No abstract

Purpose Reciprocity has traditionally been overlooked in social exchange models of inter-firm relationships. Therefore, this research integrates reciprocity and its antecedents into a social exchange model of inter-firm relationships. Design/methodology/approach The authors collected primary data from a sample of firms in the Republic of Korea using a questionnaire. They also used covariance-based structural equations modeling to fit the model given the proposed conceptualization. Findings Both conceptually and empirically, adding reciprocity and its antecedents to the social exchange model produce results that differ from previously published papers. Specifically, reciprocity affects information exchanged indirectly through both credibility and benevolence trust. In addition, the effect of information exchange mediates the effect of trust on calculative and affective commitment. Research limitations/implications The foundation of long-term inter-firm relationships is quality information exchange, which is based on the development of credibility and benevolence trust, which in turn is based on reciprocity. Thus, reciprocity is a key variable in relationship development. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to combine reciprocity and its antecedents into a social exchange model that contains trust and commitment. This model provides a bigger picture of how firms develop long-term relationships with their partner firms.

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand how perceived vulnerability reduces consumers’ willingness to utilize services offered by nonprofit organizations (NPOs). Design/methodology/approach Three online surveys were conducted across two research contexts to test the proposed model. Hayes’ PROCESS was used to analyze the data. Findings Perceived vulnerability decreases the perception of relational benefits, which in turn decrease consumers’ commitment to NPOs. Reduced commitment lessens consumers’ willingness to cooperate and acquiesce to organizations’ recommendations. Risk aversion and cognitive ability mediate the relationship between perceived vulnerability and perceived relational benefits. Research limitations/implications The findings uncover mechanisms through which perceived vulnerability influences perceived relational benefits, contributing to the understanding of behaviors of consumers that perceive vulnerable. This paper does not manipulate consumers’ perceived vulnerability but only measures their perceived vulnerability, limiting the explanatory power of causal relationships between perceived vulnerability and perceived relational benefits. Practical implications This study can provide some insight for NPOs about how to better serve their target population. To increase willingness to utilize service offerings, NPOs should decrease their perceived risks of new services. Originality/value This paper clarifies why consumers that perceive vulnerability are not willing to deploy the NPOs’ services which could improve their situation by demonstrating that cognitive ability and risk aversion mediate the relationship between perceived vulnerability and perceived relational benefits.

Access to health services affects the well-being of millions of consumers. Although the topic of health-related access is regularly featured in popular and academic conversations, these conversations primarily concentrate on objective or situational access factors. This research focuses instead on consumers’ subjective perception of access to better appreciate how personally experienced service availability and ease of access jointly determine consumers’ access perceptions. The authors find that perceived access to health services (PAHS) offers insight into the relationships between access, perceived health vulnerability, and overall health. Through scale development and a series of three theory-testing studies, this work demonstrates the close link between PAHS and perceived vulnerability (Study 1), connects this relationship to overall health (Studies 1–3), and establishes behavioral changes associated with access-vulnerability concerns (Study 2). Moreover, Study 3 finds evidence for a “muting” effect of health system distrust on the relationship between PAHS and perceived vulnerability as well as an “amplifying” effect of health motivation on the relationship between perceived vulnerability and overall health. Together, these studies illustrate PAHS’s relevance for explaining consumer vulnerability and overall health.