As one would expect from Wolfgang Ulaga and Andreas Eggert this is an excellent paper that identifies that established models of buyer-seller relationships do not reflect managerial emphasis on supplier performance evaluation when modelling business relationships.
The paper proposes that relationship value should be included as a key constituent in such models.
Here we see more support for t adding relationship value to the ballance sheet.
The paper aims to explore the construct's links with key constituents of relationship quality, i.e. commitment, satisfaction, and trust which is, to my mind the wronge direction because of the level of supposition in the implied questions (do we really 'have' to trust always?).
The findings suggest that relationship value is an antecedent to relationship quality and behavioural outcomes in the nomological network of relationship marketing. This is a problem for them because they keep tieing it back to marketing which is constantly being disintermediated. Better if they sought to PR solution.
Value displays a stronger impact on satisfaction than on commitment and trust, they say. "Value also directly impacts a customer's intention to expand business with a supplier. In turn, its impact on the propensity to leave a relationship is mediated by relationship quality. Contrary to previous research, trust does not appear in this study as an antecedent of behavioural outcomes, but as a mediator of the satisfaction-commitment link."
When the goal is to increase business with an existing customer, managers should focus on relationship value. In turn, when managers are concerned with the risk of customers leaving a relationship, they should focus on relationship quality. Trust appears as an important ingredient in stabilising existing business relationships."
Source:
Title: Relationship value and relationship quality: Broadening the nomological network of business-to-business relationships
Author(s): Wolfgang Ulaga, Andreas Eggert
Journal: European Journal of Marketing
ISSN: 0309-0566
Year: 2006 Volume: 40 Issue: 3/4 Page: - 327
No comments:
Post a Comment