Investigating Client In their Relationships with Advertising

This study examines how characteristics of performance, relationship investments, general beliefs about relationships and conditions about the internal and external environment are associated with client tolerance toward their experiences in client-advertising agency relationships (CAR), particularly at the service encounter. A critical incident technique is adopted, collecting both negative incidents and positive incidents. The generic aspects of CAR above were conceptualised from a literature review incorporating buyer-seller behaviour, interorganisational relationships, and CAR research. The literature review was refined by qualitative research, involving depth interviews with 14 agencies and 11 client organisations. Respondents were key informants who had decision-making responsibility for their relationships. The depth interviews collectively sought to identify the range of negative and positive critical incidents experienced by clients and their agencies. Additionally, the points of contact between client and agency were identified from which critical incidents were experienced, together with characteristics considered to influence tolerance. These characteristics were screened to identify 32 independent variables and 5 investment variables for a postal survey of clients. The purpose was to identify the main predictors of tolerance. A unique feature of the study was the development of grouping variables designed to measure tolerance, based on seven dependent variables. The amount of incidents experienced per respondent were accounted for in making decisions about tolerance. Discriminant analysis was used to identify predictor variables for each set of grouping variables. This showed that a number of performance variables, investment criteria, client beliefs and environmental conditions were associated with tolerance. Performance predictors included consistent work processes, proactivity and stability of key account management. Additional predictors included beliefs in compatible working styles and less effort in making changes by clients, supporting the view that processes may become more important under stressful times because they facilitate governance. Procedures and processes might also reflect the need to ensure fairness in relationships.