2015 | 19 | 221-239
Article title

Power of companies in supply chains and their effect on network development

Title variants
Languages of publication
A general supply chain functions as a closed cluster and consists of at least three companies: supplier, producer and buyer. In an optimal case the companies within a supply chain are well integrated, partnership rests on trust which results in common strategic decisions. Business practices show that there is a stronger company within the chain that uses its power position to influence network development. The objective of the research is to measure how and what kind of power position is needed to influence the supply chain. The hypothesis states, that power and network development are opposite effects in a supply chain. Statistical examination of data gained from 221 companies state that the company with power position has advantages if the supply chain extends. SPSS analysis proves that the hypothesis is false and opens a new direction of research. Companies within the supply chain have to cope with power structures while cooperating with each other. They tend to look for solutions to ease dependency. Using or misusing power has several factors; mainly they are inherited from the strongest link of the supply chain. This is usually a problem but the results of the statistical analysis show that still a win-win situation is needed for the companies in order to deepen the cooperation. To conclude this research the data shows that the goal is to be more competitive as a chain, not just as a company.
Physical description
  • Ayers J. (2001), Handbook of supply chain management, Boca Raton: St. Lucie Press.
  • Bachrach P., Baratz M.S. (1962), Two faces of power, “American Political Science Review”, Vol. 56, pp. 947-952.
  • Bencsik A. (2009), A tudásmenedzsment emberi oldala, Miskolc: Z-Press Kiadó.
  • Brown R. (2000), Clusters, supply chains and local embeddedness in fyrstad, “European Urban and Regional Studies”, London: SAGE Publications, pp. 291-305.
  • Business Dictionary (2013), (access 16.01.2013).
  • Chikán A. (2003), Vállalatgazdaságtan, Budapest: Aula Kiadó.
  • Faragó L. (2005), A jövőalkotás társadalomtechnikája, Budapest-Pécs: Dialóg Campus Kiadó, p. 126.
  • George D., Mallery P. (2005), SPSS for windows step by step, Boston: Pearson Education.
  • Handfield R.B., Nichols E.L. (1999), Introduction to supply chain management, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
  • Harnett D.L., Soni A.K. (1991), Statistical methods for business and economics, Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
  • Johnson G., Scholes K. (1997), Exploring corporate strategy, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
  • Józsa L. (2005), Marketingstratégia, Budapest: Akadémiai Könyvkiadó.
  • Lengyel I. (2010), Regionális gazdaságfejlesztés: Versenyképesség, klaszterek és alulról szerveződő stratégiák, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
  • Mandják T., Piricz N., Kővágó G. (2010), Üzleti kapcsolatok a magyarországi ellátási láncokban. – Új marketing világrend, c. konferencia, Budapest: Magyar MarketingSzövetség Marketing Oktatók Klubja.
  • Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2013), (access 16.01.2013).
  • Murdoch J. (2000), Networks – a New Paradigm of Rural Development? “Journal of Rural Studies. Elsevier“ Vol. 16, pp. 407-419.
  • Rechnitzer J., Smahó M. (2011), Területi politika, Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
  • Saunders M., Lewis P., Thornhill A. (2003), Research methods for business students, Harlow: FT Prentice Hall.
  • Szegedi Z., Prezenszki J. (2003), Logisztika-menedzsment, Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó.
  • Weber M. (1987), Adalékok Max Weber ‘Szociológiai alapfogalmak’ címû munkájának (1919-1920) értelmezéséhez, Max Weber: Gazdaság és társadalom, Budapest:Közgazdasági és Jogi Könyvkiadó.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.