Cited by 2,601Customer Service Quality and LoyaltyQuality and Supply ManagementMarketing and Advertising Strategies

Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Relationship Marketing: A Meta-Analysis

Palmatier, Robert W., Dant, Rajiv P., Grewal, Dhruv, Evans, Kenneth R.·2006·Journal of Marketing

Abstract

Relationship marketing (RM) has emerged as one of the dominant mantras in business strategy circles, though RM investigations often yield mixed results. To help managers and researchers improve the effectiveness of their efforts, the authors synthesize RM empirical research in a meta-analytic framework. Although the fundamental premise that RM positively affects performance is well supported, many of the authors’ findings have significant implications for research and practice. Relationship investment has a large, direct effect on seller objective performance, which implies that additional meditated pathways may explain the impact of RM on performance. Objective performance is influenced most by relationship quality (a composite measure of relationship strength) and least by commitment. The results also suggest that RM is more effective when relationships are more critical to customers (e.g., service offerings, channel exchanges, business markets) and when relationships are built with an individual person rather than a selling firm (which partially explains the mixed effects between RM and performance reported in previous studies).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1509/jmkg.70.4.136

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Two independent coders achieved a high agreement level (97%) in coding the experiments.

    “The coders achieved a high agreement level (97%) and resolved disagreements through discussion, following established practices (de Oliveira Santini et al., 2020;Palmatier et al., 2006).”
  • Prior meta-analyses identify relationship quality as a mediator of the relational benefits-customer loyalty relationship.

    “Second, in prior meta-analyses that have shaped relationship marketing theory (Palmatier et al. 2006; Verma et al. 2016), the authors identify relationship quality as a mediator of the relational benefits-customer loyalty relationship.”

    From Understanding and managing customer relational benefits in services: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Palmatier et al. 2006

  • Prior meta-analyses often conceptualize relational benefits as a single, general construct, discounting the potentially divergent effects of different relational benefits on customer outcomes.

    “Prior meta-analyses (Palmatier et al. 2006; Verma et al. 2016) often conceptualize relational benefits as a single, general construct, discounting the potentially divergent effects of different relational benefits on customer outcomes.”

    From Understanding and managing customer relational benefits in services: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Palmatier et al. 2006

  • Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis offers support for a positive relationship between relationship quality and customer loyalty.

    “Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis also offers support for a positive relationship between relationship quality and customer loyalty.”

    From Understanding and managing customer relational benefits in services: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Palmatier et al. 2006

  • Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis reveals that the broad concept of relationship quality best captures the strength and breadth of a relationship between customers and service providers.

    “Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis reveals that the broad concept of relationship quality-rather than its specific dimensions-best captures the strength and breadth of a relationship between customers and service providers.”

    From Understanding and managing customer relational benefits in services: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Palmatier et al. 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., Grewal, D., & Evans, K. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Babson College (US)
  • University of Missouri (US)
Venue
Journal of Marketing
Published
2006-10
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
136-153
ISSN
  • 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7185
OpenAlex
W3126090267
Cited by
2,601
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 136 · 2025: 120 · 2024: 102 · 2023: 132 · 2022: 152 · 2021: 180 · 2020: 194 · 2019: 175 · 2018: 139 · 2017: 167 · 2016: 138 · 2015: 162 · 2014: 154 · 2013: 153 · 2012: 127
FWCI
17.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Marketing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Marketing and Advertising Strategies
Keywords
relationship marketing, relationship investment, relationship quality, relationship strength, customer commitment, objective performance, mediation pathways, business-to-business relationships, service relationships, channel relationships

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review