Search results

Drawing on resource‐advantage theory and a diverse literature base, this article seeks to further the development of the explanatory foundations of relationship marketing theory by proposing, and then providing, tentative answers to three “why?” questions in relationship marketing: why is relationship marketing so prominent now? Why do firms and consumers enter into relationships with other firms and consumers? Why are some efforts at relationship marketing more successful than others?

Before addressing the three questions, the paper begins by discussing the different forms of relationship marketing.

Although relationship marketing is a relatively young field of inquiry, relationship marketing theory is an extremely rich area of research. Relationship marketing can take many forms and, as a result, relationship marketing theory has the potential to increase one's understanding of many aspects of business strategy.

The answers to the three questions in this paper provide a strong foundation for the further development relationship marketing theory and are useful for both relationship marketing theorists and practitioners.

As relationship marketing theory and practice are developed further, the authors hope that the article will provide useful guidance to those involved. From a marketing theory standpoint, the eight kinds of factors provide guidance to researchers exploring the many forms of relational marketing. For practitioners, they provide a useful framework for evaluating extant relationship marketing strategies and for developing future strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to apply pragmatic and practical perspectives to the transferability of research findings by examining the potential of structuration to serve as the relationship marketing meta‐theory.

The paper revisits the advanced subjectivist critique of functionalism as the dominant research paradigm before challenging the apparent fortification of the interpretivist paradigm and, in so doing, highlights interpretivism's weaknesses when dealing with social structures.

With the proposed model, relationship marketing researchers, using structuration theory, can recognize the temporal and spatial specificity – and thereby transferability – of interactions and relationships. Structuration is academically rigorous and pragmatic, because it avoids the distraction of the largely academic paradigm wars.

By addressing the often‐noted spatial and temporal limitations of relationship marketing research, this research responds to calls for longitudinal research. The model offers the potential for examining historical interactions and relationships to gain insight into the constraining and enabling forces of social structures.

The use of a multi‐paradigm perspective is more pragmatic than a single paradigm investigation. Using structuration as that multi‐paradigm perspective, a relationship marketing researcher can gain greater insight into the spatial and temporal specificity and transferability of research findings. Researchers thus may assess the limitations of implementing marketing practice on the basis of the findings they gain from one space and time context in a different space and time context.

A paper discussing structuration is a rarity among marketing literature. This paper is the first to outline the potential use of structuration as the meta‐theory in relationship marketing research.

This study aims to examine the impact of customer brand value dimensions on relationship marketing dimensions through consumer hope in the context of digital payment applications (apps) services. The study considers the role of consumer engagement using a moderated mediation, and applies customer perceived value, affect theory of social exchange and relationship marketing theories.

The study is based on data collected from 301 digital payment app users. Structural equation modeling results were analyzed using Smart PLS. The authors performed moderated mediation, with different levels of customer engagement as a moderating variable, using Model 8 of PROCESS. The authors considered customer perceived value dimensions, digital quality value, perceived value, hedonic value and social value as antecedents to consumer hope and explored the role of trust, commitment and continued usage as a consequence of consumer hope.

Three levels of perceived consumer value, digital quality, price value and social value, positively influenced consumer hope, which has positively influenced trust, commitment and continuance usage. Using moderated mediation analysis, consumer hope influenced continuance usage through trust at different levels of engagement, but consumer hope did not influence continuance usage through commitment at different levels of engagement.

The study highlights the role of consumer hope in linking customer value dimensions with relationship marketing dimensions. The study can guide managers to ensure continued usage of digital payment apps, which is a strategic objective. The results are relevant for the digital setting.

This paper aims to present the first systematic review of the literature relating to the relationships between organisations and their marketing agencies, the agency–client relationship, and presents a concept matrix that identifies the key areas of investigation, and topics where further research would be beneficial. As agencies play a pivotal role in operationalising marketing strategy, this relationship is central to marketing theory, management and practice.

A systematic review of the literature was performed using key databases and search terms, and filtering on the basis of criteria relating, for example, to relevance and format, to create a core set of refereed papers on the agency–client relationship in the marketing and advertising domains. Bibliographic and thematic analysis was used to profile the literature in the dataset, and to draw out key themes.

The paper provides an analysis of the extant knowledge base, including key themes, journals and research methods. The following themes emerged from the literature, and are used to elaborate further on the existing body of knowledge: conflict, client account management, contracts and agency theory, cultural and international perspectives and co-creation. An agenda for future research is proposed that advocates a focus on theoretical foundations, research strategies and research topics and themes.

This is the first systematic review of the literature on agency–client relationships, which is scattered across disciplines and informed by several theoretical perspectives. Given the increasing complexity of agency–client relationships in the digital age, and increasing need to understand “marketing-as-practice”, the coherent overview offered by this paper is of particular value for guiding future research.

This paper aims to explore the theoretical foundations of relationship marketing from the perspective of several management‐related disciplines, and to attempt a fresh perspective that seeks to integrate these contributions.

Despite the recent popularity of research into relationship marketing, there is still some confusion surrounding the concept of and how it differs both from “non” relationship marketing and from other ways of managing marketing relationships. This confusion reflects, to some extent, the diverse origins of the concept and the scarcity of research into such fundamental questions as what is a relationship, and what forms of relationship are more or less suited under different circumstances to management through relationship marketing. Taking a broad approach to the subject, the paper explores and integrates these theoretical foundations.

This article finds that an integrated account can be offered for the emergence of relationship marketing as a coherent area for research. Areas of marketing research with particular relevance to the development of research into relationship issues are: supply chain management, interaction theory, database marketing, and services marketing. Future research into relationship marketing should focus on: the rationale, processes and structures involved in relationship marketing.

The paper encompasses and integrates the diverse theoretical origins of relationship marketing and integrates the research traditions emerging from these origins as they relate to relationship marketing. The paper then considers the implications and priorities for the future development of research and theory in relationship marketing.

Discusses the nature and sometimes negative consequences of the dominating marketing paradigm of today, marketing mix management, and furthermore discusses how modern research into, for example, industrial marketing and services marketing as well as customer relationship economics shows that another approach to marketing is required. This development is supported by evolving trends in business, such as strategic partnerships, alliances and networks. Suggests relationship marketing, based on relationship building and management, as one emerging new marketing paradigm of the future. Concludes that the simplicity of the marketing mix paradigm, with its Four P model, has become a strait‐jacket, fostering toolbox thinking rather than an awareness that marketing is a multi‐faceted social process, and notes that marketing theory and customers are the victims of today’s mainstream marketing thinking.

Discusses the nature and sometimes negative consequences of the dominating marketing paradigm of today, marketing mix management, and furthermore discusses how modern research into, for example, industrial marketing and services marketing as well as customer relationship economics shows that another approach to marketing is required. This development is supported by evolving trends in business, such as strategic partnerships, alliances and networks. Suggests relationship marketing, based on relationship building and management, as one emerging new marketing paradigm of the future. Concludes that the simplicity of the marketing mix paradigm, with its Four P model, has become a straitjacket, fostering toolbox thinking rather than an awareness that marketing is a multi‐faceted social process, and notes that marketing theory and customers are the victims of today′s mainstream marketing thinking. By using the notion of a marketing strategy continuum, discusses a number of consequences of a relationship‐type marketing strategy for the focus of marketing, pricing, quality management, internal marketing and intraorganizational development. Briefly comments on the possibility of developing a general marketing theory based on the relationship building and management approach.

The aim of this paper is to argue for an explicit foundation of market exchange on person‐to‐person relationships as an alternative to the foundation on person‐to‐goods relationship underlying the exchange model inherited from neoclassical economics and classical contract law and used in a large significant share of marketing studies.

The paper provides a unifying theoretical framework to the analysis of transactions and relationships that links institutional approaches from economics, sociology, and law.

Relational contract theory provides a common ground for phenomena studied by both traditional exchange‐based and relationship marketing approaches. Relational contract theory conceives all types of market exchange as based on person‐to‐person relationships and provides an anchor for institutional, social and economic approaches in marketing.

The concept of transaction provides a common foundation for the analysis of marketing phenomena that holds in diverse environments, including arms‐length transactions and close‐linked relationships. It provides an interface between marketing theory on the one hand and institutional, social and economic disciplines on the other.

Contracts specify how the parties to a transaction can realize action options opened up by property rights arrangements. Contracting strategy is the vital backbone of an industrial service strategy. Sound design of business models starts with the identification of the optimal owner of a resource, i.e. the actor who is in the best position to manage uncertainties or take on responsibilities associated with resource use.

This is the first investigation of a contractual foundation of marketing theory. It embeds the concept of exchange in an institutional framework and adapts it to the evolving business reality shaped by co‐operating firms and the rising share of services in value creation.

The boundaries of relationship marketing have been discussed since relationship marketing was first investigated in the 1970s. Investigating these boundaries, this paper reviews the links between relationship marketing and network theory. Three main themes of marketing relationships are identified: relationship marketing, neo‐relationship marketing and network theory. A framework is developed to allow for the positioning of these three themes of marketing relationships. While this framework has been developed in terms of a table, the intent is not to box theorists into neat positions but rather to develop an overall position statement for the three types of marketing relationships. Theorists can discuss marketing relationships depending on their position within the framework. Consequently, the framework allows for further development of relationship and neo‐relationship marketing by offering better applications for the practitioner, and enhances understanding of network theory. Suggestions are offered for the integration of marketing relationships into the marketing curriculum and further implications for marketing research are discussed.

Determining the strategic thrust of the firm, it may be argued, is the principal task of top management. This task is aided by recent theories of business and marketing strategy, including the normative imperatives based on industry factors, resource factors, competences, market orientation, and relationship marketing. Choosing wisely from among the various theories of strategy requires an accurate understanding of the contexts of competition. This article argues that resource‐advantage theory, an evolutionary, disequilibrium‐provoking process theory of competition, provides that understanding. That is, resource‐advantage theory grounds theories of business and marketing strategy.