The paper supports the idea that competition is nowadays played among supply chains rather than among companies.

The competitive action has been mainly analyzed as a single actor' strategy, looking for gaining a competitive advantage over competitors (Porter, 2008). The competitive advantage is connected to distinctive resources and capabilities owned and/or controlled by the single actor and, especially, to how a company is capable to combine and connect such resources and capabilities reaching a distinctive positioning (Grant, 1991). By re-defining the most traditional view, Porter underlines how strategy has to look for uniqueness rather than to the search for being better than others in the market (Porter, 1996). Following such a view, scholars have addressed their attention to identify new sources of differential advantage, based on a at least temporary uniqueness. Such new sources mostly rely on intangible issues and on the capability to perform more efficiently and effectively market-driven processes (Day, 1994).

By shifting his view from tangible to intangible issues, from products to processes, literature has focalized on the company's network relationships as fundamental sources of differential advantage (Hakansson, Snehota, 1989; Dyer, Singh, 1998). The structure and dynamics of a company's business relationships, as well as the company's relational capabilities can sensibly make the difference between one company's performance and another's in the eye of the customer. Processes of value creation and delivery capable to meet customer expectations are only in part referred to activities performed by a single supplier company. Rather, they are connected to a number of companies that interact and connect their resources and capabilities in supply chains' contexts (Christopher, 2012; Cox, Lamming 1995).

The customer satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) can be addressed to a single supplier, notably the branded company that directly interfaces with the customer but it is strongly connected to how the branded company's supply chain has been able to mobilize resources, connect activities and exchange information. (Dyer, 1996; Gadde et al., 2010). In confronting and evaluating its perceptions in respect to two different brands a customer expresses his satisfaction (or not) towards the performance of two different supply chains (Hines, 2004). Taking a branded company, driving a supply chain (it is also known as strategic center or leader company), structuring, mobilizing and enabling effective and efficient business relationships with effective and efficient suppliers becomes the most important tool to gain market shares and keep customers satisfied. As network literature well explains, even if a company is a leader in a supply chain, business relationships with supplier companies can only be partially addressed and oriented, mobilized. (Ford, Hakansson, 2002).

The general aim of this paper is to discuss the impact of the processes of contractual formalization in business networks on the competitiveness of the supply chains. More precisely, the paper focalizes on a new tool introduced by Italian government, named "Contratto di Rete" (Network Contract - NC)1, that can be also useful to reinforce, orient and develop efficient and effective supply chains. The NC is not simply a type of strategic business alliance as a joint venture or a consortium can be (Guercini and Woodside 2012). It is a flexible tool that companies may use and it is a legal framework within which a network of companies can experiment various opportunities to innovate and to be more competitive. The NC sustains SMEs' development and competitiveness, especially in an international context. The NC also represents a new way of response for Italian SMEs to the current economic crisis, and to the challenges posed by an increasingly globalized and competitive market.

Small and medium enterprises represent a significant portion of the industry in most countries. This share is particularly relevant in the Italian reality. In Italy the weight very strong of the small business and the relative weakness of big business has recently been the focus of debate on the loss of competitiveness of the country's industrial system (Coltorti et al., 2013). Empirically, the paper studies the case of Gucci and its supply chains that have used the NC to reinforce and promote their positioning and their performance. In particular, sponsored by the Florentine brand of luxury and with the support of Confindustria Florence, three NC have been developed - P.re.Gi. , Almax and Fair – among the companies of three supply chains of small leather goods , bags and luggage . Each of the three networks includes companies that provide the complete production cycle, from cutting the skin and in one case even tanning to the final packaging of the object . The idea behind the signing of the “Contratto di rete” is come together to promote the transfer of innovation, knowledge transfer, know -how and training, but also to make economies of scale, improve access to credit, streamline costs and streamlining the supply chain, to ensure improved transparency in the flow of marginalization by the leader until the last sub-contractor. In each of the three networks, the parent company is different from Gucci that is left out of the contract. But, most interesting, Gucci will play the role of facilitator, subject to address and exchange of best practices, support and advice in the organizational, technological, financial and training issues.

By studying the three NC, the paper wants to emphasize the most important issues both supporting and limiting the action of supply chains as competitive sets. Based on our preliminary study of these Network Contracts, made possible by the availability of a large secondary material and by the research conducted by the authors both on the new legislative tool leading to formalized networks and on the business networks spread since long-term in the leather industry, we formulate some propositions which can be tested as hypothesis or considered as alternatives explanations of the possible role played by the NC to support the competitiveness of companies and supply chains.

The study of the Network Contract must take into account with attention to different layers it may impact and influence the competitiveness of the supply chains. At a first layer, it can be a tool of survival of present existing competitive ability and/or supporting the development of new capabilities. One aspect not mutually exclusive but complement the other. It can, however, be interesting to see logic sub-standing the formalization of existing networks and which are the objectives present in the declared intentions as well as those emerging from the observation of the behavior of the actors involved. You may recognize different levels of goal through the process of formalization. A first objective is linked to the fact that the importance of business networks makes them subject to specific policy of public policy makers. This makes the process of formalization important and useful for access policies to support networks. In this sense, a first proposition can be the following:
P1. The network contract represents a tool of formalization of existing business networks that allows first to make visible, perceptible such structures and enabling policy makers to support them through appropriate policies to support their growth or survival.

At a second layer, the formalization of existing networks can have organizational impacts. The recognition of a strategic center within the network, the formal creation of central coordination unit, or at least the existence of roles and shared resources can also substantially initiating organizational changes that make the network an entity able to access to larger economies and critical mass in respect to individual companies. The contractual formalization can produce effects on the roles of the individual actors involved and determine a different conduct of trials. This can allow the achievement of economies, the achievement of critical mass to trigger new initiatives, to realize innovations. Where networks emerge from declining districts the depletion of external economies can be a way to internalizing in formalized networks a part of the resources as an answer to the crisis of the external district. NC can thus support companies to benefit from the shift from external economies to internal “networks” economies In this sense, a second proposition can be the following:
P2. The formalization through contracts in business networks has organizational effects that result in new processes and methods of use of the resources that can affect the operation of the business network and generate economies.

At a third layer, in addition to affecting the relationship between the companies and the policy makers as well as the organizational processes in the business network, the formalization by NC can have effects on the contents of the strategy implemented by the firms involved and implemented by the whole chain. Particularly in the luxury sector competition among supply chains assumes importance in terms of exclusivity and the level of quality of the offered products. The contents of the strategy have systematically need to take account of the supply chains. This pushes systematically luxury brands (defined as actors) to search for forms of vertical control through ownership (acquisition of suppliers) and through contracts (contracts for exclusive supply). Consider the role of supply chain strategies related to issues such as: (1) ecological sustainability and social sustainability of productions from luxury brands; (2) country of origin and country of product design on which is affixed the company logo; (3) traceability and guarantees associated with the use of branded products etc. In this sense, a third proposition can be the following:
P3. The formalization of contracts in business networks has effect on the strategies declared and / or emerging from the behavior of the actors, both in terms of content and dynamics in the implementation.

The paper, through an in-depth analysis of the three networks connected to the Gucci’s supply chain, wants to test the hypotheses corresponding to the three propositions formulated above making a comparison between the supply networks before and after the formalization of the business relationships by the Network Contract.

The paper is structured as follows: in the first section the paper emphasizes the shift from a view of competition among companies to competition among supply chains and stresses major problems emerging in supply network dynamics. It then focalizes on the NC tool and its characteristics that can support supply network dynamics. The paper thus focuses on the three networks connected to the brand Gucci. In the final section, the paper summarizes the three mail levels of impact that the NC may have on the supply chains’ competitiveness: the supportive level, the organizational level and the strategic level. A comparison between the main issues affecting supply chains competitiveness in case of their formalized or not-formalized networks structure let draw final conclusions are on the role of Network contracts as positive and negative promoter on supply chains competitiveness.

• Annalisa Tunisini(Catholic University of Milan, Italy)
• Simone Guercini(University of Florence, Italy)