外文翻譯和原文__物流橫向合作的機(jī)遇和障礙[1].doc

附件1: 外文資料翻譯譯文物流橫向合作的機(jī)遇和障礙Frans Cruijssen, Martine Cools, Wout Dullaert1 緒論全球市場(chǎng)的激烈競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，產(chǎn)品生命周期的縮短以及顧客期望較高的服務(wù)已迫使托運(yùn)人和物流服務(wù)提供商投資來(lái)建立彼此之間密切的互惠互利關(guān)系。例如縱向的合作，包括了供應(yīng)商，生產(chǎn)商，配送商，顧客和物流服務(wù)提供商，該理論被廣泛的學(xué)術(shù)研究所支持。Gibson et al. (2002)指出該研究主要在于鑒別潛在的機(jī)遇（例如Gentry, 1993），關(guān)鍵成功因素法（例如Tate, 1996）和合伙人選擇的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。最普遍和最好的研究是關(guān)于托運(yùn)人雇傭第三方物流服務(wù)提供商來(lái)完成他們的物料管理和產(chǎn)品配送業(yè)務(wù)的全部或部分業(yè)務(wù)的研究(Simchi-Levi et al., 1999)。Tyan et al. (2003)闡述了被第三方物流服務(wù)提供商整合的供應(yīng)鏈的優(yōu)勢(shì)，這種經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模能夠讓他們獲得單個(gè)托運(yùn)人所不能獲得的大規(guī)模的設(shè)施。Leahy et al. (1995)評(píng)定了托運(yùn)人和第三方物流服務(wù)提供商之間縱向合作成功的決定性因素。橫向合作被European Union (2001)定義為市場(chǎng)上具有相同水平的公司在運(yùn)作時(shí)的協(xié)調(diào)慣例。物流中的橫向合作所獲得的推動(dòng)主要是在西歐。在比利時(shí)和荷蘭，歐洲物流中心的引力一書(shū)中，作者在書(shū)中指出歐洲有30家正式的物流合伙企業(yè)。通過(guò)緊密的合作，物流服務(wù)提供商的合伙人可以提高生產(chǎn)力，例如通過(guò)優(yōu)化運(yùn)輸路線，減少空運(yùn)里程和降低非核心作業(yè)的成本來(lái)增加物流網(wǎng)絡(luò)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。橫向合作方面的物流文獻(xiàn)還比較地不成熟，雖然海洋運(yùn)輸(see e.g. Shepperd and Seidman, 2001)和空運(yùn)行業(yè)(Fan et al., 2001; Oum et al., 2002)方面的橫向合作的文獻(xiàn)比較普遍并且研究也非常的成熟，但是在物流橫向合作方面的文獻(xiàn)卻非常地匱乏。這個(gè)問(wèn)題只被Bahrami (2003), Cruijssen and Salomon (2004), Erdmann(1999), and Vos et al. (2003)研究過(guò)，他們研究的重點(diǎn)在于通過(guò)仿真研究來(lái)確定合作能夠帶來(lái)潛在的節(jié)約成本和列舉了一些成功的案例。本文闡述了物流橫向合作中潛在機(jī)遇以及在實(shí)踐中運(yùn)作中和維護(hù)物流合伙關(guān)系的主要障礙，并對(duì)此進(jìn)行了第一次大規(guī)模的實(shí)驗(yàn)性研究。2 研究綜述雖然關(guān)于物流橫向合作方面的文獻(xiàn)比較匱乏，但是在自營(yíng)公司之間的合作，比如戰(zhàn)略聯(lián)盟和共同經(jīng)營(yíng)，這些經(jīng)驗(yàn)已經(jīng)被收集到管理類文獻(xiàn)作為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)了。該文獻(xiàn)構(gòu)成了物流橫向合作的機(jī)遇和障礙的一系列研究的基礎(chǔ)。這項(xiàng)研究的發(fā)展是基于物流服務(wù)提供商大量操作員的認(rèn)識(shí)和見(jiàn)解。這份調(diào)查中有很多物流服務(wù)提供商的總經(jīng)理闡述了他們對(duì)這項(xiàng)研究的看法。2.1 機(jī)遇聯(lián)盟形成的背后的驅(qū)動(dòng)力是聯(lián)盟成立后對(duì)每個(gè)合伙人純粹的積極的影響(Parkhe, 1993)。通過(guò)合作，合伙人之間可以產(chǎn)生所謂的相關(guān)收益。Dyer and Singh (1998)定義相關(guān)收益為“在關(guān)系交流中連帶地產(chǎn)生的超常規(guī)的利潤(rùn)，該利潤(rùn)不能通過(guò)孤立的公司而只能通過(guò)聯(lián)盟中某個(gè)合伙人的特殊貢獻(xiàn)產(chǎn)生?！彼麄兊臓?zhēng)議主要集中在合作的公司能否通過(guò)特殊關(guān)系資產(chǎn)，信息共享程序，缺乏資源時(shí)的捐助和有效的管理來(lái)產(chǎn)生相關(guān)收益。 從一個(gè)物流文獻(xiàn)的上下文中我們得出相關(guān)收益可以是“有形的”（例如經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模）和“無(wú)形的”（例如學(xué)習(xí)模型）。Bartlett and Ghoshal (2000)提出了可以讓參與的公司獲得經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)模利益或?qū)W習(xí)利益的三種方法，這三種方法分別是：（1）共享他們的資源和集中精力從事核心業(yè)務(wù)；（2）分享其它參與公司的特殊優(yōu)勢(shì)和技能；（3）通過(guò)彼此之間的貿(mào)易和資源的互補(bǔ)來(lái)達(dá)到共同獲利和消除復(fù)制的高額成本。Kogut (1988)根據(jù)小額交易可以減少合伙人交易的成本，增強(qiáng)合伙人的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力和市場(chǎng)的主導(dǎo)權(quán)，能夠滿足合伙人對(duì)組織知識(shí)的需求和學(xué)習(xí)等這些條件，總結(jié)了合作聯(lián)盟的優(yōu)勢(shì)。合作的潛在優(yōu)勢(shì)同樣被很多其他的作者提及和研究，例如Hagedoorn(1993), Hamel et al. (1989), Hennart (1988), Ohmae (1989) and Zineldin and Bredenlow (2003).這些高層次的合作機(jī)遇為那些想合作的物流服務(wù)提供商能夠獲得很多特殊機(jī)遇提供了理論依據(jù)。基于這些機(jī)遇的討論，形成了下面很多的主張，這些主張涉及到成本和生產(chǎn)力，服務(wù)和市場(chǎng)形勢(shì)。2.1.1 成本和生產(chǎn)力上文已經(jīng)提到，橫向合作可以為合伙人提供一個(gè)組織學(xué)習(xí)和向其它擁有特殊技能和優(yōu)勢(shì)的合伙人學(xué)習(xí)的平臺(tái)(Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988)。通過(guò)這種方式，他們可以完善他們自己的運(yùn)作方法，這也就暗示著橫向合作的物流服務(wù)提供商能夠增強(qiáng)他們控制能力和降低供應(yīng)鏈成本的能力(Gibson et al., 2002)。此外，在非核心業(yè)務(wù)方面的橫向合作能夠提供潛在的共同采購(gòu)（例如運(yùn)輸工具，車上電腦和燃料）的機(jī)會(huì)進(jìn)而降低采購(gòu)成本(Dyer and Singh, 1998)。根據(jù)核心業(yè)務(wù)和非核心業(yè)務(wù)以及降低采購(gòu)成本降低的研究可以得出下面三種觀點(diǎn)：（1）橫向合作可以提高公司核心業(yè)務(wù)的生產(chǎn)力，例如減少空駛，更好地使用倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)設(shè)施等等。（2）橫向合作可以降低非核心業(yè)務(wù)的成本，例如組織安全培訓(xùn)，共享燃料設(shè)施等等。（3）橫向合作可以降低采購(gòu)成本，例如運(yùn)輸工具，車上電腦，燃料等等。2.1.2 服務(wù)合作的專業(yè)化對(duì)生產(chǎn)力的影響是眾所周知的。最優(yōu)秀的實(shí)踐價(jià)值鏈可以通過(guò)公司間的專業(yè)化，進(jìn)而到允許單獨(dú)的公司集中從事一些簡(jiǎn)單的活動(dòng)以及與其他公司之間的復(fù)雜的交流來(lái)表現(xiàn)(Alchian and Demsetz, 1972; Dyer, 1997)。通過(guò)這中做法，橫向合作不僅能夠帶來(lái)利益和協(xié)作效應(yīng)（例如規(guī)模經(jīng)濟(jì)，高素質(zhì)的勞動(dòng)力，較高的研究水平和高科技的使用權(quán)），還能夠以較低的成本帶來(lái)較大的顧客附加價(jià)值的增加(Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003)。此外，聯(lián)盟還能夠使公司間相互學(xué)習(xí)彼此的技術(shù)和能力(Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988)，這也是另一種以較低的成本改進(jìn)質(zhì)量的潛在的方法。我們綜合了關(guān)于顧客服務(wù)的橫向合作機(jī)遇的理論，得出了以下的兩個(gè)觀點(diǎn)：（4）物流服務(wù)提供商在拓寬他們服務(wù)的同時(shí)還能夠從事專門(mén)的研究。（5）物流服務(wù)提供商能夠以較低的價(jià)格提供較高質(zhì)量的服務(wù)，例如在速度方面，配送頻率方面，覆蓋的地理范圍方面以及配送時(shí)間的可靠性方面等等。2.1.3 市場(chǎng)形勢(shì)純粹的數(shù)量規(guī)模說(shuō)明了，當(dāng)為大的工業(yè)托運(yùn)人（例如在石油化工工業(yè)）提供物流服務(wù)時(shí)，個(gè)體的單獨(dú)的物流服務(wù)提供商是禁止進(jìn)入這個(gè)服務(wù)鏈條中的。橫向合作聯(lián)盟是一個(gè)非常有用的工具，它能夠拓展可用的車隊(duì)，服務(wù)的范圍以及地理覆蓋范圍，同樣還能夠增加他們的顧客影響力(Bleeke and Ernst, 1995)。這個(gè)機(jī)遇在觀點(diǎn)（6）中被列了出來(lái)。觀點(diǎn)（7）反映了橫向合作是在不確定市場(chǎng)狀況下保護(hù)公司利益、增強(qiáng)公司競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力和市場(chǎng)主動(dòng)權(quán)的一種服務(wù)方式。 (Kogut, 1988)。（6）橫向合作能夠使單獨(dú)的物流服務(wù)提供商在更大的合同框架下為大的托運(yùn)人提供服務(wù)。（7）橫向合作能夠幫助保護(hù)公司的市場(chǎng)份額。這七種關(guān)于橫向合作的機(jī)遇的觀點(diǎn)被總結(jié)在表1中。表1 關(guān)于橫向合作機(jī)遇的七種觀點(diǎn)編碼 觀點(diǎn)（1）橫向合作可以提高公司核心業(yè)務(wù)的生產(chǎn)力，例如減少空駛，更好地使用倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)設(shè)施等等。（2）橫向合作可以降低非核心業(yè)務(wù)的成本，例如組織安全培訓(xùn)，共享燃料設(shè)施等等。（3）橫向合作可以降低采購(gòu)成本，例如運(yùn)輸工具，車上電腦，燃料等等。（4）物流服務(wù)提供商在拓寬他們的服務(wù)的同時(shí)還能夠從事專門(mén)的研究。（5）物流服務(wù)提供商能夠以較低的價(jià)格提供更高質(zhì)量的服務(wù)，例如在速度方面，配送頻率方面，覆蓋的地理范圍方面以及配送時(shí)間的可靠性方面等等。（6）橫向合作能夠使單獨(dú)的物流服務(wù)提供商在更大的合同框架下為大的托運(yùn)人提供服務(wù)。（7）橫向合作能夠幫助保護(hù)公司的市場(chǎng)份額。2.2 障礙文獻(xiàn)中很少有關(guān)注這種密切合作關(guān)系的負(fù)擔(dān)和不好的方面(Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003)。橫向合作通常是作為一種不確定性的保證，而這種不確定性主要是指很難來(lái)策劃一些必需的業(yè)務(wù)和估量已實(shí)現(xiàn)的產(chǎn)出。因此擁有可信賴的關(guān)系就顯得非常重要了(van der Meer-Kooistra and Vosselman, 2000; Tomkins, 2001)，但是這種機(jī)遇的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)依然存在。這種相關(guān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的一個(gè)典型的來(lái)源就是合伙人的機(jī)會(huì)主義的行為，也就是該合伙人不遵守該協(xié)作組織的規(guī)則(Williamson, 1985; Das and Teng, 1998)。我們找到了橫向合作中與障礙相關(guān)的四個(gè)方面的觀點(diǎn)：合伙人的選擇，利益的決定和分配，合伙人中不平等的談判地位以及信息和通訊技術(shù)。2.2.1 合伙人的選擇分析一個(gè)潛在的合伙人的戰(zhàn)略和組織的能力是需要與它相關(guān)的物質(zhì)資產(chǎn)的數(shù)據(jù)，同樣還需要無(wú)形資產(chǎn)和組織能力方面的數(shù)據(jù)(Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000)。尋找潛在的貿(mào)易合伙人和評(píng)價(jià)他們的適合性和可靠性，是成為中小型物流服務(wù)提供商參與橫向合作的一個(gè)巨大障礙(Bleeke and Ernst, 1995; Williamson, 1985; Hennart, 1993; North, 1990)。此外，最近的實(shí)驗(yàn)證據(jù)(Chalos and OConnor, 2004)證明了合伙人的不確定性，是使該組織管理復(fù)雜性的一個(gè)主要原因。物流服務(wù)提供商選擇合伙人的兩個(gè)障礙如下：（8）很難找到一個(gè)同等規(guī)模，能夠跟自己在（非核心）核心業(yè)務(wù)方面合作的物流服務(wù)提供商。（9）很難找到一個(gè)可靠的團(tuán)體來(lái)協(xié)調(diào)合作，使所有的參與者都滿意。2.2.2 利益的決定和分配大部分聯(lián)盟的狹窄范圍阻止了他們對(duì)這種組織的自然屬性，廣度，以及在合伙企業(yè)改革中可能產(chǎn)生的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和酬金的分配，甚至阻止了對(duì)每個(gè)合伙人的角色和任務(wù)定義的全面理解(Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000)。預(yù)期和非預(yù)期的成本的公平分配的重要性同樣被強(qiáng)調(diào)在內(nèi)（Gibson et al. 2002)。觀點(diǎn)（10）,（11）,（12）包括了關(guān)于橫向合作利益的決定和分配的阻礙因素。（10）由于橫向合作的原因合伙人很難預(yù)先決定利潤(rùn)和運(yùn)營(yíng)收入。（11）合伙人事先很難保證對(duì)分配的工作的利益公平分配。（12）一個(gè)公平的利益分配原則對(duì)一個(gè)成功的合伙企業(yè)的所有合伙人來(lái)說(shuō)都是必要的。2.2.3 合伙人中不公平的談判地位Gibson et al. (2002)解釋了合伙人的相關(guān)議價(jià)能力是怎樣發(fā)展和演化的，而這正是理解一個(gè)聯(lián)盟是否有可能進(jìn)行兼并的關(guān)鍵因素。相關(guān)的議價(jià)能力主要依靠三個(gè)因素：合伙人最初的優(yōu)勢(shì)和劣勢(shì)，隨著時(shí)間的變化這些優(yōu)勢(shì)和劣勢(shì)是如何變化的以及競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的發(fā)展?jié)摿?。得益于操作員的觀點(diǎn)，下面是三個(gè)關(guān)于合伙人中不公平談判地位導(dǎo)致的潛在的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的觀點(diǎn)：（13）當(dāng)一個(gè)物流服務(wù)提供商和一個(gè)同等規(guī)模的公司合作時(shí)，它會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)辨別自己更加地困難。（14）隨著時(shí)間的推移，合伙企業(yè)中的小的公司可能會(huì)失去顧客并被完全地?cái)D出市場(chǎng)。（15）當(dāng)利益不能以一種公平的方式被分享時(shí)，其中較大的合伙人將成為最大的受益者。2.2.4 信息和通訊技術(shù)活躍在物流中的公司大部分都是一些中小型的公司(SMEs)。由于SMES有落后于信息和通訊技術(shù)系統(tǒng)的實(shí)施的趨勢(shì)(Gunasekaran and Ngai, 2004)，這將阻礙那些需要大量數(shù)據(jù)交流的合作團(tuán)體的形成。我們的操作員觀點(diǎn)表明信息和通訊技術(shù)主要是一個(gè)中等層次橫向合作組織協(xié)議的一個(gè)問(wèn)題。低層次的橫向合作組織通常不需要特別的信息和通訊技術(shù)投資，而高層次的橫向合作組織能夠主動(dòng)產(chǎn)生足夠的收入來(lái)補(bǔ)償所需的信息和通訊技術(shù)方面的投資。觀點(diǎn)(16)總結(jié)了信息和通訊技術(shù)實(shí)施的阻礙因素:(16)合作的形成受到所必需的信息和通訊投資的巨大的阻礙。本文的目的在于把物流公司的特征和他們對(duì)于那些被提出的橫向合作的機(jī)遇和障礙的態(tài)度聯(lián)系在一起。由于這是第一次把這方面的觀點(diǎn)呈現(xiàn)給大量的物流服務(wù)提供商，該研究中探測(cè)因素分析法被用來(lái)鑒別在一系列機(jī)遇和障礙的觀點(diǎn)中的并不引人注目的因素。表2總結(jié)了在本部分提出的有關(guān)橫向合作障礙的九大觀點(diǎn)。表2 關(guān)于橫向合作障礙的觀點(diǎn)編碼 觀點(diǎn)（8）很難找到一個(gè)能夠跟自己在（非核心）核心業(yè)務(wù)方面合作的同等規(guī)模的物流服務(wù)提供商。（9）很難找到一個(gè)可靠的團(tuán)體來(lái)協(xié)調(diào)合作使所有的參與者都滿意。（10）由于橫向合作的原因合伙人很難預(yù)先決定利潤(rùn)和運(yùn)營(yíng)收入。（11）合伙人很難事先保證對(duì)已分配工作的公平的利益分配。（12）一個(gè)公平的利益分配機(jī)制對(duì)一個(gè)成功的合伙企業(yè)的所有合伙人來(lái)說(shuō)都是必要的。（13）當(dāng)一個(gè)物流服務(wù)提供商和一個(gè)同等規(guī)模的公司合作時(shí)，它會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)辨別自己更加地困難。（14）隨著時(shí)間的推移，合伙企業(yè)中的小的公司可能會(huì)失去顧客并被完全地?cái)D出市場(chǎng)。（15）當(dāng)利益不能以一種公平的方式被分享時(shí)，其中較大的合伙人將成為最大的受益者。(16)合作的形成受到所必需的信息和通訊投資的巨大的阻礙。附件2：外文原文原文出處：Source: Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportunities and impediments. Frans Cruijssen, Martine Cools, Wout Dullaert. Transportation Research Part E 43 (2007) 129142.Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportunities and impediments1. Introduction Fierce competition in global markets, the introduction of products with shorter life cycles, and the heightened expectations of customers have forced shippers and Logistics Service Providers (LSPs) to invest in developing stronger and mutually benecial relationships with each other. Such as vertical cooperation, involving suppliers, manufacturers, distribution centers, customers and LSPs, is supported by extensive academic research. As indicated by Gibson et al. (2002), research has mainly focused on identifying potential benets (e.g. Gentry, 1993), the critical success factors (e.g. Tate, 1996) and partner selection criteria. The most common and best-studied type of vertical cooperation involves shippers hiring third-party LSPs (3PLs) to perform all or part of their materials management and product distribution function (Simchi-Levi et al., 1999). Tyan et al. (2003) describe the supply chain advantages of consolidation of logistics ows by 3PLs. The increased economies of scale make it for example possible to acquire large equipment that would have been too expensive for the individual shipper. Leahy et al. (1995) assess the determinants for a successful vertical cooperation between shippers and a 3PL.Horizontal cooperation is dened by the European Union (2001) as concerted practices between companies operating at the same level(s) in the market. Horizontal cooperation in logistics is mainly gaining momentum in Western Europe. In Belgium and the Netherlands, the European logistics centers of gravity, the authors are aware of over 30 formal logistics partnerships. Through close collaboration, the partnering LSPs aim at increasing productivity, e.g. by optimizing vehicle capacity utilization, reducing empty mileage and cutting costs of non-core/supporting activities to increase the competitiveness of their logistics networks.The literature on horizontal cooperation in logistics is, however, still in its infancy. While for maritime shipping (see e.g. Shepperd and Seidman, 2001) and the airline industry (Fan et al., 2001; Oum et al., 2002) horizontal cooperation is quite common and well studied, the literature on horizontal logistics cooperation is scarce. This matter has only been studied by Bahrami (2003), Cruijssen and Salomon (2004), Erdmann(1999), and Vos et al. (2003), where the emphasis is on (1) quantifying the potential cost savings through cooperation by means of simulation studies and on (2) reporting a limited number of successful cases.This paper describes the rst large-scale study on empirical evidence on the potential benets of horizontal cooperation in logistics, as well as on the major impediments for starting and maintaining logistics partnerships in practice. 2. Research propositionsAlthough the literature on horizontal cooperation in logistics is scarce, cooperation between autonomous rms, such as strategic alliances and joint ventures, has received extensive attention in the management literature. This literature forms the basis of a set of propositions regarding opportunities and impediments for horizontal cooperation in logistics. The development of these propositions is also based on a series of ve pilot interviews with LSPs. For the survey a large number of managing directors of LSPs were asked about their opinion on these propositions.2.1 OpportunitiesThe driving force behind the formation of alliances is each participants expectation of a net positive value to the expected alliance outcomes (Parkhe, 1993). By cooperating, partners can generate so-called relational rents. Dyer and Singh (1998) dene relational rent as a supernormal prot jointly generated in an exchange relationship that cannot be generated by either rm in isolation and can only be created through the joint idiosyncratic contributions of the specic alliance partners. They argue that collaborating rms can generate relational rents through relation-specic assets, knowledge-sharing routines, complementary resource endowments and eective governance.In a logistics context, relational rents can be hard(e.g. economies of scale) and soft (e.g. learning). Bartlett and Ghoshal (2000) mention three ways in which strategic alliances and networks allow participating rms to reap the benets of scale economies or learning: by (1) pooling their resources and concentrating on (core) activities, by (2) sharing and leveraging the specic strengths and capabilities of the other participating rms, and by (3) trading dierent or complementary resources to achieve mutual gains and eliminate the high cost of duplication. Kogut (1988) summarizes the advantages of cooperative alliances in terms of reducing the transaction costs resulting from small number bargaining, enhancing the competitive position or market power of the partners, and fullling the partners quest for organizational knowledge and learning. The potential advantages of cooperation have also been mentioned and studied by many other authors, e.g. Hagedoorn(1993), Hamel et al. (1989), Hennart (1988), Ohmae (1989) and Zineldin and Bredenlow (2003).These high-level opportunities of cooperation support the identication of a number of specic opportunities that cooperating LSPs can benet from. Based on a discussion of these benets, a number of propositions are formulated below. These propositions relate to Costs and Productivity, Service and Market position.2.1.1 Costs and ProductivityAs mentioned above, cooperation provides a platform for organizational learning, giving rms access to the skills and capabilities of their partners (Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988). In this way, they can improve their own operational processes. It implies that cooperating LSPs can increase their ability to control costs and to reduce the costs of the supply chain (Gibson et al., 2002). Moreover, collaboration on non-core activities oers the potential of joint purchases (e.g. of vehicles, onboard computers and fuel) in order to reduce the purchasing costs (Dyer and Singh, 1998). The opportunities for cost reduction in terms of core and non-core activities and purchases are captured in the following three propositions:(1) Horizontal cooperation increases the companys productivity for core activities, e.g. decrease in empty hauling, better usage of storage facilities etc.(2) Horizontal cooperation reduces the costs of non-core activities, e.g. organizing safety trainings, joint fuel facilities, etc.(3)Horizontal cooperation reduces purchasing costs, e.g. vehicles, onboard computers, fuel etc2.1.2 ServiceThe impact of cooperative specialization on productivity is well known. Best practice value chains are characterized by interrm specialization allowing individual rms to focus on a narrow range of activities and engage in complex interactions with other rms (Alchian and Demsetz, 1972; Dyer, 1997).In doing so, cooperation not only oers benets and synergy eects such as economies of scale, skilled labor force, high R&D level and access to superior technology, but also generates greater customer value added at lower cost (Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003). Moreover, alliances enable companies to learn from each others skills and capabilities (Hamel, 1991; Kogut, 1988; Westney, 1988), which is another potential source of quality improvement at lower costs. We integrated the opportunities of horizontal cooperation regarding customer service into the following two propositions:(4) LSPs can specialize while at the same time broadening their services.(5) LSPs can oer better quality of service at lower costs, e.g. in terms of speed, frequency of deliveries, geographical coverage, reliability of delivery times etc.2.1.3 Market position The sheer size of the volumes involved in serving large industrial shippers (e.g. in the (petro) chemical industry) sometimes prohibits individual LSPs from entering the tendering process on an individual basis. Alliances are a useful tool to expand the available eet, service range and geographic coverage, and, as a result, to increase their customer reach (Bleeke and Ernst, 1995). This opportunity is captured in proposition(6). Proposition (7)reects the potential for horizontal cooperation to serve as a means to protect companies under uncertain market conditions and to enhance the competitive position or market power (Kogut, 1988)(6) Horizontal cooperation enables individual LSPs to tender with large shippers on larger contracts.(7) Horizontal cooperation helps to protect the companys market share.The seven propositions regarding opportunities of horizontal cooperation are summarized in Table 1.Table 1Propositions about opportunities of horizontal cooperationCode Proposition(1) Horizontal cooperation increases the companys productivity for core activities, e.g. decrease in empty hauling, better usage of storage facilities etc.(2) Horizontal cooperation reduces the costs of non-core activities, e.g. organizing safety trainings, joint fuel facilities, etc.(3Horizontal cooperation reduces purchasing costs, e.g. vehicles, onboard computers, fuel etc(4)LSPs can specialize while at the same time broadening their services.(5) LSPs can oer better quality of service at lower costs, e.g. in terms of speed, frequency of deliveries, geographical coverage, reliability of delivery times etc.(6)Horizontal cooperation enables individual LSPs to tender with large shippers on larger contracts.(7)Horizontal cooperation helps to protect the companys market share.2.2 ImpedimentsThe literature pays little attention to the burdens and dark sides of close relationships (Zineldin and Bredenlow, 2003). Horizontal cooperation often is an uncertain undertaking in which it is dicult to plan the required activities or measure the realized output. Therefore, having a trustworthy relationship is vital(van der Meer-Kooistra and Vosselman, 2000; Tomkins, 2001), but the risk of opportunism remains real. A typical source of relational risk is opportunistic behavior of the partners, i.e. actions of the partner that do not comply with the spirit of the cooperation (Williamson, 1985; Das and Teng, 1998). We develop propositions relating to impediments to horizontal cooperation in four areas: partner selection, determining and dividing the gains, unequal negotiation positions of partners, and Information and Communication Technology.2.2.1 Partner selectionAnalyzing a potential partners strategic and organizational capabilities requires data on its physical assets, as well as on less-tangible assets and organizational capabilities (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000). The search costs incurred to nd potential trading partners and to evaluate their aptness and reliability can be a very big hurdle for small and medium sized LSPs (Bleeke and Ernst, 1995; Williamson, 1985; Hennart, 1993; North, 1990).Furthermore, recent empirical evidence (Chalos and OConnor, 2004) conrms that partner unreliability is a major source of the managerial complexity of cooperation. Two partner selection impediments for LSPs are formulated below:(8) It is hard to nd commensurable LSPs with whom it is possible to cooperate for (non-)core activities.(9) It is hard to nd a reliable party that can coordinate the cooperation in such a way that all participants are satised.2.2.2 Determining and dividing the gainsThe narrow scope of most alliances prevents full understanding of the nature, extent, and distribution of risks or rewards that might accrue in the course of the partnerships evolution, or even a clear denition of each partners roles and tasks (Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2000). The importance of a fair distribution of expected and unexpected costs is also stressed in Gibson et al. (2002). The propositions (10), (11), and(12) contain the impediments concerning the determination and division of gains from horizontal cooperation.(10)It is hard for the partners to determine the benets or operational savings due to horizontal cooperation beforehand.(11) Partners nd it hard to ensure a