Business-to-business marketing: organizational buying behaviour, relationships and networks 163
These three components – actors, activities and
resources – are not independent of each other;
they are all interconnected. The existence of
bonds between actors is necessary in order for
any strong activity and resource links to
develop. Actors carry out activities and activate
resources. Resources may limit the activities
which the actors can pursue, but the activities
may evolve and change as the abilities of the
actors change. Actor bonds, activity and
resource links evolve and change, and the
three components adjust accordingly, making
networks dynamic entities (Hakansson and
Snehota, 1992; Michel et al., 2002). Network
terminology is generic and all encompassing, it
does not specifically address only organiza-
tional buying behaviour, but places the focal
company within the context of its business
environment, taking into account competitors,
suppliers, customers, distributors etc.
Implications for marketing
management
A company’s actor bonds, activity links and
resource ties determine its position, strength
and reputation within a network. Through
examining its position, a company can decide
its future strategy, i.e. whether it should enter
a new network, leave a network, defend its
position in the network or change its position
within the network. Johanson and Mattsson
(1986) stated that a company’s position can be
examined from both a micro and a macro
perspective. The micro position is character-
ized by (i) the position of the company in
relation to the other company (companies), (ii)
its importance to the other company, and (iii)
the strength of the relationship with the other
company. The macro position is characterized
by (i) the identity of the other companies with
which the company has direct and indirect
relationships in the network, (ii) the role of
the company in the network, and (iii) the
strength of the relationships with the other
companies. Mattsson (1987) believes that
implementing any strategic change will lead
to a change in the network position of the
company.
The network approach, like the interaction
approach from which it has developed, offers a
very different perspective from traditional mar-
keting and purchasing behaviour; it integrates
the two activities and examines relationships
rather than markets. It is useful for determining
the focal company’s strategy and the allocation
of the company’s scarce resources. The network
approach emphasizes how important it is
for companies to consider all of their relation-
ships with their suppliers and buyers, and to
develop a rational strategy for managing them
(Zolkiewski and Turnbull, 2001).Relationship portfolio analysis
Companies have become increasingly aware of
the importance of managing their network of
suppliers and customers. Three major trends
have occurred in purchasers’ relationships with
their suppliers, largely as a result of the move
to supply chain management. Buyers have
outsourced an increasing number of activities,
leaving them to concentrate on their core
competencies with the aim of increasing their
efficiency and effectiveness. Yet, at the same
time, the number of suppliers a purchaser uses
has decreased and buyers increasingly want to
collaborate in some way with their suppliers.
Obviously, implementation of many of these
changes is aimed at decreasing the direct and
indirect costs of procurement and increasing
the ability of the company to generate revenue.
In order to achieve these aims, however, it is
vital that the company has a thorough knowl-
edge of its suppliers’ relationships, including
the scope of these relationships (i.e. the extent
and importance of buying to the company’s
overall business), the structure of its supply
base (i.e. the number and type of suppliers the
company chooses to have) and the posture of
its supplier relationships (i.e. how a company
handles and deals with its relationships, are the
companies close, integrated etc.) (Ford, 1998;
Michelet al., 2002).