Social interdependence theory is based on the understanding that the composition of the cluster decides the collaborations in that cluster and thusly influences the result. The assumptions are that the errand must be sufficiently basic and the members smartly sufficient that there were no representative distinctions between the members. Participation and rivalry are depicted in it’s unadulterated structure hence, the initial theory solely works with complete rivalry or complete agreeable circumstances. The supposition that is made is that all members exert effort on personal interest (Johnson and Johnson, 2005; Jongman, 2017). Asch (1952) as cited by Jongman (2017) states that there is a contrast between personal interest and selfishness. Personal interest can incorporate one’s own objective and that of others while narrow-mindedness exclusively centers around self-benefit. The theory accepts that all members have equivalent power or, if nothing else, the view of equivalent power. The way that all members will not ever have completely equivalent power, in actuality, does not make any difference for social interdependence (Jongman, 2017). There needs to be the view of interdependence. As expressed by Morton Deutsch in his rough law of social relations, the trademark cycles and impacts evoked by a given kind of friendly interdependence likewise will generally inspire that sort of friendly relationship, and an ordinary impact will prompt the other normal impacts (Deutsch, 1973).
Collaboration, in this way, prompts and is instigated by a direction towards upgrading shared power as opposed to an emphasis on power contrasts (Deutsch, 2011).
65
Morton Deutsch created two sorts of social interdependence and a sort that portrays itself by the shortfall of social association: positive reliance (cooperative) and negative association (competition). Both these kinds of social association are portrayed by one or the other positive or adverse objective reliance. At the point when there is a shortfall of objective reliance there is additionally a shortfall of social relationship (Jongman, 2017). This structure is called: no- relationship or no interdependence (individualistic endeavors). Positive reliance is the point at which the insight is that the ideal result can be accomplished if all individuals from the SC accomplish their objectives. Negative association is the point at which the insight is that on the off chance that one of the individuals from the SC arrives at its objective the others can no more, completely, achieve their objective (Jongman, 2017). Positive association brings about advancement of one another's prosperity which prompts higher efficiency and accomplishment, more convinced connections among people and more noteworthy mental well-being and prosperity. No-Association prompts little communication among people and brings down efficiency and accomplishment, more negative connections among people, and lower mental well-being and prosperity (Johnson and Johnson, 1989). Only positive and negative social association are applicable to the theory of social interdependence on the grounds that no-reliance does not prompt agreeable or competitive collaborations.
66
Figure 5: Overview of Social Interdependence Theory (Jongman, 2017).
The aftereffects of positive reliance or negative association are accomplished by actions and this is dictated by the connection patterns and mental procedures. These actions can be either effective or bungling, as depicted in Figure 5. Effective actions increment the individual's possibility of arriving at his/her objective. While bungling actions diminish the opportunity of the individual arriving at his/her objective (Jongman, 2017). At the point when there is negative association members will be helped by their own successful activities, impeded by different members’ effective activities, helped by different members bungling activities and blocked by their own bungling activities. This is on the grounds that only one individual can completely accomplish their objective and any effective activity of one individual attempting to arrive at this objective will diminish the possibilities of the others attempting to arrive at this objective (Deutsch, 1949).
67
At the point when there is positive relationship members will be helped by their own effective activities and their colleagues’ successful activities, and frustrated by their own and their members bungling activities. The group will possibly arrive at the objective when all work has been completed hence any activity that postpones this (bungling) will defer the entire group and any compelling activity from any of the colleagues will draw them all nearer to the objective (Jongman, 2017).
Interdependence has been portrayed in SCM to an extremely restricted degree and only in an intra-hierarchical scope, examining how departments inside a firm rely upon each other.
Interdependence in the SC has somewhat been managed as far as how the firms are successively reliant and, in this manner, need to co-ordinate their tasks while relationship among chains has been marginally addressed in the SCM writing (Jongman, 2017). Endeavours to enhance individual SC’s by disregarding the relationships and interdependence among chains, may hamper the proficiency somewhere else in the network, which might call for responses. Thus, interdependence among departments in an organization should be focused on as part of SCM so the SC can be fully optimized and well-functioning. This theoretical framework is used in this study to evaluate interdependence among different departments at DSA, and to provide suggestions for improving interdependence for the optimisation of the SC.