A follow-up survey to one published in the Summer 1991 issue of Sloan Management Review (“How Much Has Really Changed between U.S. Automakers and Their Suppliers?” by Susan Helper) shows that long-term, closely linked relationships have performance advantages for automakers and their suppliers in both the United States and Japan. Although such high-performance relationships with customers are still more prevalent in Japan than in the United States, the nature of supplier relations in the two countries is converging in some respects. The current survey includes more than 600 automotive suppliers in the United States and almost 500 suppliers in Japan.
1. K. Clark, “Project Scope and Project Performance: The Effect of Parts Strategy and Supplier Involvement on Product Development,” Management Science 35 (1989): 1237–1263.
2. T.G. Noordeweier, G. John, and J.R. Nevin, “Performance Outcomes of Purchasing Arrangements in Industrial Buyer-Vendor Relationships,” Journal of Marketing 54 (1990): 80–95.
3. J. Heide and G. John, “The Role of Dependence Balancing in Safeguarding Transaction-Specific Assets in Conventional Channels,” Journal of Marketing 54 (1988): 20–35.
4. S. Helper, “How Much Has Really Changed between U.S. Automakers and Their Suppliers?” Sloan Management Review, Summer 1991, pp. 15–28.
5. O. Williamson, Markets and Hierarchies (New York: Free Press, 1975).
6. A. Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1970);
S. Helper, “Strategy and Irreversibility in Supplier Relations: The Case of the U.S. Automobile Industry,” Business History Review, Winter 1991, pp. 781–824; and
7. M. Sako, Prices, Quality and Trust: Interfirm Relations in Britain and Japan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
8. Unless otherwise noted, all comparisons reported are statistically significant at the .05 level or better according to the Kruskal-Wallis test (a nonparametric version of the t-test). See:
W.J. Conover, Nonparametric Statistics (New York: John Wiley, 1971).
9. M. Lieberman, “The Diffusion of ‘Lean Manufacturing’ in the Japanese and U.S. Auto Industry” (Los Angeles, California: University of California, Anderson School of Management, working paper, 1994).
10. A percentage point change measures the difference between one rate and another rate. For example, the change between a 6 percent margin and a 4 percent margin is 2 percentage points.
The International Motor Vehicle Program at MIT sponsored the surveys. The Sloan Foundation and the Ameritech Foundation provided a large part of the funding. Helper did the North American survey with support from the Center for Regional Economic Issues at Case Western Reserve University. Sako did the Japanese survey with support from the Japan Auto Parts Industries Association (JAPIA) and the Economic Research Institute of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Machine Industry. The authors thank Mike Fogarty, Pat Coburn, Ardith Fogarty, Sylvia Brandt, Michele Lachman, Richard Parkin, Janine Dukes, Jennifer Redman, and Godfrey Chua in the United States; Akio Suzuki and members of the International Committee of JAPIA, Katsuji Ishiro and others at Kikai Shinko Kyokai Keizai Kenkyusho, Mamoru Hoshino of JAMA, and Hiroki Sato in Japan; and Karen Dennison in Britain.