Creating Value Through Customer and Supplier Relationships

Creating Value Through Customer and Supplier Relationships

William C. Johnson, Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 1Norapol Chinuntdej, Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Art Weinstein, Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Abstract

Companies that deliver superior value to customers and suppliers on an ongoing basis are able to keep them over the long term. Relationship marketing represents a key strategy for retaining more existing customers, upgrading customer relationships, and creating business advocates. This paper reviews key insight on customer value and relationship marketing in a business market context. Five vanables (trust, commitment, dependence, cooperation, and information exchange)-the relationship enablers-are identified as the foundation elements for building profitable, long-term business relationships.

How Value Is Created Through Relationship Marketing Customer Value: An Overview of the Literature

The term "value" has been studied and defined from several perspectives. Customer value is a topic of keen and growing interest to managers and researchers (Parasuraman, 1997). It has become an important theme for both academicians and practitioners who are searching for excellence in today's business. Customer value is so important in this decade because customer value can be utilized by firms to differentiate themselves from the pack (Weinstein and Pohlman, 1998). Woodruff (1997: 141) collects some key definitions by several researchers, as follows:

Value is the consumer's overall assessment of the utility of a product based onperceptions of what is received and what is given.

Value in business markets (is) the perceived worth in monetary units of the set of economic, technical, service, and social benefits received by a customer firm in exchange for the price paid for a product, taking into consideration the available suppliers' offerings and prices.

Buyers' perceptions of value represent a tradeoff between the quality or benefits they perceive in the product relative to the sacrifice they perceive by paying the price.

Customer value is market perceived quality adjusted for the relative price of your product.

1 Address correspondence to Dr. William C. Johnson, Nova Southeastern Urmersitv. school of business and entrepreneurship, 3100 Southwest 9 th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315, USA. Phone: 954-262- 5109, Fax: 954-262-3965, E-mail: [email protected] McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page 1 of 16

However, Woodruff (1997) defines meaning of customer value as "a customer's perceived preference for and evaluation of those product attributes, attributes performances, and consequences arising from use that facilitates(or blocks) achieving the customer's goals and purposes in use situations (p. 142)."

Zeithaml (1988) conceptualizes value four ways: value is low price, value is whatever customers want in a product; value is the quality a customer gets for the price that he/she pays, and value is what the customer gets for what he/she gives. Drawing on these categories, Zeithaml defines perceived value as " the consumer's overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given (p. 13)."

Wemstein and Pohlman (1998) indicate that value may be an old concept but it is a new paradigm in business. Customer value is a strategic driver that help any firms differentiate themselves from the pack in the mind of the customers.

Treacy (1995) suggests that firms adopt one of three value disciplines: product leadership, operational excellence, or customer intimacy. These disciplines will provide the best product, the best total cost, and the best total solution, respectively. Also, Naumann (1995) states that the customer value triad consists of three key ingredients: value-based prices, product quality, and service quality. Fredericks and Salter (1995) point out that price, product quality, service quality, innovation, and image are the factors that create what the customers perceive as a superior value. They also note that such factors must stem from customer requirements. According to Berry (1996), customer value is the total experience it includes product assortment, respect for customers, time and energy savings, fun, and fair prices.

The value concept also influences the other management disciplines. Sustainable competitive advantage requires superior customer value (Jensen, 1995). Supply chain management is studied in terms of a virtual value chain to best serve customers (Rayport and Sviokla, 1995). Segmentation and the marketing mix are also focal points for value creation research ( Keane and Wang^s, 1995; Sukhdial, Chakraborty. and Steger's, 1995). According to Langley and Holcomb (1992), logistics can bear a principal responsibility in the task of creating value for the customer. They suggest the unique framework of how to establish a competitive advantage of customer value through logistics management.

Another main line of research is developed from the proposition that value must be created from internal systems. The Service Profit Chain model-the line of research relating value, internal service quality, customer satisfaction, and profitability, has been developed by Heskett, Sasser, and Schlesinger (1997). The model is a path model which outlines a chain of events starting with a company's human resource practices, leading to revenue growth and profitability. The model asserts that internal service quality- which is driven by adequate tools to serve customers, rewards or recognition which is measured from customer value index, or management support which is based onin McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,


customer value-drives employee satisfaction. Providing high internal service quaht> to employees serves as a first step to generate employee satisfaction. When employees are satisfied, they are more likely to be productive. Thus, they can provide high external service value or high quality customer service. This leads to customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. Eventually, high customer loyalty level will increase firm's revenue growth and profitability.

Finally value is created in relationships , how firms connect with their customers personally and systematically. Sheth and Sharma (1997) believe that the relationships between firms and suppliers will enable firms to receive better product quality, service quality, and lower cost. Thus, strong business relationships increase efficiency (lower cost) and effectiveness (better product/service quality) yielding superior value for partners. The study by Cooper and Gardner (1993) suggests that building good business relationships is so important because this will build value in partnerships.

Another perspective on this main line of research comes from Anderson and Narus's (1991) research. They emphasize that value can be created in supplier-customer relationships. The supplier can gain this success by "flaring out" in pure transactional exchange and pure collaborative exchange relationships. Suppliers adopting this relationship strategy can gain competitive advantage over the other suppliers because the supplier innovates to provide relationships more closelx aligned to customer requirements.

The above discussion has established the idea that firms wanting to survive in today's highly competitive world must recognize the importance of creating superior value for customers. Next, the paper will discuss about relationship marketmg-a new paradigm shift in marketing.

Relationship Marketing: An Overview of the Literature

According to Gronroos (1994), today's environment has been changing and several new concepts in marketing have been emerging the globalization of business, customer retention, the market economies, and relationship marketing, among other trends. He feels that the marketing mix which emerged in 1950s should be changed to a new concept for approaching marketing problems in today's environment. The traditional marketing concept or the marketing mix is a production-oriented paradigm, but the paradigm has already seen a shift to a customer or market orientation. Thus, the four Ps of the marketing mix are no longer suitable to fulfill the requirements of the marketing concept in this value decade. He states firmly that relationship marketing is the new paradigm shift in marketing.

In recent years, relationship marketing has been defined in several ways. Uronroos (1994) defines relationship marketing as marketing which is "to establish, maintain, and enhance relationships with customers and other partners, at a profit, so that the objectives of the parties involved are met (p.9)." Morgan and Hunt (1994) mention that relationship marketing is establishing, developing, and maintaining successful relational exchange.in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,


Relationship marketing can be viewed as a process. Copulinsky and Wolf (1990) consider relationship marketing as a process where the mam goal is to create a database including existing and potential customers. Evans> and Laskm (1994) also define relationship marketing as a process. They offer a conceptual framework for relationship marketing. This framework consists of three portions inputs (understanding customer expectations, building service partnerships, empowering employees, and total quality management), outcomes( customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, increased profitability, and quality products), and ongoing assessment (customer feedback, integrating marketing into the firm's strategic planning framework).

Other researchers analyze relationship marketing in the long-term view of buyer-seller relationships. Turnbul and Wilson (1989) state that relationship marketing is the formation of long-term buyer-seller relationships through the creation of structural and social bonds between companies. Sheth and Parvatiyar (1995) say that relationship marketing is developing close interactions with selected customers, suppliers, and competitors for value creation through collaborative effort.

Notice that relationship marketing is ongoing. A business relationship is like a marriage-success is achieved not just through good intentions but also through hard work and close attention to the other party's needs. Further, the goal is to identify and create new value with individual customers. Amazon.com does this via a "personalization" technology known as collaborative filtering. Once you have made a purchase from them, Amazon.com, recommends a new book by comparing your tastes with those of fellow book buyers who have reported liking the kinds of books that you enjoy. Not only should value be created, but the resulting benefits need to be shared over the lifetime of the relationship.

The relationship will endure only to the extent that "win-win" situation exists. For example, Compaq computers has reached an agreement with internet service providers America On-line and GTE Corp., along with on-line retailer Amazon.com, where each of the these companies agree to share with Compaq a slice of the revenues generated using Compaq computers. Another case is that American Airlines create a program called "Airpass" for one of it large corporate customers, Perot Systems. When Perot employees book flights, they don't have to bother waiting for tickets; they just simply present a card at the ticket counter or gate. Miles are automatically credited to the employee's American frequent flyer account. Upgrade are readily available and American allows Perot employees to use its Ambassadors Clubs for business and leisure travel.

Considering the case of Ryder System Inc., in the mid-1980s, Ryder began a relationship with one of the large Bell operating companies via a short-term truck rental. Over time, Ryder has provided more value to the customer, including full-service equipment leases, drivers, a full outbound delivery network, and logistics solutions. In the last years, Ryder also has assumed operation of all inbound transportation and distributor-center packaging /shipping/cross docking and storeroom operations, all staffed and operated by Ryder personnel. From the humble beginning of a single truckin McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings oj The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page 4ot 16

rental, this account has grown into a totally integrated supply-chain system worth $30 million to Ryder, with a 1998 estimated account value of $50 million, including extended support into Latin America.

The foregoing discussion of customer value and relationship marketing raises the question of how value is created through relationship marketing, the topic of the next section.

Creating Value Through Relationship Marketing

Evidence indicates that the relationship between customer and supplier is increasing in frequency and importance under the relationship marketing paradigm. Gummesson (1998) states: "the ethics and values of relationship marketing are different from the practice of conventional marketing. Although a relationship between a supplier and a customer is commercial, it is a relationship and that requires a long-term view, mutual respect, a win-win strategy, and the acceptance of the customer as a partner and coproducer of value and not just a passive recipient of a supplier's product (p.243)." Sheth and Sharma (1997) indicate that firms have to move away from traditional transaction oriented marketing strategies and move toward relationship marketing strategies. They emphasize that value can emerge through supplier-buyer relationship. They state: "developing relationship with suppliers will be critical for the functioning of firms (p.95)." They conclude that organizational buying is shifting from the transaction oriented to the relational oriented philosophy. Relationship marketing requires a shift away from the traditional buying process to a supplier relationship process. They mention that there are four underlying reasons for building supplier relationships: increased cost efficiency, increased effectiveness, enabling technologies, and increased competitiveness.

Kalwani and Narayandas (1995) studied the long-term relationship perspective and conclude: "supplier firms in long-term relationships with select customers are able to retain or even improve their profitability levels more than firms which employ a transactional approach (p. 14)."

Furthermore, some researchers have been concerned with the evolving changes in relationships characteristics. Heide and John (1990) review the literature and suggest that during the recent years, the nature of customer-supplier relationships have been undergoing dramatic changes. The ties between customers and suppliers are increasingly characterized by term like "closer", "alliances", and "partnerships" and in contrast to more traditional "arm's-length" type of interaction. Wheatley (1991) also supports this proposition that firms have been shifting away from adversarial interactions, typical of the arm's-length, traditional buyer-seller transaction, and seeking longer-term relationships which is based on mutual advantage and mutual survival.

The concept of relationship marketing and customer value can also be applied toward new logistics management. Langley and Holcomb (1992) state: "in their quest for new ways to establish a competitive edge, many companies are recognizing the unique typesin McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page 5 ot 16

of customer value that can be created through logistics management (p.l)." They offer a new strategic logistics management perspective which requires the coordination between buyers and sellers. Such logistics management approaches have three generic ways of creating customer value: effectiveness (performance to meet customer requirements in certain critical result areas), efficiency (the firm's ability to provide the desired product/service mix at a level of cost that is acceptable to the customer), and differentiation (the firm's ability to create value for the customer through uniqueness and distinctiveness of logistical service). The study by Gardner, Cooper, and Noordewier (1994) reveals that carriers and warehousers prefer more partnerships in their relationships with their core customers to achieve the objectives of the relationship. According to Mentzer (1993), one of main drivers that shape the new management of logistics channel relations is value-driven concept. He asserts: "value emphasizes not just the delivery of the quality customers require but also the guarantee that customers perceive the quality they are receiving (p.35)." Thus, new logistics management must represent cooperation between organizations and individuals to satisfy the customers'time, place, quantity, form, and possession utilities. Sigua\\. Simpson, and Baker (1998) posit that market orientation betuccn suppliers and distributors will strengthen their relationships, which finally leads to distributor satisfaction with better financial performance.

The literature review on supply chain management reveals the importance of integration among buyer-seller relationships, relationship marketing, creating value, and supply chain activities. For example, Cooper, Ellram, Gardner, and Hanks (1997) state: "the logistics function has played a leading role for industry in building and defining partnership-style relationships. Thus, the confluence of two recent changes, the emergence of logistics as one of the most cross-functional of corporate entities, and the new marketing emphasis on the style of the relationships combine to place logistics managers in the position with the best view for vertical channel integration across multiple channel levels (p.67)." They propose the value tree which is the integration of supply chain viewpoint and the partnership building process.

The preceding discussion of customer value, relationship marketing, and customer- supplier relationships has provided a perspective of how to create value through customer-supplier relationships under the relationship marketing paradigm. Customer value is the ultimate goal of any firm in this decade. Relationship marketing provides a new framework for how marketers can develop new strategy to meet customer value. Since "relationships involve an ongoing process that requires partnership maintenance and responses to change (Keep et al., 1998)", marketers must focus on the maintenance of a set of customer-supplier relationships that represent the linn s most important business assets (Webster, 1992)". Thus, there is a need to determine which factors strengthen and maintain the relationship between customers and suppliers leading to value creation. The purpose of the next section is to present determinants of relationship value.

i/i IMcLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,University College, Dublin 1999

Page 6 of 16

The Five Key Relationship Variable for Relationship Enablers

The literature suggests that in recent years the determinants of successful buyer-seller or customer-supplier relationships have received a great deal of attention from marketing scholars. For example, Olsen and Fllram (1997) explain that there are four mam factors which describe the strength of the buyer-supplier relationship: economic factors, character of the exchange relationship, cooperation between buyer and supplier, and distance between the buyer and supplier. Landry (1998) reports the research by Lawrence and Gulati that the most effective alliances with external suppliers arc built on four pillars: power balancing, co-specialization, target costing, and personal ties. Keep, Hollander, and Dickinson's (1998) study of long-term business-to-business relationships reveals that economic growth, information asymmetry partially prompted by geographic dispersion, entry barriers in one or both industries, dependence asymmetry and economies of scale are important forces impinging on relationship development. Heide and John (1990) offer a purchasing relationship models which consists of three dimensions: joint action, expected continuity, and verification effort of suppliers.

Moore (1998) considers the relationship under the logistics management perspective and mentions that successful logistics alliances have a long-term orientation that requires trust, loyalty, and a sharing of information, risks, and rewards. Wilson's (1995) integrated model of buyer-seller relationships is built on the following variables: commitment, trust, structural bonds, comparison level of the alternate es, adaptation, nonretnevable investments, shared technology, and social bonds. Furthermore. Johnson (1999) who investigates the interfirm relationship in industrial distribution channels as a strategic integration, reveals that dependence, flexibility, continuity expectations, and relationship age encourage the distributor's strategic integration of its supplier relationship.

In sum, there are some common relationship building variables which marketing scholars view as being the most critical. We refer to these variables as "relationship enablers". We propose that relationship enablers will minimize relationship decay and strengthen the bonds that lead to long-term customer-supplier relationships. The relationship enablers consist of trust, commitment, dependence, cooperation, and information exchange.

Trust

Trust is one factor that has been strongly suggested as having an important role in facilitating closer buyer-supplier relationships by reducing the tendency of firms to take advantage of each other (Zaheer, McEvily, and Perrone, 1998). A seller can create confidence in the eyes of the buyer by being credible and following on what they promise. For example, Fedex dominates the market overnight delivery because the> promise to have the customer's package there "absolutely, positively, overnight" Fedex's customers rest easy at night knowing that this statement is not simpK an advertising slogan, but a pledge to deliver on what they promise. Baker, Simpson. and Siguaw (1999) conclude from their extensive literature revie\\ in seeing ho\v importantin McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Koran (eds.), Proceedings oj The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page? ot 16

trust is in the relationship building that: " while a number of constructs have emerged as potential indicators of an attitude and perspective toward the creation and maintenance of a long-term relationship, the greater support has been provided for trust, cooperation, commitment, and satisfaction (p.51) 11 . Ganeson (1994) proposes that high levels of trust characteristics during relational exchanges enable both parties to focus on the long-term benefits of the relationship. The performance outcomes from trust-based relationship will enhance competitiveness and reducing transaction cost (Noordewier, John, and Newm, 1990).

Trust has received a great deal of attention in social psychology, sociology, economics, as well as marketing (Doney and Cannon, 1997). Also, trust is a major area of research in international marketing topic (e.g., Dacin, Hitt, and Levitas, 1997: Johnson, Cullen, Sakano, and Takenouchi, 1996; Madhok, 1995). Each discipline provides insights into the nature of trust, its definition, and its processes to build the efficient relationship between partners.

Under the relationship marketing literature, trust has been defined in various ways. Wilson (1995) proposes that trust is a fundamental relationship model building block. He also lists four of the most often cited definitions of trust: A willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence. One party believes that its needs will be fulfilled in the future by actions taken by

the other party. A party's expectation that another party desires coordination, will fulfill obligations,

and will pull its weight in the relationship. The belief that a party's word or promise is reliable and a party will fulfill his/her

obligations in an exchange relationship.

Drawing from these perspectives, Smeltzer defines trust by stating: "a trustworthy customer or supplier is one that displays the following characteristics does not act in a purely self-serving manner, accurately discloses relevant information when requested, does not change supply specifications, standards, or costs to take advantage of other parties, and generally acts according to normally accepted ethical standards (p.41)."

The preceding discussion shows that trust no doubt is one of the most crucial factors in strengthening customer-supplier relationships.

Commitment

Besides trust, commitment is another crucial relationship enabler representing a key construct in both conceptual and empirical models of various mterorgamzational exchange relationships ( Anderson and Wietz, 1992; Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Ring and Van de Ven, 1992). Commitment reflects the actions and values of key decision makers regarding continuation of the relationship, acceptance of the joint goals and values of the partnership, and the willingness to invest resources in the relationship (Shamdasani and Sheth, 1995). For instance, UPS and J.C.Penny recently formed a $1 billion partnership in which UPS becomes Penney's sole mail-order carrier, as well as their logistics carrier, bringing their equipment and expertise to the partnership. Such a in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Koran (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page 8 oil 6

commitment signals a willingness by each player to modify their existing systems to fit the other, inextricably binding these companies together.

Further, commitment can be described as tk an exchange partner believing that an ongoing relationship with another is so important as to warrant maximum efforts at maintaining it; that is, the committed party believes the relationship is worth working on to ensure that it endures indefinitely (Morgan and Hunt, 1994: 23)". Commitment implies an importance of the relationship to the partners and the desire to continue the relationship into the future, leading to a positive effect on relationship profitability (Holm, Enkkson, and Johanson, 1996). Anderson and Witz (1992) note that commitment comprises three facets: a desire to develop a stable relationship; a willingness to make short term sacrifices to maintain the relationship; and a confidence in the stability of the relationship.

Lund (1985) states that a committed partner is more likely to expend the time and resources needed to achieve the goals of the relationship, while showing the desire and intent to maintain a strong relationship. Moore (1998), drawing from the literature on commitment, suggests that "commitment involves continuity or a long-term orientation with both parties cooperating to maintain the relationship", also "commitment is believing that an ongoing relationship is so important that it warrants maximum efforts to maintain it and ensure that it continues indefinitely' 1 (p.25)."

In sum, we maintain that trust and commitment are the two most crucial relationship variables. Finding a successful relationship without trust and commitment is rare. Furthermore, trust and commitment seem to be strongly associated with complaint handling satisfaction.

Cooperation

Cooperation is defined as the activity that both the customer and supplier are working jointly to achieve mutual and individual goals (Baker et al., 1999). Cooperation also involves coordinated activities between customer and supplier aimed at producing desirable results for both firms. Anderson and Narus (1990) define cooperation as "similar or complementary coordinated actions taken by firms in interdependent relationships to achieve mutual outcomes or singular outcomes with expected reciprocation over time (p.45)."Olsen and Ellram (1997) offer a portfolio approach to supplier relationships, in which they note that the cooperation between buyers and suppliers can be described in three terms: cooperation in development; technical cooperation; and integration of management.

The gains experienced by cooperating in the customer-supplier relationship can more than offset the loss of autonomy in a relationship (Johnson and Wemstem, 1999). Moreover, cooperation frequently involves a willingness to develop joint goals and even share resources. Procter & Gamble actually manages Wal-Mart's inventory, and it's P&G's responsibility to decide when Wal-Mart needs shipments. To do this, P&G has complete access to Wal-Mart's inventory. It manages everything and makes decisionsin McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15' Annual IMP Conference,


on its own shipments. This arrangement is beneficial for both parties. Wal-Mart can charge less because it does not have the cost ot tracking or storing inventory, while P&G has a much bigger share of business and it does not have to compete with other suppliers.

Dependence

Dependence is a need to maintain the channel relationship to achieve desired goals (Frazier, 1983). Weinstein and Johnson(1999) define dependence as a willingness to invest time and dedicate resources for the purpose of establishing and strengthening a business relationship. For instance, take Gillette's relationship with ADC, a promotional materials supplier. ADC's partner relationship with Gillette initially started when ADC was chosen to help develop a display program for Gillete's new men's toiletry line, The Gillette Series, consisting of shaving preparation products, deodorants, antiperspirants, and after-shave products. ADC's involvement began with the initial display concept, followed by prototyping, engineering and assembling pre-packed displays which were shipped to Gillete's major distribution centers. ADC acted as an extension of Gillette's manufacturing and marketing by providing coordinated logistics, display development, pack-out, and distribution. ADC committed 54,000 square feet of manufacturing space and over a hundred employees to this product launch.

There are some scholars who argue that a firm should avoid depending on its partners (e.g., Gaski, 1984). However, some oppose this proposition. For example. Lusch, and Brown (1996) offer empirical support which suggests that wholesale-distributors and suppliers should form relationships in which they both have a high need for each other. Johnson (1999) posits that when dependence is involved in the industrial distribution channel; substantial gains emerge. Such gams include a higher level of shared information, streamlined and efficient transactions, cost savings, technological and process innovation, shortened lead times in product development, logistics management, and other marketing programs such as joint promotions and shortened response times. He also states that such gams also contribute to value creation. Etgar and Valency (1983) reveal that the more dependent on the supplier the distributor is, the greater the extent to which a formal agreement is signed between the distributor and the major supplier.

Another view of dependence is based on the proposition that mutual dependence between buyer and supplier is high, it is likely that both parties will have a high stake in ensuring the relationship's success because of investments of time, effort, and money (Anderson and Weitz, 1992; Buchanan, 1992). Some scholars suggest that if firms need to engage in economic exchange to obtain necessary resources outside their control (resource-specific investments) it will increase the dependence on each partner in relationship (Ganesan, 1994; Gundlach and Cadotte, 1994).

Thus, any customer-supplier relationship should promote dependence and, given the right conditions, relationship quality will be enhanced (Buchanan. 1992).

Information Exchangein McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,

University College, Dublin 1999Page 10 ot 16

Information exchange assists the buyer and seller in foreseeing and responding to each other's objectives which strengthens the relationship (Lusch and Brown, 1996). Information exchange works as the lubricant in keeping the other four relationship enablers from corroding (Weinstem and Johnson, 1999). When buyers offer more information sellers in turn are willing provide more services, creating a \\in-v\m situation. McKesson Corporation, a major drug wholesaler representing thousands of independent pharmacies, helps them set up accounting and inventory systems, as \\cll as computer ordering systems The retailers gain value from impro\cd stock planning, resulting in fewer stock-outs and more satisfied customers. McKesson benefits by- creating "captive" retail accounts who grant McKesson unprecedented access to their sales and financial data. Because resellers are forced to to collect and respond to information regarding customer needs, they are likely to share information and engage in cooperative effort with their suppliers to meet customer needs (Baker et aL 1999).

Noordewier, John, and Nevin (1990) investigate industrial buyer-vendor relationships and state that three factors the exchange of long-term forecasts, market information, and structural planning information-lead to a greater willingness to share knowledge essential to coordination. The factors leading to close relationships between buyers and sellers are examined based on the interaction model and the result demonstrates that the exchange of information along with interpersonal contacts produces a cooperative atmosphere between buyer and seller that eventually sets the stage for mutual adaptation in the relationship (Metcalf, Frear, and Krishman, 1992).

In summary, each of the relationship enablers will be evident to varying degrees in successful buyer-seller relationships. Clearly, some of these factors will become more important over the life of the business relationship than others. Trust and cooperation, for example, are critical during the initial stages of relationship building; commitment, dependence, and information exchange become more important later in the relationship (Weinstein and Johnson, 1999).

Conclusion

This paper examines the emergence of customer value and relationship marketing as new paradigm shift in marketing. Firms wanting to survive in today's highly competitive business world must recognize the importance of creating superior value for customers by practicing the relationship marketing concept. The marketing paradigm has shifted from traditional transactional marketing to relationship marketing. The ultimate goal of relationship marketing is to create strong long-term business relationships to survive in this value decade. To meet this critical requirement, the paper proposes companies focus on five key relationship enablers-trust, commitment, dependence, cooperation, and information exchange. Firms must continuously create, strengthen, and maintain each of these relationship enablers over the lifetime of business relationships.

References

in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings oj The 15"' Annual IMP Conference,University College, Dublin 1999

Page 11 ot 16

Anderson, J.C. and J.A. Narus. 1990. "A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships. "Journal of Marketing 54( January) :42-5 8.

Anderson, J.C. and J.A., Narus. 1991. "Partnering as a Focused Market Strategy." California Management Review Spring: 95-113.

Anderson, E. and B. Weitz. 1992. "The Use of Pledges to Build and Sustain Commitment in Distribution Channels." Journal of Marketing Research 29 (February): 18-34.

Baker, T.L., P.M. Simpson, and J.A. Siguaw. 1999. "The Impact of Suppliers'Perceptions of Reseller Market Orientation on Key Relationship Constructs." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27 (1): 50-57.

Berry, L. 1996. "Retailers with a Future." Marketing Management Spring:39-46.

Berry, L. and M.S. Yadav. 1996. "Capture and Communicate Value in the Pricing of Services." Sloan Management Review Summer: 41-51.

Buchanan, L. 1992. "Vertical Trade Relationships: The Role of Dependence and Symmetry in Attaining Organizational Goals." Journal of Marketing Research 29 (February): 65-75.

Cooper, M.C. and J.T. Gardner. 1993. "Building Good Business Relationships-More than Just Partnering or Strategic Alliances? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 23(6): 14-26.

Cooper, M.C., L.M. Ellram, J.T. Gardner, and A.M. Hanks. 1997. "Meshing Multiple Alliances." Journal of Business Logistics 18(1): 67-89.

Dacin, M.T., M.A. Hitt, and E. Levitas. 1997. "Selecting Partners for SuccessfulInternational Alliances: Examination of U.S. and Korean Firms." Journal of World Business 32(1): 3-16.

Doney, P.M. and J.P. Cannon. 1997. "An Examination of the Nature of Trust in Buyer- Seller Relationships. "Journal of Marketing 61 (April): 35-51

Etgar, M. and A. Valency. 1983. "Determinants of the Use of Contracts in Conventional Marketing Channels." Journal of Retailing 59 (Winter): 81 -92.

Evans, J.R. and R.L. Laskm. 1994. "The Relationship Marketing Process: AConceptualization and Application." Industrial Marketing Management 23: 439- 452.

Frazier, G.L. 1983. "On the Measurement of Interfirm Power in Channels of Distribution." Journal of Marketing Research 20(May): 158-166.

in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,University College, Dublin 1999

Page 12 ot!6

Frazicr, G.I... and R.C Rod> 1991 "The l : .^ of Influence Strategies in Inter!inn Relationships in Industrial Product Channels. "Journal uj Marketing 55 (January). 52-69.

Fredericks, J.O. and J.M. Salter II. 1995. "Beyond Customer Satisfaction." Management Review May: 29-32.

Ganesan, S. 1994. "Determinants of Long-Term Orientation in Buyer-Seller Relationships." Journal of Marketing 5 8( April): 1-19.

Gardner, J.T., M.C. Cooper, and T.G. Noordewier. 1994. "Understanding Shipper- Carrier and Shipper-Warehouser Relationship. "Journal of Business Logistics 15 (2): 121-143.

Gaski, J. 1984. "The Theory of Power and Conflict in Channels of Distribution." Journal of 'Marketing 48 (Summer): 9-29.

Gronroos, C. 1994. "From Marketing Mix to Relationship Marketing: Towards a paradigm Shift in Marketing." Management Decision 32(2): 4-20.

Gummesson, E. 1998. "Implementation Requires a Relationship Marketing Paradigm." Journal of Academy of Marketing Science 26 (3): 242-249.

Gundlach, G.T. and E.R. Cadotte. 1994. "Exchange Interdependence and InterfirmInteraction:Research in a Simulated Channel Setting." Journal oj Marketing Research 31 (November): 516-532.

Heide, J.B. and G. John. 1990. "Alliances in Industrial Purchasing: The Determinants of Joint Action in Buyer-Supplier Relationships." Journal of Marketing Research 21 (February): 24-36.

Heskett, J.L., W.E. Sasser, and L.A. Schlesinger. 1997. The Service Profit Chain: How Leading Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty, Satisfaction, and Value. New York: The Free Press.

Holm, D.B., K. Eriksson, and J. Johanson. 1996. "Business Networks and Cooperation in International Business Relationships." Journal of International Business Studies 27(5): 1033-1053.

Jensen, H.R. 1995. "An Interpretation of How Competitive Advantage in Consumer Markets Can Be Achieved Through Superior Customer Value." American Marketing Association Summer Educators Conference Proceeding p.535-540.

Johnson, J.L. 1999. "Strategic Integration in Industrial Distribution Channels:Managing the Interfirm Relationship as a Strategic Asset." Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science 21 ( 1 ):4-18.in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings of The 15th Annual IMP Conference,


Johnson, J.L., J.B. Cullen, T. Sakano, and H. Takenouchi. 1996. "Setting the Stage for Trust and Strategic Integration in Japanese-U.S. Cooperative Alliances " Journal of International Business Studies 27(5): 981-1004.

Kalwani, M.U. and N. Narayandas. 1995. "Long-Term Manufacturer-SupplierRelationships: Do They Pay Off for Supplier Firms'.'" Journal of Marketing 59 (January): 1-16.

Keane, T.J. and P. Wang. 1995. "Applications for the Lifetime Value Model in Modern Newspaper Publishing." Journal of Direct marketing Spring: 59-66.

Keep, W.W., S.C. Hollander, and R. Dickmson. 1998. "Forces Impinging on Long- Term Busmess-to-Busmess Relationships in the United States: An Historical Perspective." Journal of Marketing 62 (April): 31-45.

Landry, J.T. 1998. "Supply Chain Management: The Case for Alliances." Harvard Business Review 76(November/December): 24-25.

Langley, C.J.Jr. and M.C. Holcomb. 1992. "Creating Logistics Customer Value. " Journal of Business Logistics 13(2): 1-27.

Longenecker, C.O. and W.K. Meade II. 1995 "Marketing as a Management Style." Business Horizons 38(4): 77-83.

Lusch, R.F. and J.R. Brown. 1996. "Interdependency, Contracting, and RelationalBehavior in Marketing Channels." Journal of Marketing 60(October): 19-38.

Madhok, A. 1995. "Revisiting Multinational Firms Tolerances tor Joint \ eniure.v" Journal of International Business Studies 26( 1): 117-138.

Mentzer, J.T. 1993. "Managing Channel Relations in the 21 st Century. "Journal of Business Logistics 14(1): 27-42.

Metcalf, L.E., C.R. Frear, and R. Knshman. 1992. "Buyer-Seller Relationships: An Application of the IMP Interaction Model." European Journal of Marketing 26(2): 27-47.

Moore, K. R. 1998. "Trust and Relationship Commitment in Logistics Alliances: A Buyer Perspective. " International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management (January): 24-37

Morgan, R.M. and S.D. Hunt. 1994. "The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. "Journal of Marketing 58 (July): 20-38.

Naumann, E. 1995. Creating Customer Value, Cincinnati: Thomson Executive Press.


Page 14 ot!6

Noordewier, T. G., G. John, and J.R. Newm. 1990. "Performance Outcomes ofPurchasing Arrangements in Industrial Buyer-Vendor Relationships. "Journal of Marketing 54(October):80-93.

Novack, R.A., L.M. Rmehart, and M.V. Wells. (1992). "Rethinking ConceptFoundations in Logistics Management." Journal of Business Logistics 13 (2): 233-268.

Olsen, R.F. and L.M. Ellram. 1997. "A Portfolio Approach to Supplier Relationships." Industrial Marketing Management 26:101-113.

Parasuraman, A. 1997. "Reflections on Gaming Competitive Advantage ThroughCustomer Value." Journal of the Academy oj Marketing Science 25(2): 154-161

Rayport, J.F. and J.J. Sviokla. 1995. "Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain. " Harvard Business Review November/December: 75-85

Reidenbach, R.E. 1996. "Follow the Value Chain to Superior Performance. " The Bankers Magazine November-December: 48-52.

Ring, P.S. and H.H. Van de Ven. 1992. "Structuring Cooperative Relationships Between Organizations." Strategic Management Journal 13: 483-498.

Ramsey, R.P. and R.S. Sohl. "Listening to Your Customers: The Impact of Perceived Salesperson Listening Behavior on Relationship Outcomes." Journey of A cademy of Marketing Science 25(2): 127-137.

Shamdasani, P.N. and J.N. Sheth. 1995. "An Experimental Approach to Investigating Satisfacition and Continuity in Marketing Alliances. " European Journal of Marketing 29(4): 6-23.

Sheth, J.N. and A. Parvatiyar. 1995. "Relationship Marketing in Consumer Markets:Antecedents and Consequences." Journal of the Academy oj Marketing Science 23:255-271.

Sheth, J.N. and A. Sharma. 1997. "Supplier Relationships: Emerging Issuer and Challenges. " Industrial Marketing Management 26: 91-100.

Siguaw, J.A., P.M. Simpson, and T.L. Baker. 1998. "Efffects of Supplier MarketOrientation on Distributor Market Orientation and the Channel Relationship: The Distributor Perspective." Journal of Marketing 62 (July): 99-111.

Smeltzer, L.R. 1997. "The Meaning and Origin of Trust in Buer-SupplierRelationships." International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management (January): 40-48.


Page 15oll6

Sukhdial, A.S., G. Chakraborty, and E.K. Steger. 1995. "Measuring Values CanSharpen Segmentation in the Luxury Auto Market.' 1 Journal of Advertising Research January/February: 9-22.

Treacy, M.E. 1995. "The Discipline of Market Leaders: Delivering Unmatched Value Year After Year." The Conference Board: 9-13.

Turnbull, P.W. and D.T. Wilson. 1989. "Developing and Protecting ProfitableCustomer Relationships. " Industrial Marketing Management 18 (233-238.

Webster, F.E.Jr. 1992. "The Changing Role of Marketing in the Corporation." Journal of Marketing 56 (October): 1-17.

Wemstem, A. and W.C. Johnson. 1999. Superior Customer Value: Concepts, Cases, and Application in Services Marketing. Boca Raton, Florida, St.Luice Press.

Wemstein, A. and R.A. Pohlman. 1998. "Customer Value: A New Paradigm for Marketing Management." Advances in Biuinc** Studies 6(10): 89-97.

Wheatley, M. 1991. "Partners in Purchasing ." Management Today (October): 84-86.

Wilson, D.T. 1995. "An Integrated Model of Buyer-Seller Relationships. "Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 23(4): 335-345.

Woodruff, R.B. 1997. "Customer Value: The Next Source for Competitive Advantage." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25(2): 139-153.

Zaheer, A., B. McEvily, and V. Perrone. 1998. "The Strategic Value of Buyer-Supplier Relationships." International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management (August): 20-26.

Zeithaml, V.A. 1988. "Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means- End Model and Synthesis of Evidence. "Journal of Marketing 52( July): 2-22.

in McLoughlin, Damien. and C. Horan (eds.), Proceedings oj The 15th Annual IMP Conference,University College, Dublin 1999

Page 16 of 16

Documents

Creating Value Through Customer and Supplier Relationships