Measuring exchange norms and its impact on satisfaction in a B2C context

Abstract

This research investigates the relevance of exchange norms in a business-to-consumer context and studies the impact of both relational and discrete norms on customer satisfaction in services. As existing scales focus only on relational norms and are mostly limited to business-to-business contexts, Study 1 ( n = 164) proposes measurement scales for seven exchanges norms adapted to a business-to-consumer context: Reciprocity, The Linking norms, Creation and restraint of power, Role integrity, Solidarity, Flexibility, and Effectuation of consent. Study 2 ( n = 295) tests the influence on these norms on customer satisfaction. The article demonstrates that exchange norms as a whole positively affect customer satisfaction and, more specifically, that relational norms explain satisfaction better than discrete norms. The findings also show that, contrary to customer relationship proneness, relationship duration moderates the link between exchange norms and customer satisfaction.

When supplier development initiatives fail: Identifying the causes of opportunism and unexpected outcomes

“…However, the effects of this are poorly understood (Blonska et al, 2013). In addition, prior research considers relational norms as a (implicitly) positive phenomenon that support successful outcomes, in business-to-business collaboration (Elommal et al, 2019). Conversely, we argue that the literature overlooks relational norms that define commonly acceptable 'dark-side' behaviours.…”

“…Previous research, informed by social exchange theory, establishes that relational norms can reduce opportunism directly or indirectly (Paswan et al, 2017). Many studies consider relational norms as common, positive values, priorities, and rules shared by suppliers and buyers (Elommal et al, 2019). By contrast, this analysis finds that norms of opportunism permit opportunistic behaviour by suppliers and buyers arising from supplier development efforts.…”

“…To reduce opportunistic behaviour, the literature considers the effectiveness of various control mechanisms. This includes power (Caniels & Gelderman, 2010;Gorton et al, 2015;Handley & Benton, 2012;Hernandez-Espallardo & Arcas-Lario, 2003), relational norms (Elommal et al, 2019;Paswan et al, 2017), information sharing (Eckerd & Hill, 2012;Wang et al, 2014), and specific investments (Handley & Benton, 2012;Liu et al, 2014;Yu et al, 2006). Yet, control mechanisms against opportunism may not always be effective.…”

“…Previous research investigates several determinants of relational norms including environmental dynamism (Joshi & Campbell, 2003), relationship structure (Gençtürk & Aulakh, 2007), trust (Paulssen et al, 2016), and exchange hazards (Poppo & Zenger, 2002;Sheng et al, 2006;Yang et al, 2016). Most extant studies conceptualize relational norms in an overwhelmingly positive light, envisaging them to reduce the likelihood of opportunism (Elommal et al, 2019).…”

A Brand Like a Friend—How Brand Likeability Influences Brand Perception

“…Oliver (1997, p. 8) defines satisfaction as “the consumer’s fulfillment response. It is a judgment that a product or service feature, or the product or service itself, provided […] a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.” Hence, post-consumption satisfaction reflects the consumer’s assessment of the perceived discrepancy between prior expectations and the actual performance of the product (Elommal et al, 2019). When a product performs worse (vs. better) than expected, dissatisfaction (vs. satisfaction) results.…”