A Proposal for Case Study Methodology in

Supply Chain Integration Research

Teresa M. McCarthy, Susan L. Golicic

1 Introduction................................................................................................. 252
2 Research Purpose and Questions ................................................................ 254
3 Theoretical Justification.............................................................................. 255
4 Methodology............................................................................................... 258
5 Contributions .............................................................................................. 263
6 References................................................................................................... 265

Summary:
This paper describes a case study research proposal designed to explore how and
why firms chose to integrate process activities with supply chain partners. Previ-
ous quantitative studies suggest that integrating demand management, collabora-
tive forecasting, and demand planning activities can lead to competitive advan-
tage and improved supply chain performance. This qualitative research fills a gap
in previous research by exploring the phenomenon of Interfirm Demand Integra-
tion in a true supply chain context, garnering perceptions from multiple supply
chain partners. Results are expected to contribute to managerial, theoretical, and
methodological knowledge.

Keywords:
Case Study, Supply Chain Management, Demand Management, Collaborative Forecasting,
Qualitative Research
252 T. M. McCarthy, S. L. Golicic

1 Introduction
In practice, many firms plan and execute supply and demand activities separately
(Vokurka & Lummus, 1998). Shankar (2001: 76) asserts supply chain manage-
ment has traditionally focused on “back-end operational functions, while market-
ing has addressed front-end, or customer-facing functions”. The gap that exists
between these two areas limits the potential for competitive advantage in the mar-
ketplace. As firms recognize that competition is no longer limited to company
versus company, but rather supply chain versus supply chain, reliance on trading
partners to help bridge the supply-demand gap and achieve competitive advantage
becomes more important. As such, it is essential for trading partners to understand
how to integrate supply and demand activities in order to deliver superior cus-
tomer value. The purpose of this paper is to present a proposal to investigate why
and how firms integrate business processes with their supply chain partners in
order to bridge the gap between supply and demand activities. An additional ob-
jective is to offer a detailed description of the process followed when designing a
supply chain research project to foster rigor in methodological approach and exe-
cution.
Achrol (1997) suggests that, as firms move toward a more strategic, precise focus
on core competencies resulting in vertical disaggregation and outsourcing of non-
core competencies, networks of trading partners become more critical for gaining
access to resources not controlled within the firm. These “opportunity networks”
(Achrol, 1997: 62) represent nonequity modes of governance (Tsang, 2000) in
which each trading partner brings a specific strategic resource to the network, and
trading partners cooperate on mutually important activities.
One mode of nonequity governance that has been explored in the interfirm litera-
ture is joint action arrangements, which is defined as “the extent to which parties
undertake activities jointly rather than unilaterally” (Heide & John, 1990: 29).
Joint action (JA) has been tested as a single construct representing the degree to
which manufacturers and suppliers cooperate on certain activities that are impor-
tant for both parties, such as: component testing, long-range planning, and fore-
casting (Heide & John, 1990), marketing strategy, new product launches, and
premium volumes (Zaheer & Venkatraman, 1995); cost cutting, product redesign,
new product development (Joshi & Stump, 1999).
McCarthy (2003) suggests the concept of undertaking activities jointly in an inter-
firm governance situation is more complex than that which has been measured in
previous studies. McCarthy refined the JA construct and conceptualized Interfirm
Demand Integration Process as a higher-order construct comprised of three first-
order constructs. Interfirm Demand Integration (IDI) is a nonequity mode of gov-
ernance defined as, “the systemic, strategic coordination of the customer-focused
functions and tactics across businesses within the supply chain, for the purposes of
improving the long-term performance of the individual companies and the supply