A model of supplier–retailer power asymmetry in the Australian retail industry
Introduction
Relationships have long been considered vital to business success (Ford, 2002, Brennan and Turnbull, 1999, Turnbull et al., 1996), but it is the understanding of the dynamics of those relationships that can hold the key to that success. Power and interdependence have been a central theme of relationship dynamics and are considered crucial for understanding relationships (Caniels & Gelderman, 2007). In the retail industry there is almost an implicit understanding that relationships between powerful retailers and their suppliers will be asymmetric (Hingley, 2001). These relationships can be long-term, with the parties being committed to the relationship, albeit ‘calculative commitment’ (Kumar, 2005). Essentially many suppliers have little choice but to maintain their relationships in order to access consumers (Schellhase, Hardock, & Ohlwein, 2000).
Numerous studies have highlighted the ability of major retailers to exert power in highly concentrated markets (Gedeon et al., 2008, Olsen et al., 2014, Hingley, 2003). To date the majority of these studies have concentrated on players in the European and US markets. This paper investigates this phenomenon from an Australian perspective. The Australian grocery retail market is highly concentrated with two major dominant players. Such dominance may lead to power asymmetry and a channel climate that may lead to the exercise of that power asymmetry (Zhuang & Zhang, 2011).
Given this context, the purpose of this paper is to understand the supplier–retailer relationship dynamics (specifically power) in the Australian environment. The specific research questions of this study are:
- •
To what extent do Australian retailers have and/or exert power in the grocery supply chain?
- •
What is the impact of power asymmetry in this context (negative and positive)?
Section snippets
Power in business relationships
Power is a central theme of relationship dynamics and is interestingly considered crucial to the operational and commercial success of relationships (Dahlstrom and Dwyer, 2008, Cox and Chicksand, 2005, Turnbull et al., 1996). In any business relationship, the balance of power and the degree of dependence or interdependence will help shape the dynamics of the exchange processes that lead to the evolution of relationships. In order to understand the role of power in relationships it is important
The Australian context
The Australian grocery retail industry is dominated by two major supermarkets, Woolworths and Coles. In 2013, Woolworths was the leading player with 39.6% market share, while Coles held 33.5% (IBIS World, 2014). To highlight the dominance of these players, it should be noted that Metcash, which supplies independent grocers, has only 9.5% market share and Aldi the next biggest supermarket has only 10.3% market share. In 2011 there was a dramatic shift in power in the grocery supply chain
Methodology
To understand the impacts of power asymmetry, qualitative exploratory research was undertaken using a combination of documentary analysis and in-depth interviews.
Documentary analysis can provide a researcher with rich insights into an area where no other course of analysis is possible because of the contemporary nature of the research area (Davis & Schneider, 2010). An overriding advantage of using documentary analysis is the lack of bias; the authors of the documents have no way of knowing at
Discussion of findings
Initial analysis concentrated on power, dependence and the impacts of these on the Australian grocery retail sector. From the outset of this study, power was considered a central theme. However upon analysing the documents and interview transcripts several other recurrent themes emerged. This section will outline the findings on these and other emerging themes.
A model of power asymmetry
Based on these findings we propose a model identifying the determinants of buyer power and increased asymmetry. It is developed based on three key areas in this context, Company, Dyad, and Environment. The themes which emerged above are linked to these areas to show the evolutionary nature of power asymmetry. Essentially the degree of retailer power is influenced by the various determinants and results in increased or decreased levels of power asymmetry (Fig. 1).
Conclusions, implications and future research
This paper has sought to understand the nature of supplier–retailer relationships in the Australian grocery industry with a specific focus on power asymmetry and its impacts. Using documentary analysis and in-depth interviews with suppliers, the existence of a growing power asymmetry was established and the impacts of this on the industry were ascertained. Both positive and negatives impacts were uncovered but it was clear that for suppliers in this particular industry the negatives far
References (64)
- et al.
The influence of power driven buyer/seller relationships on supply chain satisfaction
Journal of Operations Management
(2005) Self-interest and not benign power—a comment on Hingley's “Power to all out Friends”
Industrial Marketing Management
(2005)- et al.
Retailer power and supplier welfare: The case of Wal-Mart
Journal of Retailing
(2001) - et al.
Adaptive behavior in buyer–supplier relationships
Industrial Marketing Management
(1999) - et al.
Power and interdependence in buyer supplier relationships: A purchasing portfolio approach
Industrial Marketing Management
(2007) - et al.
The limits of lean management thinking: Multiple retailers and food and farm supply chains
European Management Journal
(2005) - et al.
Supermarkets and suppliers in the United Kingdom: System integration, information and control
Accounting, Organizations and Society
(1996) Power to all our friends? Living with imbalance in supplier–retailer relationships
Industrial Marketing Management
(2005)- et al.
Theory testing using case studies in business-to-business research
Industrial Marketing Management
(1999) The power of power in supplier–retailer relationships
Industrial Marketing Management
(2005)
Comments on power to all our friends? Living with imbalance in supplier–retailer relationships by Martin Hingley
Industrial Marketing Management
Is lack of competition in the grocery sector a public health issue?
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
The impact of power and relationship commitment on the integration between manufacturers and customers in a supply chain
Journal of Operations Management
Power, conflict and cooperation: The impact of guanxi in Chinese marketing channels
Industrial Marketing Management
Analysing clinical practice guidelines. A method of documentary analysis
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Report of the ACCC inquiry into the competitiveness of retail prices for standard groceries
ACCC: Coles discounting of house brand milk is not predatory pricing
ACCC takes action against Coles for alleged unconscionable conduct towards its suppliers
ACCC takes further action against Coles for alleged unconscionable conduct towards its suppliers
Court finds Coles engaged in unconscionable conduct and orders Coles pay $10 million penalties
Dob in your supermarket, ACCC tells suppliers
Satisfaction and loyalty to suppliers within the grocery trade
European Journal of Marketing
Influence, leadership, control
Retail power, competition and local consumer choice in the UK grocery sector
European Journal of Marketing
Competition law in Australia
The Australian consumer law
Qualitative research inquiry and research design, choosing among five traditions
The concept of power
Behavioral Science
The political economy of distribution systems
Journal of Marketing Channels
Between antinomies and gastro-anomy: Mapping Australian health food culture across the post-war decades
Consumption, Markets and Culture
The marketing system
The waterbed effect: Where buying and selling power come together
Wisconsin Law Review
Cited by (26)
Assessing the impact of manufacturer power on private label market share in an equilibrium framework
2023, Journal of Business ResearchThe financial impacts of environmental violations on supply chains: Evidence from an emerging market
2021, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation ReviewManaging structural inter-organizational tensions in complex product systems projects: Lessons from the Metis case
2021, Journal of Business ResearchThe accountability paradox: How holding marketers accountable hinders alignment with short-term marketing goals
2020, Journal of Business ResearchCitation Excerpt :On the other hand, the alternative choice requires additional cognitive effort by calling into question the short-term marketing goal (to sell more). Satisfying the retailer requires integration of potentially negative consequences for other stakeholders (Torres & Tribó, 2011) and a risk of retailer dominance (Sutton-Brady, Kamvounias, & Taylor, 2015). Subjective marketing knowledge.
Market dominance or product cost advantage: Retail power impacts on assortment decisions
2020, International Journal of Production EconomicsPower in a startup's relationships with its established partners: Interactions between structural and behavioural power
2019, Industrial Marketing Management
- 1
Tel.: + 61 2 9036 9306; fax: + 61 2 9352 6732.