Enabling relationship structures and relationship performance improvement: The moderating role of relational capital Marko Kohtamäki a, b , Jukka Vesalainen a , Stephan Henneberg c, ⁎, Peter Naudé c , Marc J. Ventresca d a University of Vaasa, Department of Management, Vaasa, PO Box 700, FI-65101, Finland b University of Oxford, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, UK c Manchester Business School, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 6PB, UK d University of Oxford, Saïd Business School, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, Park End Street, Oxford OX1 1HP, UK abstract article info Article history: Received 4 May 2011 Received in revised form 23 July 2012 Accepted 1 August 2012 Available online 22 August 2012 Keywords: Enabling structures Inter-organizational networks Business relationships Social capital Relationship-specific investments Based on data from 248 asymmetric subcontractor–customer relationships in Finland, this study analyzes the direct impact of relationship structures, relational capital, and the subcontractor's relationship-specific in- vestments on the improvement of operational relationship performance. In addition, the study investigates the moderating role of relational capital on the links between relationship structures, relationship-specific in- vestments, and relationship performance improvement. We found that both relational capital and relationship-specific investments directly affect the relationship performance improvement, while relation- ship structures do not. However, relational capital positively moderates the link between relationship struc- tures and relationship performance improvement by creating enabling structures. Thus, our findings contribute to the existing literature and discussion on enabling organizational and relationship structures by demonstrating how relational capital changes the role and impact of relationship structures. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Business relationships have become an important research topic in business marketing (Ford & Mouzas, 2010; Henneberg, Naudé, & Mouzas, 2010; Palmatier, Dant, Grewal, & Evans, 2006). In particular, well-performing business relationships are seen as important sources of competitive advantage for companies (Chang & Gotcher, 2007; Madhok & Tallman, 1998; Palmatier, Dant, & Grewal, 2007). The issue of relationship performance in business interactions is particularly rele- vant in times of increasing global competition and economic uncertainty (Jap, 1999; van der Vaart & van Donk, 2008). At the same time, compa- nies and the larger value-creating systems within which they are embed- ded have moved from standardized product strategies toward more customized and solution-oriented ones (Grönroos, 2008; Norman, 2001; Parolini, 1999; Pitelis, 2009; Vargo & Lusch, 2008). These trends have set growing demands on business relationships between compa- nies; better coordination, adaptation, and increased learning capabilities are needed in such business interactions (Möller & Törrönen, 2003; Selnes & Sallis, 2003). Joint learning and especially the improvement of operational performance are particularly important in long-term business relationships, where relationship-specific investments and high switching costs lock in business partners (Bensaou, 1999; Hines, 1995). In these situations, it is more effective to act jointly than to try to force or coerce exchange partners by using (or threatening to use) market exchange processes (Vickery, Jayaram, Droge, & Calantone, 2003). It is therefore pivotal for research in business re- lationships as well as for managerial practice to understand and analyze factors that facilitate the improvement of relationship performance. Prior studies on relationship marketing have shed light on the fac- tors that explain various relational outcomes. In their seminal study, Morgan and Hunt (1994) analyze both antecedents and effects of trust and commitment, suggesting these two constructs as central mediating variables in business-relationships. Palmatier et al. (2006) in their meta-analysis studied the factors that facilitate various relation- al outcomes, such as relationship loyalty, cooperation and seller perfor- mance, using trust, dependence, relationship investments and seller expertise (among others) as antecedent variables. They also looked into some important moderating variables, such as the type of the mar- ket as well as type of exchanges (service vs. product, and channel vs. direct). Their study highlights the mediating roles of trust, commitment, relationship satisfaction and quality. In addition, a number of studies highlight the importance of relationship-specific investments for devel- opment and performance of business relationships (Chang & Gotcher, 2007; Dyer & Hatch, 2006). While these studies highlight the role of trust, commitment and relationship-specific investments, they neglect the role of relationship structures, i.e. the structures that facilitate Industrial Marketing Management 41 (2012) 1298–1309 ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 161 3063463. E-mail addresses: marko.kohtamaki@uwasa.fi (M. Kohtamäki), jve@uwasa.fi (J. Vesalainen), stephan.henneberg@mbs.ac.uk (S. Henneberg), peter.naude@mbs.ac.uk (P. Naudé), marc.ventresca@sbs.ox.ac.uk (M.J. Ventresca). 0019-8501/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.08.001 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Industrial Marketing Management