When dependence no longer prevents exit: How power abuse signals, moral emotions, and exit preparedness drive B2B relationship termination

Abstract

Business-to-business (B2B) relationship researchers have long assumed that dependence and power asymmetry stabilize continuity and discourage relationship termination. This study extends and refines this view by developing and testing a framework that specifies temporally ordered relationships that identify conditions under which firms may terminate relationships despite ongoing dependence. Drawing on a two-wave longitudinal survey of boundary-spanning managers in B2B relationships, we model relationship termination as the outcome of interconnected interpretive, emotional, and strategic mechanisms. The results show that perceived power abuse signals evoke moral emotions, particularly anger and humiliation. However, we also find that only anger undermines relational trust, revealing an important asymmetry in the relational consequences of moral emotions. Over time, lower levels of relational trust increase the likelihood of relationship termination. Importantly, firms do not terminate relationships impulsively in response to emotional reactions; rather, exit preparedness moderates this relationship, such that declining trust leads to termination primarily when firms are strategically prepared to exit. By integrating moral emotions, relational trust, and exit preparedness, this study shows that the constraining effects of dependence are conditional on how firms interpret partner behavior and develop the capacity to act on relational reassessments.