Affective Commitment in Industrial Customer Supplier Relations A Psychological Contract Approach

Affective commitment in industrial
customer-supplier relations: a psychological

contract approach
Mikael Lovblad and Akmal S. Hyder
Department of Business and Economic Studies, University of Ga vle, Ga vle, Sweden, and
Lars Lonnstedt
Department of Forest Products, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this conceptual paper is to develop the construct of affective commitment in business-to-business relationships between
customers and suppliers, as well as to introduce the psychological contract as a central antecedent to affective commitment.
Design/methodology/approach A review of the literature on psychological contracts and relationship marketing relating to affective relationship
commitment was conducted to make a theoretical contribution in a buyer-supplier relationship context.
Findings By focusing on the individual and incorporating relevant mental processes, theories on affective commitment have been developed. A
model and propositions concerning the impact of psychological contracts on affective relationship commitment are suggested, where the psychological
contract plays a central role in mediating the effects of several antecedents to affective commitment.
Research limitations/implications By focusing on the individuals role in affective relationship commitment, this paper contrasts with much of the
earlier research, which has used the rm as the unit of analysis. For practitioners, using such an approach will provide a more realistic view of the
dynamics in the relationship.
Originality/value This study makes two main contributions. First, it develops conceptual clarity of the affective commitment construct by putting a
clear focus on the individual. Second, it proposes a model that describes the inuence of several antecedents to affective commitment, suggesting a
central role of psychological contracts in explaining the presence of affective commitment in business-to-business relationships.
Keywords Relational orientation, Balance of obligations, Individual level, Trust, Contracts, Business-to-business marketing, Channel relationships
Paper type Conceptual paper
An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
1. Introduction
A multitude of studies have recognized commitment as
playing a crucial part in business relationships to achieve
positive relationship outcomes (Kelly, 2004). Commitment
has been seen to increase productivity, effectiveness and
efciency in the relational exchange (Gundlach and Murphy,
1993), and has become one of the most studied variables in
research on buyer-seller relationships (Cater and Zabkar,
2009). Recent research on B2B relationships has described
commitment as a multi-dimensional construct (Gedeon et al.,
2009; Sharma et al., 2006), often categorized into cognitive,
normative and affective commitment (Kelly, 2004). Cognitive
commitment, also called calculative commitment, can be
described as when a party maintains a relationship because it
needs to, due to lack of alternatives, relationship-specic
investments or other reasons. In the case of normative
commitment, the relationship is maintained since the actors
feel they ought to maintain it, often for cultural reasons.
When affective commitment is present in a relationship, the
parties involved keep the relationship going due to a feeling
that they want to maintain it (Kumar et al., 1994).
Affective commitment is often regarded as vital for good
performance in a B2B relationship. Evanschitzky et al. (2006)
found affective commitment to be dominant in securing
loyalty in relationships, and several other authors have
identied its centrality in achieving positive relationship
outcomes (Kumar et al., 1994; Cater and Zabkar, 2009). In
this paper, we will concentrate on affective commitment and
discuss how it functions in relations between customers and
suppliers in B2B markets, a type of relationship that has
received little attention in the literature on commitment. It
will be argued that affective commitment lacks conceptual
clarity in the extant literature and, to resolve this problem, we
distinguish between organizational and individual levels of
analysis and focus on the individual level to pursue our
discussion on affective commitment. We review antecedents
of individual-level affective commitment and examine how
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0885-8624.htm
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
27/4 (2012) 275285
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624]
[DOI 10.1108/08858621211221652]
Received: 10 February 2010
Revised: 17 November 2010
25 March 2011
Accepted: 30 March 2011
275
focusing on the individual level will help to increase the
understanding of customer-supplier relationships. Further,
we will discuss the psychological contract as one of the key
antecedents to individual level affective commitment, and its
relation to other antecedents found in extant literature.
The next section presents a literature review on affective
commitment, followed by the introduction of the psychological
contract concept and its links to customer-supplier
relationship, as well as illustration of how it functions as the
main antecedent to individual-level affective commitment.
Comments on the other antecedents are then followed by a
discussion. The last two sections of the paper deal with
suggestions for future research and managerial implications.
2. Affective commitment in marketing
relationships
A large number of studies have applied the concept of affective
commitment to channel relationships (e.g. Kim and Frazier,
1997), and the concept has also been used in B2B relationships
between customers and suppliers (e.g. de Ruyter et al., 2001).
Several studies have identied affective commitment as a major
factor in increasing a business partners intention to stay in the
relationship (de Ruyter et al. 2001), in loyalty (Cater and
Zabkar, 2009) and in the willingness to invest (Kumar et al.,
1994). There are, however, discrepancies in how affective
commitment has been dened and applied. A review of extant
literature reveals three general ways of describing the construct.
One approach focuses on identication with and involvement
in an organization (Cater and Cater, 2010), while a second
approach concentrates on the desire to continue a relationship
(Sharma et al., 2006). The third approach focuses on a
generalized sense of positive regard and attachment to the other
party (Wetzels et al., 1998; Gounaris, 2005). Though different
in formulation, all three of these descriptions are strongly
related to individuals because identication, desire and a sense
of regard are seen at the individual level. We therefore argue
that affective relationship commitment is a psychological state
of individuals. However, the construct has largely been studied
on the rm level. The upcoming discussion will focus on what
roles do individual and organizational levels play in the
conceptual development of affective commitment. Two
questions are important in this regard: In what ways can an
individual or an organization be affectively committed to a B2B
relationship? And, is it possible for an organization to be
affectively committed to a relationship?
As shown in Table I, the discussion regarding organizational
level vs. individual level in B2B relationships has been applied
to commitment as a unied construct. By applying this dual-
level approach to affective commitment, we are able to
identify differences in the way the affective commitment
construct has been handled in extant literature. Most
importantly for the discussion in this paper, many of the
denitions of affective relationship commitment cited in Table
II include psychological states, such as identication, desire
and sense of unity, which would indicate a focus on
individual-level affective commitment. Even so, the
construct has often been researched at the rm level, which
is evident by how it has been operationalized in the research
instruments.
In reviewing the literature on affective commitment, we
found that several studies (e.g. Kumar et al., 1995; Kelly, 2004)
asked key informants how their organizations felt about a
business counterpart. This becomes problematic when the
difference between individual-level and organizational-level
affective commitment is not consciously taken into account,
but treated instead as the same thing. We argue that affective
commitment can indeed be researched at both levels, but that
the two levels need to be treated separately. This line of
thought largely follows the logic earlier applied to interpersonal
and interorganizational trust (Ganesan and Hess, 1997). Like
trust (Zaheer et al. 1998), affective commitment can by
denition only exist in the mind of an individual, and the
organizational level of affective commitment describes the
extent to which the affective commitment towards a
relationship with a business partner is shared by the relevant
individuals in the focal organization. The link between the
individual-level and organizational affective commitment is
found in the institutionalizing processes within each rm
involved in the relationship. Both positive and negative affect
are reinforced between individuals over the course of the
relationship. Accordingly, the individual inuences the
organization and vice versa in the institutionalizing process.
But this denition of organizational affective commitment does
not imply that if one is committed, then all are. Instead, the
construct describes the extent to which affective commitment is
shared within an organization. It is thus a link between shared
norms in the organization and the degree of organizational
affective commitment.
In B2B literature, various reasons for affective commitment
are included in the descriptions of affective relationship
commitment. Kumar et al. (1995) nd that affective
commitment applies when a party has the desire to continue
a relationship because of a positive attitude toward the partner.
In the same manner, Kelly (2004) recognize desire for
afliation as the rationale behind the formation of this kind of
commitment. We argue that the discussion of specic motives,
such as desire for afliation or identication, is less relevant
because individuals tend to have very different motives for their
feelings towards a relationship. Instead, we nd it useful to
raise the denition to a more abstract level and draw on social
exchange theory. According to Blau (1986), individuals
associate with one another because they benet from the
association. Such benets can take the form of material as well
as immaterial gains (Sweeney and Webb, 2007), and we argue
that individuals tend to have a higher affective commitment to
relationships when they nd it emotionally rewarding. If the
main reason for maintaining a relationship is material reward, it
is a matter of calculative commitment. By applying this more
abstract level, the specic nature of the emotional reward from
the relationship can vary substantially yet still within the
framework of affective commitment.
We now begin to approach a denition of affective
relationship commitment by combining the three
conclusions made so far, that:
1 affective commitment involves a psychological state,
which;
2 can only be experienced by individuals; and
3 is built on the perception of a rewarding relationship.
Building on the work of de Ruyter et al. (2001), we dene
affective relationship commitment at the individual level as the
extent to which an individual wants to maintain the
relationship with a supplier, due to emotional rewards gained
from that relationship. We further dene the organizational
level of affective commitment as the extent to which relevant
Affective commitment in industrial customer-supplier relations
Mikael Lovblad, Akmal S. Hyder and Lars Lonnstedt
Volume 27 Number 4 2012 275285
276
individuals in the focal organization share this affective
commitment towards a business partner. In the remaining
part of the paper, we will focus on individual-level affective
commitment, since this is where affective commitment occurs.
3. Psychological contract: a major antecedent to
individual-level affective commitment
The construct of psychological contract is dened as an
individuals belief in mutual obligations between that person
and another party such as an employer (Rousseau and
Tijoriwala, 1998). Millward and Hopkins (1998) describe the
psychological contract from an employer-employee relation
perspective, as beliefs held by individuals about their
contractual terms and conditions. We propose the
psychological contract as a central antecedent to affective
commitment in B2B relationships, since it provides a lens
through which the individual views the relationship. The
psychological contract is a cognitive schema (Rousseau, 2001)
that helps the individual to structure and make sense of
information received and experiences gained. Psychological
contracts tell how an individual denes the deal between
him/her self and another party, and also constitute the
measurement against which the individual judges whether or
not the other party is living up to its obligations, and what that
individuals own obligations in the relationship are (McLean
Parks et al., 1998). The psychological contract is thus central
to how interactions in the relationship are perceived, whereby
the outcome of this interaction is compared to the
expectations modeled in the psychological contract.
In organizational psychology, the construct of psychological
contract has been used to understand phenomena such as
Table I Personal and organizational commitment in B2B studies
Authors Exogenous variables Focal variables Context/sample Key ndings
Williams et al.
(1998)
National culture, structural
bonding and social bonding
Commitment Questionnaire survey to
business people in China
(25), Germany (31), Costa
Rica (40), Jamaica (54) and
the USA (129)
Structural bonding had a
much higher effect on
commitment than social
bonding. The effect of social
bonding was higher in
collectivistic cultures than in
individualistic cultures
Tellefsen (2002) Outcome satisfaction,
interaction satisfaction,
purchasing manager
gatekeeping, sales person
information control
Commitment Mail survey to 1705
purchasing managers
Personal needs have a
greater inuence on
relationship commitment
than organizational needs
Tellefsen and
Thomas (2005)
Organizational trust, service
performance, delivery
performance, cost
performance, organization
dependence, organizational
continuity
Personal trust, personal
expertise, personal power,
likeability, personal
dependence, personal
continuity
Organizational commitment
Personal commitment
Mail survey to 453 market
research managers in the
USA
Personal and organizational
commitment are two distinct
constructs, affected by
different antecedents. Both
signicantly impact the
relational exchange
Abdul-Muhmin
(2005)
Instrumental factors
(satisfaction with suppliers
product, pricing, distribution
and marketing
communication),
Interpersonal factors
(perceived supplier
benevolence, credibility and
opportunism)
Relationship satisfaction,
commitment and propensity
to leave the relationship
Questionnaire to 550
purchasing representatives in
Saudi Arabia
Interpersonal factors had a
greater impact on
relationship satisfaction than
instrumental factors
Sweeney and Webb
(2007)
Social benets, psychological
benets
Functional benets,
individual commitment
Individual commitment
Firm commitment
Mail survey to 548 Australian
rms
Individual commitment and
rm commitment are
important throughout a
relationship. Greater
individual commitment leads
to greater rm commitment
277
trust (Atkinson, 2007), organizational citizenship behavior
(Hui et al., 2004) and commitment (Millward and Hopkins,
1998). The psychological contract is one type of soft
contract, i.e. an unwritten contract that can exist in a
relationship (Rousseau, 1995). When the psychological
contract items are shared within a group, they can be said
to constitute a normative contract since they are actually
shared expectations of behavior within that group. Normative
contracts have been applied to B2B relationships in order to
investigate how the actors involved understand their mutual
obligations in a business relationship (Lusch and Brown,
1996). By incorporating the psychological contract into B2B
theory, enables us to distinguish between the idiosyncratic
and shared items in the individual, soft contracts. This in
turn yields a more nuanced view of the relationship,
recognizing that not all perceived obligations are shared
within a group. Two main reasons suggest that the construct
can bring value also to the discussion on affective relationship
commitment between buyers and sellers.
First, the construct of psychological contract is used in
organizational theory as a way of operationalizing the social
exchange between employer and employee (Coyle-Shapiro
and Conway, 2005), describing the mental picture of how one
individual regards his/her social exchange with another.
Psychological contracts have been linked to commitment in
different intra-organizational contexts. Tetrick (1995) ascribes
the construct a central role in understanding union
commitment, especially with regard to the affective aspect
thereof. Several authors (e.g. Bellou, 2008) use the construct
related to organizational commitment. The psychological
contract complements constructs such as relationship norms
and normative contracts, earlier used in B2B research, since it
describes the view of the individual without the requirement
of mutuality or sharing this view with others. This aspect can
have an impact on relationship performance since differences
in the perception of promises and obligations in the
relationship can lead to difculties in the management of a
relationship. Also, the psychological contract builds on
promises (Rousseau, 2001), which have been identied as a
crucial element in service relationships (Bitner, 1995) as well
as in B2B relationships in industrial marketing (Narayandas
and Rangan, 2004).
Second, to date, three studies conducted in marketing
settings provide empirical support for the applicability of the
construct in marketing context. The rst of these was
published in 2005 by Pavlou and Gefen and deals with
psychological contract violations in online B2C marketplaces.
The second study (Kingshott, 2006; Kingshott and Pecotich,
2007) investigates the impact of psychological contract on
trust and commitment in the motorized vehicle industry.
When studying relationships between suppliers and
distributors, the authors observed a direct effect of
psychological contract on relationship commitment and
trust. This study is probably the rst to apply the construct
to relationship marketing research. The third is a study of
B2B relationships in Sweden by Lovblad and Bantekas
(2010), who found empirical support for a link between
relational orientation and fulllment of psychological
contract, and affective relationship commitment. These
three studies indicate the existence of psychological
contracts between buyers and sellers, but do not investigate
whether the construct has specic effects on the relationship
between the parties. Psychological contract needs to be
Table II Antecedents and outcomes of affective commitment in B2B research
Identied antecedent Denition of affective commitment Identied outcome
Trust, social bonds and satisfaction. (Cater and
Zabkar, 2009)
Trust, cooperation and adaptation (Cater and
Cater, 2010)
An identication with and involvement in a
particular organization
Higher intention and desire to stay, greater
performance, increased willingness to invest.
(Kumar et al. 1994); Loyalty (Cater and Zabkar,
2009); Attitudinal and behavioral loyalty (Cater and
Cater, 2010)
Interdependence, interdependece assymetry
and trust (Geyskens et al., 1996)
Trust, relationship characteristics, market
characteristics (de Ruyter et al., 2001)
A desire to continue a relationship Intention to stay (de Ruyter et al., 2001);
Specialized investment, trustworthiness,
manifest conict, role performance (Kim and
Frazier, 1997)
A sense of unity (or level of unity) towards the
relationship or the counterpart.
Not reported
Values and trust (Zabkar and Brencic, 2004) The congruence of values and goals among
partners
Not reported
Trust (Gounaris, 2005)
Satisfaction, technical quality, trust
benevolence, trust honesty (Wetzels et al.,
1998)
A generalized sense of positive regard for and
attachment to the other party
Intention to stay (Gounaris, 2005; Wetzels et al.
1998), investment intention (Gounaris, 2005)
Relationship termination costs, benets,
shared values, communication, opportunistic
behavior and instrumental commitment
(Abosag et al., 2006)
Is more personal, involving social interactions
among individuals representing partner
organizations
Cooperation (Abosag et al., 2006)
278
examined in this new context and more research is required to
explore its role and scope.
Organizational theory literature examining the relationship
between psychological contract and affective commitment has
established three relevant perspectives on how psychological
contracts inuence affective commitment (Figure 1). The rst
perspective that links psychological contracts with
commitment is the orientation of the psychological contract,
as exemplied by Millward and Hopkins (1998). Building on
Rousseaus (1990) ndings, Millward and Hopkins (1998)
nd that:
.
a stronger relational orientation correlates positively with
affective commitment;
.
a stronger transactional orientation correlates negatively
with affective commitment; and
.
the two orientations of the psychological contract are
inversely correlated.
While a transactional orientation is characterized by specic,
short-term, monetary obligations, a relational orientation
focuses on broad, long-term, socio-emotional obligations
(Thomas et al., 2003; see also Rousseau, 1995, for a detailed
discussion). This perspective exhibits similarities with the
often-used split between calculative and affective dimensions
of commitment. Calculative commitment refers to
relationships based solely on economic or extrinsic needs
(Mavondo and Rodrigo, 2001), whereas the affective
dimension deals with emotionally based intrinsic needs.
There is, however, a distinct difference between the two
dimensions of commitment noted and the transactional/
relational aspect of psychological contracts applied here. In
the case of psychological contracts, the focus is on the
individuals perception and mental picture of the obligations
of the relationship, rather than the actual conditions of the
relationship and the activities performed within it. In a B2B
relationship, differences are likely to exist in the relational/
transactional orientation of the psychological contract
between individuals from the same organization. A
hypothetical example would be the case of purchasing of
indirect material for a production process where individuals
involved in the production might have psychological contracts
with a relational orientation, while individuals involved from
the purchasing department have a much higher degree of
transactional orientation. We therefore nd this dimension
relevant for the B2B setting and build on the ndings of
Millward and Hopkins (1998) (see Figure 1 for a schematic
summary of all propositions):
P1a. Relational orientation of an individuals psychological
contract will correlate positively to his/her affective
commitment to the relationship.
P1b. Transactional orientation of an individuals
psychological contract will correlate negatively to his/
her affective commitment to the relationship.
The second relevant perspective comes from organizational
research, where the perceived balance of obligations has also
been linked to affective commitment. Shore and Barksdale
(1998) found that when an individual perceives a balance
between his/her own obligations and those of the other party,
this correlates positively with affective relationship
commitment. In other words, a balanced psychological
contract is favorable for the relationship. Linking this
perspective to the research on commitment in marketing
relationships enables us to understand the psychological
reasons for a link between instrumental commitment and
affective commitment. Idiosyncratic investment reduces the
opportunity to terminate the relationship (Morgan and Hunt,
1994), leading to instrumental commitment. But if one party
perceives that the other party is making similar investments,
the correlation to affective commitment is likely to be positive
(Gilliland and Bello, 2002). Since the psychological contract
can contain perceived obligations relating to products and
services as well as socio-emotional aspects, studies on this
perspective might render interesting results:
P2a. A psychological contract with a perceived balance of
obligations for the parties involved will correlate
positively with affective relationship commitment.
P2b. A psychological contract with a perceived imbalance in
obligations for the parties involved will correlate
negatively with affective relationship commitment.
The third perspective on the link between psychological
contracts and affective commitment found in organizational
research relates to the fullment or breach of the
psychological contract. Sturges et al. (2005) nd a positive
relation between psychological contract fulllment and
affective commitment, thereby conrming the results of
earlier studies (e.g. Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler, 2000).
Furthermore, Bunderson (2001) nds that breach of
psychological contract decreases commitment. We therefore
see a link between fulllment/breach of the psychological
Figure 1 Antecedents to affective commitment
279
contract and affective commitment, which should also hold in
a marketing relationship context. It is worth noting, however,
that the act of breaching a contract can be perceived
differently in different cultures. For example, Abdul-Muhmin
(2005) found that opportunism did not have a negative effect
on relationships studied in Saudi Arabia. Generally,
opportunistic behavior is regarded as a breach of the
psychological contract (Gundlach and Achrol, 1995). In the
Saudi Arabian case, however, behaving opportunistically is
part of the business culture (Abdul-Muhmin, 2005) and is
therefore not regarded as a breach of the psychological
contract. Thus, for psychological contract in the customer-
supplier setting, the propositions are:
P3a. Fulllment of the psychological contract will have a
positive impact on affective relationship commitment.
P3b. Breach of the psychological contract will have a
negative impact on affective relationship commitment.
Since the purpose of this model is to establish a link between
psychological contracts and affective commitment, this paper
does not specically address the dynamics of the contract, for
example, how the contract is formed and inuenced. It is also
important to note that, similarly to the ndings in
organizational research, the different variables presented in
the propositions and model is viewed as continuums and not
dichotomies (Millward and Hopkins, 1998; Sturges et al.,
2005). It is not a matter of relational or transactional
orientation, but rather the degree thereof (Knight, 2000).
Further antecedents to affective commitment
In the literature, several antecedents to affective commitment
in B2B relationships have been identied. Given the denition
of affective commitment stated above, that individuals have
higher affective commitment to relationships they nd
emotionally rewarding, we nd it useful to propose
antecedents which are likely to inuence this aspect of
commitment. As is presented below, we argue that several of
these antecedents are mediated by the psychological contract.
The basis for assuming a mediating effect lies in the role of the
psychological contract as a cognitive schema, which has effect
on an individuals feelings towards the relationship.
Experiences from the relationship, such as perceived
dependence as discussed below, are compared with the
schema associated with the relationship, and will have greater
or lesser effect on feelings towards the relationship. We further
suggest that the psychological contract inuences affective
commitment both directly and indirectly. In the case of trust
and satisfaction, for example, the psychological contract has a
mediated, indirect effect on affective commitment.
In the following sections we discuss each of the proposed
antecedents to affective commitment, and how they relate to
the psychological contract.
Trust
A frequently noted antecedent to affective commitment it
trust (Geyskens et al., 1996; Gounaris, 2005; Cater and
Cater, 2010), even though the causal relationship between the
two factors have been debated (Rampersad et al. 2010). Trust
has been dened as a psychological state comprising the
intention to accept vulnerability based on positive
expectations of the intentions or behavior of another
(Rousseau et al., 1998, p. 395), and thus represents a
means for an individual to manage risks. Ganesan and Hess
(1997) nd different levels and dimensions of trust to have
different effects on commitment, further claiming that
interpersonal credibility trust and organizational
benevolence trust have the greatest impact on commitment.
In the same vein, Tellefsen and Thomas (2005) nd that
personal trust is a driver for personal commitment, while
organizational trust promoted commitment at the
organizational level, which support the proposition:
P4. Interpersonal trust has a positive relation to individual-
level affective commitment.
Organizational research has indicated a relationship between
the psychological contract and trust. Robinson (1996) found
that breach of the psychological contract inuences trust
negatively, a nding that has found support in several other
studies (Zhao et al., 2007). Fulllment of the psychological
contract is all about delivering on a perceived promise, which
has been identied as an important factor for building
credibility trust in B2B relationships (Doney et al., 2007).
Further, both Millward and Hopkins (1998) and Thomas et al.
(2003) indicate that individuals in employment relationships
with psychological contracts with a relational orientation are
more likely to build high levels of trust than individuals with a
transactional orientation. B2B relationships are no exception to
it, and thus we make the following propositions:
P5. Trust is negatively inuenced by breach of the
psychological contract.
P6. There is a positive relationship between the relational
orientation of an individuals psychological contract
and trust.
Satisfaction
Earlier studies on B2B relationships have dened,
satisfaction as a buyers overall appraisal of a product or
service provider to date (Cater and Zabkar, 2009, p. 788)
which is seen as directly inuencing the formation of affective
commitment (Wetzels et al., 1998). There has been some
debate regarding the direction of the causal relationship
between quality and satisfaction, particularly in service
relationships (Wetzels et al., 1998), but following several
authors (Cronin and Taylor, 1992) we view satisfaction as an
outcome of the quality of the interaction between the parties
involved. Application of psychological contract to this
discussion further strengthens this view. In the evaluation of
the psychological contract, the individual compares the
outcome of the interaction with his/her expectations. If the
outcome meets or exceeds the items of the psychological
contract, this will lead to satisfaction. This gives us to the
following propositions:
P7. There is a direct relationship between the evaluation of
the psychological contract and satisfaction.
P8. There is a direct relationship between satisfaction and
Relationship characteristics
Relationship characteristics have been dened as frequent,
informal and open communication in which conicts are
constructively solved (de Ruyter et al., 2001, p. 277), and
have been seen to inuence the building of affective
commitment (de Ruyter et al., 2001). Following this
280
denition, the relationship characteristics actually describe and
include several other antecedents to affective commitment
identied in literature. They essentially describe cooperation
(Mysen and Svensson, 2010), the handling of conict (Kim
and Frazier, 1997) and the social bonds (Cater and Zabkar,
2009) of the relationship. While previous studies have observed
a direct effect from these antecedents on affective commitment,
we propose that they are mediated by the relational orientation
of the psychological contract. Good relationship characteristics,
entailing open communication and constructive conict
handling, would inuence the orientation of the psychological
contract of the individual. The perception of what is regarded
as good relationship characteristics is also guided by the
orientation of the psychological contract, where an individual
with a relational orientation is more likely to react positively to
the relationship characteristics than an individual with a
transactional orientation:
P9. There is a direct relationship between the relationship
characteristics and a relational orientation of the
psychological contract, mediating the effect of the
relationship characteristics on affective commitment.
Dependence
Research has produced mixed results related to the effect of
the dependence between the relationship partners and
affective commitment. Geyskens et al. (1996) found that
interdependence between the partners had a positive effect on
affective commitment, but that -somewhat surprisingly
dependence asymmetry did not lead to a negative effect. And
while de Ruyter et al. (2001) found that the market
characteristics, dened as perceived dependence and
switching risks and costs (de Ruyter et al., 2001, p. 277)
had a positive effect on affective commitment, Wetzels et al.
(1998) could nd no support for an effect of dependence on
affective commitment. Kim and Frazier (1997) did however
observe an effect of a distributors specialized investment
towards a supplier and the distributors affective commitment
towards the same supplier. We argue that the perceived
dependence on a business partner is mediated by the balance
of obligations in the psychological contract of the individual.
An individual who perceives himself/herself (or his/her
organization) to be highly dependent on a business partner
is likely to hold a relational orientation of his/her
psychological contract, and this mediates the effect of
dependence on affective commitment, leading to:
P10. There is a positive relationship between the perceived
dependence on a business partner and the perceived
balance of obligations in an individuals psychological
contract, mediating the effect of dependence on
Role performance
Role performance is dened as how well the supplier rm
actually carries out its channel roles (Kim and Frazier, 1997,
p. 857), and has been found to have a positive inuence on
affective relationship commitment. Similar ndings come
from the B2B services sector, where the functional quality of a
service, dened as how a service is delivered (Wetzels et al.,
1998) has been found to have a positive effect. Kim and
Frazier (1997) argue that when one party feels that the
business partner works hard on its behalf, this will lead to a
greater sense of unity. When related to the psychological
contract, we suggest that the effect of role performance is
mediated by the evaluation of the psychological contract with
respect to its effect on satisfaction and affective commitment.
In the evaluation of the psychological contract, the outcome
of the business interaction, i.e. the performance, is compared
to the expectation. This leads to a positive, neutral or negative
evaluation, with a corresponding effect on the feeling of
satisfaction and affective commitment:
P11. The positive effect of the role performance of a
business partner is mediated by the evaluation of the
psychological contract, with regard to its effect on
satisfaction and affective commitment.
Discussion
The purpose of this paper is to offer an alternative approach for
understanding affective commitment in customer-supplier
relations, in an aim to overcome the identied theoretical and
methodological shortcomings in the extant literature. To fulll
this purpose, a clear focus on the individual has been proposed.
As affective commitment is associated with individuals, we
argue that to understand this construct, relevant mental
processes must be incorporated into the theory. The
psychological contract operationalizes the social exchange
process from an individuals point of view, linking the
psychological processes with the social processes. Application
of this perspective gives us a deeper understanding of how
affective commitment is built and allows the development of a
more comprehensive theory. A thorough understanding of
affective commitment is important since it has been seen to
affect several relationship outcomes, as presented in Table II.
Affective commitment has been identied as inuencing
behavioral objectives, such as investment intention (Gounaris,
2005) and intention to stay (Kumar et al., 1994) as well as
actual behaviors such as behavioral loyalty (Cater and Cater,
2010) and cooperation (Abosag et al., 2006). Combining this
affective aspect of the inter-rm relationship with other
relevant theories such as transaction cost theory is likely to
provide a more holistic view of the relationship. In such a
combination, the present paper contributes by drawing
attention to the personal aspects based on the social
exchange, while other theories provide the structural aspects.
Making a distinction between what the psychological
contract can explain and seeing its possible merits and
limitations is important. As Kingshott (2006) indicates, the
psychological contract can be assumed to be relevant when
analyzing relationships from a social exchange perspective,
conrming to developments in organizational theory
(Cullinane and Dundon, 2006). Secondly, the construct is
focused on understanding individuals involved in a
relationship. Damperat and Jolibert (2009) use different
levels of explanation to investigate buyer-seller relationships:
individual, interaction, relationship and inter-group. This
article is clearly related to the rst of these levels and should
be combined with relevant theories regarding the other levels in
order to explain the full dynamic of an inter-rm relationship.
From a methodological standpoint, we suggest that
research regarding affective relationship commitment should
focus on the individual. Choosing the individual in a
relationship as the unit of analysis makes it possible to
develop an appropriate research instrument and select right
281
respondents. In order to gain an understanding of the social
dynamics of the relationship, several individuals involved in
the relationship should be investigated rather than using one
key informant (Kumar et al. 1993). If not, important aspects
of the complexity of the relationship may be lost. The use of
several respondents will assist the study of affective
relationship commitment at the organizational level.
Suggestions for further research
Since the construct of psychological contract is a rarely
investigated area in marketing, there is a need to explore the
construct in the marketing context. Organizational research
has shown which aspects of the construct might be of
importance in understanding affective commitment. A
qualitative research approach may therefore be suitable to
operationalize these aspects in a customer-supplier context.
Based on the ndings of such a study, item scales can be
developed for a quantitative survey aimed at examining the
effects of psychological contracts on affective commitment.
This paper has not offered any operationalization of the scales
that appear in the model, since this type of research has yet to
be performed in a marketing context. An example of how the
construct has been operationalized in organizational research
is the 12-item scale used by several authors to measure
psychological contract fulllment (Sturges et al., 2005). This
scale includes: opportunities for promotion, pay, nancial
rewards other than salary, type of work, pressure of the job,
number of hours to be worked, etc (Sturges et al., 2005,
p. 827). In the case of interorganizational research, however,
the task of determining what items to use remains. Further,
this paper has not specically investigated the dynamics of the
psychological contract, for example, how the psychological
contract is formed and inuenced. This will be a task for
future research.
This conceptual paper has proposed a model for
understanding how affective commitment is built in B2B
relationships. Future studies are needed to establish empirical
support for the relationship between dependent and
independent variables, along with the suggested mediating
effects of the psychological contract.
Researchers of customer-supplier relations can nd
inspiration and insights for further research on the construct
of psychological contract in the fairly rich literature on the
subject. The psychological contract is a dynamic phenomenon
(Millward and Hopkins, 1998), as it develops over time
through the experiences gathered by the individual
(Rousseau, 1995). This implies that longitudinal studies are
likely to be valuable for understanding the process of
psychological contracting (Rousseau, 1995). Another
interesting perspective relates to how perceived promises are
communicated. Organizational research has shown that
factors outside the focal relationship can also be important
in this respect. One example is that employees tend to look at
how an employer treats other employees and view this as a
promise of similar treatment. In an interorganizational
context, factors such as experiences from other suppliers in
the same category may likely inuence a customers
psychological contract with a specic supplier, which Pavlou
and Gefen (2005) also indicate in their study. If a link
between psychological contracts and affective commitment
can be rmly established, much research lies ahead to fully
understand the construct in the new context of customer-
supplier relations.
Managerial implications
The implications of this paper for managers are several.
Drawing from the previous research, it is possible to conclude
that affective commitment is a crucial factor to achieve
positive relationship outcomes. The paper suggests that to
understand the dynamics of affective commitment in a
relationship it is not sufcient to look at the organizational
level. Instead, one needs to look at the individuals involved,
and understand their perceptions of the relationship.
If the purpose is to increase the affective commitment of a
business partner, understanding the psychological contracts of
the relevant individuals in the partner organization can offer
important insights into how this can be accomplished. We
suggest that it will be benecial to inuence the psychological
contracts in a more relational direction, by promoting an open-
ended and integrated relationship. However, it is important to
point out that different orientations of the psychological
contracts will lead to quite different experiences: transactional
orientation, which is short-lived, works for quick outcome
while relational orientation promotes longevity and openness.
Relational orientation offers managers more time to build their
psychological contracts based on augmented affective
commitment to the relationship. Whatever may be the
direction, a psychological contract will remain dynamic and
can be inuenced.
One of our hypotheses claims that promoting a balance in
the obligations between the parties lead to an increase in
affective commitment. In a business relationship, this relates
closely to mutual dependence between the partners. Creating
a feeling of we are in this together, will likely promote
affective commitment to the relationship. Further, an
understanding of the psychological contract means that a
manager has a good comprehension of what promises and
obligations the business counterpart experience as relevant for
the relationship. It is therefore not the whole thing that has
been explicitly said or written in discussions and contracts
that guides the experience of a managers performance, but
how the business counterpart experience these conditions is of
great value and to be integrated to the total understanding of
the relationship. Based on this experience, a manager will
evaluate the business relationship and decide the
organizations future course of action.
References
Abdul-Muhmin, A.G. (2005), Instrumental and
interpersonal determinants of relationship satisfaction and
commitment in industrial markets, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 619-28.
Abosag, I., Tynan, C. and Lewis, C. (2006),
The commitment-trust theory: the British and Saudi
Arabian cross-national perspectives, paper presented at the
22nd IMP Conference, Milan, 7-9 September, available at:
www.impgroup.org/uploads/papers/5601.pdf (accessed
18 December 2009).
Atkinson, C. (2007), Trust and the psychological contract,
Employee Relations, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 227-46.
282
Bellou, V. (2008), Exploring civic virtue and turnover
intention during organizational changes, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 61 No. 7, pp. 778-89.
Bitner, M.J. (1995), Building service relationships: its all
about promises, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 246-51.
Blau, P.M. (1986), Exchange and Power in Social Life,
Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.
Bunderson, S.J. (2001), How work ideologies shape the
psychological contracts of professional employees: doctors
responses to perceived breach, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 717-41.
Cater, B. and Zabkar, V. (2009), Antecedents and
consequences of commitment in marketing research
services: the clients perspective, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 785-97.
Cater, T. and Cater, B. (2010), Product and relationship
quality inuence on customer commitment and loyalty in
B2B manufacturing relationships, Industrial Marketing
Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.-M. and Conway, N. (2005), Exchange
relationships: examining psychological contracts and
perceived organizational support, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 4, pp. 774-81.
Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.-M. and Kessler, I. (2000),
Consequences of the psychological contract for the
employment relationship: a large scale survey, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 903-30.
Cronin, J.J. Jr and Taylor, S.A. (1992), Measuring service
quality: a re-examination and extension, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 56, July, pp. 55-68.
Cullinane, N. and Dundon, T. (2006), The psychological
contract: a critical review, International Journal of
Management Reviews, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 113-29.
Damperat, M. and Jolibert, A. (2009), A dialectical model of
buyer-seller relationships, Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, Vol. 24 Nos 3/4, pp. 207-17.
de Ruyter, K., Moorman, L. and Lemmink, J. (2001),
Antecedents of commitment and trust in customer-
supplier relationships in high technology markets,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 271-86.
Doney, P.M., Barry, J.M. and Abratt, R. (2007), Trust
determinants and outcomes in global B2B services,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 9/10,
pp. 1096-116.
Evanschitzky, H., Iyer, G.R., Plassmann, H., Niessing, J. and
Meffert, H. (2006), The relative strength of affective
commitment in securing loyalty in service relationships,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59 No. 12, pp. 1207-13.
Ganesan, S. and Hess, R. (1997), Dimensions and levels of
trust: implications for commitment to a relationship,
Marketing Letters, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 439-48.
Gedeon, I.-M., Fearne, A. and Poole, N. (2009), The role of
inter-personal relationships in the dissolution of business
relationships, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
Vol. 24 Nos 3/4, pp. 218-26.
Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M., Scheer, L.K. and
Kumar, N. (1996), The effects of trust and
interdependence on relationship commitment: a trans-
Atlantic study, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 303-17.
Gilliland, D.I. and Bello, D.C. (2002), Two sides to
attitudinal commitment: the effect of calculative and
loyalty commitment on enforcement mechanisms in
distribution channels, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 24-43.
Gounaris, S.P. (2005), Trust and commitment inuences on
customer retention: insights from business-to-business
services, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 2,
pp. 126-40.
Gundlach, G.T. and Achrol, R.S. (1995), The structure of
commitment in exchange, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59
No. 1, pp. 78-92.
Gundlach, G.T. and Murphy, P.E. (1993), Ethical and legal
foundations of relational marketing exchanges, Journal of
Hui, C., Lee, C. and Rousseau, D.M. (2004), Psychological
contract and organizational citizenship behavior in China:
investigating generalizability and instrumentality, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 2, pp. 311-21.
Kelly, S.J. (2004), Measuring attitudinal commitment in
business-to-business channels, Market Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 636-51.
Kim, K. and Frazier, G.L. (1997), On distributor commitment
in industrial channels of distribution: a multicomponent
approach, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 8,
pp. 847-77.
Kingshott, R.P.J. (2006), The impact of psychological
contracts upon trust and commitment within supplier-
buyer relationships: a social exchange view, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 724-39.
Kingshott, R.P.J. and Pecotich, A. (2007), The impact of
psychological contracts upon trust and commitment in
supplier-distributor relationships, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 9/10, pp. 1053-72.
Knight, L.A. (2000), Learning to collaborate: a study of
individual and organizational learning, and
interorganizational relationships, Journal of Strategic
Kumar, N., Hibbard, J.D. and Stern, L.W. (1994),
The nature and consequences of marketing channel
intermediary commitment, Working Paper No. 94-115,
September, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.
Kumar, N., Scheer, L.K. and Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. (1995),
The effects of perceived interdependence on dealer
attitudes, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, August,
pp. 348-56.
Kumar, N., Stern, L.W. and Anderson, J.C. (1993),
Conducting interorganizational research using key
informants, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36
No. 6, pp. 1633-51.
Lusch, R.F. and Brown, J.R. (1996), Interdependency,
contracting and relational behaviour in marketing
channels, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 4, pp. 19-38.
Lovblad, M. and Bantekas, A. (2010), What do you expect?
The effect of psychological contracts on affective
commitment in industrial marketing relationships,
Journal of Relationship Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 161-78.
McLean Parks, J., Kidder, D.L. and Gallagher, D.G. (1998),
Fitting square pegs into round holes: mapping the domain
of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological
contract, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19 No. 7,
pp. 697-730.
Mavondo, F.T. and Rodrigo, E.M. (2001), The effect of
relationship dimensions on interpersonal and
interorganizational commitment in organizations
283
conducting business between Australia and China, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 111-21.
Millward, L.J. and Hopkins, L.J. (1998), Psychological
contracts, organizational and job commitment, Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 16, pp. 1530-56.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), The commitment-
trust theory of relationship marketing, Journal of
Mysen, T. and Svensson, G. (2010), RELQUALs impact on
satisfaction in Norwegian business relationships, Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 119-31.
Narayandas, D. and Rangan, K.V. (2004), Building and
sustaining buyer-seller relationships in mature industrial
markets, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, July, pp. 63-77.
Pavlou, P.A. and Gefen, D. (2005), Psychological contract
violation in online marketplaces: antecedents, consequences,
and moderating role, Information Systems Research, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 372-99.
Rampersad, G., Quester, P. and Troshani, I. (2010),
Examining network factors: commitment, trust,
coordination and harmony, Journal of Business
& Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 487-500.
Robinson, S.L. (1996), Trust and breach of the
psychological contract, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 574-99.
Rousseau, D.M. (1990), New hire perspectives of their own
and their employers obligations: a study of psychological
contracts, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 11 No. 5,
pp. 389-400.
Rousseau, D.M. (1995), Psychological Contracts in
Organizations: Understanding written and unwritten
agreements, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Rousseau, D.M. (2001), Schema, promise and mutuality:
the building blocks of the psychological contract, Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 4,
pp. 511-41.
Rousseau, D.M. and Tijoriwala, S.A. (1998), Assessing
psychological contracts: issues, alternatives and measures,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 679-95.
Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S. and Camerer, C.
(1998), Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of
trust, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3,
pp. 393-404.
Sharma, N., Young, L. and Wilkinson, I. (2006),
The commitment mix: dimensions of commitment in
international trading relationships in India, Journal of
International Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 64-91.
Shore, L.M. and Barksdale, K. (1998), Examining degree of
balance and level of obligation in the employment
relationship: a social exchange approach, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 731-44.
Sturges, J., Conway, N., Guest, D. and Liefooghe, A. (2005),
Managing the career deal: the psychological contract as a
framework for understanding career management,
organizational commitment and work behavior, Journal
of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 821-38.
Sweeney, J.C. and Webb, D.A. (2007), How functional,
psychological, and social relationship benets inuence
individual and rm commitment to the relationship,
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 7,
pp. 474-88.
Tellefsen, T. (2002), Commitment in business-to-business
relationships: the role of organizational and personal
needs, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 31 No. 8,
pp. 645-52.
Tellefsen, T. and Thomas, G.P. (2005), The antecedents and
consequences of organizational and personal commitment
in business service relationships, Industrial Marketing
Tetrick, L.E. (1995), Developing and maintaining union
commitment: a theoretical framework, Journal of
Thomas, D.C., Au, K. and Rawlin, E.C. (2003), Cultural
variation and the psychological contract, Journal of
Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K. and van Birgelen, M. (1998),
Marketing service relationships: the role of commitment,
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 13 Nos 4/5,
pp. 406-23.
Williams, J.D., Han, S.-L. and Qualls, W.J. (1998),
A conceptual model and study of cross-cultural business
relationships, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 135-43.
Zabkar, V. and Brencic, M.M. (2004), Values, trust and
commitment in business-to-business relationships:
a comparison of two former Yugoslav markets,
International Marketing Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 202-15.
Zaheer, A., McEvily, B. and Perrone, V. (1998), Does trust
matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and
interpersonal trust on performance, Organization Science,
Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 141-59.
Zhao, H., Wayne, S.J., Glibkowski, B.C. and Bravo, J. (2007),
The impact of psychological contract breach on work-
related outcomes: a meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 647-80.
About the authors
Mikael Lovblad works with corporate strategy in the Swedish
industry group Sandvik. He received his graduate degree from
the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in cooperation
with the University of Gavle. Mikael holds a Master of
Business Administration from the University of Gavle and his
Bachelor of Business Administration from Malardalen
University. The research area for Mikael is relationships
between customers and suppliers on industrial markets. He has
previously published in Career Development International and
Journal of Relationship Marketing. Mikael Lovblad is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: mld@hig.se
Akmal S. Hyder is Professor and Chair of Business
Administration at the Academy of Education and
Economics, University of Gavle, Sweden. He earned his
PhD from Uppsala University, Sweden, in the eld of
international marketing. He was in charge of the international
exchange program and served as a guest professor at a South
Asian University for a couple of years. Dr Hyder has written
several articles in international journals like International
Business Review, Scandinavian Journal of Management,
Industrial Marketing Management, European Journal of
Marketing and Business and Society Review. He is currently
engaged in research projects on strategic alliances, impact of
cultural differences on foreign establishments, services
marketing and international merger.
Lars Lo nnstedt has a Chair in Business Administration,
Faculty of Forest Science, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden. He has a PhD, Master and also
284
an undergraduate degree in the same subject from Stockholm
University. Dr Lo nnstedt has a broad research and
methodological experience from a career of more than 30
years. His interests are in forest products companies
competitive advantages, small scale forest owners behavior
and environmental consequences from recycling of paper.
Results have been published in different international
journals. Lately Dr Lo nnstedt has developed a Masters
program in forest industrial economics.
Executive summary and implications for
managers and executives
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of the article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in
toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the
research undertaken and its results to get the full benet of the
material present.
Affective commitment to a B2B relationship in which
people feel they want to maintain the relationship rather
than feel they need to or merely ought to is often
regarded as vital for good performance. It has been found to
be dominant in securing loyalty, and its centrality in achieving
positive outcomes has been noted. Affective commitment has
been identied as inuencing behavioral objectives, such as
investment intention and intention to stay as well as actual
behaviors such as behavioral loyalty.
A thorough understanding of affective commitment is
important since it has been seen to affect several relationship
outcomes. Mikael Lovblad et al. feel that to understand the
dynamics of affective commitment in a relationship it is not
sufcient to look at the organizational level. Instead, one
needs to look at the individuals involved, and understand their
perceptions of the relationship. Choosing the individual in a
relationship as the unit of analysis makes it possible to develop
an appropriate research instrument and select the right
respondents.
They propose that combining the affective aspect of the
inter-rm relationship with other relevant theories such as
transaction cost theory is likely to provide a more holistic view
of the relationship. In Affective commitment in industrial
customer-supplier relations: a psychological contract
approach they present an alternative approach for
understanding it by proposing a clear focus on the individual.
As affective commitment is associated with individuals, they
argue that, to understand the construct, relevant mental
processes must be incorporated into the theory.
They propose the psychological contract as a central
antecedent to affective commitment in B2B relationships,
since it provides a lens through which the individual views the
relationship. The psychological contract is a cognitive schema
that helps the individual to structure and make sense of
information received and experiences gained. Psychological
contracts tell how an individual denes the deal between
him/her self and another party, and also constitute the
measurement against which the individual judges whether or
not the other party is living up to its obligations, and what that
individuals own obligations in the relationship are. The
psychological contract is, therefore, central to how
interactions in the relationship are perceived, whereby the
outcome of this interaction is compared to the expectations
modeled in the psychological contract.
There are discrepancies in how affective commitment has
been dened and applied. One approach focuses on
identication with and involvement in an organization while a
second approach concentrates on the desire to continue a
relationship. A third approach focuses on a generalized sense of
positive regard and attachment to the other party. Though
different in formulation, all three of these descriptions are
strongly related to individuals because identication, desire and
a sense of regard are seen at the individual level. The authors,
therefore, argue that affective relationship commitment is a
psychological state of individuals. However, the construct has
largely been studied at the rm level. Their discussion focuses
on what roles do individual and organizational levels play in the
conceptual development of affective commitment. Two
questions are important in this regard: In what ways can an
individual or an organization be affectively committed to a B2B
relationship? And, is it possible for an organization to be
affectively committed to a relationship?
For managers, if the aim is to increase the affective
commitment of a business partner, understanding the
psychological contracts of the relevant individuals in the
partner organization can offer important insights into how this
can be accomplished. It will be benecial to inuence the
psychological contracts in a more relational direction by
promoting an open-ended and integrated relationship.
However, it is important to point out that different
orientations of the psychological contracts will lead to quite
different experiences: transactional orientation, which is short-
lived, works for a quick outcome while relational orientation
promotes longevity and openness. Relational orientation offers
managers more time to build their psychological contracts
based on augmented affective commitment to the relationship.
Whatever may be the direction, a psychological contract will
remain dynamic and can be inuenced.
One of the authors propositions is that promoting a
balance in the obligations between the parties leads to an
increase in affective commitment. In a business relationship,
this relates closely to mutual dependence between the
partners. Creating a feeling of we are in this together will
likely promote affective commitment to the relationship.
An understanding of the psychological contract means that
a manager has a good comprehension of what promises and
obligations the business counterpart experiences as relevant
for the relationship. It is therefore not the whole thing that has
been explicitly said or written in discussions and contracts
that guides the experience of a managers performance, but
how the business counterpart experiences these conditions is
of great value and to be integrated to the total understanding
of the relationship. Based on this experience, a manager will
evaluate the business relationship and decide the
organizations future course of action.
(A precis of the article Affective commitment in industrial
customer-supplier relations: a psychological contract approach.
Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)
285
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Affective Commitment in Industrial Customer Supplier Relations A Psychological Contract Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Affective Commitment in Industrial Customer Supplier Relations A Psychological Contract Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Affective commitment in industrial

customer-supplier relations: a psychological

You might also like