TY - JOUR
T1 - The bases of power approach to channel relationships
T2 - has marketing’s scholarship been misguided?
AU - Hunt, Shelby D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015, © 2015 Westburn Publishers Ltd.
PY - 2015/5/4
Y1 - 2015/5/4
N2 - Abstract: A recent commentary by Blois and Hopkinson in this journal provides a thoughtful critique of the use of French and Raven’s (1959) bases of power approach in channels of distribution research. Their commentary claims that power-base studies (1) suffer from ‘weak results’ and lack ‘psychometrically sound’ measures, (2) provide an inadequate ‘categorising [of] power sources’, (3) suffer from a ‘questionable’ use of an interpersonal theory of power in ‘inter-organisational or B2B situations’, (4) suffer from a ‘misreporting’ of the original French and Raven article and (5) are deficient because they ground channels research on a 1959 theory article that was, itself, ‘much less rigorous in its arguments than would be expected’, with ‘uneven support’ from the article’s citations. The five criticisms of the power-base approach seem to imply that, throughout the four-plus decades of power-base research, marketing’s scholarship has been misguided. This reply argues that the five criticisms are suspect and the power-base approach to understanding channels of distribution has provided an informative theoretical foundation for guiding research.
AB - Abstract: A recent commentary by Blois and Hopkinson in this journal provides a thoughtful critique of the use of French and Raven’s (1959) bases of power approach in channels of distribution research. Their commentary claims that power-base studies (1) suffer from ‘weak results’ and lack ‘psychometrically sound’ measures, (2) provide an inadequate ‘categorising [of] power sources’, (3) suffer from a ‘questionable’ use of an interpersonal theory of power in ‘inter-organisational or B2B situations’, (4) suffer from a ‘misreporting’ of the original French and Raven article and (5) are deficient because they ground channels research on a 1959 theory article that was, itself, ‘much less rigorous in its arguments than would be expected’, with ‘uneven support’ from the article’s citations. The five criticisms of the power-base approach seem to imply that, throughout the four-plus decades of power-base research, marketing’s scholarship has been misguided. This reply argues that the five criticisms are suspect and the power-base approach to understanding channels of distribution has provided an informative theoretical foundation for guiding research.
KW - bases of power
KW - channels of distribution
KW - franchising
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926336403&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/0267257X.2014.987988
DO - 10.1080/0267257X.2014.987988
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:84926336403
VL - 31
SP - 747
EP - 764
JO - Journal of Marketing Management
JF - Journal of Marketing Management
SN - 0267-257X
IS - 7-8
ER -