Search results

This paper aims to explore how and why salespeople enhance or hinder long-term business-to-business (B2B) customer relationships at the interpersonal level by considering self-disclosure and relational cost and reward evaluations.

Data from interviews (N = 47) with B2B sales professionals were analyzed, focusing on the shift of the phases in long-term B2B customer relationships.

Long-term B2B customer relationships evolve at the interpersonal level through a process of continuous relational cost and reward evaluation, self-disclosure and business disclosure in three phases: becoming business partners, collaborative partners and collaborative and personal partners. The reward evaluations progress from being business related to including even more relational benefits. Disclosure progresses through general business disclosure and general self-disclosure; strategic business disclosure and personal life self-disclosure; and synergistic business disclosure and private self-disclosure.

The long-term B2B customer relationships could be studied at the interpersonal level from the customer’s perspective. Self-disclosure could be studied in cross-cultural settings as well as gender differences should be considered in future studies. Business and social penetration theory could be applied to investigate different types of relationships and other professional relationships, such as those between employers and employees. It would be important to test whether the business-related and self-disclosure subtypes apply to the development of other types of professional relationships or whether other disclosure subtypes exist. The authors recommend exploring salespeople’s and customers’ privacy management strategies in multiple communication channels.

Managers may apply the results of this study in their customer relationship management and sales training.

The findings outline a contextual extension of social penetration theory.

Due to fierce competition in the mobile retailing market, it is desirable to identify the success factors driving consumers to reuse a mobile shopping application. This research intends to develop a model for mobile shopping app success by integrating an e-commerce systems success (ESS) model and sales promotion benefits and parasocial interaction literatures.

302 useable online questionnaires were obtained. The data analysis was conducted using the structural equation modelling.

The results indicate the validity of the ESS model in predicting consumers' reuse intention of mobile shopping apps where three quality dimensions of system, information and service facilitate both perceived value and user satisfaction, which in turn generates reuse intention. Furthermore, savings and entertainment denoting the utilitarian and hedonic sales promotion benefits have positive impact on perceived value but have no influence on satisfaction. Parasocial intention between consumers and sellers facilitates both value perception and satisfaction.

This research contributes to the mobile retailing literature by identifying the success factors driving consumers' continuance intention of mobile shopping apps. Theoretically, it validates and extends the ESS model in mobile shopping app context by identifying savings, entertainment and parasocial interaction as additional success factors. Based on the findings, two approaches are proposed to suggest mobile retailers design a successful mobile shopping app.

This paper seeks to explore the reasons why many organisations do not evaluate the effectiveness of their reward policies and practices, examines the approaches used by those organizations which do evaluate, and develops a model of evidence‐based reward management which describes how evaluation can take place.

The paper draws on a study of why organisations do or do not evaluate reward and an examination of what organizations taking evaluation seriously were doing about it. The study was based on a survey of 173 reward and HR practitioners and 13 case studies.

The survey found that only 46 per cent of respondents carried out a full evaluation. Other surveys have established that an even lower proportion evaluated. Those organisations which evaluate reward do so because they recognise that it is necessary to obtain value for money from their considerable expenditure on pay. Those who do not evaluate offer a number of reasons, but the most important was lack of resources or time. It was established that while an evidence‐based approach was desirable there was no set pattern of conducting an evaluation.

Information about the evaluation practices of the case study organisations and the concept of evidence‐based reward management as an approach to evaluation provide guidance to practitioners on how they can measure the effectiveness of their reward policies and practices.

The paper extends the pioneering research of Corby et al. to develop new insights into the process of reward evaluation.

The empirical support for agency theory explanations for the great variance in CEO pay has been equivocal. Drawing from the performance appraisal literature, we hypothesize that boards of directors incorporate human judgment into the evaluation and reward of CEO performance in order to balance managerial risk with agency costs. We test Baysinger and Hoskisson’s (1990) proposition that insider‐dominated corporate boards rely on subjective performance evaluation to reward the CEO, and we argue that R&D intensity influences this relationship. Using a sample of Fortune firms, findings support our contention that human judgment is important in evaluating and rewarding CEO performance.

Discusses how, ideally, senior managers should approach the installation of a staff rewards structure sequentially: process and openness, job descriptions, evaluation of jobs, salary policy curve, grades, anomalies, cost of living increases, maintaining the rewards structure, market rate problems, perks, relationship with consultants, and rewarding individuals. Stresses the need for differentiating between job and job holder, and between poor and good performers and highlights the substantial investment involved.

The purpose of this study, drawing from exchange theory, is to examine how the intertwined relationships between power, justice and relative dependence influence relationship performance in buyer – seller relationships.

A two-wave structural equation model with latent variable interactions was estimated on a dataset of 283 buyer – seller relationships.

Exercised coercive and reward power follow different processes, direct and indirect, to influence relationship performance. The use of coercion was found to be substantively more detrimental to the buyer – seller relationship than the use of rewards were beneficial. Relative dependence tempers the negative influence of coercion.

Managers of buyer – seller relationships need to be judicious in their use of coercion and rewards. In their efforts to manage relationship performance, whenever possible, managers should seek to avoid punishing their partner more so than they should seek to reward them.

Although proposed under a single theoretical perspective, power and justice have developed as separate streams within the extant literature. Examining these constructs together can increase the current understanding of how to manage buyer – seller relationships.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.