Causal Linkages between Relationship Cultivation Strategies and Relationship Quality Outcomes

Abstract

This study used a survey method to examine how relationship cultivation strategies used by a membership organization affected members' perceptions of relationship quality outcomes with the organization. Links among six relationship cultivation strategies and four relationship quality outcomes provide new information concerning the function of cultivation effects. Overall, relationship cultivation strategies like access, positivity, sharing tasks, and assurances represent the proactive approaches that organizations may employ to cultivate or nurture quality relationships with their target publics.

Notes

¹The original term, relationship maintenance, was renamed to relationship cultivation to reflect the dynamic processes of relationship management suggested by J. E. Grunig (2006). Throughout this manuscript relationship cultivation is used instead of relationship maintenance.

²“State” is used throughout this manuscript as a substitute for the name of the state.

³Response rate = (complete + incomplete)/(total-nondelivered).

⁴The detailed procedures of the scale development for relationship cultivation strategies can be found at Ki, E.-J., & Hon, L. C. (2009). A measure of relationship cultivation strategies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21, 1–24.

⁵The detailed procedures for this scale development can be found at the following article. Ki, E.-J., & Hon, L. C. (2007). Reliability and validity of organization-public relationship measurement and linkages among relationship indicators on a membership organization. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84, 419–438.

⁶Exogenous variables are those that do not have causes specified in the model.

⁷Endogenous variables are those that have causes specified in the model. They are dependent variables here.

⁸As there is no demographic information about the member population of the state farm bureau, this study compared the sample of this study with the demographic data from United States Department of Agriculture-State Agriculture Statistics Service. There may be some differences between the demographic information from State Agricultural Statistics Service and the member population of State Farm Bureau. However, the demographic information used here is the most similar available to that of the population of the State Farm Bureau members.

⁹ The demographic information from United States Department of Agriculture does not provide educational information about the population. Therefore, comparison of demographic information in this category could not be provided.

¹⁰ A Cronbach's alpha coefficient of approximately .90 is excellent, around .80 is very good, and values around .70 are adequate (Kline, 2005).