Relationship formation and governance in consumer markets: Transactional analysis versus the behaviourist approach

Although relationship marketing (RM) is widely discussed in contemporary marketing literature, its theoretical foundations are rarely debated. Much published work on the subject relies implicitly on behaviourist exchange theory to support major propositions. Exchange theory neatly elucidates many RM hypotheses, but cannot explain the failure of campaigns that furnish customers with increasingly generous relationship rewards. Phenomenological approaches which explore the fundamental psychodynamics of supplier/customer relationships (especially the ways in which entities inwardly construct their own meanings for their experiences) represent a powerful alternative to the behaviourist model. A business, it is suggested, is like a person in that it possesses an ego, has a collective psyche, adopts specific ego states, and occupies a particular corporate life position which helps determine the nature of its relationships with its clientele. Core propositions of transactional analysis are commandeered to categorize managerial feelings towards customers. It is concluded that positive self‐regard, corporate openness and integrity, transparency of the corporate self, genuine liking for customers, and unadulterated confidence in the propriety of the company's mission are necessary prerequisites for successful RM. Also the firm has to view RM as an entire philosophy of marketing; not merely as a set of promotional practices and techniques.