Dependence as a strategic option for firms: A contribution to resource dependence theory

Empirical studies to understand the nature of the dependence are insufficient within the Resource Dependence Theory (RDT). In the literature, there is no study discussing the reason "why dependent organizations intend to stay within the dependence-power relationship despite their relative disadvantageous position in that relationship". Studies have usually focused on "how dependent firms can change their position in dependence relationships". Therefore, the literature has been mainly shaped within the framework of the strategic actions undertaken by dependent organizations to change the structure of dependence rather than the development of understanding on the nature of dependence. This tendency indicates that "power" and being "powerful" are taken as references. This has also limited the relationship between dependence-strategy. Moving from this gap in literature, in this study, it was focused on dependent organizations' reasons for staying within the dependence relationship in a way to be an expansion for the dependence classification in RDT. Accordingly, "the likelihood of dependence as a strategic option" was discussed. It was necessary to create a theoretical framework to be able to empirically address the likelihood of dependence as a strategic option. For this purpose, it was first discussed "the likelihood of dependence as a strategic option" based on the meanings attributed to dependence by major organizational theories. However, it was seen that there was no possibility to create such a theoretical framework based on the explanation and implications of organizational theories. Therefore, by using the discourses of strategic management, a theoretical framework specific to the study was developed. In the framework, the themes related to the likelihood of dependence as a strategic option and then the indicators for each theme were created, and the categories were created by classifying the indicators. The methodology section was designed as a Multiple Qualitative Case Study on suppliers in the automotive industry to make the empirical crosscheck of the theoretical framework. The themes/categories within the theoretical framework were guided in the collection and analysis of data and in the interpretation of findings. The interviews and secondary data were used in the collection of data. The purposeful sampling technique was adopted to determine the sample firms and the people in these firms. In this context, interviews were conducted with the general managers and/or owners of nine automotive supplier firms. Directed Qualitative Content Analysis was used since the themes and categories were guided in the analysis of data. As a result of the analyzes, all of the themes and categories in the theoretical framework were found empirically. Furthermore, two new codes from direct data were identified. According to findings, it was observed that the advantages that dependent organizations provided from dependence relationship under asymmetric conditions provided competitive advantage and sustainability for them. Thus, it was concluded that dependence could be a strategic option for dependent organizations under asymmetric conditions. As a result of the study, an expansion proposal was suggested for the dependence distinction of the RDT. According to RDT, it is assumed that dependent organizations will intend to get rid of the relationship due to the challenging effects they are exposed to in asymmetric conditions. According to the results of this study, contrary to the assumptions of the theory, it was seen that it was theoretically and empirically possible that dependence could be a strategic option under asymmetric dependence conditions. From this point of view, the current dependence distinction in the form of symmetric-asymmetric in the RDT was expanded as "strategic options" through asymmetric dependence.