Abstract
This article outlines the main methodological implications of using BloombergSPLC, FactSet Supply Chain Relationships, and Mergent Supply Chain for aca-demic purposes. These databases provide secondary data on buyer–supplierrelationships that have been publicly disclosed. Despite the growing use of thesedatabases in supply chain management (SCM) research, several potential valid-ity and reliability issues have not been systematically and openly addressed.This article thus expounds on challenges of using these databases that arecaused by (1) inconsistency between data, SCM constructs, and research ques-tions (data fit); (2) errors caused by the databases’classifications and assump-tions (data accuracy); and (3) limitations due to the inclusion of only publiclydisclosed buyer–supplier relationships involving specific focal firms (data repre-sentativeness). The analysis is based on a review of previous studies usingBloomberg SPLC, FactSet Supply Chain Relationships, and Mergent SupplyChain, publicly available materials, interviews with information service pro-viders, and the direct experience of the authors. Some solutions draw uponestablished methodological literature on the use of secondary data. The articleconcludes by providing summary guidelines and urging SCM researcherstoward greater methodological transparency when using these databases.