2005), The effect of people on the supply
chain world: some overlooked issues, Human Systems Management, Vol. 24 No. 3,
pp. 197-208.
Majumdar, S.K. and Venkataraman, S. (1998), Network effects and the adoption of new
technology: evidence from the US telecommunications industry, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 11, pp. 1045-1062.
Marcellus, R.L. and Dada, M. (1991), Interactive process quality improvement, Management
Science, Vol. 37 No. 11, pp. 1365-1376.
Mohr, J. and Nevin, J. (1990), Communication strategies in marketing channels: a theoretical
perspective, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 36-51.
Morrison, M. and Mezentseff, L. (1997), Learning alliances a new dimension of strategic
alliances, Management Decision, Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 351-357.
Morton, S.C., Dainty, A.R.J., Burns, N.D., Brooks, N.J. and Backhouse, C.J. (2006), Managing
relationships to improve performance: a case study in the global aerospace industry,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 44 No. 16, pp. 3227-3241.
Muller, M. and Sonja, G. (2011), An empirical investigation of antecedents to information
exchange in supply chains, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 6,
pp. 1531-1555.
Muthusamy, S.K. and White, M.A. (2005), Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic
alliances: a social exchange view, Organization Studies, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 415-441.
Nair, A. (2006), Meta-analysis of the relationship between quality management practices and
firm performance implications for quality management theory development, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 948-975.
Narasimhan, R. and Kim, S.W. (2002), Effect of supply chain integration on the relationship
between diversification and performance: evidence from Japanese and Korean firms,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 303-323.
Nonaka, I. (1991), The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69 No. 6,
pp. 96-104.

Nyaga, G.N. and Whipple, J.M. (2011), Relationship quality and performance outcomes:
achieving a sustainable competitive advantage, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 32
No. 4, pp. 345-360.
Osterloh, M. and Frey, B. (2000), Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms,
Organization Science, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 538-550.
Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.R. (1978), The Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependency
Perspective, Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Ring, P.S. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1994), Developmental process of cooperative
interorganizational relationships, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 90-118.
Roberts, K.H. and OReilly, C.A. III (1974), Failures in upward communication in organizations:
three possible culprits, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 205-215.
Robinson, C.J. and Malhotra, M.K. (2005), Defining the concept of supply chain quality
management and its relevance to academic and industrial practice, International Journal
of Production Economics, Vol. 96 No. 3, pp. 315-337.
Ross, D.F. (1998), Competing Through Supply Chain Management, Chapman & Hall,
New York, NY.
Rumelt, R.P. (1984), Towards a strategic theory of the firm, in Lamb, R.B. (Ed.), Competitive
Strategic Management, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 556-571.
Rungtusanatham, M., Salvador, F., Forza, C. and Choi, T.Y. (2003), Supply-chain linkages and
operational performance: a resource-based-view perspective, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 9, pp. 1084-1099.
Sampath, K., Saygin, C., Grasman, S.C. and Leu, M.C. (2006), Impact of reputation information
sharing in an auction-based job allocation model for small and medium-sized enterprises,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 44 No. 9, pp. 1777-1798.
Sanders, N.R., Autry, C.W. and Gligor, D.M. (2011), The impact of buyer firm information
connectivity enablers on supplier firm performance: a relational view, International
Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 179-201.
Shin, H., Collier, D.A. and Wilson, D.D. (2000), Supply management orientation and
supplier/buyer performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 317-333.
Sila, I. and Ebrahimpour, M. (2005), Critical linkages among TQM factors and business results,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 11,
pp. 1123-1155.
Sila, I., Ebrahimpour, M. and Birkholz, C. (2006), Quality in supply chains: an empirical
analysis, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 491-502.
Sila, I., Ebrahimpour, M. and Birkholz, C. (2007), Quality in supply chains: an empirical
analysis, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 491-502.
Simatupang, T.M. and Sridharan, R. (2002), The collaborative supply chain, International
Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 15-30.
Sitkin, S.M., Sutcliffe, K.M. and Schroeder, R.G. (1994), Distinguishing control from learning in
total quality management: a contingency perspective, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 537-564.
Smith, K.G., Carroll, S.J. and Ashford, S.J. (1995), Intra- and inter-organizational cooperation:
toward a research agenda, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 7-23.
Sousa, R. and Voss, C.A. (2002), Quality management re-visited: a reflective review and agenda
for future research, Journal of Operation Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 91-109.

Supply chain
quality
management
527

IJQRM
30,5

528

Starbuck, W.H., Greve, A. and Hedberg, B. (1978), Responding to crisis, in Smart, C.F. and
Stanbury, W.T. (Eds), Studies on Crisis Management, Butterworth, Montreal, pp. 111-137.
Stevenson, M. and Spring, M. (2009), Supply chain flexibility: an inter-firm empirical study,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 946-971.
Stock, J.R. (2002), Marketing myopia revisited: lessons for logistics, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 32 Nos 1/2, pp. 12-21.
Tan, K., Handfield, R.B. and Krause, D.R. (1998), Enhancing firms performance through quality
and supply base management: an empirical study, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 2813-2837.
Tan, K., Kannan, V.R., Handfield, R.B. and Ghosh, S. (1999), Supply chain management: an
empirical study of its impact on performance, International Journal of Operations
& Production Management, Vol. 19 No. 10, pp. 1034-1052.
Teng, S.G., Ho, S.M., Shumar, D. and Liu, P.C. (2006), Implementing FMEA in a collaborative
supply chain environment, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
Vol. 23 Nos 2/3, pp. 179-196.
Terziovski, M. and Hermel, P. (2011), The role of quality management practice in the
performance of integrated supply chains: a multiple cross-case analysis, Quality
Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 10-25.
Trent, R.J. (2001), Applying TQM to SCM, Supply Chain Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 70-78.
Vanpoucke, E., Boyer, K.K. and Vereecke, A. (2009), Supply chain information flow strategies:
an empirical taxonomy, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 1213-1241.
Volery, T. and Mensik, S. (1998), The role of trust in creating effective alliances: a managerial
perspective, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17 Nos 9/10, pp. 987-994.
Vonderembse, M.A., Uppal, M., Huang, S.H. and Dismukes, J.P. (2006), Designing supply chains:
towards theory development, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 100
No. 2, pp. 223-238.
Wicks, A.C. (2001), The value dynamics of total quality management: ethics and the foundations
of TQM, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 501-536.
Wilson, D.D. and Collier, D.A. (2000), An empirical investigation of the Malcolm Baldrige
National Quality Award casual model, Decision Sciences, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 361-383.
Wong, A. (2001), Leadership for effective supply chain partnership, Total Quality Management,
Vol. 12 Nos 7/8, pp. 913-919.
Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K. and Cheng, T.C.E. (2011), Value of information integration to supply
chain management: roles of internal and external contingencies, Journal of Management
Information Systems, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 161-200.
Xu, L.D. (2011), Information architecture for supply chain quality management, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 183-198.
Yang, J., Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K. and Ntoko, A.N. (2009), The antecedents of dyadic quality
performance and its effect on buyer-supplier relationship improvement, International
Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 120 No. 1, pp. 243-251.
Yeung, A.C.L. (2008), Strategic supply management, quality initiatives, and organizational
performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 490-502.
Yeung, A.C.L., Edwin Cheng, T.C. and Lai, K. (2006), An operational and institutional
perspective on total quality management, Production and Operations Management,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 156-170.

Yi, L., Yuan, L. and Leinan, Z. (2010), Control mechanisms across a buyer-supplier relationship
quality matrix, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 3-12.
Zhang, L., Wang, S., Li, F., Wang, H., Wang, L. and Tan, W. (2011), A few measures for ensuring
supply chain quality, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 49 No. 1,
pp. 87-97.

Supply chain
quality
management

Further reading
Mellat-Parast, M. and Digman, L. (2008), Learning: the interface of quality management and
strategic alliances, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 114 No. 2,
pp. 820-829.
Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996), Interorganizational collaboration and
collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 116-145.

529

About the author

Dr Mahour Mellat-Parast is Assistant Professor of Technology Management at North Carolina
A&T State University. Mahour Mellat-Parast can be contacted at: mahour@ncat.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.