LA FALTA DE LA CORRECTA INFORMACIÓN SOBRE EL CONSUMO DE ALCOHOL

The evaluation of relationship quality, especially in the business context, is an on-going and complex process. Numerous actors can be involved in continually evaluating relationship quality and all of them using different criteria (see e.g. Halinen 1997; Kotsalo-Mustonen 1996; Holmlund 1997).

Although the actor can be either an individual or an unit (i.e. firm, department, purchasing unit etc.), the evaluation of relationship quality first and foremost happens on the individual level (see e.g. Kotsalo-Mustonen 1996, p. 64). The relationship quality is seen in this study as perceived relationship quality resulting from the evaluation process, and this perception can be held by a group of individuals (Holmlund 1997, p. 76- 77). Thus, it can be argued that the individuals make the evaluations, but these evaluations and the results of them (perceived quality) can be shared between individuals. Persons having same kind of background (e.g. working in the same department) are exposed to same kinds of stimuli, and accordingly their evaluations result in same kind of perceptions. The perceptions can be also discussed, and thus they may remind each other. The perception (i.e. perceived quality) held by several individuals is merely a collection of perceptions or a jointly accepted perception (Kotsalo- Mustonen 1996, p. 47). This means that if we want to analyze the relationship quality formation of a manufacturer-client relationship at corporate level we have to take into account relationship quality perceptions of all those people who are actively involved (and/or have been actively involved) in that relationship.

The analysis of relationship quality evaluation can be executed on different levels of the relationship. Wilson and Mummalaneni (1986) have suggested that at least three different levels can be identified. The levels are corporate, department and individual. In the evaluation of relationship quality a fourth level, relationship level can be added. The three first levels can be regarded as intraorganizational levels, and the fourth one as an interorganizational one. Depending on the relationship the role and content of these levels will, however, differ. On relationship and corporate level, the official relationship is developed, i.e. commercial and legal contracts are made. On individual level personal relationships are developed and information is exchanged. The department level co-ordinates the functions of the two other levels. By using this separation, the fact that evaluation first and foremost happens on the individual level can be forgotten. It is natural that the departments or the organizations themselves do not make

any evaluations which lead to perceptions. But it can be argued that the group of individuals in the organization, share a common view concerning the result of the evaluation.28

Of course, although the individuals have a key role in evaluating the relationship, evaluation can be discussed together with e.g. peers, superiors, actors from the other side of the relationship. Thus, the individual evaluation is affected by the evaluation made by others who are also involved in the relationship (see figures 4 and 5). This process also leads to the relationship quality perception on the department, corporate and relationship levels. It has to be noticed, however, that the frameworks developed in this study describe the evaluation from the perspective of the one individual.

Figure 4 illustrates the way from individual evaluations to the relationship quality perception on higher levels of organization (for the sake of simplicity department level is excluded). In order to form a relationship quality perception at corporate (i.e. intraorganizational), or relationship

(interorganizational) level, evaluations made at an individual level have to be discussed with, or otherwise informed to, others involved in the relationship. In figure 4, by the influence is meant these discussions and information between individuals involved in the relationship.

28 _{The separation into four levels (i.e. individual, department, corporate and relationship)} can be confusing also in the sense that the borders between the levels, especially between corporate and department level, are not in reality so clear (e.g. Järvinen 1996; Alajoutsjärvi 1996; see also Kotsalo-Mustonen 1996). If we also take into consideration the different organizational levels (Järvinen 1996), in which the interaction in reality happens, levels can be numerous and complicated.

Evaluation made by Individual A Evaluation made by Individual B Evaluation made by Individual C Evaluation made by Individual D RQ perception of Individual A RQ perception of Individual B RQ perception of Individual C RQ perception of Individual D RQ perception in Organization A RQ perception in Organization B RQ perception in Relationship

denotes possible influence

denotes temporal order and possible influence

Figure 4: The formation of organization/relationship level relationship quality perception.29

Figure 5 shows the effect of others on the relationship quality perception. Two actors of the relationship (A and B) are evaluating relationship quality. They both have made their own evaluations concerning a particular episode, and have formed their episode and relationship quality perceptions. These perceptions are affected, in addition, by their own evaluations based on their own experiences, the image they have about the perception that the other actors hold concerning episode and relationship quality.

Additionally, both episode and relationship quality perceptions are affected by the perception of the actors from outside the relationship which are perceived as important, i.e. the important others in the figure 5 (see more Holmlund and Kock 1995a,b; Järvelin and Lehtinen 1996; Holmlund 1997). These actors may include, for example, in channel context, those

29 _{It has to be noticed that also the Individuals A and D, A and C, and B and D discuss the} evaluations they have made, and thus affect each others perceptions. For simplicity’s sake the arrows describing this were not included in figure 4.

actors that are perceived to be the most powerful inside a certain channel (i.e. the important others in figure 5). The effect of these actors can be considered as a network effect on the relationship quality. Thus, it can be said that relationship quality is an evaluation which is embedded in a social system. B's perception of Relationship Quality perceived by A B's perception of perceived by A Episode Quality Episode Quality perceived by B perceived by B perceived by B perceived by B Relationship Quality Relationship Quality Relationship quality Episode Quality Episode Quality perceived by A perceived by A A's perception of A's perception of Perceptions of Important Others concerning Relationship Quality Perceptions of Important Others concerning Relationship Quality

Figure 5: Effects of others on relationship quality perception. (See Järvelin and Lehtinen 1996).

The way that the relationship quality evaluation is presented in figures 4 and 5 represents an ideal form of relationship quality evaluation, as both

partners evaluate the relationship together and form a shared perception of relationship quality. The minimum requirement for the relationship quality