外文翻譯和原文物流橫向合作的機遇和障礙

1、附件1: 外文資料翻譯譯文物流橫向合作的機遇和障礙Frans Cruijssen, Martine Cools, Wout Dullaert1 緒論全球市場的激烈競爭，產(chǎn)品生命周期的縮短以及顧客較高的服務(wù)期望已迫使托運人和物流服務(wù)提供商投資來建立彼此之間的更緊密和互惠互利的關(guān)系。例如縱向的合作，包括了供應(yīng)商，生產(chǎn)商，配送商，顧客和物流服務(wù)提供商，該理論被廣泛的學(xué)術(shù)研究所支持。Gibson et al. (2002)指出該研究主要在于鑒別潛在的機遇（例如Gentry, 1993），關(guān)鍵成功因素法（例如Tate, 1996）和合伙人選擇的標準。最普遍和研究最好的是關(guān)于托運人雇傭第三方物流服務(wù)提供商

2、來完成他們的物料管理和產(chǎn)品配送功能的全部或部分的功能的研究(Simchi-Levi et al., 1999)。Tyan et al. (2003)闡述了被第三方物流服務(wù)提供商整合的供應(yīng)鏈的優(yōu)勢，這種經(jīng)濟規(guī)模能夠讓他們獲得單個托運人所不能獲得的大規(guī)模的設(shè)施。Leahy et al. (1995)評定了托運人和第三方物流服務(wù)提供商之間縱向合作成功的決定性因素。橫向合作被European Union (2001)定義為市場上具有相同水平的公司在運作時的協(xié)調(diào)慣例。物流中的橫向合作所獲得的推動主要是在西歐。在比利時和荷蘭，歐洲物流中心的引力一書出版，作者在書中指出歐洲有30家正式的物流合伙企業(yè)。通過緊

3、密的合作，物流服務(wù)提供商的合伙人可以提高生產(chǎn)力，例如通過優(yōu)化運輸路線，減少空駛里程和降低非核心作業(yè)的成本來增加物流網(wǎng)絡(luò)的競爭力。橫向合作方面的物流文獻還比較地不成熟，雖然海洋運輸(see e.g. Shepperd and Seidman, 2001)和空運行業(yè)(Fan et al., 2001; Oum et al., 2002)方面的橫向合作的文獻比較普遍并且研究也非常的成熟，但是在物流橫向合作方面的文獻卻非常地匱乏。這個問題只被Bahrami (2003), Cruijssen and Salomon (2004), Erdmann(1999), and Vos et al. (2003

4、)研究過，他們研究的重點在于通過仿真研究來確定合作能夠帶來的潛在的節(jié)約的成本和列舉了有限的成功案例。本文闡述了物流橫向合作中潛在機遇以及在實踐中運行和維護物流合伙關(guān)系的主要的障礙，并對此進行了第一次大規(guī)模的實驗性研究。2 研究綜述雖然關(guān)于物流橫向合作方面的文獻比較匱乏，但是在自營公司之間的合作，比如戰(zhàn)略聯(lián)盟和共同經(jīng)營，這些經(jīng)驗已經(jīng)被收集到管理類文獻作為標準了。該文獻構(gòu)成了物流橫向合作的機遇和障礙的一系列研究的基礎(chǔ)。這些研究的發(fā)展是基于物流服務(wù)提供商大量的操作員的認識和見解的。這份調(diào)查中大量的物流服務(wù)提供商的總經(jīng)理被問及他們對這些研究的看法。2.1 機遇聯(lián)盟形成的背后的驅(qū)動力是聯(lián)盟成立后對每個合

5、伙人純粹的積極的影響(Parkhe, 1993)。通過合作，合伙人之間可以產(chǎn)生所謂的相關(guān)收益。Dyer and Singh (1998)定義相關(guān)收益為“在關(guān)系交流中連帶地產(chǎn)生的超常規(guī)的利潤，該利潤不能通過孤立的公司而只能通過聯(lián)盟中某個合伙人的特殊貢獻產(chǎn)生?！彼麄兊臓幾h主要集中在合作的公司能否通過特殊關(guān)系資產(chǎn)，信息共享程序，缺乏資源時的捐助和有效的管理來產(chǎn)生相關(guān)收益。 從一個物流文獻的上下文中我們得出相關(guān)收益可以是“有形的”（例如經(jīng)濟規(guī)模）和“無形的”（例如學(xué)習(xí)模型）。Bartlett and Ghoshal (2000)提出了可以讓參與的公司獲得經(jīng)濟規(guī)模利益或?qū)W習(xí)利益的三種方法，這三種方法分別

6、是：（1）共享他們的資源和集中精力從事核心業(yè)務(wù)；（2）分享其它參與公司的特殊的優(yōu)勢和技能；（3）通過彼此之間的貿(mào)易和資源的互補來達到共同獲利和消除復(fù)制的高額成本。Kogut (1988)根據(jù)小額交易可以減少合伙人交易的成本，增強合伙人的競爭力和市場的主導(dǎo)權(quán)，能夠滿足合伙人對組織知識的需求和學(xué)習(xí)等這些條件，總結(jié)了合作聯(lián)盟的優(yōu)勢。合作的潛在優(yōu)勢同樣被很多其他的作者提及和研究，例如Hagedoorn(1993), Hamel et al. (1989), Hennart (1988), Ohmae (1989) and Zineldin and Bredenlow (2003).這些高層次的合作機遇

7、為那些合作的物流服務(wù)提供商能夠獲得很多的特殊的機遇提供了理論依據(jù)?；谶@些機遇的討論，形成了下面很多的主張，這些主張涉及到成本和生產(chǎn)力，服務(wù)和市場形勢。2.1.1 成本和生產(chǎn)力上文已經(jīng)提到，橫向合作可以為合伙人提供一個組織學(xué)習(xí)和向其它擁有特殊技能和優(yōu)勢的合伙人學(xué)習(xí)的平臺(Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988)。通過這種方式，他們可以完善他們自己的運作方法，這也就暗示著橫向合作的物流服務(wù)提供商能夠增強他們的控制和降低供應(yīng)鏈成本的能力(Gibson et al., 2002)。此外，在非核心業(yè)務(wù)方面的橫向合作能夠提供潛在的共同采購（例如運輸工具，車上電腦和

8、燃料）的機會進而降低采購成本(Dyer and Singh, 1998)。根據(jù)核心和非核心以及采購的成本降低的機遇的研究可以得出下面三種觀點：（1）橫向合作可以提高公司核心業(yè)務(wù)的生產(chǎn)力，例如減少空駛，更好地使用倉儲設(shè)施等等。（2）橫向合作可以降低非核心業(yè)務(wù)的成本，例如組織安全培訓(xùn)，共享燃料設(shè)施等等。（3）橫向合作可以降低采購成本，例如運輸工具，車上電腦，燃料等等。2.1.2 服務(wù)合作的專業(yè)化對生產(chǎn)力的影響是眾所周知的。最優(yōu)秀的實踐價值鏈通過公司間的專業(yè)化進而到允許單獨的公司集中從事一些較窄范圍的活動以及與其他公司之間的復(fù)雜的交流來表現(xiàn)的(Alchian and Demsetz, 1972; D

9、yer, 1997)。通過這樣做，橫向合作不僅能夠帶來利益和協(xié)作效應(yīng)（例如規(guī)模經(jīng)濟，高素質(zhì)的勞動力，高的研究水平和高科技的使用權(quán)），還能夠以較低的成本帶來較大顧客附加價值的增加(Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003)。此外，聯(lián)盟還能夠使公司間相互學(xué)習(xí)彼此的技術(shù)和能力(Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988)，這也是另一種以較低的成本改進質(zhì)量的潛在的方法。我們綜合了關(guān)于顧客服務(wù)的橫向合作機遇的理論，得出了以下的兩個觀點：（4）物流服務(wù)提供商在拓寬他們的服務(wù)的同時還能夠從事專門的研究。（5）物流服務(wù)提供商能夠以較低的價格提供較高質(zhì)量的服務(wù)

10、，例如在速度方面，配送頻率方面，覆蓋的地理范圍方面以及配送時間的可靠性方面等等。2.1.3 市場形勢純粹的數(shù)量規(guī)模表明了當為大的工業(yè)托運人（例如在石油化工工業(yè)）提供物流服務(wù)時基于個體的單獨的物流服務(wù)提供商是禁止進入這樣一個服務(wù)鏈條中的。橫向合作聯(lián)盟是一個非常有用的工具，它能夠拓展可用的車隊，服務(wù)的范圍以及地理覆蓋范圍，同樣還能夠增加他們的顧客影響力(Bleeke and Ernst, 1995)。這個機遇在觀點（6）中被列了出來。觀點（7）反映了橫向合作作為在不確定市場狀況下保護公司利益和增強公司競爭力和市場主動權(quán)的一種服務(wù)方式的潛力(Kogut, 1988)。（6）橫向合作能夠使單獨的物流服

11、務(wù)提供商在更大的合同框架下為大的托運人提供服務(wù)。（7）橫向合作能夠幫助保護公司的市場份額。這七種關(guān)于橫向合作的機遇的觀點被總結(jié)在表1中。表1 關(guān)于橫向合作機遇的七種觀點編碼 觀點（1）橫向合作可以提高公司核心業(yè)務(wù)的生產(chǎn)力，例如減少空駛，更好地使用倉儲設(shè)施等等。（2）橫向合作可以降低非核心業(yè)務(wù)的成本，例如組織安全培訓(xùn)，共享燃料設(shè)施等等。（3）橫向合作可以降低采購成本，例如運輸工具，車上電腦，燃料等等。（4）物流服務(wù)提供商在拓寬他們的服務(wù)的同時還能夠從事專門的研究。（5）物流服務(wù)提供商能夠以較低的價格提供更高質(zhì)量的服務(wù)，例如在速度方面，配送頻率方面，覆蓋的地理范圍方面以及配送時間的可靠性方面等等。

12、（6）橫向合作能夠使單獨的物流服務(wù)提供商在更大的合同框架下為大的托運人提供服務(wù)。（7）橫向合作能夠幫助保護公司的市場份額。2.2 障礙文獻中很少有關(guān)注這種密切的合作關(guān)系的負擔和不好的方面(Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003)。橫向合作通常是作為一種不確定性的保證，而這種不確定性主要是指很難來策劃一些必需的業(yè)務(wù)和估量已實現(xiàn)的產(chǎn)出。因此擁有可信賴的關(guān)系就顯得非常重要了(van der Meer-Kooistra and Vosselman, 2000; Tomkins, 2001)，但是這種機遇的風險依然存在。這種相關(guān)風險的一個典型的來源就是合伙人的機會主義的行為，也就是該合

13、伙人不遵守該協(xié)作組織的規(guī)則(Williamson, 1985; Das and Teng, 1998)。我們找到了橫向合作中與障礙相關(guān)的四個方面的觀點：合伙人的選擇，利益的決定和分配，合伙人中不平等的談判地位以及信息和通訊技術(shù)。2.2.1 合伙人的選擇分析一個潛在的合伙人的戰(zhàn)略和組織的能力需要與它相關(guān)的物質(zhì)資產(chǎn)的數(shù)據(jù)，同樣還需要無形資產(chǎn)和組織能力方面的數(shù)據(jù)(Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000)。尋找潛在的貿(mào)易合伙人和評價他們的適合性和可靠性導(dǎo)致的這方面的研究成本成為中小型物流服務(wù)提供商參與橫向合作的一個巨大的障礙(Bleeke and Ernst, 1995; William

14、son, 1985; Hennart, 1993; North, 1990)。此外，最近的實驗性證據(jù)(Chalos and OConnor, 2004)已確定合伙人的不確定性是該組織管理復(fù)雜性的一個主要原因。物流服務(wù)提供商選擇合伙人的兩個障礙如下：（8）很難找到一個能夠跟自己在（非核心）核心業(yè)務(wù)方面合作的同等規(guī)模的物流服務(wù)提供商。（9）很難找到一個可靠的團體來協(xié)調(diào)合作使所有的參與者都滿意。2.2.2 利益的決定和分配大部分聯(lián)盟的狹窄范圍阻止了他們對這種組織的自然屬性，廣度，以及在合伙企業(yè)改革中可能產(chǎn)生的風險和酬金的分配，甚至對每個合伙人的角色和任務(wù)的定義的全面的理解(Bartlett and

15、Ghoshal, 2000)。預(yù)期和非預(yù)期的成本的公平分配的重要性同樣被強調(diào)在內(nèi)（Gibson et al. 2002)。觀點（10）,（11）,（12）包括了關(guān)于橫向合作的利益的決定和分配的阻礙因素。（10）由于橫向合作的原因合伙人很難預(yù)先決定利潤和運營收入。（11）合伙人很難事先保證對已分配工作的公平的利益分配。（12）一個公平的利益分配機制對一個成功的合伙企業(yè)的所有合伙人來說都是必要的。2.2.3 合伙人中不公平的談判地位Gibson et al. (2002)解釋了合伙人的相關(guān)議價能力是怎樣發(fā)展和演化的，而這正是理解一個聯(lián)盟是否有可能進行兼并的關(guān)鍵因素。相關(guān)的議價能力主要依靠三個因素：

16、合伙人最初的優(yōu)勢和劣勢，隨著時間的變化這些優(yōu)勢和劣勢是如何變化的以及競爭對手的發(fā)展?jié)摿?。得益于操作員的觀點，下面是三個關(guān)于合伙人中不公平談判地位導(dǎo)致的潛在的競爭對手的觀點：（13）當一個物流服務(wù)提供商和一個同等規(guī)模的公司合作時，它會發(fā)現(xiàn)辨別自己更加地困難。（14）隨著時間的推移，合伙企業(yè)中的小的公司可能會失去顧客并被完全地擠出市場。（15）當利益不能以一種公平的方式被分享時，其中較大的合伙人將成為最大的受益者。2.2.4 信息和通訊技術(shù)活躍在物流中的公司大部分都是一些中小型的公司(SMEs)。由于SMES有落后于信息和通訊技術(shù)系統(tǒng)的實施的趨勢(Gunasekaran and Ngai, 200

17、4)，這將阻礙那些需要大量數(shù)據(jù)交流的合作團體的形成。我們的操作員觀點表明信息和通訊技術(shù)主要是一個中等層次橫向合作組織協(xié)議的一個問題。低層次的橫向合作組織通常不需要特別的信息和通訊技術(shù)投資，而高層次的橫向合作組織能夠主動產(chǎn)生足夠的收入來補償所需的信息和通訊技術(shù)方面的投資。觀點(16)總結(jié)了信息和通訊技術(shù)實施的阻礙因素:(16)合作的形成受到所必需的信息和通訊投資的巨大的阻礙。本文的目的在于把物流公司的特征和他們對于那些被提出的橫向合作的機遇和障礙的態(tài)度聯(lián)系在一起。由于這是第一次把這方面的觀點呈現(xiàn)給大量的物流服務(wù)提供商，該研究中探測因素分析法被用來鑒別在一系列機遇和障礙的觀點中的并不引人注目的因素

18、。表2總結(jié)了在本部分提出的有關(guān)橫向合作障礙的九大觀點。表2 關(guān)于橫向合作障礙的觀點編碼 觀點（8）很難找到一個能夠跟自己在（非核心）核心業(yè)務(wù)方面合作的同等規(guī)模的物流服務(wù)提供商。（9）很難找到一個可靠的團體來協(xié)調(diào)合作使所有的參與者都滿意。（10）由于橫向合作的原因合伙人很難預(yù)先決定利潤和運營收入。（11）合伙人很難事先保證對已分配工作的公平的利益分配。（12）一個公平的利益分配機制對一個成功的合伙企業(yè)的所有合伙人來說都是必要的。（13）當一個物流服務(wù)提供商和一個同等規(guī)模的公司合作時，它會發(fā)現(xiàn)辨別自己更加地困難。（14）隨著時間的推移，合伙企業(yè)中的小的公司可能會失去顧客并被完全地擠出市場。（15）

19、當利益不能以一種公平的方式被分享時，其中較大的合伙人將成為最大的受益者。(16)合作的形成受到所必需的信息和通訊投資的巨大的阻礙。附件2：外文原文（復(fù)印件）原文出處：Source: Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportunities and impediments. Frans Cruijssen, Martine Cools, Wout Dullaert. Transportation Research Part E 43 (2007) 129142.Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportuni

20、ties and impediments1. Introduction Fierce competition in global markets, the introduction of products with shorter life cycles, and the heightened expectations of customers have forced shippers and Logistics Service Providers (LSPs) to invest in developing stronger and mutually benecial relationshi

21、ps with each other. Such as vertical cooperation, involving suppliers, manufacturers, distribution centers, customers and LSPs, is supported by extensive academic research. As indicated by Gibson et al. (2002), research has mainly focused on identifying potential benets (e.g. Gentry, 1993), the crit

22、ical success factors (e.g. Tate, 1996) and partner selection criteria. The most common and best-studied type of vertical cooperation involves shippers hiring third-party LSPs (3PLs) to perform all or part of their materials management and product distribution function (Simchi-Levi et al., 1999). Tya

23、n et al. (2003) describe the supply chain advantages of consolidation of logistics ows by 3PLs. The increased economies of scale make it for example possible to acquire large equipment that would have been too expensive for the individual shipper. Leahy et al. (1995) assess the determinants for a su

24、ccessful vertical cooperation between shippers and a 3PL.Horizontal cooperation is dened by the European Union (2001) as concerted practices between companies operating at the same level(s) in the market. Horizontal cooperation in logistics is mainly gaining momentum in Western Europe. In Belgium an

25、d the Netherlands, the European logistics centers of gravity, the authors are aware of over 30 formal logistics partnerships. Through close collaboration, the partnering LSPs aim at increasing productivity, e.g. by optimizing vehicle capacity utilization, reducing empty mileage and cutting costs of

26、non-core/supporting activities to increase the competitiveness of their logistics networks.The literature on horizontal cooperation in logistics is, however, still in its infancy. While for maritime shipping (see e.g. Shepperd and Seidman, 2001) and the airline industry (Fan et al., 2001; Oum et al.

27、, 2002) horizontal cooperation is quite common and well studied, the literature on horizontal logistics cooperation is scarce. This matter has only been studied by Bahrami (2003), Cruijssen and Salomon (2004), Erdmann(1999), and Vos et al. (2003), where the emphasis is on (1) quantifying the potenti

28、al cost savings through cooperation by means of simulation studies and on (2) reporting a limited number of successful cases.This paper describes the rst large-scale study on empirical evidence on the potential benets of horizontal cooperation in logistics, as well as on the major impediments for st

29、arting and maintaining logistics partnerships in practice. 2. Research propositionsAlthough the literature on horizontal cooperation in logistics is scarce, cooperation between autonomous rms, such as strategic alliances and joint ventures, has received extensive attention in the management literatu

30、re. This literature forms the basis of a set of propositions regarding opportunities and impediments for horizontal cooperation in logistics. The development of these propositions is also based on a series of ve pilot interviews with LSPs. For the survey a large number of managing directors of LSPs

31、were asked about their opinion on these propositions.2.1 OpportunitiesThe driving force behind the formation of alliances is each participants expectation of a net positive value to the expected alliance outcomes (Parkhe, 1993). By cooperating, partners can generate so-called relational rents. Dyer

32、and Singh (1998) dene relational rent as a supernormal prot jointly generated in an exchange relationship that cannot be generated by either rm in isolation and can only be created through the joint idiosyncratic contributions of the specic alliance partners. They argue that collaborating rms can ge

33、nerate relational rents through relation-specic assets, knowledge-sharing routines, complementary resource endowments and eective governance.In a logistics context, relational rents can be hard(e.g. economies of scale) and soft (e.g. learning). Bartlett and Ghoshal (2000) mention three ways in which

34、 strategic alliances and networks allow participating rms to reap the benets of scale economies or learning: by (1) pooling their resources and concentrating on (core) activities, by (2) sharing and leveraging the specic strengths and capabilities of the other participating rms, and by (3) trading d

35、ierent or complementary resources to achieve mutual gains and eliminate the high cost of duplication. Kogut (1988) summarizes the advantages of cooperative alliances in terms of reducing the transaction costs resulting from small number bargaining, enhancing the competitive position or market power

36、of the partners, and fullling the partners quest for organizational knowledge and learning. The potential advantages of cooperation have also been mentioned and studied by many other authors, e.g. Hagedoorn(1993), Hamel et al. (1989), Hennart (1988), Ohmae (1989) and Zineldin and Bredenlow (2003).Th

37、ese high-level opportunities of cooperation support the identication of a number of specic opportunities that cooperating LSPs can benet from. Based on a discussion of these benets, a number of propositions are formulated below. These propositions relate to Costs and Productivity, Service and Market

38、 position. Costs and ProductivityAs mentioned above, cooperation provides a platform for organizational learning, giving rms access to the skills and capabilities of their partners (Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988). In this way, they can improve their own operational processes. It implies th

39、at cooperating LSPs can increase their ability to control costs and to reduce the costs of the supply chain (Gibson et al., 2002). Moreover, collaboration on non-core activities oers the potential of joint purchases (e.g. of vehicles, onboard computers and fuel) in order to reduce the purchasing cos

40、ts (Dyer and Singh, 1998). The opportunities for cost reduction in terms of core and non-core activities and purchases are captured in the following three propositions:(1) Horizontal cooperation increases the companys productivity for core activities, e.g. decrease in empty hauling, better usage of

41、storage facilities etc.(2) Horizontal cooperation reduces the costs of non-core activities, e.g. organizing safety trainings, joint fuel facilities, etc.(3)Horizontal cooperation reduces purchasing costs, e.g. vehicles, onboard computers, fuel etc ServiceThe impact of cooperative specialization on p

42、roductivity is well known. Best practice value chains are characterized by interrm specialization allowing individual rms to focus on a narrow range of activities and engage in complex interactions with other rms (Alchian and Demsetz, 1972; Dyer, 1997).In doing so, cooperation not only oers benets a

43、nd synergy eects such as economies of scale, skilled labor force, high R&D level and access to superior technology, but also generates greater customer value added at lower cost (Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003). Moreover, alliances enable companies to learn from each others skills and capabilities

44、 (Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988), which is another potential source of quality improvement at lower costs. We integrated the opportunities of horizontal cooperation regarding customer service into the following two propositions:(4) LSPs can specialize while at the same time broadening thei

45、r services.(5) LSPs can oer better quality of service at lower costs, e.g. in terms of speed, frequency of deliveries, geographical coverage, reliability of delivery times etc. Market position The sheer size of the volumes involved in serving large industrial shippers (e.g. in the (petro) chemical i

46、ndustry) sometimes prohibits individual LSPs from entering the tendering process on an individual basis. Alliances are a useful tool to expand the available eet, service range and geographic coverage, and, as a result, to increase their customer reach (Bleeke and Ernst, 1995). This opportunity is ca

47、ptured in proposition(6). Proposition (7)reects the potential for horizontal cooperation to serve as a means to protect companies under uncertain market conditions and to enhance the competitive position or market power (Kogut, 1988)(6) Horizontal cooperation enables individual LSPs to tender with l

48、arge shippers on larger contracts.(7) Horizontal cooperation helps to protect the companys market share.The seven propositions regarding opportunities of horizontal cooperation are summarized in Table 1.Table 1Propositions about opportunities of horizontal cooperationCode Proposition(1) Horizontal c

49、ooperation increases the companys productivity for core activities, e.g. decrease in empty hauling, better usage of storage facilities etc.(2) Horizontal cooperation reduces the costs of non-core activities, e.g. organizing safety trainings, joint fuel facilities, etc.(3Horizontal cooperation reduce

50、s purchasing costs, e.g. vehicles, onboard computers, fuel etc(4)LSPs can specialize while at the same time broadening their services.(5) LSPs can oer better quality of service at lower costs, e.g. in terms of speed, frequency of deliveries, geographical coverage, reliability of delivery times etc.(

51、6)Horizontal cooperation enables individual LSPs to tender with large shippers on larger contracts.(7)Horizontal cooperation helps to protect the companys market share.2.2 ImpedimentsThe literature pays little attention to the burdens and dark sides of close relationships (Zineldin and Bredenlow, 20

52、03). Horizontal cooperation often is an uncertain undertaking in which it is dicult to plan the required activities or measure the realized output. Therefore, having a trustworthy relationship is vital(van der Meer-Kooistra and Vosselman, 2000; Tomkins, 2001), but the risk of opportunism remains rea

53、l. A typical source of relational risk is opportunistic behavior of the partners, i.e. actions of the partner that do not comply with the spirit of the cooperation (Williamson, 1985; Das and Teng, 1998). We develop propositions relating to impediments to horizontal cooperation in four areas: partner

54、 selection, determining and dividing the gains, unequal negotiation positions of partners, and Information and Communication Technology. Partner selectionAnalyzing a potential partners strategic and organizational capabilities requires data on its physical assets, as well as on less-tangible assets

55、and organizational capabilities (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000). The search costs incurred to nd potential trading partners and to evaluate their aptness and reliability can be a very big hurdle for small and medium sized LSPs (Bleeke and Ernst, 1995; Williamson, 1985; Hennart, 1993; North, 1990).Furth

56、ermore, recent empirical evidence (Chalos and OConnor, 2004) conrms that partner unreliability is a major source of the managerial complexity of cooperation. Two partner selection impediments for LSPs are formulated below:(8) It is hard to nd commensurable LSPs with whom it is possible to cooperate

57、for (non-)core activities.(9) It is hard to nd a reliable party that can coordinate the cooperation in such a way that all participants are satised. Determining and dividing the gainsThe narrow scope of most alliances prevents full understanding of the nature, extent, and distribution of risks or re

58、wards that might accrue in the course of the partnerships evolution, or even a clear denition of each partners roles and tasks (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000). The importance of a fair distribution of expected and unexpected costs is also stressed in Gibson et al. (2002). The propositions (10), (11), and(12) contain the impediments concerning the determination and division of gains from horizontal cooperation.(10)It is hard for the partners to determine the benets or operational savings due to horizontal cooperation beforehand.(11) Partners nd it hard to ensure a