Introduction
The performed research was initially aimed at evaluating the value of companies’ relationships with their partners and determining the existing weaknesses that might potentially result in undesirable conflicts and disagreements. According to Ndubisi, there are three main conflict handling styles that can be used to eliminate misunderstanding between partners and raise the mutual trust and commitment: integrating, accommodating, and compromising (8). All the three sections were included in the survey and will be analyzed particularly carefully in the report at hand.
Data Collection
The major data collection tool was a survey that included 15 sections so that the partnership relations were analyzed within different dimensions. The study sample comprised eight companies most of which would characterize themselves as “service providers” with a workforce exceeding 250 employees. All the respondents were males aged 29-42 years old. Seven respondents out of 8 were Arabs, and one respondent was Russian.
Results
To begin with, it is proposed to review the positive findings and distinguish, in such a manner, those aspects of partnership relations that do not need any critical improvements. The survey results show positive trends in such section as “trust,” “integrating,” “accommodating,” “compromising,” “forcing,”, “constructive,” “general honesty,” “obligation,” “information,” “power,” “dependence,” “ethics norms,” and “commitment.”
The best scores i.e. 5 and above, can be found in such sections as “trust,” “integrating,” “accommodating,” “obligation,” “information,” and “commitment.” As such, it might be concluded that most respondents believe that their partner acts openly and transparently fulfilling the obligations and shares the same values as the company. Additionally, the major part of respondents is satisfied with the way their partner promotes the interest of the company under different conditions as well as with the partner’s ability to find compromises.
The highest score can be found in the commitment section which means that respondents notice the practical effort their companies do to maintain their collaboration with the partner. The scores in “power” and “dependence” sections are likewise above average which means the respondents have a clear understanding of the partner’s value for their company.
Another positive tendency is the 3.2 score in the “avoiding” section that signifies that the respondents generally prefer to resolve the problems at the early stages without letting them emerge into critical conflicts. Likewise, most respondents are content with the “general honesty” that the partner exhibits.
Meanwhile, it is also important to point out some negative trends that have been pointed out in the course of this study. First and foremost, the respondents’ compliance with the ethic norms seems to be alarming. As such, this section has a 4.5 score which means that the major part of respondents admits that they occasionally conceal the data from their clients or provide it in a distorted form. Second, there are some concerning findings in the “destructive” section. Thus, most respondents report frequent conflicts between their company and its partner. Additionally, the major part of respondents points out that their partner often imposes the decisions on the company forcing the latter to prioritize them.
Analysis
Upon analyzing the retrieved findings, several conclusions can be drawn.
First and foremost, the examined marketing relations are unlikely to be hazarded by critical conflicts due to the generally positive scores in the key sections such as “trust,” “accommodating,” “integrating,” and “commitment.” The last section is particularly important since the commitment aspect plays a critical role in establishing consistent market relationships. According to Ndubisi, commitment is a reliable indicator of the relations’ value and stability (3). All the conflict handling techniques that the expert proposes are mainly targeted to enhance employees’ commitment.
From this perspective, the examined companies appear to be too committed to their partners to put their relations at risk. However, the problem might reside in the roots of this commitment. As such, Ndubusi notes that commitment should be based on trust (3). In the frame of the discussed study, the underpinning reason seems to be slightly different. As such, it might be suggested that high commitment is explained by the high scores in the “power” and “dependence” sections. Otherwise stated, the companies are committed to their partners because they are sure of their competitive advantage in the market. However, the conflicts might naturally arise when the company enters another partnership with a more powerful market player.
Second, the discussed study has some limitations. Most importantly, the survey sample comprised only eight respondents of similar sex and national identity. As such, it can be naturally assumed that the findings would have differed under a more diverse sample.
Conclusion
The analysis of the research findings shows that the participated companies show positive tendencies in their relations with partners. As such, the level of trust and commitment are generally high that signifies low risks of critical disagreements. In the meantime, it should be pointed out that the respondents’ commitment seem to be driven by the partners’ authority and competitive advantage in the relevant market rather than by the true satisfaction with their business conduct.
Works Cited
Ndubisi, Nelson Oly. “Conflict handling, trust and commitment in outsourcing relationship: A Chinese and Indian study.” Industrial Marketing Management 35.1 (2010): 1-9. Print.