IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i6p1850-d150328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Explanatory Power of Reciprocal Behavior for the Inter-Organizational Exchange Context

Author

Listed:
  • Martina Pieperhoff

    (Research Institute for Cooperation and Cooperatives, Institute for SME-Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business, 1020 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

In order to create sustainable competitive advantages, organizations are embedded in dyadic exchange relationships, which depend on the coordination of the behavior of the actors involved. Often, coordinated behavior is explained by trust. Since trust develops in a process of reciprocal responses to presumed trustworthy behavior, it is a reciprocity-based concept. While inter-organizational exchange relationships can appear in different stages (forming, establishing, broken), different reciprocity types (direct, indirect, negative) can be distinguished. The study links reciprocal behavior to different stages of inter-organizational exchange relationships in order to investigate reciprocity as a possible coordination mechanism of behavior and thus explore the basis of coordination of trust-based behavior. Qualitative Comparative Analysis as a set-theoretic approach is applied to analyze the empirical data consisting of 78 qualitative semi-structured interviews with managers of small-, medium- and large-sized companies. The results show that different reciprocity types become effective in different stages of an inter-organizational exchange relationship: For forming inter-organizational exchange relationships indirect reciprocal behavior, besides direct reciprocity, becomes effective while in establishing inter-organizational exchange relationships, direct reciprocal behavior is evident. Negative reciprocal behavior leads to a break up of relationships. Using these results, on the one hand, the concept of trust can be sharpened by deepening the understanding of the trust-building mechanisms and on the other hand, reciprocity can be seen as coordination mechanism in exchange relationships of different stages. In doing so, with this knowledge, relationships can be coordinated towards a long-term orientation in order to create sustainable advantages.

Suggested Citation

  • Martina Pieperhoff, 2018. "The Explanatory Power of Reciprocal Behavior for the Inter-Organizational Exchange Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1850-:d:150328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1850/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1850/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wu, Joshua B. & Hom, Peter W. & Tetrick, Lois E. & Shore, Lynn M. & Jia, Liangding & Li, Chaoping & Song, Lynda Jiwen, 2006. "The Norm of Reciprocity: Scale Development and Validation in the Chinese Context," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 377-402, November.
    2. Morgan, Robert M. & Hunt, Shelby, 1999. "Relationship-Based Competitive Advantage: The Role of Relationship Marketing in Marketing Strategy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 281-290, November.
    3. Judit Oláh & Attila Bai & György Karmazin & Péter Balogh & József Popp, 2017. "The Role Played by Trust and Its Effect on the Competiveness of Logistics Service Providers in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, December.
    5. T. K. Das & Bing‐Sheng Teng, 2002. "The Dynamics of Alliance Conditions in the Alliance Development Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 725-746, July.
    6. Joshua B. Wu & Peter W. Hom & Lois E. Tetrick & Lynn M. Shore & Liangding Jia & Chaoping Li & Lynda Jiwen Song, 2006. "The Norm of Reciprocity: Scale Development and Validation in the Chinese Context," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 2(3), pages 377-402, November.
    7. Paul S. Adler, 2001. "Market, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 215-234, April.
    8. Joanna Kurowska-Pysz & Katarzyna Szczepańska-Woszczyna, 2017. "The Analysis of the Determinants of Sustainable Cross-Border Cooperation and Recommendations on Its Harmonization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Ming-Chuan Yu & Qiang Mai & Sang-Bing Tsai & Yi Dai, 2018. "An Empirical Study on the Organizational Trust, Employee-Organization Relationship and Innovative Behavior from the Integrated Perspective of Social Exchange and Organizational Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, March.
    10. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Brandes, Leif & Franck, Egon, 2012. "Social preferences or personal career concerns? Field evidence on positive and negative reciprocity in the workplace," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 925-939.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helena Bulińska-Stangrecka & Anna Bagieńska, 2019. "HR Practices for Supporting Interpersonal Trust and Its Consequences for Team Collaboration and Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Agata Austen, 2018. "In Search of Network Sustainability: A Multi-Level Perspective on the Paradox of Cooperation and Competition in Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martina Pieperhoff, 2018. "Reziprozität in interorganisationalen Austauschbeziehungen - eine Typologisierung," ZfKE – Zeitschrift für KMU und Entrepreneurship, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 66(4), pages 273-287.
    2. Ho, Mia Hsiao-Wen & Wang, Fatima, 2015. "Unpacking knowledge transfer and learning paradoxes in international strategic alliances: Contextual differences matter," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 287-297.
    3. Ling, Qian & Lin, Meizhen & Wu, Xiaoyi, 2016. "The trickle-down effect of servant leadership on frontline employee service behaviors and performance: A multilevel study of Chinese hotels," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 341-368.
    4. Helena Bulińska-Stangrecka & Anna Bagieńska, 2019. "HR Practices for Supporting Interpersonal Trust and Its Consequences for Team Collaboration and Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Marisol Carvajal-Camperos & Paloma Almodóvar & Ignacio Danvila-del-Valle, 2024. "Examining the conditions for signing a strategic alliance contract: a configurational approach to the biotechnology sector," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 44-68, February.
    6. Joe-Okidi, Precious Ogbeyalu & Amah, Edwinah (PhD) & Okocha, Belemenanya Friday (PhD), 2022. "Career Development Strategies and Employees Effectiveness of Hotels in Rivers State," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 9(8), pages 55-61, August.
    7. Yan Li & David Ahlstrom & Neal Ashkanasy, 2010. "A multilevel model of affect and organizational commitment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 193-213, June.
    8. Hom, Peter W. & Xiao, Zhixing, 2011. "Embedding social networks: How guanxi ties reinforce Chinese employees’ retention," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 188-202.
    9. Yina Mao & Kelly Peng & Chi-Sum Wong, 2012. "Indigenous research on Asia: In search of the emic components of guanxi," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 1143-1168, December.
    10. Miller, Peter & Kurunmäki, Liisa & O'Leary, Ted, 2008. "Accounting, hybrids and the management of risk," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 942-967.
    11. Agata Austen, 2018. "In Search of Network Sustainability: A Multi-Level Perspective on the Paradox of Cooperation and Competition in Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-21, July.
    12. Taolin Wang & Lirong Long & Yong Zhang & Wei He, 2019. "A Social Exchange Perspective of Employee–Organization Relationships and Employee Unethical Pro-organizational Behavior: The Moderating Role of Individual Moral Identity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 473-489, October.
    13. Badrinarayan Srirangam Ramaprasad & Sethumadhavan Lakshminarayanan & Yogesh P. Pai, 2021. "Exploring the Mediating Role of Employee Attitudes in the Relationship between High-Performance Work Systems and Turnover Intention among IT Professionals in India: A Serial Mediation Approach," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 22(1), pages 197-218, February.
    14. Giese, Karsten & Thiel, Alena, 2012. "When Voicelessness Meets Speechlessness – Struggling for Equity in Chinese-Ghanaian Employment Relations," GIGA Working Papers 194, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    15. Nick Lin-Hi & Xiaohan Gao-Urhahn & Torsten Biemann & Irmela F. Koch-Bayram, 2023. "Internal CSR and blue-collar workers’ attitudes and behaviors in China: a combination of a cross-sectional study and a field experiment," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 1185-1213, July.
    16. Jia, Flora Fang & Wang, Jeff Jianfeng, 2013. "Marketing channel relationships in China: A review and integration with an institution-based perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2545-2551.
    17. Dan Nie & Anna-Maija Lämsä, 2015. "The Leader–Member Exchange Theory in the Chinese Context and the Ethical Challenge of Guanxi," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 128(4), pages 851-861, June.
    18. Kamini Gupta & Donal Crilly & Thomas Greckhamer, 2020. "Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 1869-1900, October.
    19. Cheng, Cheng-Feng & Chang, Man-Ling & Li, Chu-Shiu, 2013. "Configural paths to successful product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2561-2573.
    20. Markus Mayer & Markus Voeth, 2022. "Improving negotiation success in B2B sales organizations: is structured negotiation management a success factor?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 163-196, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1850-:d:150328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.