Abstract

The authors propose a new theoretical rationale that explains the paired existence of both a manufacturer's decision to limit the number of intermediaries operating in a specific geographic market and a distributor's decision to limit brand assortment in a product category. Using transaction cost reasoning, they suggest that channel selectivity agreements can be understood as interrelated exchanges of pledges, or credible commitments, that counterbalance exposure to opportunism and neutralize sources of relationship instability, thereby strengthening an interorganizational relationship. The empirical results, which are based on dyadic data from 362 manufacturer–distributor relationships, are broadly supportive of their framework.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.