ABSTRACT

Purpose – Most research on the power issue has taken a dyadic view, implicitly assuming that power is employed directly and successfully on one target via a single route without stakeholders. When such a direct approach is unsuccessful or impractical, however, power holders may influence their targets via third parties. This study, from a triadic point of view, details how the coercive power is exercised through two-step maneuvers, and what differences are between power exercise in the dyads and that in the triads. Methodology/Approach – In-depth interviews were conducted with four suppliers in different industry settings.

Findings – Four types of two-step influence tactics are identified on the basis of strategic nature (covert/overt) and the pathways of influence (single/multiple). Differing from the power usage in a dyad without stakeholders, the power usage with the stakeholders in a triad was found to (1) reduce the levels of dependence on the target firm; (2) alleviate the conflicts and retaliation; (3) alter the power direction and influence strength; and (4) add more rooms for the power holder to manipulate the influence tactics. Research implications – The findings of this study expand the understanding of an under-researched dimension of coercive power usage and leverage by connecting the different stakeholders in the channel triads. The four coercive power tactics and their drivers show how the shift of power source from a dyad to a triad impacts on the target firm’s behavior and overall network performance. Practical implications – The findings also provide some guidance for practitioners, so that they may use the two-step coercive influence tactics more appropriately based on the different strategic nature and pathways of influence in the marketing channels. Originality/Value – This study contributes to the literature by providing a conceptual framework and variables for analyzing the two-step power tactics in the channel triads.

摘要

目的–大多数关于权力问题的研究都是二元论的，隐含地假设权力是在没有利益相关者的情况下通过一条途径直接成功地用于一个目标的。但是，当这种直接方法不成功或不切实际时，掌权者可能会通过第三方影响其目标。从三合会的角度来看，这项研究详细说明了如何通过两步演习来行使强制性力量，以及在二元组和三元组中的力量行使之间有什么区别。方法/方法–对不同行业背景下的四家供应商进行了深入访谈。

研究结果–根据战略性质（显性/显性）和影响途径（单/多），确定了四种类型的两步影响策略。与没有利益相关者的二元组中的电力使用不同，三合一中的利益相关者中的电力使用被发现：（1）降低了对目标公司的依赖程度；（二）减轻矛盾和报复；（3）改变动力方向和影响强度；（4）为权力持有人增加更多的空间来操纵影响策略。研究意义–这项研究的发现通过连接渠道三合会中的不同利益相关者，扩大了对未充分研究的强制性电力使用和杠杆作用的理解。四种强制性电源策略及其驱动力说明了电源从二元组向三元组的转换如何影响目标公司的行为和整体网络性能。实际意义–研究结果还为从业人员提供了一些指导，以便他们可以根据营销渠道中不同的战略性质和影响途径，更适当地使用两步骤强制性影响策略。创意/价值 –本研究通过提供概念框架和变量来分析渠道三合会中的两步权力策略，为文献做出了贡献。