Corresponding Author: Petrus
Evensius
E-mail: [email protected]
INTRODUCTION
Major transformations in global business have
created new challenges and opened up opportunities across the supply chain. One
of the most important aspects of supply chain management is the buyer-supplier
relationship, namely, the relationship between buyers and suppliers. This
relationship is key to the continuity of company operations and a major factor
in increasing competitiveness and response to market changes (Lee Park et al., 2023).
Modern companies must build strong strategic
partnerships to face an uncertain and ever-changing business climate.
Purchasing is no longer just a simple transaction but is also an effort to
create added value for the Company (de Menezes et al., 2021).
Changing
dynamics in global markets, including changes in trade policies, geopolitical
uncertainty, and global crises, have complicated relationships between buyers
and suppliers. Companies must evaluate and adapt their buyer-supplier
relationship management strategies to respond to these changes. (Jeon et al., 2023).
The impact of technology,
especially in digitalization and analytics, has created major changes in how
companies interact with their suppliers. Strategic partnerships between buyers
and suppliers are becoming increasingly recognized as a key element in successful
buyer-supplier relationships. Close collaboration and value exchange are the
primary focus in achieving success in this relationship. (Sacco & Magnani, 2023).
Flexibility in the supply chain
buyer-supplier relationship is the key to adapting to market changes. Close
collaboration enables more flexible operations that are responsive to changing
market needs (Conti et al., 2023).
Trust remains an irreplaceable
foundation in the buyer-supplier relationship. This trust is built through
transparency, integrity, and openness, all of which positively impact
communication, shared risk management, and innovation in the supply chain (Tukamuhabwa et al., 2023).
As an integral part of the
production process, the purchasing department has a strategic role in building
effective relationships with suppliers. A multi-supplier targeting strategy is
an approach to achieving profits through cost savings (Brookbanks & Parry, 2022).
Supplier reputation, as the image
or perception held by the purchasing company, also influences the dynamics of
the relationship between buyers and suppliers. A good reputation impacts
overall business relationships positively (Li et al., 2022).
Reasons for research on
buyer-supplier relationships with PT vendors. Astra Daihatsu Motor is important
in the context of changing global business dynamics, the need for strategic
partnerships, and the impact of digital technology on the supply chain. This
research is expected to provide valuable insights to improve the quality of
relationships between buyers and suppliers in the Indonesian automotive
industry.
The following is automotive data
in the context of research on buyer-supplier relations with PT Astra Daihatsu
Motor vendors.
Table
1. Top 10 Automotive Companies in Indonesia
|
No
|
Company
name
|
|
1
|
Astra
International
|
|
2
|
Toyota
Motor Manufacturing Indonesia (TMMIN)
|
|
3
|
Honda
Prospect Motor
|
|
4
|
Daihatsu
Astra Motor
|
|
5
|
Nissan
Motor Indonesia
|
|
6
|
General
Motors Indonesia
|
|
7
|
Suzuki
Indomobil Motor
|
|
8
|
Isuzu
Astra Motor Indonesia
|
|
9
|
Mitsubishi
Motors Krama Yudha Sales Indonesia (MMKSI)
|
|
10
|
Mercedes-Benz
Indonesia
|
Figure
1. Car Sales in Indonesia
The
Association of Indonesian Automotive Industries (Gaikindo) reported that car
sales from factories to dealers (wholesales) in the domestic market amounted to
80,271 units in October 2023. The number fell slightly by 0.4% compared to the
previous month (month-to-month/m-to-m), which is 79,919 units. Compared to the
same period last year, car sales in the domestic market fell 13.9% (year on
year/year).
In October 2022, car sales in the domestic market were recorded at
93,194 units. Meanwhile, retail car sales in the domestic market were 79,351
units in October 2023. The number fell 1.9% (m-to-m) monthly and 11.4% annually (yoy). The
decline in car sales in the market was caused by slowing economic growth in
Indonesia in the third quarter of 2023. Credit interest rates have also
increased due to Bank Indonesia (BI) raising its benchmark interest rate by 25
basis points (bps) to 6% in October 2023. Meanwhile, based on the brand,
Toyota
will still dominate wholesale car sales in the domestic market in October 2023.
This Japanese car recorded sales of 27,438 units last month. Daihatsu followed
his position because he sold 14,099 cars. Then, Honda and Suzuki recorded car
sales of 11,938 units and 5,990 units, respectively.
Figure 3.
Source: reprocessed data from the Association
of Indonesian Automotive Industries (Gaikindo)
Table 2. Previous Research
|
No
|
Articles
& Journals
|
Hypothesis
|
Keywords
|
Results
|
|
1
|
(Perano et al., 2023) Embracing
supply chain digitalization and unphysicalization to enhance supply chain
performance: a conceptual framework
|
The influence of digital
innovation on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
artificial intelligence; Big
data; Blockchain; Digital technologies; Supply chain digitalization; Supply
chain management; Supply chain performance; Unphysicalization
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on the relationship between buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
2
|
(Malyavkina et al., 2019) ,
Blockchain technology as the basis for digital transformation of the supply
chain management system: benefits and implementation challenges
|
The influence of digital
innovation on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
blockchain; digital technology;
digital transformation; focused on transparency; in this; integration
strategy; intended for; management; mutual trust and being; supply chain;
supply chain ecosystem; use throughout the global
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on the relationship between buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
3
|
(Alam�ki & Korpela, 2021) , Digital
transformation and value-based selling activities: seller and buyer
perspectives
|
The influence of digital
innovation on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
Buyer�supplier relationship;
digital transformation; Sales ecosystem; Sales management; Value-based
selling
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on the relationship between buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
4
|
(Kazemargi et al., 2022) Managing
open innovation within supply networks in mature industries
|
The influence of digital
innovation on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
Exploration; Mature industries;
Open innovation; Strong ties; Supply network; Weak ties
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on the relationship between buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
5
|
(Alam�ki & Korpela, 2021) �Digital transformation and value-based
selling activities: seller and buyer perspectives
|
The influence of digital
innovation on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
Buyer�supplier relationship;
digital transformation; Sales ecosystem; Sales management; Value-based
selling
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on the relationship between buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
6
|
(Hautala-Kankaanp��, 2022) The impact
of digitalization on firm performance: examining the role of digital culture
and the effect of supply chain capability
|
The influence of digital
innovation on supply chain flexibility
|
digital culture; Digital
platforms; Operational performance; Supply chain capability
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
7
|
(Marrucci et al., 2022) ,
"Connected we stand, disconnected we fall." Analyzing the
importance of digital platforms in transnational supply chain management
|
The influence of digital
innovation on supply chain flexibility
|
Coronavirus pandemic; Digital
ecosystems; Digital platforms; Global supply chain; International trade
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
8
|
(Pizzichini et al., 2023) , The role
of digital knowledge servitization in supply chain management
|
The influence of digital
innovation on supply chain flexibility
|
Digital knowledge servitization;
Digital servitization; Digital supply chain ecosystem; Manufacturing; Open
innovation; Supply chain management
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
9
|
(Saunila et al., 2021) , Managing
supplier capabilities for buyer innovation performance in e-business
|
The influence of digital
innovation on supply chain flexibility
|
Innovation; Supply chain
services
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
10
|
(Garay-Rondero et al., 2020) , Digital
supply chain model in Industry 4.0
|
The influence of digital
innovation on supply chain flexibility
|
Digitization; Industry 4.0;
Supply chain management; Supply networks; Technological change; Value chain
|
Digital innovation has a
positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
11
|
(Vijayakumar et al., 2019) ,
Investigation of supplier selection criteria that lead to buyer-supplier
long-term relationships for the semiconductor industry
|
The Influence of reputation on
buyer-supplier relationships
|
Buyer-supplier long-term
relationship; Buyer satisfaction; Malaysia; Semiconductor industry; Supplier
selection criteria
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
12
|
(Khan et al., 2019) ,
Information technology outsourcing: Influence of supplier firm size and
reputation on Buyers' A priori perceptions of opportunism and uncertainty
|
The Influence of reputation on
buyer-supplier relationships
|
Opportunism; Outsourcing;
Reputation; Transaction costs; Uncertainty
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
13
|
(Vijayakumar et al., 2019) ,
Investigation of supplier selection criteria that lead to buyer-supplier
long-term relationships for the semiconductor industry
|
The Influence of reputation on
buyer-supplier relationships
|
Buyer-supplier long-term
relationship; Buyer satisfaction; Malaysia; Semiconductor industry; Supplier
selection criteria
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
14
|
(Manello & Calabrese, 2019) The
influence of reputation on supplier selection: An empirical study of the
European automotive industry
|
The Influence of reputation on
buyer-supplier relationships
|
Automotive; Corporate
reputation; Supplier selection; Tier 1 suppliers
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
15
|
(Habib et al., 2020) Treat me
well, and I may leave you kindly: A configurational approach to a buyer's
relationship exit strategy
|
The Influence of reputation on
buyer-supplier relationships
|
Buyer-supplier relationships;
Configurations; Relationship exit; Social exchange theory; Transaction cost
economics; fsQCA
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on buyer-supplier relationships.
|
|
16
|
(Steiner & Brandhoff, 2020) , An
analysis of configurations of relationship quality dimensions to explain
sources of behavioral outcomes in globalized manufacturing
|
The influence of reputation on
supply chain flexibility
|
B2B customer value; Customer
satisfaction; Global business; Innovation; Loyalty; Manufacturing industries;
Mechanical engineering; Perceptual customer constructs; Share of wallet;
fsQCA
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
17
|
(Brookbanks & Parry, 2022) The impact
of a blockchain platform on trust in established relationships: a case study
of wine supply chains
|
The influence of reputation on
supply chain flexibility
|
Blockchain; Information
asymmetry; Supply chain; Trust; Trust ecosystem; Visibility
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
18
|
(Forslund et al., 2022) ,
Challenges in extending sustainability across a transport supply chain
|
The influence of reputation on
supply chain flexibility
|
Agency theory; Case studies;
Communications; Communications; Goal congruence; Logistics service industry;
Relations; Sustainability; Sweden; Transport operations; Transport supply
chain
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
19
|
(Lepist� et al., 2022) By
combining traditional and new views, enhancing customer satisfaction,
personnel satisfaction, and company reputation with total quality management.
|
The influence of reputation on
supply chain flexibility
|
Company reputation; Customer
satisfaction; Performance; Personnel satisfaction; Total quality management
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on supply chain flexibility.
|
|
20
|
(Koporcic & Halinen, 2018) ,
Interactive Network Branding
|
The influence of reputation on
supply chain flexibility
|
business networks; corporate
branding; interpersonal interaction; paper type conceptual paper; process;
small- and medium-sized enterprises
|
Reputation has a positive effect
on supply chain flexibility.
|
Based
on the background above, this research aims to determine and analyze the
influence of digital innovation and reputation on the buyer-supplier
relationship mediated by supply chain flexibility. Empirical study: PT vendors.
Astra Daihatsu Motor So, the benefit of this research is to provide insight for
academics about the complexity of buyer-supplier relationships in global
business, emphasizing operational sustainability and adaptation to market
changes. The benefit lies in understanding the role of strategic partnerships
in improving the quality of buyer-supplier relationships amidst business
uncertainty. The analysis of the impact of technology in this research provides
useful information for academics to understand opportunities for efficiency and
collaboration in buyer-supplier relationships as well as the effective
application of value in a business context. Also provides important benefits for the
manufacturing industry with a focus on Buyer Supplier Relationships (BSR). In
facing challenges and opportunities in a dynamic global supply chain, research
emphasizes the importance of strategic partnerships in improving the quality of
BSR. Utilization of technology, such as digitalization and analytics, opens up
opportunities for efficiency and collaboration in BSR. Strategic partnerships
are a key element in successful BSR, emphasizing collaboration, value exchange,
operational flexibility, and building trust through transparency. In addition,
the vital role of the purchasing department is discussed in achieving profits
through multi-supplier targeting strategies focusing on competitive prices and
building trust.
METHOD
Cross-sectional approach, where data will be
collected at one point to analyze the influence of digital innovation and
reputation on supply chain flexibility and buyer-supplier relationships (Nyagadza et al., 2021). Initially, a Likert scale survey will be
developed based on relevant research variables and theory, with items designed
to measure digital innovation, company reputation, supply chain flexibility,
and the quality of buyer-supplier relationships. The sample will consist of professionals and managers
in the relevant industry. After data
collection, Equation Modeling-Partial Least Square (SEM-PLS) structural
analysis will be conducted using the SmartPLS version 3.0 program to test the
proposed conceptual model and related hypotheses. SmartPLS visual features will
build a structural model and estimate the relationship between latent
variables. These features will help in model validation, with various fit
indices used to assess how well the data fits the proposed model. The results
of this analysis will provide in-depth insight into the dynamics between these
variables and provide empirical evidence that supports or challenges the
research hypothesis (Santoso, 2021). The population in this research is the buyer-supplier of the
Automotive Manufacturing Company Vendor PT. Astra Daihatsu Motor. The sample
target is the purchasing supplier of the Automotive Manufacturing Company
Vendor PT. Astra Daihatsu Motor has around 500 people using the Slovin formula.
So, the sample size required for this research is around 222 respondents from
500 employees of the Automotive Manufacturing Vendor Company supplier PT. Astra
Daihatsu Motor. This research uses data from respondents, namely
questionnaires, called primary data, and books, journal articles, and websites,
called secondary data, are used to build theories. The analysis techniques used
in this research are validity, reliability, and hypothesis testing.
Figure 3. Research Model
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Hypothesis Testing Results
Hypothesis testing using the Bootstrapping method
produces coefficient values, t statistics, and p values, as presented in the
following model.
Figure
4. PLS Bootstrapping
Source:
Data processed with SmartPLS version 3 (2024)
The
provisions for making hypotheses based on the t-statistical value at a
significance level of 5%, the t-statistical value > 1.96, and the p-value
< 0.05 are said to have a significant influence (Hair, Black, Babin, &
Anderson, 2014). Complete hypothesis testing is as follows.
Direct Effect Test
The results of testing the
hypothesis of direct variable influence are as follows.
Table
3. Direct Effect Test
|
|
Original Sample
|
TStatistics
|
PValues
|
|
Supply Chain Flexibility -> Buyer-Supplier
Relationship
|
0.413
|
8,474
|
0,000
|
|
Digital Innovation -> Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.347
|
6,470
|
0,000
|
|
Digital Innovation -> Supply Chain Flexibility
|
0.456
|
8,321
|
0,000
|
|
Reputation -> Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.254
|
5,919
|
0,000
|
|
Reputation -> Supply Chain Flexibility
|
0.468
|
8,345
|
0,000
|
Source:
Data processed with SmartPLS version 3 (2024)
Based on the results of the
direct influence test can be explained further in the following hypothesis
testing.
a. Hypothesis
Test (H1)
H1: Digital
innovation has a positive influence on buyer-supplier relationships
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 6.470 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H1 is declared accepted, meaning
that digital innovation has a positive influence on the buyer-supplier
relationship.
b. Hypothesis Test (H2)
H2:
Digital innovation has a positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
The
results of the t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 8.321 with a
significance probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value
is > 1.96, and the p-value is < 0.05, so H2 is declared
accepted, meaning that digital innovation has a positive influence on supply
chain flexibility.
c. Hypothesis
Test (H3)
H3: Company
reputation has a positive influence on buyer-supplier relationships.
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 5.919 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H3 is declared accepted, meaning
that reputation has a positive influence on the buyer-supplier relationship.
d. Hypothesis
Test (H4)
H4: Company
reputation has a positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 8.345 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H4 is declared accepted, meaning
that reputation has a positive influence on supply chain flexibility.
e. Hypothesis
Test (H5)
H5: Supply chain
flexibility has a positive influence on buyer-supplier relationships.
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 8.474 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H5 is declared accepted, meaning
that supply chain flexibility has a positive influence on the buyer-supplier
relationship.
Indirect Effect Test
The results of testing the
hypothesis of indirect variable influence are as follows.
Table 4. Indirect Effect Test
|
|
Original Sample
|
T Statistics
|
P Values
|
|
Digital Innovation -> Supply
Chain Flexibility -> Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.188
|
6,831
|
0,000
|
|
Reputation -> Supply Chain
Flexibility -> Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.193
|
5,489
|
0,000
|
Source:
Data processed with SmartPLS version 3 (2024)
Based on the results of the
direct influence test can be explained further in the following hypothesis
testing.
a. Hypothesis
Test (H6)
H6: Digital
innovation positively influences buyer-supplier relationships mediated by
supply chain flexibility.
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 6.831 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H6 is declared accepted, meaning
that digital innovation has a positive influence on buyer-supplier
relationships mediated by supply chain flexibility.
b. Hypothesis
Test (H7)
H7: Reputation
has a positive influence on buyer-supplier relationships mediated by supply
chain flexibility
The results of the
t-statistical test obtained a calculated t-value of 5.489 with a significance
probability of 0.000. It can be seen that the calculated t-value is > 1.96,
and the p-value is < 0.05, so H7 is declared accepted, meaning
that reputation has a positive influence on the buyer-supplier relationship
mediated by supply chain flexibility.
c. Mediation
Effect Test
The results of testing the
mediation effect that connects the independent variable to the dependent
variable are as follows.
Table
5. Mediation Effect Test
|
|
Direct
|
Indirect
|
Note.
|
|
Digital Innovation
-> Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.347
|
0.188
|
Partial Mediation
|
|
Reputation ->
Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.254
|
0.193
|
Partial Mediation
|
|
Reputation ->
Buyer-Supplier Relationship
|
0.254
|
0.193
|
Partial Mediation
|
Source:
Data processed with SmartPLS version 3 (2024)
The direct and indirect
effects can be interpreted as follows based on the coefficient values.
1) The
coefficient value of the direct effect of digital innovation on the buyer-supplier
relationship is 0.347, and the influence is significant, while the coefficient
value of the indirect effect of digital innovation on the buyer-supplier
relationship is 0.188, and the influence is significant. It can be seen that
there is a decrease in the coefficient value; this shows that supply chain
flexibility is only able to partially mediate (partial mediation) the influence
of digital innovation on the buyer-supplier relationship.
2) The
coefficient value of the direct effect of reputation on the buyer-supplier
relationship is 0.254, and the influence is significant, while the coefficient
value of the indirect effect of reputation on the buyer-supplier relationship
is 0.193, and the influence is significant. It can be seen that there is a
decrease in the coefficient value; this shows that supply chain flexibility is
only able to partially mediate (partial mediation) the influence of reputation
on the buyer-supplier relationship.
The Influence of Digital Innovation on Buyer-Supplier Relationships
The results of the hypothesis test stated that H1
was accepted, meaning that digital innovation had a positive influence on
buyer-supplier relationships. This finding is supported by a positive
coefficient value (0.347), meaning that every increase in digital innovation
will align with an increase in the buyer-supplier relationship. This hypothesis
is acceptable because digital innovation often introduces systems and
technology that help monitor product or service quality in real-time and
increase efficiency in business processes. This helps increase customer
satisfaction and reduce the risk of losses, strengthening the relationship
between buyers and suppliers. With digital collaborative platforms, buyers and
suppliers can collaborate on new product development, process improvements, and
increased efficiency. Such collaboration allows for a more equitable sharing of
risks and benefits and creates closer relationships between the two parties.
Digital innovations, such as e-procurement and e-invoicing, can also reduce
administrative and operational costs associated with business transactions
between buyers and suppliers. This can lead to greater mutual benefits and
increased satisfaction for both parties.
The Influence of Digital Innovation on Supply Chain Flexibility
The hypothesis test results stated that H2 was
accepted, meaning that digital innovation positively influenced supply chain
flexibility. This finding is supported by a positive coefficient value (0.456),
meaning that every increase in digital innovation will align with an increase
in supply chain flexibility. This hypothesis is accepted because digital
innovation allows for faster and more responsive adaptation to changing market
conditions and customer demands. Digital technology enables real-time
monitoring of the entire supply chain, including inventory, production, and
delivery. With accurate and up-to-date information, companies can respond
quickly to changes in demand and market conditions. Digital innovation enables
closer collaboration between various partners in the supply chain, including in
distributing PT products. Astra Daihatsu Motor. Improved collaboration
facilitates better coordination and information sharing, which is necessary to
address uncertainty and change in the supply chain. Digital innovation enables
supply chains to become more responsive, adaptive, and flexible to changes in
the business environment. This allows companies to meet customer demands more
efficiently and overcome challenges that may arise in the supply chain.
The Influence of Reputation on Buyer-Supplier Relationship
The results of the hypothesis test stated that H3
was accepted, meaning that reputation has a positive influence on the
buyer-supplier relationship. This finding is supported by a positive
coefficient value (0.254), meaning that every increase in reputation will align
with an increase in the buyer-supplier relationship. Acceptance of this
hypothesis is because a good reputation builds trust between buyers and
suppliers; when a company has a good reputation for quality, reliability, and
integrity, suppliers will be more inclined to trust it with sensitive information,
such as cost details or production schedules. This reputation leads to better
collaboration and closer relationships. Companies with good reputations tend to
maintain long-term relationships with their suppliers. Suppliers will feel more
comfortable and secure investing in the relationship because they know the
company is reliable and will likely provide sustainable business opportunities.
Companies with a strong reputation tend to attract high-quality suppliers. Good
suppliers will also want to engage with companies with a good reputation, as
this can improve their image. Therefore, a good reputation can help companies
to attract the best suppliers in their industry. Collaboration between
companies and suppliers becomes more efficient in a flexible supply chain. A
good reputation can facilitate more effective collaboration, including sharing
information, identifying opportunities, and overcoming obstacles.
The Influence of Reputation on Supply Chain Flexibility
The results of the hypothesis test state that H4
is accepted, meaning that reputation has a positive influence on supply chain
flexibility. This finding is supported by a positive coefficient value (0.468),
meaning that every increase in reputation will align with an increase in supply
chain flexibility. This hypothesis is acceptable because a good reputation can
strengthen the relationship between the company and partners in the supply
chain, increasing flexibility and adaptability in facing market challenges and
changes. A good reputation makes suppliers feel more satisfied and engaged in
the relationship with the company. This can encourage suppliers to be more
willing to collaborate to meet changing needs or support necessary changes in
the supply chain. Companies with a good reputation can also attract innovative
suppliers and partners who can help them adapt to market and technological
changes. Collaboration with innovative partners enables companies to develop
new solutions and innovate business processes and products. A good reputation
in a rapidly changing business environment can help a company respond to market
changes, or customer demands more quickly and effectively. Flexibility in the
supply chain allows companies to adjust production, distribution, and logistics
strategies more quickly and without significant disruption.
The Effect of Supply Chain Flexibility on Buyer-Supplier Relationships
The hypothesis test results stated that H5 was accepted,
meaning that supply chain flexibility positively influences the buyer-supplier
relationship. This finding is supported by a positive coefficient value
(0.413), meaning that every increase in supply chain flexibility will align
with an increase in the buyer-supplier relationship. This hypothesis is
acceptable because supply chain flexibility allows buyers and suppliers to
collaborate better to address changes in market demand, customer needs, or production
challenges. When buyers and suppliers can adapt quickly and efficiently to
changing market conditions, this strengthens engagement and collaboration
between them. The ability to adapt operations in the supply chain demonstrates
the reliability and commitment of each party. Buyers and suppliers can depend
on each other to respond quickly to market changes, building stronger trust in
their relationship. Flexibility in the supply chain allows the creation of
sustainable partnerships between buyers and suppliers. When both parties feel
that they can adapt to changes in the business environment, this encourages the
formation of long-term, mutually beneficial partnerships. Flexibility in the
supply chain also allows buyers and suppliers to be more responsive to customer
demands or sudden market changes. By speeding up response times, it can
increase customer satisfaction and generate a positive impact on the
relationship between buyers and suppliers.
The Influence of Digital Innovation on Buyer-Supplier Relationships through
Mediating Supply Chain Flexibility
The hypothesis test results stated that H6 was accepted,
meaning that digital innovation positively influenced buyer-supplier
relationships through the mediation of supply chain flexibility. This finding
is supported by a positive coefficient value (0.188), meaning that every
increase in digital innovation will change supply chain flexibility, ultimately
increasing the buyer-supplier relationship. Acceptance of this hypothesis is
due to digital innovation enabling greater openness and transparency in supply
chains. With technology enabling real-time inventory, production, and shipping
tracking, buyers and suppliers can access relevant information quickly. This
creates a more transparent environment, which strengthens trust between both
parties. Digital innovation allows for more flexibility in production
scheduling, shipping, and other needs, allowing buyers and suppliers to be more
responsive to market or customer needs changes. Such flexibility helps prevent
disruptions in the supply chain and strengthens the partnership between the two
parties. Digital innovation enables better responsiveness to changes in market
demand or customer needs. With technology enabling rapid changes in production,
distribution, and logistics, buyers and suppliers can adapt their operations
more efficiently. This helps reduce response cycle times and improve customer
satisfaction, strengthening the relationship between buyers and suppliers.
The Effect of Reputation on Buyer-Supplier Relationships through Mediating
Supply Chain Flexibility
The results of the hypothesis test stated that H7
was accepted, meaning that reputation positively influences buyer-supplier
relationships through the mediation of supply chain flexibility. This finding
is supported by a positive coefficient value (0.193), meaning that increasing
company reputation will change supply chain flexibility, ultimately increasing
the buyer-supplier relationship. This hypothesis is acceptable because a good
reputation creates trust between buyers and suppliers. When there is strong
trust between both parties, they are more likely to work together flexibly in
the face of changing market conditions or customer needs. This trust forms a
strong foundation for effective collaboration and coordination. Companies with
a good reputation tend to attract more reliable and high-quality suppliers. In
ongoing relationships, buyers and suppliers feel more comfortable investing in
the flexibility and customization necessary to meet mutual needs. A good
reputation helps build long-term, mutually beneficial relationships between
both parties. Companies with a good reputation tend to be more responsive to
changes in market demand or other external conditions. Flexibility in the
supply chain allows buyers and suppliers to adapt their operations quickly and
efficiently to meet changing needs. This greater responsiveness strengthens the
relationship between buyers and suppliers by demonstrating that both parties
can be relied on in dynamic situations.
CONCLUSION
The conclusion of this study is that digital
innovation and corporate reputation have a significant influence on the
relationship between buyers and suppliers as well as supply chain flexibility.
Findings indicate that digital innovation has a positive impact on
buyer-supplier relationships, with an increase in digital innovation
correlating with an improvement in these relationships. This is attributed to
the ability of digital innovation to introduce systems and technologies that
enable real-time monitoring of product or service quality, improve business
efficiency, and facilitate collaboration between buyers and suppliers.
Similarly, corporate reputation also has a positive impact on buyer-supplier
relationships, with a good reputation building trust and facilitating better
collaboration between both parties. Furthermore, both factors contribute to
increased supply chain flexibility, allowing companies to be more responsive to
changes in the market and customer needs.
The implications of this study underscore the
importance for companies to invest in digital innovation and build a good
reputation to strengthen relationships with suppliers and enhance flexibility
in their supply chains. Company managers need to recognize the importance of
adopting new technologies and make efforts to maintain a good reputation, as
both can have a positive impact on supply chain performance and business
relationships with suppliers. By leveraging digital innovation and a good
reputation, companies can improve customer satisfaction, reduce the risk of
losses, and strengthen long-term relationships with suppliers. Therefore,
efforts to develop and maintain digital innovation and a good reputation should
be a priority for companies in managing their supply chains.
REFERENCES
Alam�ki, A., & Korpela, P.
(2021). Digital transformation and
value-based selling activities: seller and buyer perspectives. Baltic
Journal of Management, 16(2), 298�317.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-08-2020-0304
Brookbanks, M., & Parry, G. (2022). The impact of a
blockchain platform on trust in established relationships: a case study of wine
supply chains. Supply Chain Management, 27(7), 128�146.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-05-2021-0227
Conti, E., Camillo, F., & Pencarelli, T. (2023). The
impact of digitalization on marketing activities in manufacturing
companies. TQM
Journal,
35(9), 59�82. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-11-2022-0329
de Menezes, L. M., Escrig-Tena, A. B.,
& Bou-Llusar, J. C. (2021). Sustainability
and Quality Management: has EFQM fostered a Sustainability Orientation
that delivers to stakeholders? International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, 42(13), 155�184. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-10-2021-0634
Forslund, H., Bj�rklund, M., & Svensson �lgen, V. (2022).
Challenges in extending sustainability across a transport supply chain. Supply
Chain Management, 27(7), 1�16.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2020-0285
Garay-Rondero, C. L., Martinez-Flores, J. L., Smith, N. R.,
Caballero Morales, S. O., & Aldrette-Malacara, A. (2020). Digital supply
chain model in Industry 4.0. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
31(5), 887�933. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2018-0280
Habib, F., Bastl, M., Karatzas, A.,
& Mena, C. (2020). Treat me well and I
may leave you kindly: A configurational approach to a buyer�s relationship exit
strategy. Industrial Marketing Management, 84(July), 237�250.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.07.008
Hautala-Kankaanp��, T. (2022). The impact of digitalization
on firm performance: examining the role of digital culture and the effect
of supply chain capability. Business Process Management Journal, 28(8),
90�109. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2022-0122
Jeon, M., Hwang, Y., & Hong, M. S. (2023).
Recontextualizing internationalization of higher education institutions in
South Korea through the lens of the knowledge�policy�power interface. Journal
of International Cooperation in Education, 25(1), 124�140.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jice-04-2022-0009
Kazemargi, N., Tavoletti, E., Appolloni, A., & Cerruti,
C. (2022). Managing open innovation within supply networks in mature
industries. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(6),
1106�1130. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-12-2021-0606
Khan, I. M., Rutherford, B. N., & Williams, A. J. (2019).
Information technology outsourcing: Influence of supplier firm size and
reputation on Buyers� A priori perceptions of opportunism and uncertainty. Operations
and Supply Chain Management, 12(4), 186�197.
https://doi.org/10.31387/oscm0390242
Koporcic, N., & Halinen, A. (2018). Interactive Network
Branding. IMP Journal, 12(2), 392�408.
https://doi.org/10.1108/imp-05-2017-0026
Lee Park, C., Fracarolli Nunes, M., & Machuca, J. A. D.
(2023). Social sustainability in supply chains: the role of local practices and
informal networks. International Journal of Physical Distribution and
Logistics Management, 53(1), 35�61.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-09-2021-0405
Lepist�, K., Saunila, M., & Ukko, J.
(2022). Enhancing customer
satisfaction, personnel satisfaction and company reputation with total quality
management: combining traditional and new views. Benchmarking.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-12-2021-0749
Li, X., Wu, Q., Goldsby, T. J., & Holsapple, C. W.
(2022). Enduring buyer�supplier relationship and buyer performance: the
mediating role of buyer�supplier dyadic embeddedness and supplier external
embeddedness. European Journal of Management Studies, 27(3),
291�316. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejms-03-2022-0020
Malyavkina, L. I., Savina, A. G., & Parshutina, I. G.
(2019). Blockchain technology as the basis for digital transformation of the
supply chain management system: benefits and implementation challenges. 81(Mtde),
10�15. https://doi.org/10.2991/mtde-19.2019.3
Manello, A., & Calabrese, G. (2019). The influence of
reputation on supplier selection: An empirical study of the European automotive
industry. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 25(1),
69�77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2018.03.001
Marrucci, A., Rialti, R., Donvito, R., & Syed, F. U.
(2022). �Connected we stand, disconnected we fall�. Analyzing the importance of
digital platforms in transnational supply chain management. International
Journal of Emerging Markets. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-01-2022-0073
Nyagadza, B., Kadembo, E. M., & Makasi, A. (2021). When
corporate brands tell stories: A signalling theory perspective. Cogent
Psychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2021.1897063
Perano, M., Cammarano, A., Varriale, V., Del Regno, C.,
Michelino, F., & Caputo, M. (2023). Embracing supply chain digitalization
and unphysicalization to enhance supply chain performance: a conceptual
framework. In International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics
Management (Vol. 53, Issues 5�6).
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-06-2022-0201
Pizzichini, L., Temperini, V., Caboni,
F., & Papa, A. (2023). The
role of digital knowledge servitization in supply chain management. International
Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 53(5�6),
589�611. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-06-2022-0202
Sacco, F., & Magnani, G. (2023). Sustainability and
Resilience in the Extended Value Chain: The Case of STMicroelectronics. February
2023, 197�218. https://doi.org/10.1108/s1876-066x20230000037011
Santoso, S. (2021). Analisis Structural Equation Modelling
( SEM ) Menggunakan AMOS. Elex Media Komputindo.
Saunila, M., Ukko, J., Nasiri, M.,
Rantala, T., & Sore, S. (2021). Managing
supplier capabilities for buyer innovation performancein e-business. Journal
of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 14(3), 567�583.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-01-2021-0007
Steiner, B., & Brandhoff, M. (2020). An analysis of
configurations of relationship quality dimensions to explain sources of
behavioral outcomes in globalized manufacturing. European Journal of
Marketing, 55(13), 1�40. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-10-2018-0703
Tukamuhabwa, B., Mutebi, H., & Isabirye, D. (2023).
Supplier performance in the public healthcare: internal social capital,
logistics capabilities and supply chain risk management capabilities as
antecedents in a developing economy. Journal of Business and Socio-Economic
Development, 3(1), 50�68. https://doi.org/10.1108/jbsed-04-2021-0046
Vijayakumar, Y., Rahim, S. A., Ahmi, A., & Rahman, N. A.
A. (2019). Investigation of supplier selection criteria that leads to
buyer-supplier long term relationship for semiconductor industry. International
Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(3), 982�993.
