Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1 of 4
http://www.microlinks.org/print/452
5/27/2014 12:36 PM
2 of 4
http://www.microlinks.org/print/452
of governance: modular, relational, and captive. Network-style governance represents a situation in which the lead firm exercises power through coordination of
production vis--vis suppliers (to varying degrees), without any direct ownership of the firms.[5]
Market. Market governance involves transactions that are relatively simple, information on product specifications is easily transmitted, and producers can
make products with minimal input from buyers.
Modular. Modular governance occurs when a product requires the firms in the chain to undertake complex transactions that are relatively easy to codify.
Relational. In this network-style governance pattern, interactions between buyers and sellers are characterized by the transfer of information and embedded
services based on mutual reliance regulated through reputation, social and spatial proximity, family and ethnic ties, and the like.
Captive. In these chains, small suppliers are dependent on a few buyers that often wield a great deal of power and control. Such networks are frequently
characterized by a high degree of monitoring and control by the lead firm.
Hierarchy. Hierarchical governance describes chains that are characterized by vertical integration and managerial control within a set of lead firms that
develops and manufactures products in-house. This usually occurs when product specifications cannot be codified, products are complex, or highly competent
suppliers cannot be found.
Dynamism in Governance
If one of these three variables changes, then value chain governance patterns tend to shift in predictable ways. For example, if a new technology renders an
established codification scheme obsolete, modular value chains are likely to become more relational; and if competent suppliers cannot be found, captive networks
and even vertical integration would become more prevalent. Conversely, rising supplier competence might result in captive networks moving towards the relational
type, and better codification schemes set the stage for modular networks.
5/27/2014 12:36 PM
3 of 4
http://www.microlinks.org/print/452
The most common initial form of governance that lead firms establish with MSEs in developing countries is the captive form. In captive value chains, the lead firm
(typically a global buyer from the United States or Europe) exhibits a great deal of control over the actors in the chain. In contrast, relational structures are the least
likely to initially occur between developing country producers and global buyers due to the knowledge and skill gaps, as well as social and spatial divides. [7] [8]
The following are examples of changes in variables that result in a change in the type of firm governance:
Captive to relational
Captive to modular
Captive to market
Hierarchy to relational
Hierarchy to modular
Footnotes
1. Chain Governance and Upgrading: Taking Stock. Humphrey, J., and Schmitz, H. (2004). In H. Schmitz (Ed.), Local Enterprises in the Global Economy:
Issues of Governance and Upgrading (pp. 349-381). UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
2. Inter-firm Relationships in Global Value Chains: Trends in Chain Governance and Their Policy Implications. Humphrey, J. & Schmitz, H. (2008). International
Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation, and Development, 1(3), pp. 258-282.
3. Developing Country Firms in the World Economy: Governance and Upgrading in Global Value Chains, Humphrey, J., & Schmitz, H.; INEF Report No. 61
(2002). Duisburg: University of Duisburg.
4. Humphrey (2002)
5. Export-oriented Growth and Industrial Upgrading: Lessons from the Mexican Apparel Case, Gereffi, G.; World Bank case study for Uma Subramanian.
January 31; 2005.
6. The Governance of Global Value Chains. Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). Review of International Political Economy, 12(1), p. 89.
7. Governance and Upgrading: Linking Industrial Cluster Global Value Chain Research.Humphrey, J., & Schmitz, H.; IDS Working Paper (No. 120), Institute of
Development Studies; (2005).
8. Upgrading in Global Value Chains: Lessons from Latin American Clusters. Giuliani, E., Pietrobelli, C., & Rabellotti, R.; World Development, 33(4), 549-573;
(2005).
9. From Commodity Chains to Value Chains: Interdisciplinary Theory Building in an Age of Globalization, Sturgeon, T. In J. Bair (Ed.), Frontiers of Commodity
Chain Research. Stanford University Press; (2009).
10. Sturgeon (2009).
5/27/2014 12:36 PM
4 of 4
http://www.microlinks.org/print/452
COMMENTS (0)
5/27/2014 12:36 PM