Exploitative acts signal a competitive stance, with the signaler emphasizing its intent to seek concessions emphasizing its own interests, even if such concessions may not be in the interests of its counterpart. For example, the buyer may decide to reject a supplier contract, thus signaling it wants to discontinue the relationship. A supplier can also engage in an exploitative act like reclaiming goods it had supplied just before the buyer filed for bankruptcy. These exploitative motions signal a competitive intent and that the party filing the motion is pursuing its own interest rather than collaborating.
Accommodative acts signal a cooperative intent by making concessions to the counterpart. For example, a bankrupt buyer can file a motion that allows a supplier’s payment to be made immediately rather than waiting until the end of the bankruptcy process. Or a buyer can assume a supplier contract, which confirms the business relationship will continue. Likewise, suppliers can also engage in accommodative acts like filing a “no objection certificate” that supports the buyer’s acts. When one party engages in an accommodative act, it signals to the other party that it intends to collaborate. These acts indicate an emphasis on the relationship.
We study nearly 10,000 motions filed by 310 publicly listed buyers and their suppliers over 14 years and demonstrate the key role played by each party’s accommodative and exploitative acts in the buyer’s bankruptcy survival. We find that an increase in the rate of accommodative acts (accommodative velocity) improves the buyer’s bankruptcy survival. An increase in the rate of exploitative acts (exploitative velocity) has the opposite effect.
We find that an increase in the rate of accommodative acts improves the buyer’s bankruptcy survival. An increase in the rate of exploitative acts has the opposite effect.
From: Sudha Mani, Vivek Astvansh, and Kersi D. Antia, “Buyer–Supplier Relationship Dynamics in Buyers’ Bankruptcy Survival,” Journal of Marketing.
Here’s how the rate of accommodative versus exploitative acts affects bankruptcy survival:
- A 1% increase in a buyer’s accommodative velocity improves bankruptcy survival by 39%, while a 1% increase in a buyer’s exploitative velocity decreases bankruptcy survival by 33%.
- Similarly, a 1% increase in suppliers’ accommodative velocity increases the buyer’s survival by 32%, while a 1% increase in their exploitative velocity decreases survival by 28%.
- The positive effect of accommodative velocity on a buyer’s bankruptcy survival is more pronounced when the behavior is consistent.
U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings increased by 68% in the first half of 2023 from a year earlier, with companies such as Party City, Bed Bath & Beyond, and Envision Healthcare filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Sudha Mani is Associate Professor, Monash University, Australia.