You are on page 1of 4

AbstractNumerous previous studies have shown that in the

current complex business environment, the competition faced by

business organizations is no longer mere interfirm competition, but
also interchannel competition caused by adapting to industry
globalization. Considering this trend, this study discusses the
correlation between channel power theory, relationship commitment
and channel satisfaction. This study employs the food industry as the
research subject. The results provide non-coercive power had a
positive and significant impact on the channel firms communication
and commitment, as well as the supplier communication and
commitment had a positive and significant impact on the economic
satisfaction and non-economic satisfaction of channel firms.
KeywordsChannel power, relationship !uality, satisfaction.
". "NT#$%&CT"$N
'(')*NT studies have demonstrated that the exertion
of channel power and channel relationships have a
significant influence on relationship !uality +,-, +./-, +.0-,
+12-, +33-. The feeling experienced by channel members
affects their organizations decision-ma4ing behaviors5
members perception of channel power results in the
categorization of channel power +12-. "n their studies on
channel relationship between distributors, numerous scholars
emphasized the importance of satisfaction +6-, +.6-. The
satisfaction is a typical assessment criteria used in channel
mar4eting +16-. The perceived value of relationship !uality
provides organizations the opportunity to obtain more
customers. 7ith the wide variety of bric4 and mortar, or
virtual channels, customers can now use these options, which
may further affect the correlation between their satisfaction
and loyalty. The positive or negative outcome from the
interactive relationship between buyers and sellers in modern
channels is influenced by their perception of relationship
!uality. "n mar4eting relationship, commitment and trust both
have a positive impact on factors such as compliance,
collaboration, conflict, communication, and uncertainty +/-,
+10-, +32-.
The complexity of the channel environment, diversity in
the modern mar4et, and emphasis on professional job
and strategic alliance mean organizations in an industry are
no longer separate firms that complete all operational
activities independently5 instead, they are gradually becoming
a member of the mar4eting channel system. 8urthermore,
relationship !uality is gaining increasing influence on
collaboration in partner relationships. Therefore, this study
8engyi 7u. is %octoral with the :raduate "nstitute of ;anagement <ciences,
Tam4ang &niversity, Tamsui, Taipei. *nd *djunct "nstructor with the
%epartment of ;ar4eting and (ogistics ;anagement, Chihlee "nstitute of
Technology, =ancial, Taipei >corresponding phone? @220-A-.B/3A/205 e-mail?
annie.wu1BB, D.
Euehhua (ee is *ssociate Frofessor with Tam4ang &niversity, Tamsui, Taipei
discusses number of topics including the channel power types,
the measurement construct for relationship !uality, and the
channel satisfaction types. 7e hoped the research would
identify the factors influencing channel satisfaction and serve
as a reference for organizations to allocate their resources
appropriately, thereby earning long-term competitive
"". CG*NN'( F$7'#, #'(*T"$N<G"F H&*("TE *N%
Channel power results from channel members perception
of reward and punishment behavior, recognition, professional
4nowledge, and s4ills. Thus, channel power can be
categorized into five main types, namely rewards power,
coercive power, legitimate power, referent power, and expert
power. The five types of power all have a substantial impact,
especially for channel members such as suppliers or
distributors. These powers demonstrate intention, their aim is
changing the other partys decision, execution, and, on a
psychological level, their cognition +.-, +3-, +A-, +1A-, +3/-.
"n numerous studies, communication is considered a factor
involved in the successful development of long-term
relationships. 8rom the people perspective, communication is
a way of establishing and maintaining a sound relationship
between different groups or partners who are closely
connected. Communication has a positive impact on channel
power and satisfaction +.-, +1.-, +11-.
"n channel allocation, asymmetry in channel power is
because of the inability to exercise channel power. This leads
to the relatively more powerful channel members ta4ing
advantage of other members fear, which has an adverse
impact on the partners perception and intrinsic trust of each
other. The use of coercive and non-coercive power in channel
power affects partners perception of honesty and benevolence
regarding trust between channel members. *symmetric
channel power causes further imbalance, instability, and
reduced trust in channel partner relationships. Therefore,
asymmetry in channel power is closely related to the
deterioration of trust. Coercive power is a type of
opportunistic behavior rather than an act to offer other
members expediency5 the use of coercive power reduces trust
between collaborating partners +.-, +2-, +30-.
(iterature discussions on commitment in organizations and
buyer behavior also present very important perspectives.
Commitment refers to the long-term interactive behavior with
cooperative values that partners demand, it is a promise in the
tightly connected social exchange relationships between
channels and organizational partners +0-, +13-, +1/-, +31-,
+3,-. Channel power has a significant impact on strategies,
relationship commitment, and collaboration. "n the current
complex and competitive mar4etplace, to build a long-term
channel relationship, numerous suppliers and distributors rely
on the mutual commitment regarding relationship !uality.
"nvestigation channel power and satisfaction in a
mar4eting channel
8engyi. 7u, and Euehhua. (ee
<tudies have found that from the perspective of distributor,
the use of coercive power by suppliers restricts and confines
the commitment partners have toward each other. The use of
non-coercive power has a positive effect on partnership by
strengthening the commitment, whereas coercive power has a
negative effect on partnerships by wea4ening the commitment
+.0-, +1B-, +1,-, +33-, +36-, +3A-.
"n mar4eting relationship, channel satisfaction is not one-
dimensional but can also be further developed into economic
satisfaction and non-economic satisfaction, or psychological
satisfaction or social satisfaction +..-, +.1-, +./-, +.6-.
'conomic satisfaction is achieved when members of the
channel networ4 system value channel relationships, the
objective achievement rate, partner efficiency and
productivity, and the growth in financial resource allocations5
non-economic satisfaction arises from factors such as the
importance members place on their interactions with
partners, how strongly their missions and goals are
connected, the proactive sharing and discussion of their
operational designs, and the level of respect experienced. The
two types of satisfaction differ in that members of the
distribution channels can contribute in ways >such as stoc4
turnover, marginal profit, and transaction discountsD that lead
to the economic satisfaction of commercial partners they
interact with as appropriate. Gowever, they may be re!uired
to provide elements that can lead to further social or
psychological satisfaction, such as demonstrating behaviors
deemed as meaningful, which can lead to feeling naturally
satisfied +.6-, +./-, +3.-.
""". #'<'*#CG ;'TG$%$($:E
This study employed confirmatory factor analysis >C8*D to
measure the scales construct validity, which includes
convergent validity and discriminant validity. Convergent
validity indicates that the measurement results of the same
dimension are highly correlated, and this validity can be
determined using the composite reliability and average
variance extracted. This study adopted the threshold values
suggested determined that the standardized factor loading
should exceed B.05 the composite reliability should exceed
B.,5 the average variance extracted should exceed B./ to
indicate that convergent validity exists +.2-. The final results
appear in Table ". (astly, it is observed that the goodness of fit
statistic is acceptable. The I
J df >1.B2/D, :8" >B.2/6D, *:8"
>B.21BD, #;<'* >B.B0/D, and N8" >B.2A1D achieved the
suggested thresholds +1-, +.3-, +.,-, +.A-.
"n this study, channel power is categorized into coercive
power and non-coercive power. Coercive power refers to the
power to impose punishment on people who disobey orders5
non-coercive power is further categorized into reward power,
legitimate power, referent power, and expert power and used
to provide benefits to organizations. This study adopted the
channel power scales developed to construct the
!uestionnaire. +.B-, +3B-, +6B-. 7hen partners wor4 with one
another to achieve congruent objectives, they show
relationship commitment. *dditionally, they conduct
transactions with appropriate behavior to maintain and
strengthen the long-term collaborative relationship. The
relationship commitment !uestion items were developed from
the modification of the scales proposed by +12- and +3.-. The
channel satisfaction is categorized into economic satisfaction
and non-economic satisfaction. 'conomic satisfaction arises
from the channel members gaining economic benefits,
whereas non-economic satisfaction is achieved when
members feel valued, happy, and satisfied. This study adopted
the channel satisfaction scales proposed by +.6- and +3.- and
categorized satisfaction into economic satisfaction and non-
economic satisfaction. This study used a seven-point (i4ert
scale for the !uestionnaire items5 the respondents answered
the !uestions using a scale of . to ,, which indicated
Kstrongly disagree,L Kdisagree,L Kslightly disagree,L Kneither
agree nor disagree,L Kslightly agree,L Kagree,L and Kstrongly
"). #'<&(T
This study used the t-value and standardized parameter
estimates to determine whether the hypotheses are supported.
Fositive standardized parameter estimation values indicate
that the test results have a positive correlation5 conversely,
negative standardized parameter estimation values indicate
the test results have a negative correlation. Non-coercive
power has a positive impact on the distributors
communication. Non-coercive power also has a positive
impact on the distributors commitment. Communication has
a positive impact on trust. Trust has a positive impact on
commitment. The greater the suppliers communication, the
greater the economic satisfaction of the distributor. The
greater the suppliers communication, the greater the non-
economic satisfaction of the distributor. The greater the
suppliers commitment to the distributor, the greater their
economic satisfaction. The greater the suppliers commitment
to the distributor, the greater their non-economic satisfaction.
). ;*N*:'#"*( ";F("C*T"$N<
7ith information becoming increasingly transparent,
developments in the way information is exchanged, and
advancements in "nternet applications and communication
technologies, business organizations now enjoy a commercial
environment with no boundaries or time constraints. "n the
globalized business environment, one 4ey development area
for businesses is to incorporate different local cultures,
locations, and industry bac4grounds in their organizational
management and models. Traditional business models
focused on benefits for the organization itself5 suppliers and
distributors often had conflicting relationships. Nowadays,
mar4ets worldwide are considered a single mar4et because of
globalization. The 4ey to achieving critical advantages is
offering a comprehensive supply chain system. 'mphasis is
currently on enhancing the supplier-distributor relationship to
create mutual benefits and win-win situations.
This study found that in the food industry, the perception
that the supplier-distributor relationship is complex is
reflected in their communication and commitment. 7hen
suppliers use coercive power, distributors do not tend to
display strong feelings regarding the communication and
commitment, whereas when suppliers use non-coercive
power, distributors show strong feelings regarding
communication and commitment. This leads to distributors
experiencing better channel satisfaction with their suppliers
and a higher expectation of having a long-term collaborative
relationship with suppliers. Therefore, suppliers must
continuously adjust their strategies according to distributor
needs to maximize mutual benefits between partners.
+.- '. *nderson, and =. 7eitz, K%eterminants of Continuity in Conventional
"ndustrial Channel %yads,L J. of Marketing Sci., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 3.BM
313, .A2A.
+1- #. F. =agozzi, and E. Ei, K$n the evaluation of structural e!uation
models,L J. of the Academy of Marketing Sci., vol. .0, no. ., pp. ,6MA6,
+3- N. #. =rown, N. (. Nohnson, and G. 8. Ooenig, K;easuring the sources of
mar4eting channel power ? * comparison of alternative approaches,L Int.
J. of Research in Marketing, vol. .1, no. 6, pp. 333M3/6, .AA/.
+6- N. #. =rown, #. 8. (usch, and (. F. <mith, KConflict and satisfaction in an
industrial channel of distribution,L Int. J. of Physical Distribution and
Logistics Manage. vol. 1., no. 0, pp. ./M1/, .AA..
+/- :. G. ). =ruggen, ;. Oac4er, and C. Nieuwlaat, KThe impact of channel
function performance on buyer-seller relationships in mar4eting channels,L
Int. J. of Research in Marketing, vol. 11, pp. .6.M./2, 1BB/.
+0- O. <. Coo4, and #. ;. 'merson, KFower, '!uity and Commitment in
'xchange Networ4s,L American Sociolo. Re!ie", vol. 63, pp. ,1.M,3A,
$ct. .A,2.
+,- ;. %uarte, and :. %avies, KTrust as a mediator of channel power,L J. of
Marketing #hannels, vol. .., no. 1J3, pp. ,,M.B1, 1BB6.
+2- :. (. 8razier, and N. $. <ummers, KFerceptions of "nterfirm Fower and "ts
&se 7ithin a 8ranchise Channel of %istribution,L J. of Marketing
Research, vol. 13, pp. .0AM.,0, ;ay. .A20.
+A- N. 8rench, and =. #aven, $he %ases of Social Po"er. in %. Cartwright,
'ds. <tudies in <ocial Fower, *nn *rbor, ;ichigan? &niversity of
;ichigan Fress, .A/A, pp. ./BM.0,.
+.B- N. 8. :as4i, and N. #. Nevin, KThe differential effects of exercised and
unexercised power sources in a mar4eting channel,L J. of Marketing
Research, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. .3BM.61, .A2/.
+..- N. =. :assenheimer, #. N. Calantone, and N. ". <cully, K<upplier
involvement and dealer satisfaction? "mplications for enhancing channel
relationships,L J. of %usiness and Ind. Marketing, vol. .B, no. 1, pp. ,M.A,
+.1- N. =. :assenheimer, N. &. <terling, and #. *. #obicheaux, K(ongterm
channel member relationships,L Int. J. of Physical Distribution and
Logistics Manage., vol. 10, no. /, pp. A6M..0, .AA0.
+.3- %. :efen, K'-Commerce ? The #ole of 8amiliarity and Trust,L $he Int. J.
of Manage. Sci., vol. 12, no. 0, pp. ,1/M,3,, <ep. 1BBB.
+.6- ". :eys4ens, and N-=. '. ;. <teen4amp, K'conomic and social
satisfaction ? ;easurement and relevance to mar4eting channel
relationships,L J. of Retailing, vol. ,0, no. ., pp. ..M31, 1BBB.
+./- ". :eys4ens, N-=. '. ;. <teen4amp, and N. Oumar, K* meta-analysis of
satisfaction in mar4eting channel relationships,L J. of Marketing Research,
vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 113M132, .AAA.
+.0- (. '. :oodman, and F. *. %ion, KThe determinants of commitment in the
distributor-manufacturer relationship,L J. of Marketing, vol. 3B, no. 3, pp.
12,M3BB, 1BB..
+.,- N. 8. Gair, 7. C. =lac4, =. N. =abin, #. '. *nderson, and #. (. Tatham,
Multi!ariate Data Anal. 0th 'ds. New Nersey ? Frentice Gill, 1BB0.
+.2- N. 8. Gair, #. (.Tatham, #. '. *nderson, and 7. =lac4, Multi!ariate Data
Anal. ,th 'ds. New Nersey ? Frentice Gill, .AA2.
+.A- O. T. Gau, P. 7en , P. Chen, Structural &'uation Model and Its A((licat.
China, =eijing ? 'ducational <cience Fublishing Gouse, 1BB6.
+1B- T. (. Gu, and N. =. <heu, K* 8uzzy-=ased Customer Classification ;ethod
for %emand-#esponsive (ogistical %istribution $perations,L )u**y Sets
and Syst., vol. .3A, no. 1, pp. 63.M6/B, 1BB3.
+1.- C. (ages, C. #. (ages, and (. 8. (ages, KThe #'(H&*( scale ? a measure
of relationship !uality in export mar4et ventures,L J. of %usiness
Research, vol. /2, no. 2, pp. .B6BM.B62, 1BB/.
+11- #. 8. (usch, and N. #. =rown, K"nterdependency, Contracting, and
#elational =ehavior in ;ar4eting Channels,L J. of Marketing, vol. 0B, pp.
.AM32, $ct. .AA0.
+13- N. F. ;eyer, and N. N. *llen, KTesting the <ide-=et Theory of
$rganizational Commitment ? <ome ;ethodological Considerations,L J. of
A((lied Psychology, vol. 0A, no. 3, pp. 3,1M3,2, .A26.
+16- N. N. ;ohr, #. N. 8isher, and N. #. Nevin, KCollaborative communication in
interfirm relationships ? ;oderating effects of integration and control,L J.
of Marketing, vol. 0B, no. 3, pp. .B3M../, .AA0.
+1/- C. ;oorman, #. %eshpandQ, and :. Paltman, K8actors *ffecting Trust in
;ar4et #elationships,L J. of Marketing, vol. /,, no. ., pp. 2.M.B., .AA3.
+10- #. ;. ;organ, and <. %. Gunt, KThe Commitment-Trust Theory of
#elationship ;ar4eting,L J. of Marketing, vol. /2, no. 3, pp. 1BM32, .AA6.
+1,- %. Narayandas, and ). O. #angan, K=uilding and sustaining buyer-seller
relationships in mature industrial mar4ets,L J. of Marketing, vol. 02, no. 3,
pp. 03M,,, 1BB6.
+12- =. #amaseshan, (. < .C. Eip, and N. G. Fae, KFower, satisfaction, and
relationship commitment in Chinese store-tenant relationship and their
impact on performance,L J. of Retailing, vol. 21, no. ., pp. 03M,B, 1BB0.
T*=(' "
C8* #'<&(T<
(atent variable
*)' Cronbachs R :oodness of fit
Coercive Fower
CF1 B.A10 - -
B.AB, B.,0/ B.AB/
J dfS1.B2/
CF. B.2,0 B.B60 1B.A61 :8"SB.2/6
CF3 B.2.A B.B6A .2.A.2 *:8"SB.21B,
NCF3 B.22, - -
B.A3/ B.,B0 B.A33
NCF/ B.223 B.B66 11.3,1 N8"SB.2A1
NCF6 B.20B B.B62 1.../. NN8"SB.A31
NCF1 B.266 B.B/B 1B.3/0
NCF0 B.2.B B.B6A .2.231
NCF. B.,/B B.B0B .0.60.
C;&1 B.23A - -
B.2A1 B.,3/ B.2A, C;&3 B.AB, B.B6A 1B.6BB
C;&. B.216 B.B/6 .,./33
T#6 B.2,2 - -
B.A13 B.,/. B.A10
T#1 B.20/ B.B/. 1..B,0
T#3 B.201 B.B6/ 1B.A16
T#. B.20. B.B6, 1B.206
C;;3 B.202 - -
B.ABA B.,02 B.AB2 C;;1 B.2A/ B.B60 1..2.A
C;; . B.200 B.B/, 1B.6,6
'conomic <atisfac
'<6 B.2/2 - -
B.A.2 B.,32 B.A.A
'<3 B.223 B.B60 1B.0,0
'<1 B.200 B.B/B .A.A,3
'<. B.212 B.B/3 .2.636
N'<1 B.A.B - -
B.A1B B.,A1 B.A1B N'<3 B.AB/ B.B61 16./06
N'<. B.2/6 B.B63 1..0.A
+1A- =. G. #aven, and *. 7. Oruglans4i, #onflict and Po"er. in Faul <wingle
>ed.D, The <tructure of Conflict. New Eor4? *cademic Fress, pp. 0AM.BA,
+3B- ;. E. *. #awwas, <. N.)itell, and N. G. =arnes, K;anagement of conflict
using individual power sources ? * retailersT perspective,L J. of %usiness
Research, vol. 6B, no. ., pp. AM06, .AA,.
+3.- ". #. =. #odrUguez, N. C. *gudo, and G. <. ; . :utiQrrez, K%eterminants of
economic and social satisfaction in manufacturer-distributor relationships,L
Ind. Marketing Manage., vol. 3/, pp. 000M0,/, 1BB0.
+31- O. #uyter, (. ;oorman, and N. (emmin4, K*ntecedents of commitment
and trust in customer-supplier relationships in high technology mar4ets,L
Ind. Marketing Manage., vol. 3B, no. 3, pp. 1,.M120, 1BB..
+33- ;. N. <anzo, ;. (. <antos, #. )Vz!uez, and (. ". Wlvarez, KThe effect of
mar4et orientation on buyer-seller relationship satisfaction,L Ind.
Marketing Manage., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 31,M36/, 1BB3.
+36- N. T. <impson, and %. T . ;ayo, K#elationship ;anagement ? * Call for
8ewer "nfluence *ttemptsX,L J. of %usiness Research, vol. 3A, pp. 1BAM
1.2, .AA,.
+3/- (. 7. <tern, *. ". 'l-*nsary, and *. T. Coughlan, Marketing #hannels.
New Nersey ? Frentice Gall, .AA0.
+30- (. 7. <tern, and T. #eve, K%istribution Channels as Folitical 'conomies ?
* 8ramewor4 for Comparative *nalysis,L J. of Marketing, vol. 66, no. 3,
pp. /1M06, .A2B.
+3,- (. Thompson, and :. =. <panier, KThe 'nd of ;arriage and *cceptance of
;arital Termination,L J. of Marriage and the )amily, vol. 6/, pp. .B3M
..3, 8eb. .A23.
+32- %. 7. 7allace, N. (. :iese, and N. (. Nohnson, KCustomer retailer loyalty in
the context of multiple channel strategies,L J. of Retailing, vol. 2B, pp.
16AM103, 1BB6.
+3A- =. *. 7eitz, and <. %. Nap, K#elationship mar4eting and distribution
channels,L Academy of Marketing Sci., vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 3B/M31B, .AA/.
+6B- :. Phuang, E. Yi, and *. <. ( . Tsang, KFower, conflict and cooperation ?
The impact of guanxi in Chinese mar4eting channels,L Ind. Marketing
Manage., vol. 3A, pp. .3,M.6A, 1B.B.