Salesperson - Customer Interaction Taxonomy

Salesperson - Customer Interaction

Taxonomy of Salesperson -Customer Interaction

The intent of this analysis of current research on salesperson and customer interactions includes the dynamics of buyer-supplier relationships, an overview selling model definitions and research efforts used to validate them, and a comprehensive review of key findings from research into these areas. Specifically defining a taxonomy of knowledge in this area through the use of primary research, the intent of this paper is to show specifically how salesperson to customer and buyer to supplier relationships are being clarified and made more effective through the research efforts of the theorists, educators, and practitioners mentioned in this paper.

Selling Approach in Buyer-Seller Relationships

Personal selling can be defined as the process by which a salesperson attempts to influence a customer to purchase his or her product or service (Weitz, 1981). The selling approaches/processes used to accomplish the sale and develop buyer-seller relationships establish the foundational research for this study. In addition, the concepts of relationship selling and adaptive selling will be presented and defined and the appropriateness of those selling approaches/processes to services industries, where selling is by far the most competitive, is analyzed. Selling into services-related industries requires a more thorough and focused set of selling strategies as many times the service being sold is intangible. In essence, the selling taxonomies related to service all hinge on the ability of salesperson to create a foundational link of trust with their customers, and this same dynamic holds true in the buyer-supplier relationship. The concept of trust in each of these relationships, and their implications for the development of ongoing and effective salesperson-customer and buyer-supplier relationships, is also analyzed and discussed in this paper.

The literature dealing with personal selling is a combination of conceptual articles and empirical studies designed to validate the key elements of the taxonomy of knowledge in the area of salesperson-customer dynamics. Much of the literature, particularly the empirical studies, has been based on industrial business-to-business selling situations (e.g., purchasing agents of industrial products, salespeople for chemical manufacturers and their customers) and consumer products and services selling situations (e.g., life insurance sales, sporting goods retailers). The basic principles of selling, however, are believed to be applicable to the business-to-business selling of services represented by services industry selling situations and will be verified by this study.

It should be noted that the relationship selling process and adaptive selling process are not distinctly different processes in personal selling. While the relationship selling process represents the selling strategy to develop long-term buyer-seller relationships, adaptive selling involves the knowledge and ability to be able to match the most effective selling approach to each customer. Much of the research in this area focuses on relationship selling as a long-term, even strategic approach to defining the philosophy of selling in organizations. Adaptive selling, while still a form of solution selling is orientated to shorter sales cycles and focuses on guiding customers to the best of all potential alternatives available given the services offered by the company on the one hand and the most urgent unmet needs of the customer on the other. Adaptive selling looks to adapt the current services to align with the most urgent unmet needs of customers, while relationship selling looks to impact both services mix and definition based on customer requirements and unmet needs.

Essentials of Relationship Selling

Relationship selling, as opposed to traditional, transaction oriented selling, stresses the need to form relationships with prospects and customers across all stages of the buyer-seller relationship (Jolson, 1997). Alessandra and Barrera (1993) view the relationship or collaborative oriented salesperson as one who takes the time up front to build a sincere, committed relationship and to learn the customer's needs. Traditional, transaction selling, on the other hand, is most effective with single exchange transactions, typically consists of emphasis on products or services, and is driven by price (Evans, Good & Hellman, 1998). Jolson (1997) characterizes traditional, transaction selling as one-on-one contacts, engagements, and clashes, each of which produces a winner and a loser. Alessandra and Barrera (1993) state, "what's missing in traditional selling is the salesperson's commitment to a long-term relationship." (p. 4). They also suggest traditional, transaction selling leads to an adversarial relationship where everyone loses. Anderson (1996) projects that one of the key personal selling objectives in the next millennium will be developing long-term, mutually profitable partnerships with customers.

Buyer-seller relationship theory, to be discussed in more detail in a later section of this study, is based on the premise that long-term relationships develop over a series of exchanges between buyers and sellers (Dwyer, Schurr & Oh, 1987). Jolson (1997) suggests that each of these exchanges in selling shouldn't be viewed as a series of struggles between buyers and sellers, but instead should be seen as building relationships or partnerships. Selling, from this viewpoint, then is a function not so much of closing sales but of opening relationships (Swenson & Link, 1998).

Jolson (1997) advocates the viewpoint that relationship selling is not just the process of selling once a relationship is established, but should begin at the creation of the relationship in the prospecting stage (e.g., general inquiries). He states that some authors have presented relationship selling and transaction-oriented selling as polar opposites, however, his view is that there is a need to reshape traditional selling to incorporate relationship building at all stages of the selling process. Jolson states that relationship selling is just as appropriate for the customer who doesn't have a desire for a long-term relationship as one who does.

Support of Jolson's (1997) position that relationship selling is more effective than traditional, transaction oriented selling has been supported by several of empirical studies including the following from (Crosby, Evans & Cowles, 1990; MacIntosh, Anglin, Szymanski & Gentry, 1992; DeComier & Jobber, 1993). The relevant findings from those studies are reviewed below. Crosby et al. (1990) view the salesperson's role in the selling of services as "relationship manager." They found in a study of life insurance salespeople that future sales opportunities depend on relationship quality (i.e., trust and satisfaction) as perceived by the customer.

Specifically, those salespeople who engaged in selling behaviors focused on long-term relationships such as high contact intensity, mutual disclosure, and cooperative intentions had more favorable perceptions by the customers of the relationship quality. Their results support the view that relational type selling behaviors produced a strong buyer-seller bond.

MacIntosh et al. (1992) conducted two studies designed to determine if higher performing salespeople differed in the aspects of their relationship building process in the early stages of the buyer-seller relationship. The first study of North American financial service salespeople found that higher performing salespeople place more importance on the buyer's potential level of trust in the salesperson. In fact, low performers didn't even note trust as being important at all in the early stages of the relationship. The second study, using a sample of North American industrial salespeople working for a distributor of agricultural products, determined that higher performers placed more emphasis on relationship building and less emphasis on product benefits at early stages of the buyer-seller relationships. They concluded from the two studies that relationship building and developing trust at early stages of the buyer-seller relationship are important to effective sales performance.

DeCormier and Jobber (1993) advocate the use of a relationship/counselor selling method that incorporates personality knowledge, microskills and strategies and processes. Personality knowledge refers to understanding the buyer's personality style. Microskills are the means that the salesperson uses to influence the buyer. They state the salesperson's objective is to counter negative influences and strengthen positive ones. The counselor selling process presented and tested by DeCormier and Jobber (1993) involves four stages: 1) introduction that involves rapport, respect and trust building; 2) qualification by means of gathering information to define the problem (they particularly stress the importance of the salesperson educating the prospect through influencing not lecturing); 3) presentation designed to summarize and finalize the finer details of the sale; and 4) closing with the focus on asking the prospect to respond to questions about alternatives. They stress the importance of sales training as the mechanism to implement this approach. They further tested the counselor selling method through experiments with marketing students who were taught how to sell life insurance. Their experimental method incorporated two groups, one group who had training in the counselor selling method and the second group that had only product knowledge training. The findings confirmed that the counselor selling method improved effectiveness; however, they also determined that personality knowledge training alone did not have significant results unless the microskills were addressed, as well. They state that this method of selling goes beyond the traditional transaction-oriented selling by incorporating the philosophy of adaptation, customer orientation, and satisfaction.

They also state that the large percentage of increases in sales performance resulting from training in the counselor selling model support the central importance of researching the dynamics of sales transactions in order to explain variations in salespeople's performance.

In order to move from traditional, transaction-oriented selling to relationships selling, Jolson (1997) states that there are three distinct flows of influence that must take place. The first flow of influence is disarming, the process of omitting any signs of power or control on the part of the seller. Second is liking, or how rapport is established and relationships are trigger with strangers. Third is distinctiveness, which refers to the degree that the seller's approach differs from others to which the buyer has been exposed.

Williams (1998) suggests that firms who want to move from traditional transaction oriented selling to relationship building must look closely at all aspects of sales management including recruitment, training, remuneration and sales planning. Conti and Cron (1998) state that the field sales force must be particularly involved in targeting individual customers, implementing relationship-specific offerings, and evaluating relationship outcomes for relationship selling to be effective. To accomplish those objectives, they suggest a planning framework that includes criteria that are conducive to collaborative relationships. The key criteria include; 1) the customer's business philosophy is geared towards supplier relationships, 2) the relative dependence between the buyer and seller organizations are equal, and 3) what they term "leadership edge," i.e., targeting firms that are the sellers lead users (i.e., best customers).

However, not all researchers agree that moving from traditional, transaction oriented selling to a total focus on relationship selling is appropriate. Evans et al. (1998) suggest that transactional selling is not outdated, but an appropriate approach that can be properly balanced with relational strategies. They further state that employing relational selling should not be an all or nothing decision, in fact transactional and relational selling should be used in cooperation and concert to enrich both strategies and environments.

Evans et al. (1998) state that transactional sales are encouraged in single exchange contexts where buyers and sellers have become socialized to maximize single exchange situations. The focus of these buyer-seller exchanges is on the transaction (i.e., the product or service, price discounting) as opposed to relational sales contexts that require sellers to focus on the application of the goods and services. They also make an important point in acknowledging that relational selling approaches require selling companies to make appropriate resource investments that encourage relational exchanges with customers. Not all of these resource investments will be productive unless all factors are considered. They suggest some of the factors to consider are: 1) a selling orientation toward solutions, not products; 2) determining how value is established for buyers and when the product or service is purchased; 3) the development of smooth communication processes between buyers and sellers; 4) the strategic construction of buyer trust; and 5) creating commitment on the part of the supplier. They also stress those sales training needs to be more focused on cultivating long-term relationships and bridging factors into sales opportunities, such as trust and commitment, if relationship selling is to be productive.

The point made by Evans et al. (1998) is that different customers require different selling strategies. One representation of that point is Spiro, Perreault and Reynold's (1977) conceptualizing of the sales process. They recognized that the buyer-seller relationship is affected by the personal characteristics of the individual buyer and seller, as well as the role requirements and characteristics expected by the organizations of both the buyer and seller. These factors lead to the need for adaptation of interpersonal strategies by the seller. The authors make particular note of the fact that buyer and seller strategies are interdependent and may be modified based on actual sales negotiations. Additionally, they state that previous studies indicate the salesperson can substantially control not only his or her strategy, but also the interaction process. Thus, adaptive selling may present the framework for using the appropriate selling approach for each customer.

Principles of Adaptive Selling

Adaptive selling is defined as, "altering of sales behaviors during a customer interaction or across customer interactions based on perceived information about the nature of the selling situation" (Weitz, Sujan & Sujan, 1986, p. 175). Spiro and Weitz (1990) incorporate the following into the practice of adaptive selling: 1) a recognition that different selling approaches are needed in different sales situations, 2) confidence in the ability to use a variety of different sales approaches, 3) confidence in the ability to alter the sales approach during the customer interaction, 4) a knowledge of structure that facilitates the recognition of different sales situations and access to sales strategies appropriate for each situation, 5) the collection of information about the sales situation to facilitate adaptation, and 6) the actual use of different approaches in different situations.

As Weitz (1981) states, "salespeople have the opportunity to match their behavior to the specific customer and situation they encounter" (p. 89). The salesperson is able to evaluate each selling situation and adapt his or her behavior to the appropriate expectations of the buyer. He suggests that a salesperson can adapt his or her behavior along dimensions of: establishment of an expertise influence base, the use of influence techniques (i.e., those that sacrifice long-term relationships to close the sale immediately vs. those oriented toward an open and lasting relationship), and the control of the sales interaction (i.e., the salesperson exerting control when the objective is an immediate sale, as opposed to low pressure selling when continued goodwill is at stake). Weitz (1978) suggests that the salesperson must recognize and adapt or flex to fit different customer communication styles. Weitz's (1978) model of the sales process (ISTEA Sales Process Model) suggests that the salesperson's success in influencing the customer is related to his or her ability to perform five activities. The five activities are: 1) developing impressions, 2) formulating strategies, 3) transmitting messages, 4) evaluating reactions, and 5) making appropriate adjustments. The adjustments are made throughout the entire selling process. In empirically testing the impression formation and strategy formulation constructs of the model with industrial salespeople and their customers, he found the ability of the salesperson to adjust to the customers led to greater sales performance.

Weitz et al. (1986) note that adaptive selling, however, has costs associated with it. It requires the salesperson to spend time doing "marketing research" on the customer. The effectiveness of using the adaptive selling approach is also moderated by the salesperson's ability and skills to practice the technique. The ability and skills are gained from knowledge of the structure of sales situations, sales behaviors, and contingencies that link specific behaviors to situations. They characterize adaptive selling as "working smarter" (i.e., gathering more information about the customer to be able to create more categories and strategies), while the alternative is "working harder" (i.e., simply putting more effort into the task at hand). However, in a study conducted in the Netherlands by Vink and Verbeke (1993), it was found that these may not be two contrasting concepts, but interrelated instead. In other words, to be most effective the salesperson needs to "work smarter" and "work harder." Lambert, Marmorstein and Sharma (1990) confirmed Weitz's (1978) adaptive selling theory in a study of chemical salespeople and their customers. Their findings indicated that salespersons' performance was directly related to the accuracy of their predictions of the customers' expected performance level. It is their conclusion that sales training needs to do a better job of providing insight into customers to enable salespeople to effectively practice adaptive selling.

The effectiveness of sales training to provide insight into customer types was the subject of study by Sujan, Sujan and Bettman (1988). Their study used student callers in a telephone operation designed to raise funds from alumni. They found that after the students had completed a training program designed to provide knowledge of different customer types, they were more effective. Their findings indicated that more effective salespeople have richer and more overlapping knowledge structures of customer types, in terms of both customer traits and strategies for selling to those customers.

Boorom, Goolsby and Ramsey (1998) suggest that adaptiveness requires the salesperson to gather information about prospects and then to use that information to develop unique presentations designed to cover salient buying points and persuade customers to purchase. In order for the salesperson to accomplish this objective; they state that training in presentational methods, knowledge of the salesperson's product or service and customer behaviors, as well as the economic value of the transaction and the personal cost of time and effort needed to gather the information are necessary. They stress that training should emphasize true information gathering (not just fact finding), proposing creative solutions (rather than just offering standard products), and aiding the customer after the sale by answering questions and providing technical assistance. In their study of insurance salespeople, they found that the relational communication skills of attentiveness (willingness to listen and observe non-verbal cues), perceptiveness (ability to interpret observations of the customer), and responsiveness (knowing what message to present and when to present it) all were correlated with the ability to adapt selling approaches to the customer.

Morgan and Stoltman (1990), however, make the point that the knowledge structures Weitz (1978) assumes in his ISTEA Sales Process Model may be flawed. They discuss the potential problems that might arise if salespeople adapt to customers based on knowledge structures that don't reflect the expectations of buyers. Morgan and Stoltman state, "effective selling depends on something more than an opportunity and sufficient motivation to be adaptive. It requires foresight and an ability to perceive and integrate information" (p. 45). Among the problems faced by the salesperson to adapt their presentation is adhering to incorrect theories (e.g., believing all Asian buyers have Eastern culture norms). What they suggest is that a need for training regarding how to adjust/modify one's sales approach is necessary. They make particular note of the importance of sales training to address the impression stage of the Weitz's (1978) ISTEA Sales Process Model. Their statement is, "errors that stem from the wrong premise, e.g., overly simple schemes for classifying prospects, may be corrected by current training programs by virtue of the inculcation of categorization schemes and refined knowledge structures" (p. 50). They state that training modules can be developed to describe why interrelationships exist with customers and how they were discovered. The need for sales training to address these issues is made more important in instances where long-term relationships are the objective (Morgan & Stoltman, 1990).

Marks, Vorhies and Badovick (1996) found two dimensions exist in adaptive selling: beliefs and behavior. Not surprisingly, the only significant correlation with sales performance was with the adaptive selling behavior dimension. They recognized that beliefs do influence behavior and also noted that moderating factors may exist such as the nature of the sales situation and/or the nature of the product itself that effect the ability to translate beliefs into sales performance.

An important aspect of practicing effective adapt selling behaviors is knowledge of the customer's communication style (Weitz, 1978). Williams and Spiro (1985) propose that the successful salesperson is one who adapts his or her communication style appropriately to interact with the customer. In that regard, Comstock and Higgins (1997) determined in two studies of buyers and sellers in the advertising field that salespeople should adapt their behaviors to the buyers' preferred relational messages (i.e., interpersonal behaviors such as composure, immediacy and affection, receptivity and trust, and similarity and depth) but not communicator style (i.e., the pattern of communication such as friendly, relaxed, dominant, contentious or argumentative, attentive, animated, dramatic, open, precise, and impression leaving). They also found that salespeople were generally aware of the type of sales interaction buyers prefer. This salesperson's awareness is a key factor in relationship to the focus of this study because it is the salesperson's perception of the buyer's expected interpersonal interaction that will be solicited.

Jolson (1997) characterizes adaptive selling as the salesperson's development of the relationship with the buyer as they probe for needs and other questioning into a tactical adjustment to the demands of the current situation. He recognizes the importance of adaptability of the salesperson to the interpersonal interaction style preferences of the buyer, but believes that the adaptation is a part of the relationship selling process whether the selling situation is prospecting for a new customer or maintaining the relationship with an existing customer.

Williams (1998) ties relationship selling and adaptive selling together in stating,

The longer-term focus of customer-oriented, relational selling often requires the salesperson to bypass the immediate gratification and reward promised by short-term sales. In addition, the expenditure of more time and effort are required in order to gather information about customer needs, adapt responses, and provide post-sale follow-up (p. 281).

One can deduct from the review of the relationship and adaptive selling processes that the buyer's expectation of interpersonal interaction is the key ingredient in sales effectiveness. While there is debate about whether relationship selling and traditional, transaction oriented selling are both appropriate means of adapting the selling approach to the buyer, the importance of recognizing the interpersonal interaction variables in the buyer-seller relationship (i.e., bonding, communication and trust) do form the core of knowledge needed to practice adaptive selling. Additionally, the common thread throughout the literature is that the vehicle to accomplish the task of gaining buyer knowledge is sales training.

Putting Dyadic Sales Techniques to the Test: Selling of Services

The review of relationship selling and adaptive selling has incorporated conceptual models and empirical studies drawn from both industrial products and consumer products and services selling situations, however, it is important in the context of this study to distinguish between these two types of sales. Hite and Bellizzi (1985) hypothesized that there must be differences in the industrial vs. consumer selling interaction process and tested their theory using a mixed sample of industrial and consumer salespeople. Analyzing each stage of a selling process (prospecting, getting an interview with the prospect, approach, sales presentation, handling of objections, and closing the sale), the results determined that the consumer salesperson was more "personalized" and relied more on other people (referrals and intermediaries) than the industrial salesperson. This implies that consumer salespeople need to be well trained with regard to "people" skills and the importance of first impressions (Hite & Bellizzi, 1985).

Another factor relevant to this study of services selling environments is that services marketing have been established as being different from goods or product marketing in numerous studies emanating from the seminal work of Zeithaml, Parasurman & Berry (1985).

It is noted that four key differentiating factors of services from goods have been established: 1) intangibility, 2) heterogeneity of the service deliver, 3) simultaneous production and consumption (i.e., inseparability), and 4) perishability.

Based on the differentiating factor of tangibility, a seven part customer contact model for selling services was conceptualized by George, Kelly and Marshall (1986). The GKM model phases are:

Orchestrate the customer contact encounter. This phase involves understanding the buyer's needs and expectations.

Make the service tangible. This is a unique phase to the service industry sale as it involves educating the buyer on what is offered to establish differentiation from other alternatives.

Foster and create opportunities for quality assessment. For example, establish levels of expectations.

Leverage all "public contact" personnel to gain insights into customers' levels of satisfaction overall. This phase means sensitizing all personnel on their direct role in customer satisfaction.

Encourage customer involvement during the service encounter. This phase is a result of the customer involvement factor in the delivery of services.

Involve external references or word-of-mouth.

Maximize positive organizational reputation.

All of these phases of the process are directly connected to the issues of dealing with the intangible nature of the service delivery product and, therefore, serve to establish the differences in how services are sold compared to goods.

An adaptation of the George et al. (1986) process was conceptualized by Buttle (1993). Buttle revised the GKM model based on interviews and observations of the selling of services. His model determined two parts to the process, the first being the sales interactive process that incorporates: a) a distinction between orchestrating encounters between salespeople and prospects from those with other employees and guests; b) encouraging customer involvement after the sale; and c) stressing the importance of salespeople helping the customer identify their company's service quality. The second part of his model is the sales facilitation processes, that differs from the original GKM model by adding: a) the importance of orchestrating all employee interactions, b) the importance of coordinating all factors that impact on the winning and keeping of customers, c) implementing an internal marketing program, and d) the significance of dovetailing the sales effort into a planned and integrated market communication strategy. Buttle states that the key to this model is recognizing that selling a service, such as the hotel service product, needs to integrate all of those who interact to create the service (sales, marketing, operations and human resources), not just the salesperson. This model is based on the objective of developing long-term buyer-seller relationships.

The selling processes of George et al. (1986) and Buttle (1993) make the important point that relationship selling type issues such as making the services delivered tangible and orchestrating all employee interactions with the customer need to be addressed when selling services to a greater degree than when selling products. This might suggest that relationship selling is an appropriate sales strategy for all types of customer classifications as suggested by Jolson (1997).

Taxonomy of Buyer-Seller Relationships Research

The buyer-supplier relationship is one that has become increasingly investigated from a research standpoint due to the impact of private trading exchanges (PTX) and consortia-based exchanges (CTX) including Covisint and others in key vertical markets. These private trading exchanges are beginning to form the foundation of Service-Oriented Architectures (SOA)s in services organizations looking to create greater cost savings in their buyer relationships, and also increase responsiveness to members of their own specific demand chains. The implications of these dynamics are clear; the dynamics of selling relationships are being modified by PTX growth and the use of SOAs to unify company and it strategies. All of these dynamics further are altering the dynamics of organizational buyer behavior (OBB).

The association between OBB and the dyadic buyer-seller relationship, including the most frequently cited conceptual models of the development of buyer-seller relationships, is the subject of this section.

Organizational Buyer Behavior (OBB)

The three conceptual models that significantly influenced the generation of academic research in organizational buyer behavior (OBB) are those of Robinson, Faris and Wind (1967), Webster and Wind (1972), and Sheth (1973) (Johnston & Lewin, 1996; Sheth, 1996; Wilson, 1996). Sheth (1996) notes that the initial research in OBB addressed the decision making precision in organizations, but emerging trends in buyer-seller interaction and buyer-seller relationships have developed. Sheth also recognizes the trend in OBB is moving from transaction centered to relational-centered philosophy, as well as from domestic sourcing to global sourcing. As a result of these shifts, he notes a number of promising research areas include bonding between buyers and suppliers, cross-cultural values, and services needs alignment are all forcing a higher level of trust throughout buyer-supplier relationships.

Johnston and Lewin (1996) note that there are three common elements among the seminal OOB conceptual models. The common factors include environmental or situational influences (e.g., national culture), organizational influences, and individual participants. They further indicate that OBB affects and is affected by buyer-seller relationships. Wilson (1996) concurs with the importance of the three OBB models in establishing a middle-range theory in the field marketing. She recognizes the work of Dwyer et al. (1987) and Wilson (1995) as examples of the growth of analysis in OBB toward the dyadic relationship of buyer and seller as opposed to previous research that focused only on the buyer side. However, she suggests that new models be proposed and new empirical studies be conducted to further our knowledge about OBB. In that context, she supports the emphasis on examining exchanges as ongoing relationships rather than discrete transactions. The analysis of long-term relationships, she believes, would be a further evolvement in research from the three OBB models that focused on short-term business orientation, buying based on lowest price, and very little interaction with suppliers other than the initial negotiations.

Williams (1998) also acknowledges the trend in OBB toward focusing on long-term buyer-seller relationships. He states "marketing's emerging strategic focus has shifted toward energizing performance through the implementation of longer-term, customer-oriented strategies in hopes of increasing customer satisfaction and nurturing customer relationships" (p. 271).

Buyer-Seller Relationships Models

The development of the OBB decision models established the framework for the entire buying process within an organization; however, it didn't deal with the unique dyad of the individual buyers and sellers (Dwyer et al., 1987; Wilson, 1995; Wilson, 1996). The recognition of the importance of targeted research of the dyadic buyer-seller relationship led to the development of conceptual models by Dwyer et al. (1987) and Wilson (1995). Those conceptual models, in turn, spawned further research into how long-term, mutually profitable relationships were developed and maintained that will be discussed in detail below.

The buyer-seller relationship has been characterized, based on qualitative research, as a dyadic relationship (Evans, 1963). This means that in order to effectively study the buyer-seller relationship, the disciplines of psychology and sociology have to be incorporated. The primary theoretical justification for the development of long-term buyer-seller relationships actually stems from the expectancies of social exchange theory (Hieder, 1958; Homans, 1961). Homan's

1958) propositions about interpersonal behavior suggest that interaction is a process in which two participants (i.e., the buyer and seller) carry out activities directed toward one another and exchange valuable resources. Social exchange theory views the exchange relationships as dynamic and assumes processes evolve over time as the actors mutually and sequentially demonstrate their trustworthiness (Hallen, Johanson & Seyed-Mohamed, 1991).

Overview of the Dwyer, Schurr and Oh (1987) Model

The recognition that the buyer-seller relationship is not a discrete event, but an ongoing relationship led to the development of a framework for buyer-seller relationships (Dwyer et al., 1987). The framework was theoretically based on social exchange theory, as noted above. The five-phase development process of Dwyer et al. (1987) incorporates the concept of relational exchanges vs. discrete transactions that do not involve joint decisions. The stages of the process are: 1) awareness or recognition of the feasibility of the exchange partner; 2) exploration which characterizes the search and trial phase including the development of norms for the relationship and expectations (trust would fit into this stage); 3) expansion, where increased risk taking develops due to the establishment of trust in the relationship; 4) commitment, the implicit and explicit pledge of relational continuity; and 5) dissolution or the possible break-up of the relationship.

The awareness stage is characterized as a bilateral interaction that marks the beginning of the next phase of the possible relationship (e.g., a general inquiry). It is only the recognition of the feasibility of a relationship. The second stage, exploration, is the search and trail phase. It has five sub-processes: 1) attraction, 2) communication and bargaining, 3) development and exercise of power, 4) norm development, and 5) expectation of development (trust plays an important role in this sub-process). Phase three is the expansion stage and refers to continual increase in benefits obtained by exchange partners and to their increasing interdependence. Commitment is the fourth phase that refers to the implicit and explicit pledge of relational continuity between exchange partners (e.g., top accounts). The criteria of this phase are inputs (i.e., what the parties contribute), durability (i.e., bonding is a factor in this criteria) and consistency. The final phase is dissolution that shouldn't be considered as a reversal according to Dwyer et al. (1987).

The benefits of the relational exchange sales strategy include reduced uncertainty, exchange efficiency and social satisfactions for the association. Another important advantage of this sales strategy is the possibility of significant gains in joint payoffs as a result of effective communication and collaboration to attain goals. Additionally, the buyer's perception of the effectiveness of the exchange relation is a significant mobility barrier and potential competitive advantage for the seller that insulates the latter from price competition (Dwyer et al., 1987).

Dwyer et al. (1987) stressed that their objective was to address the area of buyer-seller relationships they felt had been neglected, relational exchanges. They pointed out that discrete transactions shouldn't be ignored as one form of buyer-seller relationships. This is an important point in relation to this study as both relational exchange and discrete transaction type buyer actions are to be analyzed.

Wilson (1995) Model. Wilson (1995) built on the model of Dwyer et al. (1987) using a review of literature in the buyer-seller relationship area to determine relationship "success" variables. Those success variables were commitment (i.e., importance of continuing the relationship), trust, cooperation, mutual goals (i.e., sharing of goals that can only be accomplished through joint action), interdependence and power, performance satisfaction, structural bonds, comparison level of alternatives, adaptation (i.e., altering the processes or the item to accommodate the other party), non-retrievable investments (i.e., relationship specific investments), shared technology and social bonds.

Commitment was found to be the most common dependent variable by Wilson (1995) in previous buyer-seller relationship studies. Commitment implies importance of the relationship to the partners and a desire to continue the relationship into the future. Trust, as defined by Wilson, is the belief that one relationship partner will act in the best interests of the other partner.

Cooperation is defined as similar or complementary coordination of actions taken by firms in interdependent relationships to achieve mutual outcomes or singular outcomes with expected reciprocation. Wilson further states that cooperation and commitment interact to ensure long-term relationships. Mutual goals are defined as the goals accomplished through joint action and maintenance of the relationship. These are goals of the firms involved. Interdependence and power and their imbalance are important relationship variables. Wilson states that power imbalance is a direct result of the degree of one partner's dependence on the other partner. Performance satisfaction is the partner's satisfaction with the basic elements of the business relationship. Structural bonds are those forces that create impediments to termination of the relationship. Comparison of alternatives is the comparison of the quality of the outcome available from the best available relationship partner. Adaptation occurs when one party in a relationship alters its processes or the item exchanged to accommodate the other partner. The concept of adaptation was drawn directly from the IMP "interaction" model (Hakansson, 1982), to be discussed later in this section. Non-retrievable investments are relationship-specific commitments of resources that a partner invests in the relationship. Shared technology is the degree to which one partner values the technology contributed by the other partner to the relationship. Social bonds are the strong personal relationships that commit the partners to the relationship. The "success" variables related to the interpersonal interaction between buyer and seller will be the focus of this study and is discussed in more detail later in the study.