2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.07.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of transaction cost antecedents on control mechanisms: Exporters’ psychic distance and economic knowledge as moderators

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
0
14
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…These negative effects of relationship distance can lead to the poor coordination of activities in the relationship (Andersen, Christensen, and Damgaard 2009), hamper the proper transfer of resources between the exchange parties (Jean, Sinkovics, and Kim 2017), and make the appreciation of relational investments difficult (Leonidou et al 2011). High distance also increases both direct (e.g., transaction) and indirect (e.g., controlling) costs, with negative implications on financial outcomes (Durand, Turkina, and Robson 2016; Sachdev and Bello 2014). This discussion leads to the following hypothesis: H 4 : The lower the relational distance in the exporter–importer relationship, the higher the level of relational performance. …”
Section: Conceptual Model and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These negative effects of relationship distance can lead to the poor coordination of activities in the relationship (Andersen, Christensen, and Damgaard 2009), hamper the proper transfer of resources between the exchange parties (Jean, Sinkovics, and Kim 2017), and make the appreciation of relational investments difficult (Leonidou et al 2011). High distance also increases both direct (e.g., transaction) and indirect (e.g., controlling) costs, with negative implications on financial outcomes (Durand, Turkina, and Robson 2016; Sachdev and Bello 2014). This discussion leads to the following hypothesis: H 4 : The lower the relational distance in the exporter–importer relationship, the higher the level of relational performance. …”
Section: Conceptual Model and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, the prevalence of high levels of distance between exporters and importers can create the preconditions in which betrayal may take place. This is because distance can: (a) restrict buyer-seller interactions and set barriers to communication, thus limiting the options of creating a sustainable relationship (Durand, Turkina, & Robson, 2016;Leonidou et al, 2006); (b) give rise to information asymmetry and reduce the possibilities of properly monitoring the foreign partner's activities (Sachdev & Bello, 2014); (c) strengthen the motivation to search for a similar or closer foreign partner, as this will reduce the uncertainty associated with his/her operations (Griffith & Dmitrova, 2014;Morrison & Robinson, 1997); and (d) encourage misinterpretation of the foreign partner's behavior (Das & Rahman, 2010;Obadia, 2013).…”
Section: H3: the Higher The Level Of Inter-partner Incompatibility Inmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Griffith and Dimitrova (2014) indicate that when export managers perceive greater business PD, they select export partners with fewer complementary capabilities. Likewise, Sachdev and Bello (2014) find that PD moderates asset specificity's effect on information sharing. There is also empirical evidence that PD enhances knowledge development in foreign customer relationships, as it is positively related to SMEs' foreign market network cooperation (Nordman and Tolstoy, 2014 Mariola Ciszewska-Mlinarič, Piotr Trąpczyński those findings are the results of Johnston et al (2012) who note that PD negatively moderates the relationship between communication facets and trust and satisfaction.…”
Section: (V) Pd and Other Managerial Challengesmentioning
confidence: 81%