This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago]

On: 01 June 2012, At: 01:17

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Journal of Political Marketing

Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wplm20

Relationship Marketing and the

Political Process
a
Declan P. Bannon
a
The Paisley Business School, University of Paisley,
Paisley, PA1 2BE, Scotland

Available online: 08 Oct 2008

To cite this article: Declan P. Bannon (2005): Relationship Marketing and the Political
Process, Journal of Political Marketing, 4:2-3, 73-90

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J199v04n02_04

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-

and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable
for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Relationship Marketing
and the Political Process
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Declan P. Bannon
Paisley Business School, University of Paisley, Scotland

ABSTRACT. This paper attempts to apply Relationship Marketing

Theory to the political arena. Contrasts between traditional Management
School of thought and the Relational School are drawn. A typology of
political relationships is induced from primary ethnographic research.
Relationships are a fundamental asset of an organisation. Political par-
ties need to acknowledge the importance of nurturing and developing a
variety of relationships as a long-term strategic imperative. Crucially,
relationships are predictive of behaviour and are less likely to volatile
swings (Gordon, 1998). With voter volatility and electoral inactivity in-
creasing, enhancing and developing mutually beneficial relationships
with supporters and potential supporters appears appealing. Relation-
ships are fluid and dynamic rather than being static. Relationships can
develop and become stronger or they may then erode and weaken. How-
ever, as long as the relationship remains above a critical threshold, trans-
actions may continue. A critical incident may occur that causes specific
behavioural changes that will affect the nature and level of electoral
transactions. These critical incidents can be either positive or negative
and may have an impact on relational development or erosion. [Article
copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service:
1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com> Website:
<http://www.HaworthPress.com>  2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights re-
served.]

Declan P. Bannon is Lecturer in Strategy and Marketing at the Paisley Business

School, University of Paisley, Paisley, PA1 2BE, Scotland (E-mail: declan.bannon@
paisley.ac.uk). Research interests include relationship marketing, voter behaviour,
marketing segmentation and the application of marketing theory to non-commercial
organisations.
Journal of Political Marketing, Vol. 4(2/3) 2005
Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JPOLM
 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J199v04n02_04 73
 74 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

KEYWORDS. Political marketing, relationship marketing, critical in-

cidents, relational erosion, relational development
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

MANAGEMENT SCHOOL AND RELATIONSHIP

MARKETING ORIENTATIONS

The industrial era heralded the birth of transactional marketing. The

mass production of goods led to the search for new markets and as a
consequence, to mass consumption. Marketing was viewed as the task
of shifting the output of mass production. Measures of marketing suc-
cess were linked to sales targets and market share projections. As a con-
sequence marketing was more concerned with transactions and the
functions associated with transactions, i.e., selling and promotions
rather than relationship building. This led to short-term thinking and
short-term strategies where profit maximisation was the mantra of the
day. This is still the present situation in most companies today (Sheth &
Parvatiyar, 2000).
Relationship Marketing as first discussed by Berry in 1983 is not a
new concept but a redefining of the purpose of marketing itself. Rela-
tionship Marketing recognises the importance of sustaining mutually
satisfying exchanges and the building of customer relationships as cen-
tral to generating loyalty and repeat business. ‘The concept suggests
that instead of the narrow, transactional, one sale at a time view of mar-
keting, marketing should emphasise relationships between the organi-
sation and its markets more strongly’ (Payne et al., 1995).
The growth of a relationship orientation of marketing in the post-in-
dustrial era is the rebirth of direct marketing between producers and
consumers; how this is or will affect the practice of marketing politics is
an area that requires attention and further research.
Marketing has never had a general theory (Sheth et al., 1988; Hunt,
1983; Baker, 2000; Gronroos, 1994). However, the Management
School, with its marketing mix management paradigm and its essen-
tially transactional-based marketing, has in the past been regarded as
such. Some authors argue that the Management School of thought has
had its day or should be confined to the marketing of consumer goods
and it has no place in modern marketing. The majority of authors are ad-
vocating the Relationship School of Marketing as the modern saviour in
marketing’s mid-life crisis (Baker, 2000; Gronroos, 1994; 1997; Sheth
et al., 2000; Hunt, 1994; Webster, 1992; Payne et al., 1995; Buttle,
1996; Gummerson, 1995; 1997a; 1997b; 1998; Egan, 2001; Morgan &
 Part I: Academic Contributions 75

Hunt, 1994; and Kotler, 1997). Others believe that the way forward is a hy-
brid form of marketing that incorporates the best of the transactional school
and relationship school or that the two can and should co-exist (Pels, 1999;
Bannon, 2000; Gronroos, 1994).
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Definitions of Relationship Marketing are plentiful; however, one of

the most comprehensive is that of Christian Gronroos:

Marketing is to establish, maintain and enhance relationships

with customers and other partners, at a profit so that the objec-
tives of both parties involved are met. This is achieved by mutual
exchange and keeping of promises. Such relationships are usually
but not necessarily always long term. (Gronroos, 1994:9)

Baker (2000) describes the essential differences between the Market-

ing Management School and the Relationship School as follows. The
Marketing Management School

is based around a model that seeks to understand consumer needs

better so that it can manipulate the elements of the marketing mix
more effectively and so bend demand to the available supply. It
tends to emphasis the transaction and sees exchange largely as a
zero sum game in which there are inevitably winners and losers.
Needless to say it is the seller who intends to win. In other words it
is concerned with what marketers can do to buyers. By contrast,
relationship marketing reflects the marketing concept much better.
Relationship marketing is built upon the creation and mainte-
nance of mutually satisfying exchange relationships. It enjoys a
win-win perspective and sees the role of a producer as doing
things for customers.

In other words, the Management School focuses on what marketers

does to customers whist the Relational School focuses on what market-
ers do for customers. This is not to say the Management School is infe-
rior or outdated, just that it emanates from a different ontological basis.
The Management School approach may indeed produce win-win situa-
tions, rarely will consumers enter a loss-win situation voluntarily; how-
ever, the balance or intention to maximise the sellers value in exchange
is paramount.
The Relational School takes a long-term view of a sequence of ex-
changes and is more focused on the development of the relationship
than the maximisation of value in discrete transactions. In certain mar-
 76 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

TABLE 1. Factor Comparative Matrix

Factor Management School Relational Political Marketing

Political Marketing
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Time Horizon Short/Medium-Term Long-Term

(Gordon, 1998) (Christopher, 1993) (Anderson, 1982)
Strategy Offensive/Defensive Relationship Building
(Dibb et al., 2001)
Activities New Business Generation Retention/Customer Loyalty
(Christopher et al., 1991) (Doyle, 1998)
Focus Operational/Functional Philosophical
(Gordon, 1998) (Dibb et al., 2001)
Relationship Proxy/Professional Service Representative/Trusting/Partnership
(Gordon, 1998)
Scope Restricted Inclusive
(Gronroos, 1994) (Gordon, 1998)
Attitude Manipulative Partnership
(Van Waterscoot, 1999) (Gordon, 1998)
Communication Spin/Soundbites Message Integrity
Style Authoritative/Patronising/ Paternal/Altruistic/Craftlike
Mechanistic (Mintzberg, 1994)
Marketing Ethos Transactional Exchange Exchange Relationship
(Gronoos, 1994) (Van Waterscoot, 1999)
Exchange Type Transfer (win-lose) Transactional (win-win)
(Bagozzi, 1974) (Christopher et al., 1991) (Baker, 2000)
Business Issues Transactional Issues Quality of Relationship
(Brassington et al., 1997)
School of Marketing Management School Relationship School
(Baker, 2000) (Payne et al., 1998)
Branding Superficial/Patronising Brand Equity

keting environments, an adoption of a relational approach may be more

appropriate in creating and maintaining a competitive advantage. In
other marketing environments, the adoption of a Management School
approach may indeed be more appropriate. Table 1 compares and con-
trasts the two schools of thought in the context of a multi-factorial
framework. The dimensions for the comparison between the Manage-
ment School and Relational School have been induced from the many
papers written on Relationship Marketing over the last 30 years.
 Part I: Academic Contributions 77

The post-industrial era has seen substantial development to-

wards relationship marketing, both in practice and in manage-
rial thinking. Marketers started realising the need to supplement
a transaction orientation with an orientation that shows more con-
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

cern for customers. (Sheth & Parvatiyar, 2000)

Relationship Marketing (RM) is a systems-oriented approach

(Gronroos, 1994). When RM is applied to the capital equipment market,
it is an integration of selling, supplies, parts and after sales service. Cus-
tomers appreciate and value the integration of products and services that
provide augmented products. This is hardly surprising, customers want
to buy the benefit of the combined bundle of products/services not the
individual pieces. This systems approach was then adopted to an extent
by the consumer goods and service sectors marketers (Shapiro &
Posner, 1979).
Drummond and Ensor (1999) describe Relationship Marketing as
modern marketing practice ‘which now recognises the importance of
retaining customers and generating repeat business. Relationship ap-
proaches aim to develop customer alliances, whereby the customer not
only sees the organisation as their preferred provider, but actively rec-
ommends others to use their products and services.’
Issues such as prospecting, initial contact, transaction(s), relationship
development, relational erosion, customer retention, loyalty, critical in-
cidents, trust, commitment, type of relationship, and customer lock-in
are all key areas for academic research.
Table 2 explores the language of the relationship development pro-
cess as described by various authors. Whilst the actual words used are
different, a commonality of meaning can clearly be seen.

TABLE 2. Relationship Development Process (Adapted from Tynan, 1997)

Dwyer et al. (1987) Ford (1980) Wilson (1995) Levitt (1983) Harker (1999)
Awareness Pre-relationship Search and selection Meeting Creation
Exploration Early stage Defining purpose Going out Development
Expansion Development Boundary definition Going steady Maintenance
Commitment Long-term stage Creating relationship Marriage Interactive
 78 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

CRITICAL INCIDENTS

None of these authors describe the dynamics of a relationship, where

it strengthens and weakens along a continuum as depicted by Gronroos
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

(1994). A relationship is a fluid and dynamic process rather than being

in a static state. Relationships will develop and become stronger, they
may then erode and weaken. However, as long as the relationship re-
mains above a critical threshold, transactions should continue. An event
or critical incident may occur that causes specific behavioural or attitu-
dinal changes that will affect the nature of the transaction. A critical in-
cident is an event at which an individual voter decides that they will
change their attitudes or behaviour towards an actor (candidate/party).
These critical incidents can be either positive or negative. Positive criti-
cal incidents are events that cause a transaction to occur or a relation-
ship to strengthen and develop. Negative critical incidents are events
that cause transactions to cease or the relationship erodes and weakens.
Customers can remain at the same stage in the continuum or they can
move in a dynamic manner.
Whilst party identification (the relationship) remains high, the
strength of the identification is rapidly decreasing and thus the potential
for persuasion increases with the potential number of less strongly com-
mitted voters increasing (Denver, 1994:54; Lees-Marshment, 2001:20).
In fact party identification was relatively consistent from 1964-1992.
However, 1997 changed this situation and questions the validity of the
view that party identification is long term in development and supports
the view that the strength of party identification is reducing and voters
are acting more like consumers. The less aligned a member of the elec-
torate is, the more uncertainty exists as to their behaviour at an election.
They may be more inclined to absorb alternative political messages,
support single issues, be influenced by critical incidence or disengage
and not vote. The evidence seems to indicate that the latter is becoming
more prevalent.
The political science view of voter behaviour is based on 3 routes to
party identification, namely socialisation, social class and single issue
(Denver, 2003). Critical incidents may involve events that can indeed
be classified under these headings; however, many critical incidents fall
outside these contexts and lead the author to question the eclecticness
and reverence with which the Michigan model is held. Critical incidents
may be major events in a person’s life or seemingly trivial that may have
a short- or long-term influence. Political scientists and politicians would
like to think that voters make buying decisions based on policy and the
 Part I: Academic Contributions 79

issues. Heath et al. argue that policy voting model can be rejected. Con-
sumer buying decisions are sometimes (usually) influenced by seem-
ingly trivial factor, e.g., colour, shape, brand, etc. Voters are influenced
in the same way by critical incidents and seemingly unimportant factors
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

to anyone but themselves.

A classification of critical incidents is induced from primary research
with 167 members of the electorate. The research was constructivist in
nature and entailed depth interviews and focus groups. The categories
of critical issues identified are:

1. A single political issue develops preference This issue may induce

short-term preference or cause longer-term preference even after
the issue is no longer relevant to the voter, i.e., a degree of loyalty
has developed (interviews 15.09.02)
2. A socialisation event, i.e., the voter recalls a specific event were
preference was adopted (interviews and focus groups)
3. Social circumstances, e.g., occupational changes, income varia-
tion, moved to a different social environment
4. Personal contact, e.g., meeting, knowing, or being obliged to the
candidate or party
5. Communication, e.g., regular newsheets, leaflets, media, hearsay
6. Relational connection: the vote seeks to rationalise why they fa-
vour a candidate or party over other product offerings, e.g., the
candidate name is similar to their own (interview 24.04.03); they
live in the same locality (interview 20.04.03); share similar back-
grounds (interviews and focus groups); the candidate has a dog,
the candidate or party is favoured for a variety of trivial reasons
(various interviews)

Further research is required to investigate the nature, types and fre-

quency of critical incidents that occur.
The relationship between voter and political party is unlikely to be
linear. The relationship between a consumer and consumer durable sup-
plier is complex and involves two thresholds. Figure 1 describes the Re-
lational Marketing Continuum that includes two thresholds. Above the
upper threshold (T1), customer satisfaction rises rapidly. Below the
lower threshold (T2), satisfaction falls. However, between these two
levels, loyalty is relatively stable, i.e., this demonstrates the non-linear-
ity in customer relationships (Coyne, 1989). If this non-linearity is
transferred to the electoral process the game of political marketing
needs to re-focus what it is doing and why. It highlights the need to es-
 80 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

FIGURE 1. The Relational Marketing Continuum

No Weak Positive Strong Advocate

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Transaction

T1 T2

Relationship Development

Relational Erosion

tablish where these thresholds are and as a consequence what action if

any can be beneficial. It also highlights that probably for the vast major-
ity of voters, political activities and communication will have a negligi-
ble effect as loyalty (party identification) lies between these two
thresholds. Political organisations attempt to build the required market
share to gaining a seat, i.e., the focus is gaining short-term sales not
long-term relationship building. With the increase in voter volatility or-
ganisations must consider that electoral gain is not just about conversion
of potential new supporters but first and foremost about developing voter
loyalty and commitment to transact.
Gronroos (1994) depicts the strength of relationship as a continuum.
If we accept this analogy we can adapt it to display the dynamism of re-
lationships and build in thresholds.

UNDERSTANDING EXCHANGE IN POLITICAL MARKETING

Exchange is the act of obtaining a desired product or service from

someone by offering something in return. Exchange is a process not an
event. Two parties enter an exchange process once negotiations begin;
this isn’t to say that a transaction must occur for exchange to have taken
place (Kotler, 1997). An elongated process may occur (sometimes over
years) before a voter chooses to transact with an organisation.
To achieve customer loyalty and retention the exchange must con-
tinue to be valued after the initial transaction. Kotler (1997) makes the
distinction between a transaction and a transfer. In a transfer A gives X
to B but receives nothing in return. Gifts, subsidies and charitable con-
 Part I: Academic Contributions 81

tributions appear to all be transfers; however, in reality the giver does

receive a benefit and thus a transaction has occurred. That is to say, a
transaction is a two-way exchange of value, a transfer is a one-way pro-
cess. Typically, the transferor expects to receive something in exchange
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

for ‘the gift,’ e.g., gratitude or seeing particular behaviour.

Voting can be purely a transaction or there can be a more meaningful
relationship. Ideally the process should be an exchange transaction
where value is maximised by both parties. However, can political par-
ties always create and receive mutually satisfying exchanges?

Examples

• the casting of a vote for a candidate who has no chance of winning

• the receiving of a vote by a candidate assured of victory
• the casting of a vote and feeling it will not effect or benefit the
individual
• not voting because it is seen as a waste of time (the voter believes
they are in a one-way transfer situation and withholds the value
that could have been exchanged)
• voting and not experiencing or perceiving any tangible benefit
• voting and not winning is a disappointing exchange
• non-voting and receiving good governance
• voting out of civic duty

Logically there must be some exchange relationship in the transac-

tion, even if it is just a sense of contributing or taking part. Only in ex-
treme circumstances where one computer handles a transaction
automatically with another computer could you say that no relation-
ship exists. Even in this scenario a relationship of trust existed to es-
tablish such an automated transaction. However an imbalance in the
benefit received in transactions is inevitable. This imbalance may be
reflected in:

• the decrease of voter turnout

• the rise in voter volatility
• the increased skepticism, disenchantment and disillusionment of
the public (Electoral Commission, 2002; Bannon, 2003)
• increase in negative campaigning
• reduced general interest in political matters
• increasingly combative media
 82 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

Bagozzi (1974) describes alternatives to win-win exchanges. ‘Mar-

keting transactions often involve the receipt or delivery of either an in-
jury (conflict) or no explicit entity by one or both parties to the
exchange,’ i.e., one side offers a benefit the other side is offering no
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

benefit. If we follow the analogue of relationships in exchange the no-

tion of one-way parental giving to a new baby seems to fit; however, the
benefit derived is from the giving in the first place. An imbalance in ex-
change appears to exist. Sheth et al. (1988) identify 3 problems with the
win-win model of exchange.

1. It tends to go against human nature driven by self-interest.

2. To create a win-win, all parties must know what they want and can
communicate this effectively.
3. It may not be technologically or economically possible to create a
market transaction that results in a surplus of value.

They conclude that realistic constraints do exist and are too nu-
merous for a utopian perspective of marketing to be taken. How-
ever this is not to say that we cannot set criteria for the distribution
of values as the normative goal of marketing and measure perfor-
mance of the parties, functions, institutions against this normative
standard.

Implementation of the Marketing Concept

Most writers in the field of marketing agree that implementation

of the Marketing Concept is more difficult than it sounds and that
many organisations are simply paying lip service to the concept

TABLE 3. The Changing Role of Marketing

Marketing Practice Action Analysis Culture Time Scale

Passive Marketing – – – –
Operational Marketing yes limited managerial months
Market-Driven Management yes MR# driven manipulative short/medium
Strategic Marketing yes systematic professional years
Relationship Marketing yes sociological altruistic long term

Source: Adapted from Lambin (2000)

 Part I: Academic Contributions 83

(Lambin, 2000; Baker, 2000; Jobber, 1995; Bradley, 1995; Payne,

1998; Dibb et al., 2000). The Marketing Concept is integrated dif-
ferently in organisations as demonstrated by Table 3 (Lambin,
2000).
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

MARKETING THEORY

Short-Term versus Long-Term

The Marketing Concept cannot differentiate between the short-term

needs and wants of customers and long-term welfare to the individual
and society in general (Bradley, 2000; Lambin, 2000; Jobber, 1995;
Wensley, 1990). Indeed what of the long-term well-being of an organi-
sation that maximises value in the short-term? This concept of lon-
ger-term value creation at the expense of not maximising short-term
profits is accepted as conventional wisdom. Short-term political gain at
the expense of long-term development may not sit comfortably to-
gether. Organisations are expected to behave and act responsibly and in
a manner that benefits society.
A Relationship Marketing approach by definition will be more con-
cerned with the long-term benefits and value in exchange whilst the Man-
agement School of Marketing will adopt a shorter-term perspective. This
dilemma of short-term versus long-term is faced by most organisations. If
the philosophy of the organisation is based on developing long-term
sustainable competitive advantage then the long-term approach must be
adopted and Relationship Marketing embraced.

MARKETING RESEARCH AND POLITICS

Research has shown that the use of consumer marketing research

will force an organisation into incremental product/service improve-
ments and short-term initiatives (Tauber, 1974; Kerby, 1972). This is
attributed to the lack of imagination of the average consumer in identi-
fying improvements in the product offering (Bradley, 2000) and ‘cus-
tomers difficulty in articulating needs beyond the realm of their own
experience’ (Jobber, 1995). The assumptions are that customers know
what they want, are well informed, are highly rational in satisfying their
needs and that consumer sovereignty prevails (Dickinson et al., 1986).
It is questionable that the general public are aware or interested in politi-
 84 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

cal policy. However, there appears to be superficial understanding of

politics, and judgements are usually made with little knowledge or un-
derstanding of the complexities involved.
Incremental improvements are less risky and easier to justify and im-
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

plement. Radical or quantum leaps in innovation originate in laborato-

ries or design rooms as a result of research or technological advances.
Seldom are innovations derived from the heads of the end user. In fact it
has been argued that the application of the Marketing Concept reduces
the emphasis on product improvements and over-emphasises innovation
(Hayes & Abernathy, 1980).
This of course may not be a limitation of the application of the Mar-
keting Concept but of current limitations in research techniques.
McGee and Spiro (1988) support this argument. They argue that this
limitation to true innovation is not the inadequacy of the Marketing
Concept but the fault of the implementation of new product develop-
ment and the over-dependence on customers as the sole source of new
ideas.
Innovation can take other forms apart from product/service innova-
tion. Process or system innovation is more likely to come from internal
reviews and benchmarking than customer research. Project SAPPHO
found that successful innovation derived from a well-based understand-
ing of user needs (Rothwell, 1974).

TRUST, COMMITMENT, AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Gronroos (1994) defines Relationship Marketing as a process of mu-

tually satisfying exchanges based on fulfillment of promises and based
on trust as an important factor.
Trust is generally regarded as central to political participation. How-
ever, can voters participate in an environment of low levels of trust?
Can the electorate have low levels of trust and still remain committed to
their preferred political party? Are political parties truly accountable to
the electorate?
Gronroos (1994) describes a continuum ranging on one side a dis-
crete transaction with low emotional content or commitment, to a strong
long-term, complex relationship characterised by deep trust and com-
mitment. It is this continuum and the stages along its scale that require
investigation. Social psychologists have written extensively about the
essential elements for relationships:
 Part I: Academic Contributions 85

• trust and honesty

• caring
• support
• loyalty
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

• giving help
• sorting out disagreements (valuing the relationship and protecting it)
• communication
• liking
• respect
• reciprocation (Duck, 1991; Argyle & Henderson, 1985; Gupta,
1983; Rusbult & Buunk, 1993; Barnes, 1994).

Many authors compare an exchange relationship to that of marriage

relationship (Tynan, 1997; Levitt, 1983; Dwyer et al., 1987; Perrien et
al., 1993; Buttle, 1995; Hunt & Morgan, 1995:20). This begs the obvi-
ous question, how much trust is needed in a marriage for the relation-
ship to be maintained? Commitment may continue whilst little trust
exists. Table 4 explores some of the types of political relationship that
might occur. These relationship categories have been developed from

TABLE 4. Typology of Political Relationships

Type of Characteristics
Relationship
Hyperactivist a party activist, married into the party for better or worse
Blood brother Blood ties, born into the party, treats their party as the family
The idealist strongly held political views developed usually in an individual’s early
life, this relationship is based on true love
The mutualist seeks mutual outcomes, but with no contract, kissing cousins
Loosely aligned relationship exists but not fully committed, the open marriage
Multi-relational a voter who has more than one preference, tart syndrome
The transient floating voter, one night stands
The hostage cannot find anyone better to have a relationship with, trapped lover
Nepotistic Seeks and gains favour from a party, the parasite, married for money
relationship
The blackmailed Coerced into supporting because the alternatives are worse, the voter
is in some way locked into the relationship, barriers to exit maybe too
high, the forced partner
 86 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

primary research based on how individuals described their relationship

with their preferred political party.
Rusbult and Buunk (1993) observed that there must be commitment
in a relationship. Commitment is defined as a subjective state involving
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

both cognitive and emotional components, and being long-term in na-

ture with a desire to maintain the relationship, i.e., it’s commitment that
is the cornerstone of the relationship, not trust. If you wish to under-
stand relationships, you must establish the basis of the commitment.
Barnes (1994) argues if you want to learn if a relationship can be estab-
lished or understand the strength of an existing relationship, simply ask
the customer. Duck (1987) suggests that the language used in describ-
ing relationships is important in understanding those relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Research in the future will attempt to aid the understanding of voter per-
ceptions, desires, behaviour and the nature of the longer-term relationship
in a more dynamic manner than ever before. Relationships are a fundamen-
tal asset of organisations, and political parties must firstly acknowledge this
fact and nurture and develop relationships. Crucially, relationships are pre-
dictive in behaviour and are less likely to volatile swings (Gordon, 1998).
With voter volatility increasing, enhancing a stable relationship with sup-
porters appears appealing. Adopting a relationship approach may be attrac-
tive but what if the customer doesn’t want a relationship? Can an
organisation operate in traditional and relationship marketing? Can a hy-
brid of the two paradigms co-exist? Many authors believe they can and that
there is a paradigm shift occurring in marketing (Pels, 1997; Baker, 2000;
Sheth et al., 2000; Gronroos, 1994). This philosophical shift is evident in all
types of marketing, even the marketing of mass consumer goods. The shift
is from marketing to masses of unknown customers to developing and
managing relationships with specified and known customers. An inte-
grated relational approach to political marketing may consist of:

• integrating the marketing philosophy into the whole organisation

• a ‘true’ customer focus
• the building of new relationships with voter groups
• maintaining and strengthening of existing relationships
• the co-existence of traditional and relationship marketing (Pels,
1996)
 Part I: Academic Contributions 87

• integration of the functions of research, product creation, political

communication and service delivery
• recognition of the inseparability of marketing and political process
• longer-term strategic planning
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

• operational analysis and evaluation

When will the Marketing Orientation truly begin? There is now a

general acceptance among marketing academics of the limitations of
tradition approaches to implementing marketing. The managerial ap-
proach to marketing concentrates on the seller and subordinates the cus-
tomer to a passive as opposed to a pivotal role (Gronroos, 1994). Whilst
the traditional approaches continue to have merit, the exploration of al-
ternative approaches seems attractive. The need to compete drives the
need for innovation. Most of the major authors in marketing now advo-
cate the pursuit of Relationship Marketing and as such this is the direc-
tion political marketing will also follow. ‘It is this trend that has led to
the recognition that long-term competitive success depends on building
relationships rather than seeing marketing management as responsible
for ensuring that seller gets the better of the buyer in a series of inde-
pendent transactions each of which must be profitable to the seller’
(Baker, 2000).
Over the next decade an integrated relational approach to the applica-
tion of marketing will probably commence with the integration of 4 ar-
eas of activity:

• more efficient direct and targeted communications

• more intense research orientated towards perceived customer needs
and types of relationships
• database marketing systems
• the development of a political relationship

REFERENCES
Anderson, P. (1982). ‘Marketing, Strategic Planning and the Theory of the Firm,’ Jour-
nal of Marketing, 46(2): 15-26.
Bagozzi, R. (1974). ‘Marketing as an Organised Behavioural System of Exchange,’
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38 Oct. pp. 77-81.
Baker, M. (2000) ‘Marketing Strategy and Management’ 3rd Edition Macmillan
Business pp. 461-462.
Bannon, D. (2000). ‘Political Marketing: Plotting the Development of Political Activ-
ity into an Evolutionary Framework.’ In Proceedings of the UK Political Studies
 88 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

Association Media and Political Group in conjunction with the UK Academy of

Marketing Special interest group on Political Marketing, Loughborough Univer-
sity, 2000.
Bannon, D. (2003). ‘Voting, Non-Voting and Consumer Buying Behaviour: Non-Voter Seg-
mentation and the Underlying Causes of Electoral Inactivity,’ Journal of Public Affairs, 3/2.
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Barnes, J. G. (1994). ‘Close to the Customer: But Is It a Relationship?’ Journal of Mar-

keting Management 10: 561-570.
Berry, L. L. (1983). ‘Relationship Marketing.’ In Berry, L. L., Shostack, G. L. and
Upah, G.D. (Eds.), ‘Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing’ American Mar-
keting Association, Chicago, pp. 25-28.
Bradley, F. (1995). ‘Marketing Management’ Prentice Hall pp. 64-71.
Brassington, F., and Pettitt, S. (1997) ‘Principles of Marketing’ Pitman Publishing pp. 157.
Brown, S. (1995) ‘Life Begins at 40? Further Thoughts on Marketing’s Mid-Life Cri-
sis,’ Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 13(1): 4-17.
Brown, S. (1996). ‘Art or Science?: Fifty Years of Marketing Debate,’ Journal of Mar-
keting Management, 12(4): 243-67.
Brown, S. (1998). ‘Postmodern Marketing 2’ Thomson, London.
Buttle, F. (1996). ‘Relationship Marketing: Theory and Practice,’ London: Paul Chap-
man Publishing.
Christopher, M., Payne, A., and Ballantyne, D. (1993). ‘Relationship Marketing’ B&H
The Marketing Series for the CIM, p. 4.
Denver, D. (1994). ‘Elections and Voting Behaviour in Britain’ (2nd ed.), Harvester-
Wheatsheaf, Sussex.
Dibb, S., Simkin, L., Pride, W., and Farrel, O. (4th ed.) (2001). ‘Marketing: Concepts
and Strategies’ pp. 14-15.
Dickinson, R., Herbst, A., and O’Shaughnessy, O. (1986). ‘Marketing Concept and
Customer Orientation,’ European Journal of Marketing, 20(10): 18-23.
Doyle, P. (1998). ‘Marketing Management and Strategy’ (2nd ed.) Prentice Hall Eu-
rope pp. 44.
Drummond, G., and Ensor, J. ‘Strategic Marketing’ Butterworth and Heinemann, pp. 6-7.
Duck, S. (1987). ‘Adding Apples and Oranges: Investigators Implicit Theories About
Relationships’ in Accounting foe Relationships, (Eds.) Burnett, R., McGee, P., and
Clarke, D. London,:Methuen.
Dwyer, F., Schurr, P., and Oh, S. (1987). ‘ Developing Buyer-Seller Relationships,’
Journal of Marketing, 51: 11-27.
Ford, D. (1980). ‘The Development of Buyer-Seller Relationships in Industrial Mar-
kets,’ European Journal of Marketing, 145/6: 339-354.
Gordon, I. (1998). ‘Relationship Marketing.’ John Wiley and Sons pp. 1-21.
Gronroos, C. (1994). ‘From the Marketing Mix to Relationship Marketing,’ Manage-
ment Decision, 32(2): 4-20.
Gronroos, C. (1997). ‘Value-Driven Relational Marketing: From Products to Re-
sources and Competencies’ Journal of Marketing Management, 13: 407-419.
Gummesson, E. (1995). ‘Broadening and Specifying Relationship Marketing,’ Asia-
Australian Marketing Journal, 1: 31-43.
Gummesson, E. (1997). ‘In Search of Marketing Equilibrium: Relationship Marketing
versus Hypercompetition,’ Journal of Marketing Management, 13: 421-430.
 Part I: Academic Contributions 89

Gummesson, E. (1997). ‘Relationship Marketing–The Emperor’s New Clothes or a

Paradigm Shift? Marketing and Research Today, Feb. pp. 53-60.
Gummesson, E. (1998). ‘Implementation Requires a Relational Marketing Paradigm,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26: 242-249.
Harker, M. (1999). ‘Relationship Marketing Defined? An Examination of Current Re-
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

lationship Marketing Definitions,’ Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 17: 1.

Hayes, R., and Abernathy, W. (1980). ‘ Managing Our Way to Economic Decline,’
Harvard Business Review, 58(4) 67-77.
Heath, A., Jowell, R., and Curtice, S. (1985). ‘How Britain Votes,’ London: Pergamam.
Hunt, S. (1976). ‘The Nature and Scope of Marketing,’ Journal of Marketing, 40: 17-28.
Hunt, S. (1984). ‘Should Marketing Adopt Relativism?’ in P. F. Anderson and M. J.
Ryan (Eds.), ‘Scientific Method in Marketing’ Chicago: American Marketing Associ-
ation, pp. 30-34.
Hunt, S. (1990). ‘Truth in Marketing Theory and Research,’ Journal of Marketing, 54: 1-15.
Hunt, S. (1992). ‘For Reason and Realism in Marketing,’ Journal of Marketing, 56:
89-102.
Hunt, S. (1983). ‘Marketing Theory: The Philosophy of Marketing Science’ Irwin Series.
Hunt, S. (1994). ‘On Rethinking Marketing: Our Discipline, Our Practice, Our Meth-
ods,’ European Journal of Marketing, 28(3): 13-25.
Hunt, S. (1997). ‘Competing Through Relationships: Grounding Relationship Market-
ing in Resource-Advantage Theory,’ Journal of Marketing Management, 13: 431-445.
Jobber, D. (1995). ‘Principles and Practice of Marketing’ pp. 599-602 McGraw.
Kerby, J. (1972). ‘The Marketing Concept: Suitable Guide to Product Strategy,’ Busi-
ness Quarterly, 37 (Summer), 31-35.
Kotler, P. (1975). ‘Overview of Political Candidate Marketing,’ Advances in Con-
sumer Research, 2: 761-769.
Kotler, P. (1994). ‘Reconceptualising Marketing: An Interview with Philip Kotler,’
European Management Journal, 12(4): 353-61.
Kotler, P. (1997). ‘Marketing Management’ 9th Ed. pp. 17-20.
Kotler, P., and Roberto, E. (1989). ‘Social Marketing: Strategies for Changing Public
Behaviour’ Free Press pp. 25.
Lambin, J-J. (2000). ‘Marketing driven Management’ Macmillan Business, pp. 17-23.
Lees-Marshnent, J. (2001). ‘Political Marketing and British Political Parties,’ Man-
chester University Press.
Levitt, T. (1983). ‘The Marketing Imagination’ New York: The Free Press.
McGee, L., and Spiro, R. (1988) ‘The Marketing Concept in Perspective,’ Business
Horizons, May-June, pp. 40-45.
Morgan, R. M. and Hunt, S. (1994). ‘The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship
Marketing,’ Journal of Marketing, 58: 20-38.
Payne, A., Christopher, M., Clark, M., and Peck, H. (1995). ‘Relationship Marketing
and Competitive Advantage, Butterworth-Heinermann, p. 4.
Payne, A. and Frow, P. (1997) ‘Relationship Marketing: Key Issues and Utilities Sec-
tor,’ Journal of Marketing Management, 13: 463-477.
Pels, J. (1996). ‘Traditional and Relationship Marketing Can Co-exist’ The BGH-
Motorola Research Case 1991-1995 in Sheth, J. and Paratiyar, A. (Eds.), Proceed-
ings, Research Conference, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
 90 JOURNAL OF POLITICAL MARKETING

Pels, J. (1997). ‘Actors’ Exchange Paradigm and Their Impact on the Choice of Mar-
keting Models’ in Falkenberg, A. and Rittenburg, T. (Eds.), proceedings of the 22nd
Macro Marketing Conference, Vol. 2, Bergen.
Pels, J. (1999). ‘Exchange Relationships in Consumer Markets?’ European Journal of
Marketing 33:(1/2) 19-37.
Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 01:17 01 June 2012

Perrien, J., Filiaterault, P., and Ricard, L. (1993). ‘The Implementation of Relationship
Marketing in Commercial Banking,’ Industrial Marketing Management, 22: 141-148.
Rothwell, R. (1974). SAPPHO Updated: Project SAPPHO Phase 2, Research Policy, 3.
Rusbult, C., and Buunk, B. (1993). ‘Commitment Processes in Close Relationships: An
Interdependence Analysis,’ Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 10: 175-204.
Shama, A. (1976) ‘Marketing the Political Candidate,’ Journal of the Academy of Mar-
keting Science, 4( 4): 771.
Shapiro, B. P., and Prosner, R. S. (1979). ‘Making the Major Sale,’ Harvard Business Re-
view, 59(6): 103-110.
Sheth, J., Gardner, D., and Garret, D. (1988). ‘Marketing Theory, Evolution, and Evalua-
tion’ pp. 19-22 & 162-173.
Sheth, J., and Parvatiyar, A. (2000). ‘The Evolution of Relationship Marketing’ in The
Handbook of Relationship Marketing.
Tauber, E. (1974). ‘How Marketing Research Discourages Major Innovations,’ Business
Horizons, 17 (June) 22-26.
Tynan, C. (1997). ‘A Review of the Marriage Analogy in Relationship Marketing,’
Journal of Marketing Management, 13: 695-703.
Vaile, R. (1949). ‘Towards a Theory of Marketing’ Journal of Marketing, 30: 30-5.
Van Waterscoot, W. ‘The Marketing Mix, Michael J. Baker (Ed.). Encyclopaedia of
Marketing. London: International Thomson Business Press, pp. 319-330.
Wensley, R. (1990). ‘The Voice of the Consumer? Specifications on the Limits to the
Marketing Analogy,’ European Journal of Marketing, 26(4): 34-47.

Submitted for Review: 11/16/03