Search

Purpose: Ulaga and Eggert (2006a) examined a framework of relationship value in business markets. This study aims to replicate their study to show that relationship benefits are more important than relationship costs when it comes to choosing a main supplier. This research also extends the original study by hypothesising that the development of relationship value has a positive impact on relationship marketing outcomes, thus providing evidence for the nomological validity of the original scale. Design/methodology/approach: The study used empirical data from purchasing managers in manufacturing firms in the UK. The research instrument was a structured questionnaire. The study adopted a close replication to Ulaga and Eggert (2006a) using a rather similar context and methodology for comparison reasons. Findings: Relationship benefits are more important than relationship costs when it comes to choosing a main supplier. Cost competitiveness is a necessary but not sufficient condition to differentiate in business markets. Value dimensions relate significantly to relationship marketing outcomes, providing evidence for the nomological validity of the original scale. Research limitations/implications: Given the dynamic nature of the relationship value construct, future longitudinal research could offer useful insights on how value is created over time. Practical implications: Although internal cost reduction, which can ultimately lead to price reduction, should not be ignored, suppliers should focus on creating value through personal interaction, service quality, product enhancements and delivery efficiency. Originality/value: The findings provide support for Ulaga and Eggert's (2006a) conceptualisation, indicating that the relationship value is not merely a theoretical construct viewed on a high level of abstraction but rather can also be empirically measured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]