Theoretical approaches to research on interorganizational relationships

The present study focuses on exploring how the reference relationship is discursively constructed in companies’ reference descriptions. The following research traditions have been selected to form the theoretical background against which the identified discourses can be meaningfully analyzed.

The transaction cost theory focuses on the basic questions of efficient governance structures and optimal boundaries of the firm (e.g. Coase 1937, Williamson 1975). The essential of transaction cost theory is based on the firms ‘make or buy’ decision making (Möller, Rajala and Svahn 2004, 216). According to the resource dependency approach (e.g. Pfeffer and Salancik 1978) and the more recent dynamic capabilities view (e.g. Teece et al. 1997, Foss 1999, Eisenhardt and Martin 2000), the reason for developing inter-firm relationships is the access to external resources and capabilities. However, these traditions see the role of resources and capabilities as a source of competitive advantage in different ways (Blomqvist 2002, 39). The social exchange theory (Blau 1964, Kelley and Thibault 1978, Dwyer et al. 1987) is interested in human behavior and emphasizes reciprocity and the role of social dimension in business relationships. The interaction approach presented by the IMP group (e.g. Håkansson 1982, Möller and Wilson 1995, Ford et al. 1998) also adopts the social dimension in business relationships, but focuses on emphasizing the dynamics and interaction in relationship development. Table 2 summarizes the research traditions and their basic premises and concepts.

The research traditions presented above view the customer relationship in different ways; they employ different concepts and metaphors and pay attention to different problems while ignoring others (Blomqvist 2002, 39). For example, the transaction cost theory emphasizes the uncertainty and opportunistic aspect of business relationships, whereas the social exchange theory and the interaction approach focus on the development of trust and commitment in business relationships. On the micro-level, companies’ reference descriptions construct a social reality by partly reflecting the ideas of these larger macro-level discursive repertoires. As Hardy et al. note (2000, 1232), in order to understand the discursive activity, it is important to study both the discursive strategies used by the actors in institutional level and the broader context of relevant discourses that operate on a more general level, as well as the links between these two.