I’ve been trolling the Internet for articles on relationship management and have been finding hundreds of them, all free, and most worth the price. While there are many many insights provided, they were usually on very high level. I could find few essays where the conclusions merited being included on this site.

When I broadened my search a bit, I came across an article that would appeal to business-to-business sellers and buyers. It’s by Erin Anderson and Sandy  D. Jap, it’s called The Dark Side of Close Relationships. It appeared in the Spring, 2005, issue of the Sloan Management Review.  I believe our readers should get their hands on it for a number of reasons, not least of which is that Anderson and Jap’s research included studying over 1200 business-to-business alliances.

Anderson and Jap argue that “Relationships that seem to be doing well are often the most vulnerable to the forces of destruction that are commonly building beneath the surface of the relationship. In other words, close relationships that seem the most stable can also be the most vulnerable to decline and destruction.  We refer to this phenomenon as the dark side of close relationships.” (hard not to think of Star Wars)

One of he ways this dark side manifests itself is when both firms “are confident and optimistic about their collaboration….Since no trouble can be seen on the horizon, there is no apparent reason to change course, strategy or tactics.” The problem here is the assumption that things are going well can deaden the sensitivity of one or both parties to the relationship, and they may act opportunistically. Anderson and Jap use a great example of an auto painter who had a long relationship with the brand automaker and starting using two coats instead of the required three.

This agrees with our findings that firms in a relationship tend to assume that when no noise comes from the partner, the relationship is doing very well. I remember being hired by the CEO of a huge transportation company who said to me, “I cannot believe that things are going as well with our large customers as my account managers say it is.” His insights were solid—the account managers were burying problems they thought they would be blamed for. By bringing new sensitivity to the key relationships, the company was able to forestall serious problems and even, in one case, the customer seeking another transportation company.

Anderson and Jap feel that the dark side of relationships occurs when firms focus on three mechanisms: The creation of immediate benefits [which can lessen the effects of long-term value]; the development of strong interpersonal relationships [which, if there are few of these can result in an account manager taking customers with his/her when they leave]; and unique processes and adaptations, where the firms invest in the relationship [these investments may not be reciprocated.]

How to keep the dark side from appearing in relationships? “Prevention,” Anderson and Jap say, “is the best medicine. Bolstering relationships--through regular evaluation, backup plans (having a back-up account manager, for example] and crisis management--helps create efficient. motivated and productive relationships….”

I do disagree with one conclusion that the authors suggest. They say that to keep a relationship fresh, one should change the people close to the relationship every two years or so. Assuming that he/she is effective, most accounts would scream bloody murder if their account manager should be replaced every two years.

The article is around ten pages, it is not written in over-academic prose and it supplies many examples which I cannot include, or this piece might have been as long as the Sloan essay. It’s worth your time. Check it out. JSperry