نقش اعتماد در مدیریت تعارض خریدار و فروشنده

The present study merges work in the interpersonal relationship and buyer–seller literature to address how trust interacts with attributions to impact the effect of partner communication on conflict resolution perceptions in buyer–seller relationships. Understanding the processes underlying conflict resolution is important given that conflict is inherent in relational exchange and that conflict resolution is related to investments, satisfaction, and commitment. Results of the present research suggest that partner use of editing in communication (the ability to self-censor overreaction to negative behavior) influences conflict resolution efficacy of response through the process of responsibility attribution. Further, the combined influence of attribution of partner blame and trust is important in understanding conflict resolution efficacy of response.

While the benefits of collaborative relationships have been rightfully lauded, two concurrent themes have emerged in the literature which hold the potential to contribute to understanding when and how desired relational outcomes will accrue to partners. The first theme relates to the ubiquitousness of conflict and the central role of managing conflict in order to build relational investments, satisfaction, and commitment (c.f., Rosenbloom, 1973, Frazier, 1983, Dant and Schul, 1992, Bantham et al., 2003 and Welch and Wilkinson, 2005). The second theme relates to the prominence accorded trust in the buyer–seller relationship literature (Anderson and Narus, 1990, Mohr and Spekman, 1994 and Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Although the potential benefits of trust have received significant attention in organizational settings, there has been a tendency to emphasize the construct's relevance in social interaction (Gambetta, 1988), and yet there has been significantly less empirical exploration of exactly what role trust plays, particularly in intermediate processes (i.e., conflict resolution) that lead to subsequent positive gains in performance and satisfaction (Dirks and Ferrin, 2001). The question of how the degree of trust in buyer–seller relationships might impact the ability of dyadic partners to effectively manage conflict remains unanswered. This study addresses that question through an integration of buyer–seller relationship, interpersonal relationship, and trust literatures. Specifically, the study explores the issue of how the level of trust in ongoing buyer–seller relationships affects the communication behavior-attribution of blame–conflict resolution process. While each of these areas has received attention, this is the first study to examine relationships among all of these constructs at the level of the buyer–seller dyad. Given the ubiquity of conflict and the significance of trust in relational exchange, this would appear to be an important area for marketing researchers and practitioners interested in how to maintain effective collaborative business relationships. This research aims to contribute to the literature in several ways. First, although the marriage metaphor has played an important role in understanding business relationships (c.f., Dwyer et al., 1987), there have been repeated calls to extend the transfer from marital relationships to buyer–seller relationships as a means of deepening the understanding of relational dynamics (Hunt and Menon, 1995, Tynan, 1997 and Celuch et al., 2006). Consistent with this orientation are perspectives emphasizing the focal importance of interactions among individuals to understanding how organizations coordinate activities (c.f., Jap, 1999, Tellefsen, 2002 and Haytko, 2004). To this end, the study integrates conceptual and empirical work from the interpersonal relationship literature related to attribution, trust, and efficacy perceptions as a means of developing a more nuanced understanding of the cognitive processes implicated in conflict resolution in business relationships. This work also extends the buyer–seller relationship literature through an exploration of trust as a potential moderator in attribution-response efficacy processes in conflict resolution. Dirks and Ferrin (2001) note that the vast majority of empirical studies devoted to the organizational consequences of trust have examined main effects of the construct. Indeed, trust as a mediator of various relational antecedents and consequences has received impressive support in some studies (c.f., Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Yet the construct has not always worked as predicted in others (Anderson and Narus, 1990, Han and Wilson, 1993 and Ganesan, 1994) which may point to the possibility that it operates in alternative ways. The literature on close relationships highlights the importance of efficacy perceptions in conflict and conflict resolution (c.f., Doherty, 1981 and Fincham and Bradbury, 1987). However, questions are raised about weaker than expected effects for efficacy perceptions in some studies which point to conceptual and operational issues (Fincham and Bradbury, 1987). This research attempts to address these issues by exploring efficacy perceptions related to outcomes as well as capability, and develop reasoning to support differential results for the types of efficacy perceptions which may help to account for prior results with this construct.

8.1. Contributions to the literature While it has long been recognized that conflict can provide an impetus for business relationship reappraisal (Rosenbloom, 1973), the mechanisms underlying the process have not been understood. Understanding the cognitive processes that influence conflict resolution is important given that conflict is inherent in relational exchange and that conflict resolution is related to relational investments, satisfaction, and commitment (Frazier, 1983 and Dant and Schul, 1992Bantham et al., 2003). The present study merges work in the interpersonal relationship and buyer–seller literature to address how trust interacts with attribution of blame to impact the effect of partner communication on conflict resolution perceptions in buyer–seller dyads. These findings contribute to the extant literature in several ways. First, the research addresses calls to extend the transfer from the marital relationship literature as a means of deepening understanding of buyer–seller dynamics in dyads (Hunt and Menon, 1995, Tynan, 1997 and Bantham et al., 2003). Specifically, this study extends the work of Celuch et al. (2006) which highlights the potential importance of partner communication behavior in relational appraisal processes. Effective conflict resolution should enhance episode value in relationships (the benefits to sacrifice ratio), which is implicated in relational satisfaction (Selnes, 1998). Future research could examine what partner communication behaviors beyond editing might contribute to relational-inhibiting (or enhancing) attributions. A second contribution is that the research serves to extend the buyer–seller relationship literature through an exploration of trust as moderator in attribution–efficacy processes in conflict resolution. Recall that while trust has received significant attention in organizational settings, the vast majority of empirical studies examine main effects of the construct with mixed effects observed for outcomes associated with communication and conflict domains (Dirks and Ferrin, 2001). The notion that trust is implicated in interpretation processes receives support and clarification given the observed interaction with responsibility attributions of partner blame. Future research could explore the potential interaction of trust with other dimensions of attribution processes, specifically, attributions related to self blame. A final contribution relates to the role of efficacy perceptions in dyadic conflict resolution. The distinction between efficacy of response (outcome expectations) and response self-efficacy (capability expectations) is recognized in theories of personal control (Bandura, 1997 and Skinner, 1995). Consistent with the recognition in the close relationship literature that the distinction may be important in developing a deeper understanding of dyadic conflict resolution (Fincham and Bradbury, 1987), support is found for differential effects of partner communication editing on the types of efficacy perceptions. As expected, editing works through the attribution of partner blame to impact efficacy of response (outcome-related) and not response self-efficacy (capability-related) perceptions. Would other partner communication behavior (e.g., listening, disclosure) work differently? 8.2. Practical implications Findings of this study hold practical implications for the management of buyer–seller relationships. First, the results clearly speak to the importance of partner ability to edit communication behavior. Given that conflict is likely to occur in exchange relationships, identification of behaviors coupled with an understanding of how they work can contribute to effective conflict management. The ability to self-censor a focus on, and overreaction to, negative events is strongly related to preventing the initiation of the blame game which is so deleterious to perceptions of future success in attempting to address the conflict. Training in communication skills is a foundation of relationship repair and maintenance in the marital relationship domain (Fowers, 1998). Indeed, increases in awareness and skills can interrupt dysfunctional interaction (Benum, 1986). Second, the significance of relational trust is reinforced and clarified. Even with a lack of editing and the initiation of blame in a relationship, high trust appears to inoculate the relationship from deteriorating perceptions relating to conflict resolution. In contrast, low trust, seems to exacerbate the negative effects of negative communication and blame on the effectiveness of attempts to resolve the conflict perhaps by activating lack of respect and intent to act opportunistically interpretations. This clearly points to the importance of relational partners attempting to establish trust early in relationships and actively maintaining the trust in ongoing relationships (c.f., Selnes, 1998 and Whitener et al., 1998). The organizational literature offers specific avenues for relational trust building (Das and Teng, 1998). Reciprocity has been identified as one important antecedent to trust (Larson, 1992). Interfirm adaptation, a flexibility or willingness to accommodate unforeseen changes, has also been recognized as important for trust building in partnerships (Macneil, 1980). 8.3. Limitations, opportunities for future research, and conclusion The present research employs cross-sectional, self-report measures of respondent perceptions of constructs. Future research could certainly address design and measurement issues. Self-report limitations notwithstanding, it is important to note that common methods variance is not likely to account for interaction effects, an important focus of this study, as method variance should increase correlations consistently between construct measures (Aiken and West, 1991). Capturing perceptions from both sides of the relational dyad could prove interesting, as the influence of trust may not be the same for relational partners (Mukherji and Francis, 2008). Longitudinal designs exploring relations among study constructs across multiple conflict episodes which extend thinking beyond dyadic interaction to a network of actors could prove useful in understanding relationship adaptation and evolution (Welch and Wilkinson, 2005 and Schurr et al., 2008). In conclusion, while there is still much to be learned about how buyer–seller partners grapple with conflict resolution, trust appears to play an important role in the process. The present study, which considers communication, attribution, and efficacy perceptions, hopes to contribute to future research that explores processes critical to successful buyer–seller relationships.