Relationship closeness paradox: contingency analysis in B2B sales

被引:5
作者
Wang, Yonggui [1 ]
Hampson, Daniel Peter [2 ]
Han, Myat Su [2 ]
机构
[1] Capital Univ Econ & Business, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Int Business & Econ, Sch Business, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
Social exchange theory; Regulatory focus; Sales performance; Extent of supervision; Relationship closeness; Salesperson passive opportunism; SOCIAL-EXCHANGE THEORY; REGULATORY FOCUS; OPPORTUNISM; IMPACT; PERFORMANCE; SATISFACTION; ANTECEDENTS; CUSTOMERS; OUTCOMES; LOYALTY;
D O I
10.1108/JBIM-04-2019-0168
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Purpose This study aims to examine the positive and negative consequences of relationship closeness between salespersons and their business customers in a B2B sales context: sales performance and salesperson passive opportunism. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the social exchange theory, the authors develop a conceptual model of positive and negative consequences of relationship closeness. The authors empirically test the model using matched survey data from 269 salesperson-sales supervisor dyads and individual sales performance ratings from one of the largest distribution and market expansion companies in Myanmar. Findings Results provide evidence of positive (i.e. sales performance) and negative (i.e. salesperson passive opportunism) consequences of salesperson's perceived relationship closeness. These relationships are, however, contingent on organization-level and employee-level factors. High extent of supervision enhances the effects of salesperson's perceived relationship closeness on sales performance but attenuates its influence on salesperson passive opportunism. The effect of salesperson's perceived relationship closeness on salesperson's passive opportunism is stronger for salespersons with a promotion (vs prevention) focus. Originality/value To the best of the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate not only the benefits of relationship closeness between salespersons and customers but also its dark side: the relationship closeness paradox.
引用
收藏
页码:971 / 982
页数:12
相关论文
共 71 条
[1]   Control mechanisms and goal orientations: evidence from frontline service employees [J].
Alencar Rodrigues, Luiza Cristina ;
Coelho, Filipe ;
Sousa, Carlos M. P. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 2015, 49 (3-4) :350-371
[2]  
Anderson E, 2005, MIT SLOAN MANAGE REV, V46, P75
[3]   Affect and Retail Shopping Behavior: Understanding the Role of Mood Regulation and Regulatory Focus [J].
Arnold, Mark J. ;
Reynolds, Kristy E. .
JOURNAL OF RETAILING, 2009, 85 (03) :308-320
[4]  
Barnes JG, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P765, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199712)14:8<765::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO
[5]  
2-C
[6]   Rethinking customer relationships [J].
Bettencourt, Lance A. ;
Blocker, Christopher P. ;
Houston, Mark B. ;
Flint, Daniel J. .
BUSINESS HORIZONS, 2015, 58 (01) :99-108
[7]  
Blau P. M., 1964, EXCHANGE POWER SOC
[8]   Customer relationships with service personnel: do we measure closeness, quality or strength? [J].
Bove, LL ;
Johnson, LW .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, 2001, 54 (03) :189-197
[9]   Service Sweethearting: Its Antecedents and Customer Consequences [J].
Brady, Michael K. ;
Voorhees, Clay M. ;
Brusco, Michael J. .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 2012, 76 (02) :81-98
[10]   A framework of satisfaction for continually delivered business services [J].
Briggs, Elten ;
Landry, Timothy D. ;
Daugherty, Patricia J. .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & INDUSTRIAL MARKETING, 2016, 31 (01) :112-122