Predicting Exit, Voice, Loyalty, and Neglect

Withey, Michael J.; Cooper, William H.

doi:10.2307/2393565

Cited by 589 publications

(550 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

503

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, our findings about the differential effects of country may apply in these contexts too, though this assertion requires empirical confirmation. Exit The disinclination to continue the current relationship (Ping, 1993;Rusbult et al, 1982;Withey and Cooper, 1989) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can be either active or passive (Hagedoorn et al, 1999). By exiting the alliance, partners dissolve their relationship and must find alternative ways to achieve their objectives (Rusbult et al, 1982;Withey and Cooper, 1989). Opportunism represents an active-destructive response (Wathne and Heide, 2000), because it is an active attempt to increase benefits from the alliance in ways that are explicitly or implicitly prohibited (Ping, 1993).…”

Section: Response Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We measured exit with items pertaining to whether the respondent intended to end the relationship or stop doing business with the partner (Rusbult et al, 1982;Withey and Cooper, 1989). The measures for opportunism, adapted from Ping (1993) and Wathne and Heide (2000), included withholding information, exaggerating the adverse nature of the situation, and escaping from contractual obligations.…”

Section: Response Strategy Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Response strategies in an international strategic alliance experimental context: Cross-country differences

Tjemkes¹,

Furrer

Adolfs³

et al. 2012

Journal of International Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International strategic alliances have grown increasingly popular in recent decades, yet their failure rate is extremely high. Poor management of adverse situations contributes significantly to such high failure rates. Moreover, the international environments in which international strategic alliances operate exacerbate the adverse situations and make their management more critical.However, extant research does not specify how people from different national cultures respond to these adverse situations. In order to better understand cross-national differences, this study investigates future managers' preferences for specific response strategies in an international strategic alliance experimental context. Using a scenario-based experiment with 1,379 business students in five countries-Japan, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom-the authors assess whether preferences for seven response strategies-exit, opportunism, aggressive voice, creative voice, considerate voice, patience, and neglect-vary across countries. The results indicate that national culture, both directly and interactively through relationship-level exchange variables that characterize the adversity of the situation, influences response strategy preference. This study advances literature on response strategies by explaining that when faced with the same adverse situation, future managers from different countries likely prefer different response strategies, depending on which response strategies they believe are most adequate in their cultural environment.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Response Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Response Strategy Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Response strategies in an international strategic alliance experimental context: Cross-country differences

Tjemkes¹,

Furrer

Adolfs³

et al. 2012

Journal of International Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The latter adverse situation pressures alliance managers to respond and preserve the current relationship (Provan and Skinner, 1989). Furthermore, alliance managers with attractive alternatives may feel less positive toward their present relationship and be less willing to act on the alliance's behalf (Withey and Cooper, 1989). Conversely, alliance managers with no alternative partners feel positively about the present relationship and act on the alliance's behalf.…”

Section: Available Alternativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The antecedents of response strategies in strategic alliances

Tjemkes

Furrer

2010

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -Strategic alliances involve uncertainty, interdependence, and vulnerability, which often create adverse situations. This paper seeks to understand how alliance managers respond to these adverse situations by examining the influence of four exchange variables on response strategies. Design/methodology/approach -A scenario-based experiment provides empirical support for a typology consisting of seven conceptually and empirically distinct response strategies: exit, opportunism, aggressive voice, creative voice, considerate voice, patience, and neglect. Findings -The results indicate that economic satisfaction, social satisfaction, alliance-specific investments, and the availability of attractive alternatives differentially and interactively affect response strategies. Research limitations/implications -The study offers two main contributions to alliance literature. First, the seven response strategies accurately represent reactions that alliance managers use to deal with adverse situations. Second, the study findings validate and extend previous alliance research by highlighting that a comprehensive response strategy typology is necessary to disentangle the effects of the four exchange conditions on response strategy use, which fosters theory development and managers' ability to manage their alliances effectively. Originality/value -The study contributes to the process perspective on strategic alliances by highlighting the various response strategies that alliance managers use to deal with adverse situations and their antecedents.

show abstract

“…Speaking up about risks can be intimidating because risk in itself tends to have negative connotations and often implies calling attention to a need for change. Thus, employees are expected to implicitly weigh the net potential benefits of speaking up about perceived risks against the potential costs of doing so (Dutton and 172 Ashford, 1993;Withey and Cooper, 1989). By signaling that leaders "are interested in and willing to act on subordinate voice, subordinates' motivation to speak up should be maintained or enhanced: absent such leader behaviors, subordinates may see potential risks as outweighing perceived benefits" (Detert and Burris, 2007: 807).…”

Section: H1 Emphasis On Erm Processes Enhances Risk Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Risk Management

Lam¹

2017

Implementing Enterprise Risk Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting Exit, Voice, Loyalty, and Neglect

Cited by 589 publications

References 22 publications

Response strategies in an international strategic alliance experimental context: Cross-country differences

Response strategies in an international strategic alliance experimental context: Cross-country differences

The antecedents of response strategies in strategic alliances

Strategic Risk Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About