Motives, partner selection and establishing Trust Reciprocity and Interorganisational Commitment

Abstract

This research proposes a model of Interorganisational Commitment (IOC). The model is based on six constructs and was tested on 99 small and medium sized firms. The model examines interaction and non-interaction between firms. The theoretical model suggests that firms enter relationships in sequences, where they first consider motives and partner preferences before interaction takes place. Later in the sequence more extensive interactions develop into committed relationships that have consequences influenced by Trust (TRU) and Reciprocity (RCP) perceptions, which influence and promote lasting IOCs. The tested model exhibits nomological, convergent and discriminant validity, as well as reliability.

Developing reciprocal exchanges for tourism investors

“…Various studies have been conducted on business networks in different industries. For instance, telecommunications firms, automotive companies (Corsten et al, 2011), high-technology firms (Ferrary and Granovetter, 2009), academic institutions, the jewelry sector (Oprime et al, 2011), tourism firms (Pesämaa and Hair, 2007), and construction firms (Pesämaa et al, 2010). There have been relatively few empirical studies conducted in different industries (De Klerk and Kroon, 2007) on business networks in the context of Africa.…”

“…According to Pesämaa et al (2010), hard motives directly affect reasons to share costs, product development, and financing, which indicate that the company is expecting something in return for its cooperative efforts. In this study, hard motives are defined as sharing new product development costs, increasing the ability to enter new geographical markets, and increasing the ability to enter new product segments.…”

“…Soft motives are also assumed to be as important as hard motives and determine how partners are selected (Parkhe, 1993). This study adapted the constructs that were originally developed by Rosenfeld (1996) and later modified by Huggins (2000) and Pesämaa et al (2010). The measure had three items, namely, (X4) share know-how, (X5) increase flexibility, and (X6) share information.…”

“…This study focuses on motives, partner selection criteria, and reciprocity as some of the important factors for a successful business network. Although strategic motives and partner selection criteria have become popular (Hitt et al, 2000;Luo, 2002), little research assesses theoretical models to obtain evidence of how these outcomes occur (Lee et al, 2004;Pesämaa et al, 2010), particularly toward developing reciprocal exchange. Also, an increasing shift away from the formerly state-centric development in tourism toward some form of (pro)active involvement of private operators has been observed in a number of sub-Saharan African destinations (Mbaiwa, 2005a(Mbaiwa, , 2005b.…”

“…The structure of a business network has a significant influence on the system of the business as well as on the amount of strong and weak relationships in creating a competitive advantage (Hagedoorn et al, 2005). According to Pesämaa et al (2010), in tourism-related businesses, for instance, networks perform a significant function in coordinating different activities. These activities may include restaurants, camps, bars, ski resorts, hotels, and transportation, and guides or tour operators must be coordinated and networked as sustained through personal relationships.…”