لخّصلي

Managing the stages One implication of the notion of these five stages of development is that relationships are difficult to build quickly and from the ground up. Development takes time, particularly if the targeted partners do not currently do business together.Relationship velocity offers a stronger predictor of performance relationship level, due to people's propensity to use trend extrapolation as a decision heuristic.Through their repeated interactions, firms may develop sufficient critical incidents to move their relationship from a series of transactions to a real partnership, and in retrospect, managers might even remember their experiences as corresponding to stages, though they recognize those stages only after considerable development has occurred.Every existing channel member is a potential asset in this respect, because extant business links, even minor ones, help the awareness and exploration phases proceed much faster and can upgrade the relationship more swiftly and surely.In retrospect, the regression could be just a blip, and it does not mean the relationship is doomed to deteriorate.But a caveat also is in order.

Managing the stages
One implication of the notion of these five stages of development is that relationships are difficult to build quickly and from the ground up. Development takes time, particularly if the targeted partners do not currently do business together. Every existing channel member is a potential asset in this respect, because extant business links, even minor ones, help the awareness and exploration phases proceed much faster and can upgrade the relationship more swiftly and surely. But a caveat also is in order. Despite the appeal of the stages-of-development idea as a way to think about creating a relationship and keeping it going, relationship development rarely is as linear, orderly, and sequential as the five stages imply. On a daily basis, relationships constitute a series of episodes or critical incidents that help the players define their common purpose, set boundaries on their relationship, create value (and claim their share of it), and evaluate their returns from the relationship. Through their repeated interactions, firms may develop sufficient critical incidents to move their relationship from a series of transactions to a real partnership, and in retrospect, managers might even remember their experiences as corresponding to stages, though they recognize those stages only after considerable development has occurred. At the time of their development though, relationships often do not progress in an orderly way. Thus, it is difficult to say with confidence what stage a relationship is in for much of its history. However, the good news is that if a relationship seems to be regressing (e.g., moving from expansion to exploration), there is no real cause for alarm. In retrospect, the regression could be just a blip, and it does not mean the relationship is doomed to deteriorate. We thus might consider an alternative perspective on categorizing relationships into phases, one that describes of the state of a relationship at a specific point in time by capturing relationship velocity, or the rate and direction of change in commitment. Relationship velocity offers a stronger predictor of performance relationship level, due to people’s propensity to use trend extrapolation as a decision heuristic.