No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose: To develop a conceptual framework that explores the sources of manufacturer brand benefits for resellers. Methodology/Approach:We report a qualitative investigation where packaged goods resellers were interviewed about the benefits of manufacturer brands for their businesses. The qualitative data is analysed to develop several research propositions about the role of brands in reseller B2B relationships. Findings:A conceptual framework is developed that shows manufacturers' brands provide financial, customer and managerial benefits for resellers. These benefits have an impact on reseller relationship outcomes with the manufacturer's brand, which include satisfaction, commitment, trust, dependence and cooperation. Practical Implications:The conceptual framework provides a model that manufacturers of both major and minor brands can use to understand and manage these brand benefits in order to enhance the relationship outcomes with resellers. Originality/Value of paper:The paper responds to a need for empirical research to understand the role that brands play in channel relationships (Webster, 2000). It presents a conceptual framework that links manufacturer brand benefits to reseller relationship outcomes.The framework also includes major and minor brands as moderating variables and thus provides a basis for further quantitative research.

This article examines the public relations management of communication about genetic engineering in New Zealand. The theme is explored through an analysis of work developed by the consultancy Communication Trumps for, on the one hand, a private company involved in genetic research on fish, and, on the other hand, a government-supported public information campaign about genetic engineering. In relation to the issues management strategies employed by Communication Trumps, the article exemplifies how, by deploying tactics more commonly associated with propaganda and the engineering of consent, public relations can purposively attempt to undermine democratic processes. The article argues that through the attempted sabotage and silencing of the genetic engineering debate in New Zealand, the government, corporations, and the public relations industry combined in an effort to develop genetic engineering technologies while stifling public understanding of the implication of these technologies.