4. Research Model
Mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) were used based on the
pragmatistic paradigm
Generalization Hypotesis
Inductive Deductive
Model Model
Case Studies Inquiry
Qualitative Methodology Quantitative Methodology
4
5. Research Model
Qualitative Methodology – Case Studies
Generalization -Exploratory case structured
interview;
Inductive - convenience sampling;
Model
-Unit of analysis: Evolution of Port
wine distribution of a specific
Case Studies company in key markets:
(UK, France and Netherlands).
Qualitative Methodology
5
7. Research Model
Quantitative Methodology – Questionnaire
Hypothesis Convenience Sample.
Port Wine Producers and
Inductive distribution companies.
Model
Sample: 101 companies
Inquiry Returned questionnaires: 61
(61,4%)
Quantitative Methodology
7
8. Hypothesis testing
- The dependent variable was categorised as either cooperation or non-cooperation.
- The existence of a strong correlation between the dependent variable and the
independent variables may invalidate the use of a linear regression model. To check
for multicollinearity between independent variables, the correlation matrix of
independent variables in Table 1 was constructed. The highest value being
0.249, between the independent variables ‘adaptation’ and ‘trust’, it is clear that
correlations are in general low and multicollinearity is not a problem.
9. Hypothesis testing
-After five interactions, the model correctly predicted 83.6% of the
observations, demonstrating that the results were very satisfactory.
-Good results were also achieved for sensitivity (dependent variable = 1 =
cooperation) and specificity (dependent variable = 0 = non-cooperation).
- Overall, the estimated equation is 18% better at predicting responses than the
constant probability model.
10. Hypothesis testing
-Results of Probit analysis, based on the z statistic.
- The values of between 0.2 and 0.4 can be considered very good, according to
McFaden (1976), our model yielding a result of 0.367.
11. Hypothesis testing
Hyp. Description Result.
H1 Supply chain management capabilities promote cooperation between channel members. not conf.
H2 The exercise of coercive power exerts a negative impact on cooperation amongst channel members not conf.
H3 Persistent and intense conflict constitutes an obstacle to cooperation in marketing channels confirmed
H4 The greater the level of trust, the greater the propensity to cooperate amongst channel members confirmed
H5 Increased interdependence enhances cooperation between channel members. not conf.
H6 The greater the capacity to adapt, the greater the willingness to cooperate amongst channel members confirmed
H7 The presence of a foreign sales representative does not constrain cooperation in the marketing channel confirmed
H8 Opportunistic behaviour has a negative impact on the development of cooperative relationships not conf.
13. Conclusions
-Taking into account the strategic alternatives available for the distribution of
Port, it seems important that the industry diversifies its options by embracing
multiple channels;
- Conflict, when permanent and intense, inhibits the development of
cooperative relationships;
- Trust is likely to solve conflicts;
- A combination of trust and adaptation increases the potential for
cooperation;
- Cooperation can be considered as an important means of developing skills
and resources, which can then be applied to existing transactional
relationships.
