Skip to main content

Table 3 Descriptive results: changes of suppliers between 2006 and 2011, distribution of firms by revenue categories and by revenue dynamics

From: Analyzing the coevolution of interorganizational networks and organizational performance: Automakers’ production networks in Japan

  Count
Network dynamics
 Whole network density in 2006 0.045
 Whole network density in 2011a 0.059
 Average number of suppliers in 2006 4.50
 Average number of suppliers in 2011a 5.88
 Preserved supply relationship 388
 New suppliers 131
 Abandoned suppliers 38
 Total of changes 169
 Jaccard index 0.697
 Missing links in 2006 0%
 Missing links in 2011 11.7%
RPE performance categories
 Low revenue firms in 2006 (logRPE < 10.5) 21
 Middle revenue firms in 2006 (10.5 < =logRPE < 11.5) 62
 High revenue firms in 2006 (logRPE > =11.5) 16
 NA in 2006 1
 Low revenue firms in 2011 (logRPE < 10.5) 25
 Middle revenue firms in 2011 (10.5 < =logRPE < 11.5) 55
 High revenue firms in 2011 (logRPE > =11.5) 12
 NA in 2011 8
ROS performance categories
 Loss-making firms in 2006 (ROS < 0) 12
 Middle return firms in 2006 (0 < =ROS < =0.03) 59
 High return firms in 2006 (ROS > 0.03) 29
 Loss-making firms in 2011 (ROS < 0) 27
 Middle return firms in 2011 (0 < =ROS < =0.03) 48
 High return firms in 2011 (ROS > 0.03) 25
  1. aThe network metrics in this table were calculated after the imputation of 2006 values for the 11.7% missing values in 2011