A cross‐cultural comparison of individualism's moderating effect on bonding and commitment in banking relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe a cross‐cultural study which examined individualism's moderating effect on the relationship between bonding and commitment between banks and their corporate clients. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through surveys completed by corporate customers from 126 Canadian companies and 156 Indian companies. Multiple regression analysis was used to calculate relative effects of structural and social bond on commitment across the two samples. Hierarchical moderated regression analysis was used to examine individualism's moderating effect on the bonding‐commitment relationship. Findings The paper's findings indicate that social and structural bonding are both antecedent to commitment, but that social bonding is given higher importance in the low individualism Indian society, while structural bonding is more important in the high individualism Canadian society. Individualism moderates the relationship between both social and structural bonding and commitment. Practical implications Bank relationships are dependent upon specific cultural contexts in which buyers and sellers interact. The type of bonding relationship (e.g. social or structural) determines the strength of commitment. Bank managers must understand the proper emphasis to place on developing social connections versus business transactional relationships with clients in individualistic versus collective cultures. Originality/value This paper dramatizes the importance of understanding ways in which bonding relates to commitment, particularly when societal values vary and thus alter the relative importance of forms of bonding that generate commitment. Through empirical analyses, the paper demonstrates the moderating effect of individualism on the social bonding‐commitment and structural bonding‐commitment linkages in the context of an important service sector. To date, these relationships have not been explored in either the Indian or Canadian context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".