Content area
Full Text
Introduction
There are a number of substantial contributions within the supply chain management literature that make explicit and implicit reference to the importance of context in generating theory and understanding the practice of supply chain management ([42] Mouritsen et al. , 2003; [12] Cox et al. , 2002). Some also reject what is termed the tyranny of best practice that prescribes one best way to characterise buyer and seller relationships - collaborative working ([9] Cox, 2001) or integration ([42] Mouritsen et al. , 2003). Such contextual thinking is also grounded within [56] Porter's (1985) wider grasp of contextual sensitivity, rationalised as the five forces that shape organisational strategy. This point is neatly summed up by [42] Mouritsen et al. (2003) with respect to supply chain management (SCM):
... 'best practice' in SCM should only be copied and implemented if the objective situational factors are exactly the same, which is very seldom the case. ([42] Mouritsen et al. , 2003)
Notably, [56] Porter's (1985) five forces relate to institutional structures and contextual factors that cannot be presumed to be consistent across industries. In turning their attention to the construction sector, [11] Cox and Ireland (2002) criticised the dominant thinking within the sector for lacking an understanding of similar contextual factors ([30] Ireland, 2004). Some of this criticism was argued to be based on the sectors allegiance to notions of best practice and a failure to understand the dynamics of industry structure. Such contextual insensitivity to the unique structure of industries and the relationship between industry structures and managerial practice is also reinforced and outlined in [17] Fernie et al. (2003) and [24] Green et al. (2004).
Intriguingly, the idea that disintegration and arms-length contractual relations may be appropriate characteristics for managing supply chains in specific circumstances is posited as the basis of future research by [42] Mouritsen et al. (2003). Such a position sharply contrasts with the dominant discourse of change (see [18] Fernie et al. , 2006) within the construction sector. The current discourse of change proposes the need for a journey away from adversarial attitudes towards enlightened co-operative relations and appears to demonize adversarial opportunistic behaviour (bad) over cooperative and collaborative behaviour. Such a journey is however considered to be problematic in that...