The notion of power is regarded highly important in an inter-organizational relationship as an organization could use its positive benefits in gaining competitive advantage within its industry (Porter 1985). Organizations build relationships with other organization by tapping into their resources in order to give utmost value to their customers (Fill and Fill 2005:26). These interactions amongst organization are conducted usually in business to business markets where transactions are between the manufacturer and wholesaler or retailer in which there are no or less exchanges with the end customer. It is however, inevitable to avoid conflicts in the process of interactions but positive approaches can be adopted by organizations in reducing frictions …show more content…
Three views of theoretical foundations are widely considered in business to business marketing: social exchange theory, social penetration theory and interaction theory. The social exchange theory as pointed out by Blau (1964, cited in Hsin Hsin et al. 2015:867) is described as social interactions involving two or more parties in order to achieve a mutually benefiting goal. What this means is that, in the marketing sphere, organization are expected to seek ways of the norm of buying and selling but develop relationships which could lead to customer retention, thereby recognising interdependence in sustaining the social exchange relationship. The social exchange theory deals with the issues of rewards and trust among the trading partners which derived from a continuous exchange of financial outcomes over a period of time (Fill and Fill 2005:149). Autry and Golicic (2010) advocates that the strength of any relationship is dependent on trust and commitment and successful fulfilment of objective. Cropanzano (2005) argues that relationship between two parties can best be sustained in the long run if certain rules of exchange are adhered to. These rules provide guidelines in which both parties are expected to comply during their exchanges …show more content…
(2000). According to Baack et al. (2000), the social penetration theory is also viewed as the “onion theory” of personality in which the different layers of personality are penetrated by the buyer or seller thus creating an atmosphere for trust. This theory demonstrate that organization will reveal information when they discover that their personality traits match and can sufficiently engage in other aspects of the transaction that would be mutually benefitting to them. From an organizational view, the social penetration theory seeks to acquire more knowledge from other organizations through continuous interactions, hence information is revealed to each party (Fill and Fill
In this paper, I am going to use concepts from the social exchange theory and relational dialectics theory to describe my relationship with my boyfriend. First, I will discuss the cost and rewards of the relationship. Second, I will then discuss the dialectics of autonomy and connection followed by, openness and protection.
The Social Penetration model demonstrated two way in which communication can be more or less disclosing. The model is like an onion with layers. The first dimension is known as breadth, which is the range of the subjects being discussed, which with an onion as demonstration would be the outer layers. Second is depth, the depth level is significant and more central to ourselves, In the onion this would be the inner and core. The inner and core layers are the things with most private and significant to us. Thus, sharing information from our depth may require greater risk taking. The information from this dimension of self is typically known by and held in confidence by only a few people. Due to the fact
The theory I originally chose to critique was the Social Exchange and Rational Choice framework from our class book. I chose this theory because when we talked about it in class it made a lot of sense to me. Its propositions and foundations are very applicable to many situations, and I felt like I had a good grasp of its concepts and structure. However, in doing research for this paper, I discovered that contrary to what our book led me to believe, Social Exchange is a theory entirely separate from Rational Choice theory. So, in keeping with this discovery and despite my better judgment, I will do my best to relay and critique the information I find on either one or both theories and then compare only Social Exchange theory to the Symbolic Interaction framework. Although I will try to get the same information for both theories, there are not many resources which describe Social Exchange theory, and there are far more for Rational Choice theory, so the critique and discussion may be a little lopsided.
Dominant power is very tempting for the buyer since it provides some kind of control of quality and specifically drives price down. But, from my perspective, supply chain management is mostly all about cooperation in order to achieve success in every part of the channel and by this means get quality improvement and reduce costs throughout the supply chain so everybody is satisfied. The key here is definitely to establish long-term trusting and supportive relationships in which all members cooperate rather than dominate. For me it seems that interdependence box is better for such kind of relationships, where buyer and supplier are...
In the 1960s through the 1970s, companies realized strong engineering, design, and manufacturing functions were strong market strategy keys to create and capture customer loyalty. As the demand for new products rose in the 1980s, these market requirements were to increase their flexibility and responsiveness to adapt existing products and processes or to develop new ones in order to meet customer needs. As manufacturing improved in the 1990s, managers began noticing material and service inputs involving suppliers and their major impact on an organization’s ability to meet customer needs. As a result of these changes, organizations now find that it difficult to manage their own organizations. First, they must be involved in the management of their network of all upstream firms that provide directly or indirectly, as well as the network of downstream firms, which are responsible for delivery and market service of the product to the end customer.
There is a belief that firms have a different marketing approach depending on if the firm is trading services or goods. Service firms are assumed to have a more relational approach where they manage the whole buyer-consumer communication process while the goods firms are transactional. The main purpose of this study is to find out how firms relate to their markets and what the relative emphasis of these firms on transactional and relational aspects of marketing are.The study distinguishes the firm type by the most dominant type of product offered and the most dominant of customer
” Chartered Institute of Marketing defines it as the management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer’s requirements profitably. However, there exist numerous definitions of marketing, it is always about “meeting existing needs and anticipating future needs” (Bagozzi, 1975). The marketing concept is a kind of recipe how a company can achieve its goals by understanding the exchange partners and associated costs, being a response to external opportunities and threats and to internal strengths and weaknesses as a means of competitive advantage (Houston, 1986). Bagozzi (1975) underpins this viewpoint, arguing that marketing is much about the exchange paradigm which focuses on the question why parties take part in exchanges and how these work.
Wiersema, M. T. a. F., 1993. Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines. Harvard Business Review, p. 92.
applied to this episode, but for now it is best to comprehend how the Social Exchange theory works.
It’s very well known that all humans love to interact with others and make new relationships throughout their lives. There’s different types of relationships that are created such as family, friends, school, romance, sexual, and work. These relationships all have a benefit factor to them and a reason why these relationships are created. This all follows under the social exchange theory where every relationship has a rewarding system based on the behavior of a person. The social exchange theory best explains society unlike the other theories simply because the social exchange theory perfectly describes the behavior humans create when interacting with their relationships such as marriage, friends, and school.
Social Exchange Theory (SET) concentrates on the way that individuals figure the value of a relationship by subtracting the costs from the rewards. A relationship that has a negative worth obviously ends after a specific measure of time while an association with a positive worth has a tendency to drive forward. It is extremely easy to apply this in anybody's day by day life. Each relationship demonstrates this hypothesis correct.
The social penetration theory in this relationship was true because in the two years spent together, the longer we stayed together the more we disclosed to each other. We would tell each other a variety of things and as we spent more time together we would disclose more and more information. Although we did disclose information well, when we got into arguments we would not address the conflict and it would just build up until it exploded.
Today's business world is a very delicate model and can break down with the slightest of ease. One of the most important aspects of a successful business is a good, strong management team followed by a good, intertwining associate team. The two groups serve, as different operational structures yet need to coincide on a very strict level. For a business's employees to be at arms with each other can create a big problem that happens to be at the prime area of business. This area is the area of direct customer interaction. To not keep the customer happy is to douse oneself with gasoline and proceed to striking a match. This problem brings us back to the introduction of trust and professionalism among workers.
The purpose of this literary analysis is to determine if social networks are helpful or harmful to relationships. As social networking evolves, different aspects of communication suffer. Such as the social penetration theory, which “describes people as onions with several layers of information”. pressed tightly together in the cuff. The outermost layer consists of the kind of information you would get.
Social Exchange theory was created by George Homans in 1958. Since its publication as “Social Behavior as Exchange”, several other theorists like Peter Blau, Richard Emerson, John Thibaut, and Harold Kelley have contributed to the theory. Before diving into the biggest concepts of this theory, two main properties need to be discussed. This theory is all about social exchanges, which are essentially reactions and decisions in relationships. The two properties are self-interest and interdependence. They are the two fundamental interactions between two individuals who each have something of value to the other. When an individual is looking out for their own self-interest, they are looking out for their own economic and psychological needs which can result in things like greed and competition. However, self-interest is not seen as a negative thing; in fact, it can result in both parties achieving their own interests. Interdependence, on the other hand, is harder to study but it is the combination of the two using both their efforts to gain something. Interdependence has higher social implications. Homans, as the founder of the theory, had it say that the theory consists of a social exchange with rewards and costs between at least two people. Rewards are defined as objects that have a positive value and are sought out by individuals. Costs are defined as objects that have a negative value and are avoided by individuals. Rewards in regards to relationships are things like support, friendship, and acceptance, while costs are things like energy spent, time, and money. Essentially this theory states that every individual is trying to maximize their wins or their worth and end up with something that is more positive than negative. Worth equ...