Customer relationships with service personnel: do we measure closeness, quality or strength?
By L. Bove, Lester W. Johnson. 2001
178 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: General Health Professions, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/da5af75a0a389397c66a3a0d8e31e3185c887734
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
- Peter Totterdell
- David Holman
- Stavroula Spyropoulou
- Karen Niven
- Jochen Wirtz
- Constantine S. Katsikeas
- D. Wheatley
- Alicia A. Grandey
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
- Peter Totterdell
- Stavroula Spyropoulou
- Dionysis Skarmeas
- Karen Niven
- Jochen Wirtz
- Constantine S. Katsikeas
- David Holman
- Anna S. Mattila
In Social Psychology
- Stavroula Spyropoulou
- Dionysis Skarmeas
- Karen Niven
- Jochen Wirtz
- Constantine S. Katsikeas
- Peter Totterdell
- David Holman
Citations in the corpus
- Managing human resources for service excellence and cost effectiveness at Singapore Airlines (2008, background): “In addition, the strength of the customer-front-line employee relationship is often an important driver of customer loyalty (Bove and Johnson, 2001; Castro et al., 2004).”
- How to win friendship and trust by influencing people’s feelings: An investigation of interpersonal affect regulation and the quality of relationships (2012, background): “We focus on these qualities because, according to Bove and Johnson (2001), they represent the best indicators of two of the key characteristics of high-quality interpersonal connections; friendship is the best indicator of the closeness of a connection, while trust is the best indicator of…”
- Market and supplier characteristics driving distributor relationship quality in international marketing channels of industrial products (2008, background): “Although there has been considerable work on the conceptualization of relationship quality, the pertinent literature has not reached a general consensus on its constituents (Bove & Johnson, 2001; Naude & Buttle, 2000).”