Antecedents of trust in asymmetrical business relationships

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the different perceptions of the antecedents of trust in asymmetrical business‐to‐business relationships between food producers and retailers. Design/methodology/approach The empirical data consist of semi‐structured face‐to‐face interviews with 38 small food businesses and 54 retailers. The analysis combined both qualitative and quantitative methods. Findings The main differences identified in the antecedents of trust concerned the role of price, market potential, customer orientation, size, organisational/personal competence, marketing spirit, previous experiences, distribution of liabilities, communication, intimacy, reputation and references. In an asymmetrical business relationship, the characteristics of the less powerful partner are emphasised while the role of the more powerful partner in the development and maintenance of trust is minor. Practical implications If business partners are not aware of the particular antecedents of trust valued by the other party, this may create a sense of mistrust and hinder the development of the relationship at more profound levels. By revealing the essential differences in the perceptions of antecedents of trust, the paper enables both researchers interested in business relations and practitioners to better understand the challenges that businesses in dyadic relationships encounter, especially where the relationship is marked by asymmetry. Originality/value As there is a lack of dyadic approach to trust, studying both sides of the relationship dyad simultaneously makes visible the asymmetrical features inherent in the relationship between retailers and small food businesses. The paper contributes to the gap in the literature on trust by presenting new insights on asymmetrical buyer‐seller relationships.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.