A meta-analytic review of influence strategies in marketing channel relationships

Wesley James Johnston, Angelina Nhat Hanh Le, Julian Ming Sung Cheng

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

21 Scopus citations


Influence strategies (ISs) are a dominant topic in channel research. However, the literature lacks a consensus on when noncoercive and coercive strategies are more valuable or damaging to partnership quality, and their judicious applications remain unclear. Mainly based on social exchange perspectives, we review and conceptualize several contingency factors in the IS-partnership quality relationships in this metaanalysis. The moderating results generally suggest that the stronger positive impacts of noncoercive ISs result from a higher appreciation for supportive attempts, whereas the higher negative sensitivity to coercive ISs can be attributed to the low acceptability of forceful influences. We determine degrees of appreciation and acceptability by the perceived significance of benefits/damages, expectations, and tolerance levels for both strategies. Also, we synthesize and meta-analyze the key outcomes and antecedents of both strategies in an integrated framework. The direct-effect results indicate that the choice of effectively applying both strategies necessitates a tradeoff between goals and priorities.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)674-702
Number of pages29
JournalJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2018


  • Channels
  • Distribution
  • Influence strategies
  • Meta-analysis
  • Non-coercive/coercive
  • Power


Dive into the research topics of 'A meta-analytic review of influence strategies in marketing channel relationships'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this