1Graduate Business SchoolAssignment Cover Sheet Student name:Thaísa Martins Magacho de AndradeStudent number:2902080Course:Msc International BusinessStage/year:2Subject:BRM 1Study Mode:Full timeXPart-timeLecturer Name:Justin KeoganAssignment Title:An exploratory study of the construction of relationships seller-buyerand the impact on long-term performance, loyalty and referralsNo. of pages:23Disk included?YesNoxAdditional Information:(ie. number of pieces submitted, size of assignment, A2, A3 etc)Date due:01/02/2015Date submitted:01/02/2015Plagiarism disclaimer:I understand that plagiarism is a serious offence and have read and understood the college policy onplagiarism. I also understand that I may receive a mark of zero if I have not identified and properly attributedsources which have been used, referred to, or have in any way influenced the preparation of this assignment,or if I have knowingly allowed others to plagiarise my work in this way.I hereby certify that this assignment is my own work, based on my personal study and/or research, and that Ihave acknowledged all material and sources used in its preparation. I also certify that the assignment has notpreviously been submitted for assessment and that I have not copied in part or whole or otherwise plagiarisedthe work of anyone else, including other students.Signed & dated: 01/02/2016 Please note: Students MUST retain a hard / soft copy of ALL assignments as well as a receipt issued andsigned by a member of Faculty as proof of submission.2Business Research Methods IProf. Justin KeoganAn exploratory study of theconstruction of relationships sellerbuyer and the impact on long-termperformance, loyalty and referrals.Griffith College DublinDublin, Ireland, February 2016ByAndrade, Thaísa Martins Magacho de (2902080)3Table of ContentsTABLE OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………………….. 41. Topic Description …………………………………………………………………………….. 52. Aims and Objectives ………………………………………………………………………… 63. Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………….. 83.1 How firm´s choose the selling orientation …………………………………………. 83.2 Relationship selling versus transactional selling ………………………………… 83.3 Levels of Relationship……………………………………………………………………. 93.4 Process, components and benefits………………………………………………… 103.5 Role and importance of salesforce in the seller-buyer relationship……… 133.6 Relationship selling as base for competitive advantage ……………………. 144. Critical Review of Article …………………………………………………………………. 166. References …………………………………………………………………………………… 214TABLE OF FIGURESFigure 1: Levels of Relationship …………………………………………………………….. 10Figure 2: Antecedents and Consequences of Trust and Satisfaction in BuyerSeller Relationship ………………………………………………………………………………. 10Figure 3: Antecedents of Trust and Relationship Intentions ……………………….. 11Figure 4: Correlation of Individual and Firm Level in Relationship Selling…….. 1451. Topic DescriptionThe topic that will be focus of this proposal is the impact of relationship selling inlong-term performance of firms opposed to concept of hard selling and shortterm accomplishments. The designed title is “An exploratory study of theconstruction of relationships seller-buyer and the impact on long-termperformance, loyalty and referrals”.The focus will be in companies that sees the client as a partner and a source ofcompetitive advantage, understanding that short-term decisions can hinderfuture performance and long-term benefits (Schultz & Good 2000)The main questions that will guide this research are:1) How firm´s choose the selling orientation?2) What are the differences between relationship selling and transactionalselling?3) What are the levels of relationship applicable to optimize resourceallocation?4) What is the process and base of relationship selling? What are thebenefits of this approach?5) What is the role of the salesforce in the relationship of seller-buyer?Which selling behaviours affect the relationship quality?6) How does relationship selling affect the outcomes such as performance,loyalty and referrals?The questions should provide a framework to guide the research and outline therelevant topics and areas to be explored. According to Hartline (2000) the mainmechanisms to develop a customer-oriented strategy, base of the relationshipselling orientation, are: less formalized organizational structure, employeeempowerment, behaviour-based employee evaluations and work-groupsocialization. Based on this concept, the research will take place in Brazil indifferent industry segments and firm´s sizes trying to identify what are thedifferences and similarities in the relationship building process between a smallsized and a big-sized organization and the impact on performance and loyalty,focusing on the formalization of processes and hierarchical structure.62. Aims and ObjectivesThe interest on researching the topic arose from the author´s past workingexperience in an American multinational in different areas for six years. As afinance analyst the contact with forecasting and controlling gave a wideoverview on how the company´s targets were constructed and aligned with theheadquarters, having a strong top-down aspect and impact on the businessobjectives deployment. In the trade marketing area the author was able toparticipate in the development of promotions, point of sales campaigns andsales tactics to support the sales and marketing objectives, understanding thatthe level of customization was not enough to provide a customer-centricityapproach, instead barely addressed the distribution channels challenges.In the last position occupied in the company as sales executive the author sawhow the misalignment of the sales targets, the retail economic situation and thecustomer needs affected the relationship with the customer and long-termperformance. In this area many times the pressure for the monthly targetachievement hindered the future sales progression because the clientspressured by commercial conditions, that entwined the sales performance bycategory of products with the discount received by the client, made themincrease the inventory levels and cease purchases in the future to balanceagain their stock position.In summary the issues that were observed by the author and based theconstruction of this proposal are:1) Top-down target constructions2) Sales tactics built in high level of client clusters with little focus on thecustomer needs3) Strict commercial conditions, incentives and multinational bargain powerpressuring the customers to achieve immediate sales targets.4) Performance of sales team and client based on aggressive goals,focusing on short-term accomplishments.The author after understanding the business environment and getting in contactin her academic life with different models to achieve competitive advantage andensure the sustainability of the business designed as the aim of this research7proposal to explore how the customer-centricity can leverage the relationshipand performance in the seller-buyer dyad leading to loyalty and referrals. Toachieve this objective is important to understand the differences betweentransactional exchange (short-term focus) and relationship exchange (long-termfocus) and the importance and benefits of relationship selling in the constructionof a competitive advantage and enduring business. Another area to be exploredis the role and the behaviours the salesforce should have to enable theconstruction of a relationship and trust.In this angle of research, the areas that will be encompassed are marketing,sales, human resources and strategy formation.83. Literature Review3.1 How firm´s choose the selling orientationA firm´s selling orientation is essentially connected to the customer expectationof each transaction, and it is possible to divide the customers in intrinsic valuecustomers, extrinsic value customers and strategic value customers. For theintrinsic value customers the value lies on the good or service itself, consideringas decision factors the product quality, price, and availability. In this case, thefirm should have a transactional selling orientation to align with the customerexpectations. The extrinsic values customers requires certain level ofrelationship to maximize their value, since there is a possibility of enhancing theuse of services and goods with information and guidance. They may notmaintain loyal, but are willing to pay more for a better service. The strategicvalue customer seeks a partnership as a way to create value and have theirspecific needs attended (Beverland 2001).Guenzi (2003) complements by stating that companies should analyse theeconomic potential of the customers and the openness of the customer towardsrelationship to base the selling strategy due to the increased costs that derivesfrom this selling orientation. The author explores further the relationshipapproach and set three factors that should be considered to determine if isapplicable, being the characteristics of customers and the characteristics of thecompetitive environment as external factors and the characteristics of theselling approach as internal factor.Chow (2004) contributes to the explanation of a firm’s selling strategy alsoanalysing the competitive environment and stating that market-orientedstrategies and relationship marketing-oriented strategies are significant formarket leaders, but market-oriented are more applicable for market challengersand relationship marketing-oriented strategy is better for market followers andmarket nichers.3.2 Relationship selling versus transactional sellingGuenzi (2003) defines relationship selling as “a strategic sales orientation of thefirm privileging the aim of maintaining and strengthening relations with currentclients, rather than that of identifying and acquiring new customers”. This selling9approach, according to Crosby et al. (2001), requires that the seller have acustomer-centric approach, understanding their needs and customizing theselling offers to fit the requirements. The author also states that the relationshipis built when there is a non-transferable investment and concessions of bothparts.This adds to the lower operational cost and higher profitability profile of currentcustomer as Barksdale (1997) points out, explaining that there is a higherchance of purchase and with higher purchase value of current customers,especially if there is time invested and a relationship established.Guenzi (2003) and Beverland (2001) opposes relationship selling withtransactional selling, but don´t exclude the pursuit of both selling orientation,due to the non-exclusivity of the approaches. A firm could focus on attract newcustomer and engage the current ones to retain them. Crosby et al. (2001)clarifies that transactional exchange consists in a one-time transaction, wheregoods or services are exchanged for a determined fee and so price plays acentral role, common in commodity exchange, with little product differentiation,reduced branding and sales efforts.3.3 Levels of RelationshipKotler et al. (2008) divide the relationship in five different levels as follows: basictransactional relationship, reactive relationship, accountable relationship,proactive relationship and partnership. The divergences lie on the importanceand number of the stakeholders, their preference and the type of product orservice.In the basic transactional level, the seller just performs the direct sale andapplies no effort of following-up or retaining the client. In the reactive level, afterthe sales there is an effort of encouraging the customer to get in contact if thereis any questions or comments. In the accountable level, the salespeople takeresponsibility for the sale by calling the customer for feedbacks and potentialimprovements. In the proactive level, the firm engage in a continuous process ofperformance improvement and development of new products and servicesbased on the information obtained through the close contact with thecustomers. In the last level, the partnership relationship, the creation of value10begins in the third partner and through negotiations and resources combination,they achieve an enhanced value proposition for the customer.Figure 1: Levels of RelationshipSource: Adaptation of (Armstrong et al. 2008)Crosby (2001) also explores the different levels of relationship and cluster theclients according to the opportunities presented, suggesting that salespeoplecan enhance profitability by increasing attention and commitment to the groupwith high opportunity and current low relationship status and diminishing theefforts towards the clients with low opportunity, just maintaining them in atransactional level.3.4 Process, components and benefitsWilliams (1998) explains that to build a relationship, especially in the higherlevels, a process must be undertaken based on satisfaction, trust, andcommitment as the essential components.Selnes (1998) highlights in his study that trust and satisfaction are key playersin the evolution of the relationships and tries to expand by searching how theantecedents of trust (competence and communication) and the antecedents ofsatisfaction (commitment and conflict handling) will lead to enhancement orcontinuity of the relationships as seen in the figure below.Figure 2: Antecedents and Consequences of Trust and Satisfaction in Buyer-SellerRelationshipHigh Medium LowMany Accountable Reactive BasicMedium Proactive Accountable ReactiveFew Partnership Proactive AccountableProfit marginsNumber of customers11Source: (Selnes 1998)Gounaris & Venetis (2002) differs in the selection of antecedents of trust, statingthat trust is built based on the service quality and customer bonding, andthrough this assessment, acknowledging the length of the relationship, will givean insight of the intentions with the relationship, if they should just maintain orstrengthen.Figure 3: Antecedents of Trust and Relationship IntentionsSource: (Gounaris & Venetis 2002)These components are the base for the relationship construction process, thataccording to Williams (1998) it happens in a five sequential phases:awareness, exploration, expansion, commitment and dissolution. The processoccur in a sequence because each phase is connected with the outcomes ofthe previous phase and the success of the phases will lead to a fulfilment ofexpectations, commitment and development of trust.Williams (1998) continues explaining that a customer-oriented approachimpacts the seller-buyer relationship construction, because understanding and12responding to the needs of the customers is the base for nurturing trust andmanaging a long-term relationship. Fader (2012) clarifies that customercentricity is formulating a strategy that aligns the most valuable customer needswith the offering of services and products as a way of enhancing the customerlifetime value to be able to compete in the short term and thrive in the long term.The salesperson customer orientation is influenced by the company´spsychological climate, the sales manager´s leadership style and thesalesperson´s perceived empowerment. The organizational climate shouldrecognize and support the customer-orientation, providing autonomy, trust,fairness and encouragement of relationships with customers. The leader needsto be focused in the company´s and client´s satisfaction instead of personalprofit, give support in delicate problems situation and recognize and rewardaccording to relationship not just according to absolute sales. The salespersonshould feel empowered and have autonomy in some decisions that will suit theneeds of the customer and be motivated to continuously improve and contributeto the business strategy formation with customers insights (Martin & Bush2003).In a selling situation, customer‐oriented behaviours of salespeople indicates forthe buyers future intentions and behavioural patterns, which reduces theuncertainty level. The customer orientation will also influence the type ofbargaining power deployed by the company and salesperson migrating fromcompetitive and command positioning, which characterizes win-loseorientations, to a coordinative positioning, seeking a mutual gain, opencommunication and disposition to seek alternative solutions. This reinforcemutual trust and commitment, promoting long-term relationship (Williams 1998)Jackson (1993) identify as an advantage of the relationship selling approach theopportunity to cross sell because the salespeople understand better thecustomer and offer products that match their needs, enhancing the probability ofsales. Another point is the possibility of increased referrals a side effect ofcustomer satisfaction and trust. This selling orientation can also reduce costs,as maintaining a loyal customer is five times less costly than getting new ones.13As an ultimate benefit, helps create a barrier against competition since thebuyer is less prone to terminate the relationship and change suppliers.Abed and Haghighi (2009) complement the list of advantages of establishing aseller-buyer relationship with the following benefits: have a faster access toupcoming technologies or new markets, enables to provide a wider range ofgoods and services (cross-selling), reach economies of scale in joint researchand production, provide access to knowledge beyond a firm’s boundaries and tocomplementary skills, increase network with other firms and share the risks.3.5 Role and importance of salesforce in the seller-buyer relationshipThe salespeople are the extension of the company that reaches the client,having the role of executing the company´s selling strategy, identifying newopportunities and influencing future buying intentions (Beverland 2001).The main role of the salesperson in constructing a quality relationship with thebuyer is having the ability to create a strong communication process, enhancingthe understanding of their needs and feeding back the firm with information for abetter strategy alignment. The salespeople behaviour will influence the successof the firm´s orientation since the are key to build trust and keep the customersloyal (Barksdale et al. 1997).Anglin (1992) also explores the role of the sales team and states that the qualityof the relationship is connected to the intent of a company to conduct businesswith a salesperson in the future and as it is satisfied with the service is willing togive referrals. In this scenario, according to Boles et al. (2000), the salesmanager should motivate and enhance the salesforce performance, focusing onrelationship building and not short-term accomplishments.Guenzi and Papadoidamis (2009) explains that a company focused on relationalselling should foster some behaviours among the sales team as customeroriented selling and adaptive selling. In a customer-oriented approach, thesalesperson should seek win-win solutions to be able to build long-lastingrelationships. In an adaptive selling approach, the salesperson should alterbehaviours, customizing according the needs of each interaction, widelyapplicable in complex product and buying behaviours situation.14The challenge of big companies is to foster a relationship between companiesand not maintain only in a personal level, especially the ones with highturnovers and job rotations. One important step in this process is theformalisation of process and data records so there is a continuity of theprocesses. (Beverland 2001)3.6 Relationship selling as base for competitive advantageIn the increasing competitive scenario, companies to succeed must differentiatethemselves from the competitors in order to achieve a competitive advantage.According to Kay (1993) the success of firms is closely related to its ability toconstruct and maintain a strong relationship with its suppliers, customers,shareholders and employees, creating a distinctive structure. He explains thatthe only capabilities that fits the criteria of appropriability and sustainability are:architecture, reputation and innovation.For the purpose of this proposal, the most relevant capability is architecture,which explains how the company can create a sustainable competitiveadvantage through the long-term relationship within the firm or between the firmand its customers and suppliers or both. Sheth & Parvatlyar (1995) clarifies thatconsumers enter in a relationship and diminish their existing options in order tosimplify their buying and information process, reduce the inherent risks andmaintain cognitive stability and psychological comfort.According to Macintosh (2007) there is a correlation between the relationshipquality, leading to satisfaction with the firm and ultimately to loyalty and word-ofmouth. The author explains the importance of understanding that therelationships starts to be built in the individual level first, in the contact with thesalesperson, then evolves to the firm level and depending on the customerassessment of the company will lead to loyalty and referrals as seen in thefigure 4 below.Figure 4: Correlation of Individual and Firm Level in Relationship Selling15Source: (Macintosh 2007)Macintosh (1992) highlights that the creation of a relationship between sellerand buyer is a crucial factor to enhance sales performance and Barksdale(1997) says that a high quality relationship will also increase the customerloyalty, enhancing the probability of future purchases, referrals andrecommendations.164. Critical Review of ArticleFull Reference of Peer Reviewed Text: Macintosh, G., 2007. Customer orientation, relationship quality, and relationalbenefits to the firm. Journal of Services Marketing, 21(3), pp.150–159. 1. What review question am I asking of this text?(e.g. what is my research question? why select this text? does the CriticalAnalysis of this text fit into my investigation with a wider focus? what is myconstructive purpose in undertaking a Critical Analysis of this text?) My topic is: “An exploratory study of the construction of relationships sellerbuyer and the impact on long-term performance, loyalty and referrals” and thechosen article has several touch-points with the intended research answeringpartially the following questions:1) What are the benefits of relationship selling?2) What is the role of the salesforce in the relationship of seller-buyer?Which selling behaviours affect the relationship quality?3) How does relationship selling affect the outcomes such as performance,loyalty and referrals? 2. What type of literature is this?(e.g. theoretical, research, practice, policy? are there links with other types ofliterature?) It is a research paper because it reports the results of the collection of data totest a framework examining the potential links between customer orientation,expertise, and relationship quality at the interpersonal level and the linkbetween relationship quality and positive service outcomes at the firm level,such as loyalty and positive word of mouth.It has also traces of policy literature, especially in the end, because of the“Executive summary and implications for managers and executives” that aims togive some advices for managers and invite to read the full article. 173. What is being claimed?a) What are the main kinds of knowledge claim that the authors are making?(e.g. theoretical knowledge, research knowledge, practice knowledge?)b) What is the content of the main claims to knowledge and of the overallargument? (e.g. what, in a sentence, is being argued? what are the three to fivemost significant claims that encompass much of the detail? are there keyprescriptions for improving policy or practice?)c) With what degree of certainty do the authors make their claims? (e.g. do theyindicate tentativeness? qualify their claims by acknowledging limitations of theirevidence? acknowledge others’ counter-evidence? acknowledge that thesituation may have changed since data collection?)d) How generalized are the authors’ claims – to what range of phenomena arethey claimed to apply? (e.g. the specific context from which the claims werederived? other similar contexts? a national system? a culture? universal?implicit? unspecified?) The article is based mainly in knowledge for understanding because theauthor, after compiling several frameworks tries to find commonalities, built anew framework and understand the relationships between customerorientation, relationship quality, and positive marketing outcomes at theorganizational level through an empirical research.The main claims are:1) “Contact service people serve as the key representative of the firm, itcould be expected that positive assessments at the individual level,including interpersonal satisfaction, would have a positive influence onassessments of the firm”2) “Customers’ perceptions of the service employee’s customer orientationare positively related to interpersonal relationship quality”3) “The combination of customer orientation and expertise seems to provideboth the right type of motivation and the ability to create customer-drivenvalue”4) “High levels of positive word-of-mouth, which some have labeled 18 customer advocacy only occurred in the presence of the highest level ofrelationship quality. Unfortunately, high relationship quality does notguarantee customer advocacy”.The author acknowledges the limitations of the study that was conducted in aCanadian University with 220 business travelers regarding their relationshipswith their travel agents and since the study was done in one firm in oneindustry there is a reduced chance of generalizability. He suggests that themodel could be applicable for similar context. There is also limitations of thevalidity in the separation of individual and firm level, ruled out by the crosstabulation results.The last point highlighted by the author is the nature of the research modelthat is correlational and not causal, which implies that he may miss outvariables in his study and that the variables could influence each other inopposite directions or paths than the ones tested. 4. To what extent is there backing for claims?a) How transparent is it what, if any, sources are used to back the claims? (e.g.is there any statement of the basis for assertions? are sources unspecified?)b) What, if any, range of sources is used to back the claims? (e.g. first handexperience? the authors’ own practice knowledge or research? literature aboutothers’ practice knowledge or research? literature about reviews of practiceknowledge or research? literature about others’ polemic?)c) If claims are at least partly based on the authors’ own research, how robust isthe evidence? (e.g. is the range of sources adequate? are there methodologicallimitations or flaws in the methods employed? do they include cross-checking or‘triangulation’ of accounts? what is the sample size and is it large enough tosupport the claims being made? is there an adequately detailed account of datacollection and analysis? is a summary given of all data reported?)d) Are sources of backing for claims consistent with degree of certainty and thedegree of generalization? (e.g. is there sufficient evidence to support claimsmade with a high degree of certainty? is there sufficient evidence from othercontexts to support claims entailing extensive generalization?)19 The author constructs his framework based on already thoroughly researchedantecedents of relationship quality (customer orientation and expertise) andoutcomes of the satisfaction of the firm (loyalty and word-of-mouth) andacknowledging that there are other constructs, he assesses that the selectedones are the most relevant and consistent.He was able to reach a 36% of answer form the total amount ofquestionnaires sent and made a fine selection using only the respondentsthat filled several criteria (number of contacts, contact with several travelagents, etc) to make sure the research was credible, using 16% of totalquestionnaires sent. The sample is robust and the author explains all thestatistical analysis done, displaying the results throughout the article. 5. How adequate is any theoretical orientation to back claims?a) How explicit are the authors about any theoretical orientation or conceptualframework? (e.g. is there a conceptual framework guiding data collection? is aconceptual framework selected after data collection to guide analysis? is there alargely implicit theoretical orientation?)b) What assumptions does any explicit or implicit theoretical orientation makethat may affect the authors’ claims? (e.g. does a perspective focus attention onsome aspects and under-emphasize others? if more than one perspective isused, how coherently do the different perspectives relate to each other?)c) What are the key concepts underpinning any explicit or implicit theoreticalorientation? (e.g. are they listed? are they stipulatively defined? are conceptsmutually compatible? is use of concepts consistent? is the use of conceptscongruent with others’ use of the same concepts?) The author treats all variables in the same way, a quantitative analysis usingLikert or semantic differential questions, except the word-of-mouth variable thatwas treated differently using an index that captured both the frequency andpositive versus negative nature (valence) of comments made to others aboutthe travel agency). This could lead to a limitation in adding and comparing thevariables. 20 The concepts are consistent and complementary as proved in the previous andcurrent research. 6. To what extent are claims supported or challenged by others’ work?a) Do the authors relate their claims to others’ work? (e.g. do the authors referto others’ published evidence, theoretical orientations or value stances tosupport their claims? do they acknowledge others’ counter-evidence?)b) If the authors use evidence from others’ work to support their claims, howrobust is it? (e.g. as for 5c)c) Is there any evidence from others’ work that challenges the authors’ claims,and if so, how robust is it? (e.g. is there relevant research or practice literature?check any as for 5c) The author based his framework on a compilation several empirical researchand theoretical constructs, referring to them and using as base, but notchallenging any of them. He explains that his work differs in the fact that hedivides the levels (individual and firm) and wants to understand the relationshipof the antecedents in the individual level leading to the firm´s level. 7. What is my summary evaluation of the text in relation to my reviewquestion or issue?a) How convincing are the authors’ claims, and why?b) How, if at all, could the authors have provided stronger backing for theirclaims? The research is robust and with an extensive review of different theories andframeworks, providing a strong background for the model developed. It is alsodone with a careful methodology and the results are according to the authorsatisfactorily reliable, convergent, and discriminatorily valid. 216. ReferencesAbed, G.M. & Haghighi, M., 2009. The effect of selling strategies on salesperformance. Business Strategy Series, 10(5), pp.266–282.Anglin, K.A. et al., 1992. Relationship Development in Selling: A CognitiveAnalysis. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 12(4), p.23.Armstrong, G. et al., 2008. Principles of marketing 5th European Edition., UpperSaddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.Barksdale, H.C., Boles, J.S. & Johnson, J.T., 1997. Business relationships: anexamination of the effects of buyer‐salesperson relationships oncustomer retention and willingness to refer and recommend. Journal ofBusiness & Industrial Marketing, 12(3/4), pp.253–264.Beverland, M., 2001. Contextual Influences and the Adoption and Practice ofRelationship Selling in a Business-to-business Setting: An ExploratoryStudy. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 21(3), p.207.Boles, J. et al., 2000. Relationship selling behaviors: antecedents andrelationship with performance. Journal of Business & IndustrialMarketing, 15(2/3), pp.141–153.Chow, R. et al., 2004. A firm’s role in the marketplace and the relativeimportance of market orientation and relationship marketing orientation.European Journal of Marketing, 38(9/10), pp.1158–1172.Crosby, L.A., Frankwick, G.L. & Porter, S.S., 2001. Dynamics of RelationshipSelling: A Longitudinal Examination of Changes in Salesperson-customerRelationship Status. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,21(2), p.135.Fader, P., 2012. Customer centricity focus on the right customers for strategicadvantage, Philadeplphia: Wharton. Available at:http://www.books24x7.com/marc.asp?bookid=47593 [Accessed January26, 2016].Gounaris, S.P. & Venetis, K., 2002. Trust in industrial service relationships:behavioral consequences, antecedents and the moderating effect of
