Professional Documents
Culture Documents
It emerged in the B2B arena because the number of relationships managed were smaller (e.g. B2B sales) Is now dominant in the B2C arena via due to technology-laden concepts such as CRM and One-to-One Marketing
Between firms and customers/consumers (traditional) Among customers/Among business partners (emerging work in customer collaboration, customer/professional communities/knowledge networks)
The fundamental ground of this talk Because marketing is relational, social network theory (SNT) helps to advance marketing theory and practice.
A Historical Perspective
Marketers use basic SNT concepts, but questions and methods differ.
Points of Alignment:
Networks are socially connected actors (more than 2) Resources (e.g. information) are transferred among actors in a network There is a flow of resources within the network
Points of Difference:
SN theorist (and early marketing researchers) seek to describe individual actors and their relations/patterns of connections
Profile of actors
Knowledgeable, involved, confident, active
Degree o The number of actors with whom an individual has a direct connection
Relational Perspective
focuses on the extent to which all actors are interconnected o Relations (strands):
content, direction and and strength
o o
Ties:
Weak/Strong based on frequency of social contact, importance of relation
Multiplexity
the number of relations in a tie
Strong ties are more likely to be activate as a referral sources but consumers also actively seek information from weak ties in situational conversation (Reingen and Kernan 1986; Brown and
Reingen 1987)
Individual influence in the buying systems in a B2B context (Ronchetto, Hutt and Reingen 1989)
This effect is moderated by perceptions about potential opportunism in WOM information exchanges (e.g. non-reciprocating behavior)
(Frenzen and Nakamoto 1990)
The more valuable the info, the less powerful is the weak tie
(Frenzen and Nakamoto 1990)
Weak ties among horizontal partners are less powerful than among vertical alliance partners.
(Reindfleisch and Moorman 2001)