IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v29y2005i1p19-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economists' perceptions versus managers' decisions: an experiment in transaction-cost analysis

Author

Listed:
  • James H. Love
  • Stephen Roper

Abstract

Are the perceptions of professional economists on transaction costs consistent with make-or-buy decisions made within firms? The answer may have important implications for transaction cost research. Data on firms' outsourcing during the new product development process are taken from a large-scale survey of UK, German and Irish manufacturing plants, and we test the consistency of these outsourcing decisions with the predictions derived from the transaction cost perceptions of a panel of economists. Little consistency is evident between actual outsourcing patterns and the predictions of the (Williamsonian) transactions cost model derived from the panel of economists. There is, however, evidence of a systematic pattern to the differences, suggesting that a competence or resource-based approach may be relevant to understanding firm outsourcing, and that firms are adopting a strategic approach to managing their external relationships. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • James H. Love & Stephen Roper, 2005. "Economists' perceptions versus managers' decisions: an experiment in transaction-cost analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 29(1), pages 19-36, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:29:y:2005:i:1:p:19-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bei001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Back, Yujin & Praveen Parboteeah, K. & Nam, Dae-il, 2014. "Innovation in Emerging Markets: The Role of Management Consulting Firms," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 390-405.
    2. Andræs Barge-Gil, 2013. "Open Strategies and Innovation Performance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 585-610, October.
    3. Loch, Adam & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Settre, Claire, 2018. "Private Transaction Costs of Water Trade in the Murray–Darling Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 560-573.
    4. Gooroochurn, Nishaal & Hanley, Aoife, 2007. "A tale of two literatures: Transaction costs and property rights in innovation outsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1483-1495, December.
    5. Poudeh, Hossein Dehghani & Cheshmberah, Mohsen & Torabi, Hassan & Karimi Gavareshki, Mohammad Hossein & Hosnavi, Reza, 2019. "Determining and prioritizing the factors influencing the outsourcing of Complex Product Systems R&D projects employing ANP and grey-DEMATEL method (case study: Aviation Industries Organization, Iran)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 57-68.
    6. Materia, Valentina & Pascucci, Stefano & Dries, Liesbeth, 2015. "Are in-house and outsourcing innovation strategies interlinked? Evidence from the European agri-food sector," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212449, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Pascucci, Stefano & Royer, Annie & Bijman, Jos, 2011. "Should I Make or Should I Buy? Innovation Strategies and Governance Structures in the Italian Food Sector," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(2), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Luigi Cantone & Pierpaolo Testa & Svend Hollensen & Giuseppe Fabio Cantone, 2019. "Outsourcing New Product Development Fostered By Disruptive Technological Innovation: A Decision-Making Model," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(01), pages 1-45, January.
    9. Mettepenningen, E. & Beckmann, V. & Eggers, J., 2011. "Public transaction costs of agri-environmental schemes and their determinants--Analysing stakeholders' involvement and perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 641-650, February.
    10. Laspia, Alessandro & Sansone, Giuliano & Landoni, Paolo & Racanelli, Domenico & Bartezzaghi, Emilio, 2021. "The organization of innovation services in science and technology parks: Evidence from a multi-case study analysis in Europe," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:29:y:2005:i:1:p:19-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.