Abstract
Business relationships provide the means to create and appropriate superior value in business markets. However, despite the proliferation of research on the phenomenon, many questions remain unaddressed. Previous work focused almost exclusively on value after its creation and its sharing between the two exchange partners. Consequently, the appropriation of value as well as its interaction with value creation remains relatively unknown. Similarly, a few studies have examined the role of relational variables and power asymmetry in customer–supplier exchange relationships. To fill this gap, this study aims to examine the influence of relationship quality and power on value creation and appropriation and ultimately, on satisfaction and relationship continuity. Based on the theory of social exchange, this study proposes a conceptual model, which positions value creation and appropriation as central variables in the nomological network of business relationships. A quantitative study of 174 suppliers was carried out in order to compare the theoretical model with the empirical reality. The results obtained show that the relationship quality promotes greater value creation and appropriation in ongoing business relationships. As for power, its influence differs depending on how it is exercised within the relationship. Moreover, the appropriation of value remains the main driver of partner satisfaction, a sine qua non condition for the continuity of the relationship. This present research contributes to a better understanding of value creation-appropriation in ongoing business relationships. By strategically managing their customer–supplier relationships, managers can create and capture greater value and gain a competitive advantage.
Appendix 1. Item formulations
TRUST | |
Trust 1 | Our main customer kept promises it made to our firm |
Trust 2 | Our main customer was always honest to us. |
Trust 3 | We believed the information that our main customer provided us. |
Trust 4 | Our main customer was genuinely concerned that our business succeeded. |
Trust 5 | When making important decisions, our main customer considered our welfare as well as its own. |
Trust 6 | We trusted our main customer keeps our best interests in mind. |
Trust 7 | Our main customer was trustworthy. |
COMMITMENT | |
COMMIT1 | The relationship with our main customer is something to which we are very committed |
COMMIT2 | The relationship with our main customer is very important to our business |
COMMIT3 | The relationship with our main customer is something our business intends to maintain indefinitely |
COMMIT4 | The relationship with our main customer is very much like being family |
COMMIT5 | The relationship with our main customer is something our business really cares about |
COMMIT6 | The relationship with our main customer deserves our business’ maximum effort to maintain |
COMMUNICATION | |
COMMIT1 | In this relationship, it is expected that any information that might help our main customer will be provided to them |
COMMIT2 | Exchange of information in this relationship takes place frequently and informally and not only according to a pre-specified agreement |
COMMIT3 | It is expected that the parties will provide proprietary information if it can help the other party |
COMMIT4 | It is expected that we will keep each other informed about events or changes that affect the other party |
COMMIT5 | The communication effort between our main customer and our firm involves many inter-firm contacts |
COMMIT6 | Exchange of information in this relationship takes place in a timely manner |
COERCIVE POWER | |
CPW1 | Failure to comply with the requests of our main customer will result in financial and other penalties against our company. |
CPW2 | Our main customer threatens to withdraw from what they originally promised if we do not comply with their request. |
CPW3 | Our main customer threatens to take legal action if we do not comply with their requests. |
CPW4 | Our main customer withholds important support for our firm, in requesting compliance with their demand. |
CPW5 | Our main customer threatens to deal with another supplier, in order to make us submit to their demand. |
NON-COERCIVE POWER | |
NCPW1 | Our main customer offers specific incentives to us when we are reluctant to cooperate with them. |
NCPW2 | Our main customer has the upper hand in the relationship due to power granted to them by the contract. |
NCPW3 | Our main customer demands our compliance because of knowing that we appreciate and admire them. |
NCPW4 | Our main customer use their unique competence to make our company accept their recommendations |
NCPW5 | Our main customer partner withholds critical information concerning the relationship to better control our company. |
VALUE CREATION AND VALUE APPROPRIATION | |
Input supplier | Our company’s contributions to the relationship |
Input customer | Customer X’s contributions to the relationship |
Outcome supplier | The outcomes we received from the relationship |
Outcome customer | The outcomes Customer X received from the relationship |
Tangible input supplier | Our company’s tangible (financial and personnel) contributions to the relationship |
Tangible input customer | Customer X’s tangible (financial and personnel) contributions to the relationship |
Tangible outcome supplier | The tangible (financial) outcomes we received from the relationship |
Tangible outcome customer | The tangible (financial) outcomes customer X received from the relationship |
Intangible input supplier | Our company’s intangible (know-how and patents) contributions to the relationship |
Intangible input customer | Customer X’s intangible (know-how and patents) contributions to the relationship |
Intangible outcome supplier | The intangible (know-how and patents) outcomes we received from the relationship |
Intangible outcome customer | The intangible (know-how and patents) outcomes customer X received from the relationship |
Relational satisfaction | |
SATISFAC1 | We were very satisfied with the relationship with our main customer |
SATISFAC2 | We were pleased to work with our main customer |
SATISFAC3 | The relationship with our main customer was very favorable for us |
Relationship continuity | |
CONTIN1 | We expect our relationship with our main customer to continue for a long time |
CONTIN2 | Renewal of relationship with our main customer is virtually automatic |
CONTIN3 | It is unlikely that our firm will still be doing business with our main customer in two years |
Appendix 2. Measurement model results
Construct name/items | Factor loading | Cronbach alpha | Composite reliability | AVE |
Trust | 0.887 | 0.912 | 0.596 | |
TRUST1 | 0.793 | |||
TRUST2 | 0.725 | |||
TRUST3 | 0.765 | |||
TRUST4 | 0.728 | |||
TRUST5 | 0.803 | |||
TRUST6 | 0.794 | |||
TRUST7 | 0.791 | |||
Commitment | 0.886 | 0.917 | 0.689 | |
COMMIT1 | 0.828 | |||
COMMIT2 | 0.857 | |||
COMMIT3 | 0.868 | |||
COMMIT4 | 0.756 | |||
COMMIT6 | 0.838 | |||
Communication | 0.865 | 0.903 | 0.653 | |
COMM2 | 0.700 | |||
COMM3 | 0.770 | |||
COMM4 | 0.875 | |||
COMM5 | 0.799 | |||
COMM6 | 0.883 | |||
Relationship quality | – | 0.893 | 0.857 | |
TRUST | 0.846 | |||
COMMITMENT | 0.868 | |||
COMMUNICATION | 0.859 | |||
Coercive power | 0.867 | 0.903 | 0.652 | |
CPW1 | 0.788 | |||
CPW2 | 0.888 | |||
CPW3 | 0.815 | |||
CPW4 | 0.761 | |||
CPW5 | 0.778 | |||
Non-coercive power | 0.739 | 0.848 | 0.650 | |
NCPW1 | 0.780 | |||
NCPW3 | 0.829 | |||
NCPW4 | 0.808 | |||
Value creation | 0.948 | 0.975 | 0.950 | |
VALUE1 | 0.975 | |||
VALUE2 | 0.975 | |||
Value appropriation | 0.915 | 0.959 | 0.921 | |
VAL SUPL1 | 0.959 | |||
VAL SUPL2 | 0.961 | |||
Satisfaction | 0.914 | 0.946 | 0.853 | |
SATISFAC1 | 0.898 | |||
SATISFAC2 | 0.951 | |||
SATISFAC3 | 0.921 | |||
Relationship continuity | 0.826 | 0.896 | 0.741 | |
CONTIN1 | 0.878 | |||
CONTIN2 | 0.849 | |||
CONTIN3 | 0.856 |
Appendix 3. Discriminant validity (Cross-loading)
Value appropriation | Communication | Trust | Relationship continuity | Value creation | Commitment | Coercive power | Non Coercive power | Relationship quality | Satisfaction | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VAL SUPL 1 | 0.959 | 0.318 | 0.347 | 0.438 | 0.808 | 0.287 | −0.191 | 0.179 | 0.373 | 0.490 |
VAL SUPL 2 | 0.961 | 0.280 | 0.350 | 0.420 | 0.854 | 0.221 | −0.292 | 0.221 | 0.335 | 0.478 |
COMM2 | 0.275 | 0.700 | 0.458 | 0.325 | 0.309 | 0.453 | −0.243 | 0.049 | 0.619 | 0.240 |
COMM2 | 0.275 | 0.700 | 0.458 | 0.325 | 0.309 | 0.453 | −0.243 | 0.049 | 0.619 | 0.240 |
COMM3 | 0.318 | 0.770 | 0.441 | 0.364 | 0.292 | 0.555 | −0.194 | 0.059 | 0.675 | 0.402 |
COMM3 | 0.318 | 0.770 | 0.441 | 0.364 | 0.292 | 0.555 | −0.194 | 0.059 | 0.675 | 0.402 |
COMM4 | 0.265 | 0.875 | 0.490 | 0.340 | 0.309 | 0.647 | −0.136 | 0.048 | 0.768 | 0.313 |
COMM4 | 0.265 | 0.875 | 0.490 | 0.340 | 0.309 | 0.647 | −0.136 | 0.048 | 0.768 | 0.313 |
COMM5 | 0.191 | 0.800 | 0.427 | 0.212 | 0.214 | 0.554 | 0.023 | 0.206 | 0.678 | 0.233 |
COMM5 | 0.191 | 0.800 | 0.427 | 0.212 | 0.214 | 0.554 | 0.023 | 0.206 | 0.678 | 0.233 |
COMM6 | 0.217 | 0.883 | 0.449 | 0.279 | 0.212 | 0.584 | −0.030 | 0.096 | 0.729 | 0.293 |
COMM6 | 0.217 | 0.883 | 0.449 | 0.279 | 0.212 | 0.584 | −0.030 | 0.096 | 0.729 | 0.293 |
TRUST1 | 0.248 | 0.508 | 0.794 | 0.318 | 0.302 | 0.495 | −0.147 | 0.104 | 0.712 | 0.424 |
TRUST 1 | 0.248 | 0.508 | 0.794 | 0.318 | 0.302 | 0.495 | −0.147 | 0.104 | 0.712 | 0.424 |
TRUST 2 | 0.238 | 0.365 | 0.725 | 0.373 | 0.247 | 0.467 | −0.328 | 0.088 | 0.620 | 0.393 |
TRUST 2 | 0.238 | 0.365 | 0.725 | 0.373 | 0.247 | 0.467 | −0.328 | 0.088 | 0.620 | 0.393 |
TRUST 3 | 0.274 | 0.463 | 0.765 | 0.289 | 0.321 | 0.503 | −0.277 | 0.159 | 0.686 | 0.371 |
TRUST 3 | 0.274 | 0.463 | 0.765 | 0.289 | 0.321 | 0.503 | −0.277 | 0.159 | 0.686 | 0.371 |
TRUST 4 | 0.227 | 0.396 | 0.728 | 0.302 | 0.248 | 0.355 | −0.294 | 0.095 | 0.590 | 0.351 |
TRUST 4 | 0.227 | 0.396 | 0.728 | 0.302 | 0.248 | 0.355 | −0.294 | 0.095 | 0.590 | 0.351 |
TRUST 5 | 0.311 | 0.386 | 0.803 | 0.251 | 0.328 | 0.304 | −0.285 | 0.286 | 0.601 | 0.464 |
TRUST 5 | 0.311 | 0.386 | 0.803 | 0.251 | 0.328 | 0.304 | −0.285 | 0.286 | 0.601 | 0.464 |
TRUST 6 | 0.361 | 0.438 | 0.794 | 0.314 | 0.373 | 0.431 | −0.279 | 0.259 | 0.663 | 0.451 |
TRUST 6 | 0.361 | 0.438 | 0.794 | 0.314 | 0.373 | 0.431 | −0.279 | 0.259 | 0.663 | 0.451 |
TRUST 7 | 0.302 | 0.452 | 0.791 | 0.192 | 0.306 | 0.453 | −0.174 | 0.078 | 0.675 | 0.477 |
TRUST 7 | 0.302 | 0.452 | 0.791 | 0.192 | 0.306 | 0.453 | −0.174 | 0.078 | 0.675 | 0.477 |
CONTIN 1 | 0.423 | 0.370 | 0.347 | 0.889 | 0.471 | 0.536 | −0.232 | 0.144 | 0.484 | 0.586 |
CONTIN 2 | 0.405 | 0.339 | 0.357 | 0.837 | 0.450 | 0.395 | −0.406 | 0.204 | 0.425 | 0.438 |
CONTIN 3 | 0.310 | 0.242 | 0.257 | 0.854 | 0.389 | 0.322 | −0.323 | 0.067 | 0.319 | 0.415 |
VALUE 1 | 0.845 | 0.335 | 0.403 | 0.490 | 0.975 | 0.334 | −0.298 | 0.218 | 0.421 | 0.503 |
VAL UE 2 | 0.844 | 0.306 | 0.365 | 0.507 | 0.975 | 0.293 | −0.312 | 0.240 | 0.378 | 0.498 |
COMMIT 1 | 0.222 | 0.558 | 0.502 | 0.434 | 0.304 | 0.828 | −0.177 | 0.054 | 0.729 | 0.359 |
COMMIT 1 | 0.222 | 0.558 | 0.502 | 0.434 | 0.304 | 0.828 | −0.177 | 0.054 | 0.729 | 0.359 |
COMMIT 2 | 0.248 | 0.579 | 0.463 | 0.394 | 0.275 | 0.857 | −0.069 | 0.082 | 0.730 | 0.332 |
COMMIT 2 | 0.248 | 0.579 | 0.463 | 0.394 | 0.275 | 0.857 | −0.069 | 0.082 | 0.730 | 0.332 |
COMMIT 3 | 0.212 | 0.595 | 0.444 | 0.447 | 0.298 | 0.868 | −0.086 | 0.216 | 0.732 | 0.343 |
COMMIT 3 | 0.212 | 0.595 | 0.444 | 0.447 | 0.298 | 0.868 | −0.086 | 0.216 | 0.732 | 0.343 |
COMMIT 4 | 0.193 | 0.532 | 0.450 | 0.335 | 0.239 | 0.756 | −0.192 | 0.068 | 0.669 | 0.308 |
COMMIT 4 | 0.193 | 0.532 | 0.450 | 0.335 | 0.239 | 0.756 | −0.192 | 0.068 | 0.669 | 0.308 |
COMMIT 6 | 0.220 | 0.618 | 0.469 | 0.454 | 0.219 | 0.838 | −0.102 | 0.008 | 0.739 | 0.301 |
COMMIT 6 | 0.220 | 0.618 | 0.469 | 0.454 | 0.219 | 0.838 | −0.102 | 0.008 | 0.739 | 0.301 |
CPW 1 | −0.138 | 0.005 | −0.152 | −0.234 | −0.218 | 0.017 | 0.796 | 0.101 | −0.058 | −0.207 |
CPW 2 | −0.277 | −0.105 | −0.253 | −0.297 | −0.307 | −0.080 | 0.890 | 0.004 | −0.178 | −0.212 |
CPW 3 | −0.171 | −0.197 | −0.248 | −0.380 | −0.233 | −0.231 | 0.799 | 0.071 | −0.265 | −0.248 |
CPW 4 | −0.126 | −0.090 | −0.241 | −0.222 | −0.199 | −0.111 | 0.771 | 0.066 | −0.178 | −0.144 |
CPW 5 | −0.260 | −0.161 | −0.395 | −0.319 | −0.281 | −0.189 | 0.777 | −0.035 | −0.300 | −0.382 |
NCPW 1 | 0.168 | 0.151 | 0.285 | 0.206 | 0.221 | 0.143 | −0.154 | 0.771 | 0.232 | 0.333 |
NCPW 3 | 0.191 | 0.053 | 0.098 | 0.094 | 0.181 | 0.012 | 0.114 | 0.833 | 0.066 | 0.248 |
NCPW 4 | 0.140 | 0.047 | 0.044 | 0.068 | 0.152 | 0.080 | 0.214 | 0.818 | 0.066 | 0.090 |
SATISFAC1 | 0.436 | 0.320 | 0.478 | 0.527 | 0.440 | 0.379 | −0.293 | 0.209 | 0.464 | 0.898 |
SATISFAC2 | 0.482 | 0.355 | 0.497 | 0.546 | 0.484 | 0.370 | −0.280 | 0.296 | 0.482 | 0.951 |
SATISFAC3 | 0.478 | 0.342 | 0.530 | 0.501 | 0.499 | 0.348 | −0.265 | 0.315 | 0.483 | 0.921 |
Appendix 4. Discriminant validity (Fornell and Larcker criterion)
Value appropriation | Communication | Trust | Relationship continuity | Value creation | Commitment | Coercive power | Non-coercive power | Satisfaction | RQ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Value appropriation | 0.960 | |||||||||
Communication | 0.312 | 0.808 | ||||||||
Trust | 0.363 | 0.560 | 0.772 | |||||||
Relationship continuity | 0.447 | 0.375 | 0.377 | 0.860 | ||||||
Value creation | 0.866 | 0.329 | 0.394 | 0.511 | 0.975 | |||||
Commitment | 0.264 | 0.695 | 0.561 | 0.499 | 0.322 | 0.830 | ||||
Coercive power | −0.252 | −0.139 | −0.326 | −0.363 | −0.313 | −0.149 | 0.808 | |||
Non-coercive power | 0.209 | 0.112 | 0.197 | 0.164 | 0.235 | 0.103 | 0.043 | 0.808 | ||
Satisfaction | 0.504 | 0.367 | 0.543 | 0.568 | 0.514 | 0.396 | −0.302 | 0.297 | 0.924 | |
Relationship quality | 0.368 | 0.861 | 0.845 | 0.485 | 0.410 | 0.868 | −0.248 | 0.164 | 0.516 | 0.926 |
Appendix 5. Assessment of the reliability and validity of convergence of the global construct of relationship quality
Elements | Factor loading | Factor loading squared | Error variance = 1 − Factor loading squared |
---|---|---|---|
Trust | 0.846 | 0.715716 | 0.284284 |
Commitment | 0.868 | 0.753424 | 0.246576 |
Communication | 0.859 | 0.737881 | 0.262119 |
Total factor loading | 2.573 | 2.207021 | 0.792979 |
Total factor loading squared | 6.620329 | ||
Total factor loading squared + total error variance | 7.413308 | ||
AVEa | 0.857 | ||
CRb | 0.893 |
aAVE = (Total factor loading/number of factor).
bCR = Total factor loading squared/(Total factor loading squared + Total Error variance).
Appendix 6. Estimation of the collinearity between structural model constructs
Value appropriation | Relationship continuity | Value creation | Satisfaction | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Value appropriation | 1.000 | |||
Relationship continuity | ||||
Value creation | 1.334 | |||
Coercive power | 1.154 | 1.143 | 1.077 | |
Non-coercive power | 1.085 | 1.124 | 1.036 | |
Relationship quality | 1.241 | 1.385 | 1.107 | |
Satisfaction | 1.547 |
References
Abbad, H. 2008. “L’orientation à long terme dans le canal de distribution : le cas de la relation entre la grande distribution et les PMI agroalimentaires au Maroc.” Thèse de doctorat en Sciences de Gestion, Université de la Méditerranée.Search in Google Scholar
Alejandro, T. B., D. V. Souza, J. S. Boles, Á. H. P. Ribeiro, and P. R. R. Monteiro. 2011. “The Outcome of Company and Account Manager Relationship Quality on Loyalty, Relationship Value and Performance.” Industrial Marketing Management 40 (1): 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008.10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, J. C. 1995. “Relationships in Business Markets : Exchange Episodes, Value Creation, and Their Empirical Assessment.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 23 (4): 346–50.10.1177/009207039502300415Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, J. C., and J. A. Narus. 1990. “A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships.” Journal of Marketing 54 (1): 42. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252172.10.1177/002224299005400103Search in Google Scholar
Arend, R. J., and J. D. Wisner. 2005. “Small business and supply chain management: Is there a fit?” Journal of Business Venturing 20 (3): 403–36.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.11.003Search in Google Scholar
Armstrong, Scott J., and Terry S. Overton. 1997. “Estimating Non- Response Bias in Mail Surveys.” Journal of Marketing Research 14 (August): 396–402.10.1177/002224377701400320Search in Google Scholar
Athanasopoulou, P. 2009. “Relationship Quality: A Critical Literature Review and Research Agenda.” European Journal of Marketing 43 (5/6): 583–610.10.1108/03090560910946945Search in Google Scholar
Bandara, S., C. Leckie, A. Lobo, and C. Hewege. 2017. “Power and Relationship Quality in Supply Chains.” Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 29 (3): 501–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-09-2016-0165.10.1108/APJML-09-2016-0165Search in Google Scholar
Becker, J., K. Klein, and M. Wetzels. 2012. “Hierarchical Latent Variable Models in PLS-SEM : Guidelines for Using Reflective-Formative Type Models.” Long Range Planning 45 (5–6): 359–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001.10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001Search in Google Scholar
Belaya, V., T. Gagalyuk, and J. Hanf. 2009. “Measuring Asymmetrical Power Distribution in Supply Chain Networks: What Is the Appropriate Method?” Journal of Relationship Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332660902876927.10.1080/15332660902876927Search in Google Scholar
Benton, W. C., and M. Maloni. 2005. “The Influence of Power Driven buyer/seller Relationships on Supply Chain Satisfaction.” Journal of Operations Management 23 (1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2004.09.002.10.1016/j.jom.2004.09.002Search in Google Scholar
Billitteri, C., G. Lo Nigro, and G. Perrone. 2013. “How Risk Influences the Choice of Governance Mode in Biopharmaceutical Inter-firm Relationships.” International Business Review 22 (6): 932–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.011.10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.011Search in Google Scholar
Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar
Blois, K. 2004. “Analyzing Exchanges Through the Use of Value Equations.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 19 (4): 250–57.10.1108/08858620410540982Search in Google Scholar
Brito, R. P., and P. L. S. Miguel. 2016. “Power, Governance, and Value in Collaboration: Differences between Buyer and Supplier Perspectives.” International Journal of Laboratory Hematology 38 (1): 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12426.10.1111/jscm.12134Search in Google Scholar
Carson, S. J., T. M. Devinney, G. R. Dowling, and G. John. 1999. “Understanding Institutional Designs within Marketing Value Systems.” Journal of Marketing 63 (4_suppl1): 115–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429990634s112.10.1177/00222429990634s112Search in Google Scholar
Chandon, J.-L. 2007. Théorie de la mesure et construction d’échelles. Recherche.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, P.-Y., K.-Y. Chen, and L.-Y. Wu. 2017. “The Impact of Trust and Commitment on Value Creation in Asymmetric Buyer–Seller Relationships: The Mediation Effect of Specific Asset Investments.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 32 (3): 457–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-09-2014-0171.10.1108/JBIM-09-2014-0171Search in Google Scholar
Chicksand, D., and J. Rehme. 2018. “Total Value in Business Relationships: Exploring the Link between Power and Value Appropriation.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 33 (2): 174–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-05-2016-0100.10.1108/JBIM-05-2016-0100Search in Google Scholar
Coff, R. W. 1999. “When Competitive Advantage Doesn’t Lead to Performance: The Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Bargaining Power.” Organization Science 10 (2): 119–33. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.2.119.10.1287/orsc.10.2.119Search in Google Scholar
Crook, T. R., and J. G. Combs. 2007. “Sources and Consequences of Bargaining Power in Supply Chains”. 25: 546–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.05.008.10.1016/j.jom.2006.05.008Search in Google Scholar
Crosby, L. A., K. R. Evans, and D. Cowles. 1990. “Relationship Quality in Services Selling: An Interpersonal Influence Perspective.” Journal of Marketing 54 (3): 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400306.10.1177/002224299005400306Search in Google Scholar
Deligonul, S., D. Kim, A. S. Roath, and E. Cavusgil. 2006. “The Achilles’ Heel of an Enduring Relationship: Appropriation of Rents between a Manufacturer and Its Foreign Distributor.” Journal of Business Research 59 (7): 802–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.11.004.10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.11.004Search in Google Scholar
Dion, P., and L. Goodman. 2001. “The Determinants of Commitment in the Distributor–Manufacturer Relationship.” Industrial Marketing Management 30: 287–300. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019850199000929.10.1016/S0019-8501(99)00092-9Search in Google Scholar
Doney, P. M., and J. P. Cannon. 1997. “An Examination of the Nature of Trust in Buyer–Seller Relationships.” Journal of Marketing 61 (2): 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299706100203.10.1177/002224299706100203Search in Google Scholar
Dwyer, R., F. Schurr, H. Paul, and S. Oh. 1987. “Buyer–Seller Developing Relationships.” American Journal of Marketing(Apr., 1987), 51 (2): 11–27.10.1177/002224298705100202Search in Google Scholar
Dyer, J. H., and W. Chu. 2011. “The Determinants of Trust in Supplier-automaker Relationships in the US, Japan, and Korea.” Journal of International Business Studies 42 (1): 10–27. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.34.10.1057/jibs.2010.34Search in Google Scholar
Dyer, J. H., and H. Singh. 1998. “The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage.” Academy of Management Review 23 (4): 660–79. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.1255632.10.5465/amr.1998.1255632Search in Google Scholar
Ellegaard, Chris, Christopher John Medlin, and J. Geersbro. 2014. “Value Appropriation in Business Exchange – Literature Review and Future Research Opportunities Introduction.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 29 (April): 185–98.10.1108/JBIM-03-2012-0039Search in Google Scholar
Emerson, R. M. 1962. “Power-dependence Relations.” American Sociological Review 27 (1): 31–41. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2089716.10.2307/2089716Search in Google Scholar
Fang, E., R. W. Palmatier, and K. R. Evans. 2008. “Influence of Customer Participation on Creating and Sharing of New Product Value.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (3): 322–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0082-9.10.1007/s11747-007-0082-9Search in Google Scholar
Ferrer, M., R. Santa, P. W. Hyland, and P. Bretherton. 2010. “Relational Factors that Explain Supply Chain Relationships.” Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 22 (3): 419–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/13555851011062304.10.1108/13555851011062304Search in Google Scholar
Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen. 1977. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Retrieved from https://philarchive.org/archive/FISBAI.Search in Google Scholar
Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.” Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1): 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.10.1177/002224378101800104Search in Google Scholar
Frazier, G. L., and R. C. Rody. 1991. “The Use of Influence Strategies in Interfirm Relationships in Industrial Product Channels.” Journal of Marketing 55 (1): 52–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299105500105.10.1177/002224299105500105Search in Google Scholar
Frazier, G. L., and J. O. Summers. 1986. “Perceptions of Interfirm Power and its Use within a Franchise Channel of Distribution.” Journal of Marketing Research 23 (2): 169–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378602300209.10.1177/002224378602300209Search in Google Scholar
Fynes, B., C. Voss, and S. de Búrca. 2005. “The Impact of Supply Chain Relationship Dynamics on Manufacturing Performance.” International Journal of Operations and Production Management 25 (1): 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570510572213.10.1108/01443570510572213Search in Google Scholar
Ganesan, S. 1994. “Determinants of Long-Term in Buyer–Seller Orientation Relationships.” The Journal of Marketing 58 (April): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252265.10.1177/002224299405800201Search in Google Scholar
Gelderman, C. J., J. Semeijn, and R. De Zoete. 2008. “The Use of Coercive Influence Strategies by Dominant Suppliers.” Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 14 (4): 220–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2008.06.003.10.1016/j.pursup.2008.06.003Search in Google Scholar
Griffith, D. A., M. G. Harvey, and R. F. Lusch. 2006. “Social Exchange in Supply Chain Relationships: The Resulting Benefits of Procedural and Distributive Justice.” Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.03.003.10.1016/j.jom.2005.03.003Search in Google Scholar
Gulati, R., and M. Sytch. 2007. “Dependence Asymmetry and Joint Dependence in Interorganizational Relationships: Effects of Embeddedness on a Manufacturer’s Performance in Procurement Relationships.” Administrative Science Quarterly 52 (1): 32–69. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.1.32.10.2189/asqu.52.1.32Search in Google Scholar
Hair, J. F., M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, and S. P. Gudergan. 2018. Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1Search in Google Scholar
Hair Jr, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2014. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, vol. 46, Sage Publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002.10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002Search in Google Scholar
Hair Jr, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2017. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. Sage Publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002.10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002Search in Google Scholar
Hausman, A., and W. J. Johnston. 2010. “Industrial Marketing Management the Impact of Coercive and Non-coercive Forms of in Fluence on Trust, Commitment, and Compliance in Supply Chains.” Industrial Marketing Management 39 (3): 519–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.05.007.10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.05.007Search in Google Scholar
Henneberg, S., Z. Jiang, E. Shiu, and P. Naude. 2016. “Relationship Quality in Business to Business Relationships – Reviewing the Current Literatures and Proposing a New Measurement Model.” Psychology and Marketing 33 (4): 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20876.10.1002/mar.20876Search in Google Scholar
Jap, S. D. 2001. ““Pie sharing” in Complex Collaboration Contexts.” Journal of Marketing Research 38 (1): 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.1.86.18827.10.1509/jmkr.38.1.86.18827Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, J. L., T. Sakano, J. A. Cote, and N. Onzo. 1993. “The Exercise of Interfirm Power and Its Repercussions in U.S.-Japanese Channel Relationships.” Journal of Marketing 57 (2): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700201.10.1177/002224299305700201Search in Google Scholar
Jonsson, P., and M. Zineldin. 2003. “Achieving High Satisfaction in Supplier-dealer Working Relationships.” Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 8 (3): 224–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540310484627.10.1108/13598540310484627Search in Google Scholar
Kale, P., H. Singh, and H. Perlmutter. 2000. “Learning and Protection of Proprietary Assets in Strategic Alliances: Building Relational Capital.” Strategic Management Journal 21 (3): 217–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<217::aid-smj95>3.0.CO;2-Y.10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<217::AID-SMJ95>3.0.CO;2-YSearch in Google Scholar
Kang, J. 2013. “Value Creation and Appropriation in Strategic Alliances: Roles of Resource Characteristics and Structural Position in Alliance Network.” Business and Management Review 3 (02): 1–9.Search in Google Scholar
Krause, D. R., and L. M. Ellram. 1997. “Success Factors in Supplier Development.” International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 27 (1): 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600039710162277.10.1108/09600039710162277Search in Google Scholar
Kumar, N., L. K. Scheer, and J.-B. E. M. Steenkamp. 1995. “The Effects of Perceived Interdependence on Dealer Attitudes.” Journal of Marketing Research 32 (3): 348. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151986.10.1177/002224379503200309Search in Google Scholar
Lacoste, S., and K. Blois. 2015. “Suppliers’ Power Relationships with Industrial Key Customers.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 30 (5). https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-03-2013-0057.10.1108/JBIM-03-2013-0057Search in Google Scholar
Lacroux, A. (2009). L’ Analyse Des Modeles De Relations Structurelles Par La Methode Pls : Une Approche Emergente Dans La Recherche. In XXème congrès de l’AGRH, 1–27.Search in Google Scholar
Leonidou, L. C., M. A. Talias, and C. N. Leonidou. 2008. “Exercised Power as a Driver of Trust and Commitment in Cross-border Industrial Buyer–Seller Relationships”. 37: 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.08.006.10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.08.006Search in Google Scholar
Li, Y., Y. Liu, M. Li, and H. Wu. 2008. “Transformational Offshore Outsourcing: Empirical Evidence from Alliances in China.” Journal of Operations Management 26 (2): 257–74.10.1016/j.jom.2007.02.011Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Y. Li, and L. Zhang. 2010. “Control Mechanisms across a Buyer–Supplier Relationship Quality Matrix.” Journal of Business Research 63 (1): 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.005.10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.005Search in Google Scholar
Maloni, M., and W. C. Benton. 2000. “Power Influences in the Supply Chain.” Journal of Business Logistics 21 (l): 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004Search in Google Scholar
McDonald, F. 1999. “The Importance of Power in Partnership Relationships.” Journal of General Management 25 (1): 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/030630709902500103.10.1177/030630709902500103Search in Google Scholar
Miguel, P. L. S., L. A. L. Brito, A. R. Fernandes, F. V. C. S. Tescari, and G. S. Martins. 2014. “Relational Value Creation and Appropriation in Buyer–Supplier Relationships.” International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 44 (7): 559–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-09-2012-0291.10.1108/IJPDLM-09-2012-0291Search in Google Scholar
Mizik, N., and R. Jacobson. 2003. “The Financial Implications of Shifts in and Value Appropriation .” Journal of Marketing 67 (January): 63–76.10.1509/jmkg.67.1.63.18595Search in Google Scholar
Morgan, R. M., and S. D. Hunt. 1994. “Theory of Relationship Marketing.” Journal of Marketing 58 (July): 20–38.10.1177/002224299405800302Search in Google Scholar
Narasimhan, R., A. Nair, D. A. Griffith, J. S. Arlbjørn, and E. Bendoly. 2009. “Lock-In Situations in Supply Chains: A Social Exchange Theoretic Study of Sourcing Arrangements in Buyer–Supplier Relationships.” Journal of Operations Management 27 (5): 374–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2008.10.004.10.1016/j.jom.2008.10.004Search in Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Nunnally, J., and I. H. Bernstein. 1994. Psychometric Theory. NY: McGraw-Hill New York.Search in Google Scholar
Nyaga, G. N., D. F. Lynch, D. Marshall, and E. Ambrose. 2013. “Power Asymmetry, Adaptation and Collaboration in Dyadic Relationships Involving a Powerful Partner.” Journal of Supply Chain Management 49 (3): 42–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12011.10.1111/jscm.12011Search in Google Scholar
Nyaga, G. N., and J. M. Whipple. 2011. “Relationship Quality and Performance Outcomes: Achieving a Sustainable Competitive Advantage.” Journal of Business Logistics 32 (4): 345–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0000-0000.2011.01030.x.10.1111/j.0000-0000.2011.01030.xSearch in Google Scholar
Palmatier, R. W. 2008. “Interfirm Relational Drivers of Customer Value.” Journal of Marketing 72 (4): 76–89. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.72.4.76.10.1509/jmkg.72.4.076Search in Google Scholar
Ringle, C. M., S. Wende, and J.-M. Becker. 2015. “SmartPLS 3.” Boenningstedt. SmartPLS GmbH.Search in Google Scholar
Scheer, L. K., N. Kumar, and J. B. E. M. Steenkamp. 2003. “Reactions to Perceived Inequity in US and Dutch Interorganizational Relationships.” Academy of Management Journal 46 (3): 303–16.10.2307/30040624Search in Google Scholar
Skinner, Steven J., Jule B. Gassenheimer, and S. W. Kelley. 1992. “Cooperation in Supplier-dealer Relations.” Journal of Retailing 68(2): 174–93.Search in Google Scholar
Sosik, J. J., S. S. Kahai, and M. J. Piovoso. 2009. “Silver Bullet or Voodoo Statistics?” Group and Organization Management 34 (1): 5–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601108329198.10.1177/1059601108329198Search in Google Scholar
Tescari, F. C., and L. A. L. Brito. 2016. “Value Creation and Capture in Buyer–Supplier Relationships: A New Perspective.” RAE Revista De Administracao De Empresas 56: 474–89. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020160503.10.1590/s0034-759020160503Search in Google Scholar
Thibaut, J., and H. Kelley. 1959. The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar
Ulaga, W., and A. Eggert. 2006. “Relationship Value and Relationship Quality: Broadening the Nomological Network of Business-to-business Relationships.” European Journal of Marketing 40 (3–4): 311–27. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075.10.1108/03090560610648075Search in Google Scholar
Wagner, S. M., A. Eggert, and E. Lindemann. 2010. “Creating and Appropriating Value in Collaborative Relationships.” Journal of Business Research 63 (8): 840–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.01.004.10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.01.004Search in Google Scholar
Wagner, S. M., and E. Lindemann. 2008. “Determinants of Value Sharing in Channel Relationships.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 23 (8): 544–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620810913353.10.1108/08858620810913353Search in Google Scholar
Walter, A., and T. Ritter. 2003. “The Influence of Adaptations, Trust, and Commitment on Value-creating Functions of Customer Relationships.” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 18 (4–5): 353–65. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620310480250.10.1108/08858620310480250Search in Google Scholar
Wathne, K. H., and J. B. Heide. 2000. “Opportunism in Interfirm Relationships: Forms, Outcomes, and Solutions.” Journal of Marketing 64 (4): 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.64.4.36.18070.10.1509/jmkg.64.4.36.18070Search in Google Scholar
Wilkinson, I. F. 1979. “Power and Satisfaction in Channels of Distribution.” Journal of Retailing 55 (2): 79–94.Search in Google Scholar
Yan, T., and S. M. Wagner. 2017. “Do What and with Whom? Value Creation and Appropriation in Inter-organizational New Product Development Projects.” International Journal of Production Economics 191 (May): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.05.010.10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.05.010Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, S., H. Yu, Y. Xu, and Z. Bi. 2014. “Relationship-specific Investment, Value Creation, and Value Appropriation in Cooperative Innovation.” Information Technology and Management 15 (2): 119–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-014-0174-4.10.1007/s10799-014-0174-4Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, X., J. G. Lynch, and Q. Chen. 2011. “Reconsiderer Baron et Kenny: mythes et verites a propos de l’analyse de mediation.” Recherche et Applications En Marketing 26 (1): 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/076737011102600105.10.1177/076737011102600105Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston