What is the dark side of business relationships and what are the causes of its development?

Dark side of business-to-business (B2B) relationships

Guest Co-Editors: Piyush Sharma, Russel PJ Kingshott, Tak Yan Leung, and Ashish Malik

Submission Deadline: May 31, 2020 — Extended: June 30, 2020

Introduction to the the Special Issue
Research on the dark side of B2B relationship has attracted significant scholarly attention in the last two decades (Anderson & Jap, 2005; Mooi & Frambach, 2012). The scholarly interest arises from the theoretical and practical importance of this area of research. While theorists seek to understand the processes underlying the dark side phenomena, managers are interested in solutions to contain the negative effects arising from the dark side. A recent special issue of Industrial Marketing Management in 2016 highlights the importance of this area of enquiry (Abosag, Yen, & Barnes, 2016). Notwithstanding these considerable efforts by scholars in recent years, several gaps remain, which need to be addressed so that a more complete understanding of the dark side phenomena and associated processes can be obtained. The purpose of this special issue is to focus scholarly attention on specific areas that need further enquiry in order to continue to develop this important stream of research.

Literature Review
Research on the dark side of B2B relationships can be broadly classified into various themes, which are briefly reviewed in this section, as follows:
– B2B relationship problems: Several studies dealing with the nature and processes associated with relationship conflicts, opportunism, uncertainty, and other similar constructs (e.g. relationship unrest) contribute to our understanding of these phenomena (e.g., Yang, Sheng, Wu, & Zhou, 2018). Nevertheless, the evolving nature of business to business relationships, and the contextual changes brought about by the advent of new technologies (e.g., block-chains, multisided platforms, digital business models) warrant further examination of these in the present context.
– B2B governance problems: Building on the seminal work of Rousseau (1990) a number of scholars (e.g. Kingshott, 2006; Kingshott & Pecotich 2017) show the significance of psychological contracts (PC) within B2B relationships grounded in social exchange. Since PCs violations are known to erode trust in B2B relationships (Kingshott & Pecotich 2017) this means its presence potentially undermines trust as an alternative governance mechanism. Despite this, the impact of PC breaches and violations in B2B relationships, and in particular how they potentially undermine relationships, is poorly understood – thus warranting further examination.
– B2B relationship outcomes: Following the seminal works of Moorman, Zaltman and Deshpande (1992), Grayson and Ambler (1999), and Anderson and Jap (2005), studies have sought to examine negative outcomes of B2B relationships that grow and endure over time, such as inertia, boredom and complacency (e.g., Friend & Johnson, 2017). However, this stream of research is scant, compared to the first theme, and this is another area of focus of this special issue.
– International B2B relationships: These studies explore the unique challenges faced by B2B relationships in the cross-border and international business contexts, which exist due to cultural, linguistic and communication distance (Malik & Bebenroth 2018). This often assumes the form of global strategic business partnerships, such as joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions and strategic alliances. Studies of international human resource management have highlighted the presence of a power-laden discourse due to linguistic and cross-cultural issues. Human resources competent with linguistic resources often employ language as a means to a negotiated social identity (Lauring, 2008). The role of cross-cultural and language training is critical to avoid the dark-side of language in cross-border relationships (Beeler & Lecomte, 2017), including B2B relationships. Appropriate language strategies can improve team cohesion, knowledge transfer, organisational commitment, job satisfaction, well-being and resilience of social identity groupings. Additionally, it can minimize power and politics and prevent issues such as employee turnover, absenteeism, and presentism. B2B cross-border relationships between supplier-provider and subsidiary-parent dyads has highlighted the importance of certain people management and strategic capabilities in dealing with the excesses of power and ethnocentricity evident in such contexts (Malik et al., 2018).
– Informal B2B relationships: Informal social and professional networks and cultural practices constitute an important basis of B2B relationships in several countries. An excellent example, which has attracted considerable scholarly attention is guanxi in China (e.g., Gu, Hung, & Tse, 2008, Lee, Shin, Haney, Kang, Li, & Ko, 2017, Yen & Abosag, 2016). The dark side of guanxi, however, warrants further scrutiny. In particular, the specific mechanisms underpinning the dark side effects of guanxi (e.g., cronyism, corruption) need better explication. Similar informal networks are prevalent in other countries, which have received much less attention, such as Blat or Svyazi in Russia, Wasta in the Arab world, and Yongo in South Korea (Lee, Tang, Yip, & Sharma, 2018). Understanding the dark side effects of each of these and similar other specific informal networks will be theoretically interesting and managerially relevant.
– Non-traditional B2B relationships: In recent times, the imperatives of sustainability and inclusivity has led to a focus on social innovation alliances. These alliances are typically between social enterprises and for-profit or not-for-profit partners (Drumwright, 2014). While the outcomes are generally positive (e.g., better performance), the negative effects of such alliances merit further scrutiny. This is another area that we are interested in exploring with this proposed special issue.

Research Gaps
Despite a growing body of knowledge on the nature and outcomes of the dark side of B2B relationships, a relative lack of its theoretical explanations has attracted criticism from several scholars. Fang, Chang and Peng (2011) note that the explanations of partnership termination are generally weak or incomplete; the focus is on the manifestations and not the underlying processes. Similarly, Chung et al. (2016) observe that the theoretical conceptualization of the dark side of B2B relationships is still under development. New theoretical perspectives such as relationship tensions (Fang et al., 2011) and the behavioral theory of the firm (Baker, 2009) have been employed to inform this stream of research. We welcome papers that add to the theoretical rigor of this stream by using a diverse range of theoretical perspectives.

We are also interested in papers that propose new constructs or introduce new lines of enquiry relevant to this area. For example, recent research has espoused the construct of betrayal in international buyer-seller relationships (Leonidou et al., 2017). Borrowed from social psychology, the construct offers new insights to understand buyer- seller relationships. Customer gratitude can mitigate the effects of the dark side (Palmatier et al., 2009). Further research on these and similar new constructs are welcome.

Other areas of focus include, but are not limited to, the dark side of social capital in B2B relationships (Pillai et al., 2017), the influence of political forces such as trade tensions on relationship decline, the decline in relational orientation brought about by technological and business model innovations (Pillai & Sharma, 2003), and relationship dissolution (Halinen & Tahtinen, 2002). Finally, the impact of political connections (government-business nexus) on B2B relationships and firm performance in various countries around the world, including Brazil (Claessens, Feijen, & Laeven, 2008), China (Kotabe, Jiang, & Murray, 2017; Cheng, Chan, & Leung, 2018), Indonesia (Leuz & Oberholzer-Gee, 2006), Malaysia (Johnson & Mitton, 2003), Poland (Jackowicz, Kozlowski, & Mielcarz, 2014), and Tunisia (Rijkers, Baghdadi, & Raballand, 2017), has also attracted attention from researchers.

Based on the above, we expect the submissions to this special issue to address some of the following research gaps and questions, which are indicative and not exhaustive:
1. What are the different manifestations of the dark side in B2B relationships? How does the current technological and business environment affect the emergence and continuance of dark side phenomena?
2. What factors lead to the dark side effects? What are the consequences of the dark side effects? What are the boundary conditions for the antecedent and consequent effects?
3. How do the dark side effects emerge in informal business networks?
4. When and how do the dark side effects emerge in B2B social innovation alliances?
5. How can new theories and new constructs enrich our understanding of the dark side of B2B relationships? What role does PCs play in B2B relationships?
6. What are the specific aspects associated with relationship decline/ termination/ dissolution in the present context? Do PCs result in these relational outcomes?
7. Are there any cultural differences in the dark side of B2B relationships via traditional socio-cultural practices such as Guanxi in China, Blat or Svyazi in Russia, Wasta in the Arab world, and Yongo in South Korea etc.?
8. What are the political and judicial implications of the dark side of B2B relationships from the legal and public policy perspectives?
9. What are the dark side effects of political connections (government-business nexus) on B2B relationships and corporate performance?
10. Are there any differences in the impact of political connections on the B2B relationships of firms with different ownership types (e.g., private vs. state-owned) and different types of B2B relationships?
11. How does language differences affect people and people management processes and outcomes in cross-border B2B relationships and strategic partnerships?

Scope
We welcome both conceptual and empirical papers; however simple literature reviews that do not synthesize the current research or present a conceptual framework will not be considered for publication. We would also not accept replications of existing theories or models and simple case studies about a particular company or industry. We are agnostic regarding the method employed. Papers employing either qualitative or quantitative methods are welcome. Longitudinal studies that tease out the associated processes are particularly encouraged.

Procedure
All the authors will need to submit manuscripts for this special issue on the submission system for the Journal of Business Research. Please indicate that it is a submission for the special issue (e.g., Article Type: “SI: Dark side B2B relationships”). All submissions will go through the regular JBR review process with at least two rounds of double-blind peer reviews of each manuscript. Each submitted manuscript would be randomly assigned to one of the four guest co-editors to ensure complete fairness and transparency in the review process. Each guest co-editor would handle the complete review process for the manuscripts assigned to them but the final recommendations would be made in consultation with all the guest co-editors and the chief editors would make the final decisions.

Key deadlines
Submissions Open: March 1, 2020
Submission Deadline: May 31, 2020
Final Acceptance Deadline: May 31, 2021

Guest co-editors
Piyush Sharma, Curtin University, Australia
Russel PJ Kingshott, Curtin University, Australia
Tak Yan Leung, The Open University of Hong Kong
Ashish Malik, University of Newcastle, Australia

More info here.

References
Abosag, I., Yen, D. A., & Barnes, B. R. (2016). What is dark about the dark-side of business relationships? Industrial Marketing Management, 55, 5-9.
Anderson, E., & Jap, S. D. (2005). The dark side of close relationships. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(3), 75-82.
Baker, B. L. (2009). An Empirical Examination of the Dark Side of Relationship Marketing within a Business to Business Context. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, College of Business, University of South Florida.
Beeler, B., & Lecomte, P. (2017). Shedding light on the darker side of language: A dialogical approach to cross-cultural collaboration. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 17(1), 53-67.
Cheng, L.T.W., Chan, R., & Leung, T.Y. (2018). Impact of perk expenditures and marketing expenditure on corporate performance in China: The moderating role of political connections, Journal of Business Research, 86, 83-95.
Chung, H. F., Wang, C. L., Huang, P. H. and Yang, Z. (2016). Organizational capabilities and business performance: When and how does the dark side of managerial ties matter?. Industrial Marketing Management, 55, 70-82.
Claessens, S., Feijen, E., & Laeven, L. (2008). Political connections and preferential access to finance: The role of campaign contributions. Journal of Financial Economics, 88(3), 554-580.
Drumwright, M. E. (2014). Organizational congruence and socially responsible behaviors. In Hill, R.P. & Langan, R. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Marketing and Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 91-107). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Fang, S., Chang, Y. and Peng, Y. (2011). Dark side of relationships: A tensions-based view. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 774-784.
Friend, S. B., & Johnson, J. S. (2017). Familiarity breeds contempt: perceived service and sales complacency in business-to-business relationships. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 37(1), 42-60.
Grayson, K., & Ambler, T. (1999). The dark side of long-term relationships in marketing services. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 132-141.
Gu, F. F., Hung, K., & Tse, D. K. (2008). When does guanxi matter? Issues of capitalization and its dark sides. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 12-28.
Halinen, A., & Tähtinen, J. (2002). A process theory of relationship ending. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 13(2), 163-180.
Jackowicz, K., Kozlowski, L., & Mielcarz, P. (2014). Political connections and operational performance of non-financial firms: New evidence from Poland. Emerging Markets Review, 20, 109-135
Johnson S. & Mitton, T. (2003). Cronyism and capital controls: Evidence from Malaysia, Journal of Financial Economics, 67(2), 351–382.
Kingshott, R. P. (2006). The impact of psychological contracts upon trust and commitment within supplier–buyer relationships: A social exchange view. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(6), 724-739.
Kingshott, R. P., & Pecotich, A. (2007). The impact of psychological contracts upon trust and commitment within supplier–buyer relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 41(9/10), 1053–1072.
Kotabe, M., Jiang, C.X., & Murray, J.Y. (2017). Examining the complementary effect of political networking capability with absorptive capacity on the innovation performance of emerging-market firms. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1131-1156
Lauring J (2008) Rethinking social identity theory in international encounters language use as a negotiated object for identity making. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 8(3): 343–61.
Lee, G., Shin, G.C., Haney, M.H., Kang, M., Li, S., & Ko, C. (2017). The impact of formal control and guanxi on task conflict in outsourcing relationships in China. Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 128-136.
Lee, L. W., Tang, Y., Yip, L. S., & Sharma, P. (2018). Managing customer relationships in the emerging markets–guanxi as a driver of Chinese customer loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 86, 356-365.
Leonidou, L. C., Aykol, B., Fotiadis, T. A., Christodoulides, P., & Zeriti, A. (2017). Betrayal in international buyer-seller relationships: Its drivers and performance implications. Journal of World Business, 52(1), 28-44.
Leuz, C. & Oberholzer-Gee, F. (2006). Political relationships, global financing, and corporate transparency: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Financial Economics, 81(2), 411-439.
Malik, A., & Bebenroth, R. (2018). Mind your language!: Role of language in strategic partnerships and post-merger integration. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 11(2), 202-223.
Malik, A., Ngo, L. V., & Kingshott, R. P. (2018). Power, resource dependencies and capabilities in intercultural B2B relationships. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(5), 629-642.
Mooi, E. A., & Frambach, R. T. (2012). Encouraging innovation in business relationships – A research note. Journal of Business Research, 65(7), 1025-1030.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 314-328.
Palmatier, R. W., Jarvis, C. B., Bechkoff, J. R., & Kardes, F. R. (2009). The role of customer gratitude in relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 1-18.
Pillai, K. G., Hodgkinson, G. P., Kalyanaram, G., & Nair, S. R. (2017). The negative effects of social capital in organizations: A review and extension. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 97-124.
Pillai, K. G., & Sharma, A. (2003). Mature relationships: why does relational orientation turn into transaction orientation? Industrial Marketing Management, 32(8), 643-651.
Rijkers, B., Baghdadi, Leila, & Raballand, G. (2017). Political connections and tariff evasion: Evidence from Tunisia. The World Bank Economic Review, 31(2), 459-482.
Rousseau, D. M. (1990). New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(5), 389-400.
Yang, D., Sheng, S., Wu, S., & Zhou, K. Z. (2018). Suppressing partner opportunism in emerging markets: Contextualizing institutional forces in supply chain management. Journal of Business Research, 90, 1-13.
Yen, D.A. & Abosag, I. (2016). Localization in China: How guanxi moderates Sino-US business relationship. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5724-5734.

Comments

comments

What is dark side of business relationships?

What is the dark side of relationships?

How does relationship affect business?

How do you develop relationships in business development?