Though seems as a quiet recent term- “Relationship” is accepted largely and ardently by scholars, researchers and marketers, entrepreneurs. Relationship marketing was a breakthrough attempt by Leonard berry, professor at Texas A&M University, in 1983. He took initiative in coining the term “Relationship Marketing” enlightening into the service paradigm.
To keep the company ahead of the pack, relationships that are built should extend helping hand to both company and the customer. Earlier sales philosophy when replaced with the traditional Marketing Philosophy; the focus shifted from product preference to customer preference. Relationship marketing has gone a step further. It dictates that seller has to be more familiar and well-informed towards their customers’ desires and needs. It thrusts on long-lasting association with existing customers.
Investments may be in the form of resources as money, time, effort, or other special concessions. L. Berry – further stresses on – Price based, feeling based and structure oriented levels that are crucial to build relationship with customer.
To understand consumers better “consumer behavior” has contributed immensely. Any business enterprise has to study, understand and delight its current Consumers. Nevertheless ,in fact, some social psychologists have gone so far as to suggest that competition is inherently destructive and mutual cooperation inherently more productive (Kohn 1986). So there is the need of hour for businesses to satisfy target customers either in current market or new market. ( Sheth,Parvatiyar,2002)
Domain Vs Discipline
Source: Google Images
Even If marketing business practices can be tracked as far as 7000 B.C. (Carratu 1987), marketing lore as a distinct discipline was emerged out of economics around the beginning of this century. As the discipline gained impetus, and developed through the in the beginning of twentieth century, the primary focus was on transactions and arm-at length exchanges. However, the development of marketing as a sphere of study and practice is undergoing a transition in its orientation from transactions to relationships (Kotler 1990; Webster 1992). The thrusting on relational cohesive bonds as opposed to transaction based exchanges is very likely to refresh and redefine the domain of marketing (Sheth, Gardener and Garett 1988).
RM is turning from Domain into discipline. For a paradigm to be accepted as a discipline it must adequately recapitulate knowledge of related entities, laws, and mechanisms in the form of time- and context-free generalizations. Values and other biasing or confounding factors should be removed from influencing the results; and questions and/or hypotheses should be empirically tested through detailed and rigorous methodology (Guba 1990).
Researchers debate that RM represents a “paradigm shift in marketing” from its previous focus on “transactions,” in which firms use the “4P model” to manage marketing-mix variables (Gronroos 1994, Sheth and Parvatiyar 2000). But is RM really a new phenomenon? What underlying trends or factors drive such a change?. Researchers have made the compelling case that relational-based exchange was the norm for most of recorded history. The anomaly of transaction-based marketing emerged only in the early 1900s. Thus, relationship marketing “is really a rebirth of marketing practices of the pre-industrial age” (Sheth and Parvatiyar 1995).
Sheth and Parvatiyar (1995) offer countless examples of business, which would only occur among groups with continual relationships that built trust over time and examples of the use of family names in specific industries that branded relational trust.
Several management thinkers and scholars were agreed that certainly there was a need for a new marketing paradigm which will embrace global opportunities and meet the challenges. Through this motive, the new emerged marketing orientation is “Relationship Marketing.” In one sense, however, the paradigm is only “new” in the West.
Palmer asserts that relationship marketing is not a newly coined concept. It is a framework with both-way advantageous exchanges whose benefits have been highlighted by competitive markets. The increasing techno-savvy facilities lead to a dialogue between a supplier and multitude of customers. It can be assumed that all things renew themselves and that all organizations can benefit from win-win relationships of them with their customers. But it can be sensed to be about many centuries ago in Asia. Barter system was common in India. Its roots were strong and deep. Personal relationship was the basis for trade practices.
Marketing has been known under the name “guanxi” in China. The word “guanxi” (pronounced guan-shee) refers to networks of informal relationships and exchanges of favors that dominate business activity throughout China and East Asia (Wong & Tam, 2000). Guanxi has also been insinuated as a personal relationship or connection. In a typical Chinese connotation, guanxi has been imbued with creative flamboyance and flexibility through a network & grapevines of informal personal relationships.
According to Yau, Lee, Chow, Sin, and Alan (2000), relationship marketing has its roots in China’s cultural perspective. The Chinese choose long-lasting personalized relationships and mutual cooperation as the basis for their perpetual business negotiations & further dealings. They feel that since relationships take time and effort, relationship marketing should not just be considered an add-on approach.
RM is an ancient system of marketing based on personal relationships and has existed since 770-470 B.C. (Lovett, Simmons, & Kali,1999). Today’s organizations should learn from the Chinese that a “good” relationship should be seen as an obligation rather than a right. Just as U.S. businesses used to regard brand equity as an asset, the Chinese see guanxi as an asset (Ambler & Styles, 2000).
Summary
Relationships between customers and business firms have been consistently fostered as successful business practices worldwide. Each Relationship Building attempt leads as an outcome of both parties making mutually symbiotic investment through enhancing their relationship. Today’s organizations find customer relationship to be an asset to their companies which try to meet their customers’ needs in best possible ways. RM is turning from Domain into discipline. For a paradigm to be accepted as a discipline it adequately recapitulates knowledge of related entities, laws, and mechanisms.
PC: Google Images
©2019, Dr.Amit Medhekar. All rights reserved.
