849954 sisus

exchange is mainly based on legal contractual commitments between the actors,
though non-contractual ties tend to be important as well. Furthermore, the chosen
technology affects the information exchange. The social side of exchange is
seen as a bundle of societal processes on different managerial levels. There are
four elements which are exchanged: product or service, information, financial
exchange, and social exchange (IMP Group 1982/1997, 9).
The ontological term exchange is not explicitly embedded in network thinking;
the concept stems from various other scientific disciplines. In a single economic
transaction exchange is understood by economic and/or business means. In the
network approach, however, the term is dedicated to a range of dimensions and
aspects. Besides economic and business exchange, social, information, technological,
and even political exchange are stressed. As such, the concept of exchange
can be associated with the concepts bonding or activity link, as explained
under the network approach (Olkkonen 1998, 506)
Particularly in the marketing literature the concept of exchange has mainly three
main dimensions: the exchange paradigm is established on discrete transactions,
on hierarchy (as explained in the TCA approach according to the Coase-
Williamson theory), or on relationalism (Olkkonen 1996, 140). Of these paradigms
the first is a simple and impersonal transaction mainly based on price.
The third has exchange relationships as the focal point in a series of transaction
episodes. This means that two dimensions (pure transaction-exchange relationship)
are the ends of a continuum.
Contrary to the above, Grönroos (1995) dislikes the use of the simple concept of
exchange because it gives quite a narrow view and is even contradictory by nature.
He distinguishes between two terms instead: exchange as a short-term notion
and relationship as a long-term notion ‘implying an association of two parties‘
(op.cit.,13). Furthermore, value can be even more important than exchange
and - as Grönroos (1997, 16) states - the value is ‘embedded in the exchange‘.
Accordingly, it can be assumed that it is possible to have value adding relationships
without transactions or even exchange. Hence, the value of a relationship
per se can be high enough for the actors; they can be defined as fundamental
resources. When relationships are established, investments as well as maintenance
are required in order to eliminate a possible dissolution.
As regards social exchange (e.g. in focal nets), both utilitarian and non-utilitarian
motives are presented by Cova (1994). Accordingly, a continuum of exchange
forms can be expressed, starting from pure exchange with discrete economic
exchange, to pure gift transactions in which no economic expectations from the
39