<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" specific-use="sps-1.8" xml:lang="en" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">bbr</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>BBR. Brazilian Business Review</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BBR, Braz. Bus. Rev.</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="epub">1807-734X</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Fucape Business School</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15728/bbr.2021.18.3.3</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">00003</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Article</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Effect of Personal Values Similarity on B2B Relationship Value</article-title>
				<trans-title-group xml:lang="pt">
					<trans-title>Efeito da Similaridade de Valores Pessoais no Valor do Relacionamento B2B</trans-title>
				</trans-title-group>

			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-9932-5520</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Manosso</surname>
						<given-names>Thayane</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-7599-0617</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Silva</surname>
						<given-names>Juliano</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Antoni</surname>
						<given-names>Verner</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Damacena</surname>
						<given-names>Claudio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade de Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade de Passo Fundo</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Passo Fundo</named-content>
                    <named-content content-type="state">RS</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff2">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, PR, Brasil</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade Estadual de Maringá</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Maringá</named-content>
                    <named-content content-type="state">PR</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff3">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul, Santa Cruz do Sul, RS, Brasil </institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Santa Cruz do Sul</named-content>
                    <named-content content-type="state">RS</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c1">
					<email>thay_thay3@hotmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c2">
					<email>jdomingues8@gmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c3">
					<email>antoni@upf.br</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c4">
					<email>damacena.claudio@gmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<fn fn-type="con" id="fn1">
					<label>AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION</label>
					<p> TM - Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Research, Methodology, Resources, Software and Writing of the original draft. JS - Data curation, Formal analysis, Research, Methodology, Software, Review and editing. VA - Project management, Supervision, Validation, Review and editing. CD - Supervision, Validation, Review and editing.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="conflict" id="fn3">
					<label>CONFLICTS OF INTEREST </label>
					<p> The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in the publication of this research.</p>
				</fn>
			</author-notes>
			<!--<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
				<day>30</day>
				<month>06</month>
				<year>2021</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">-->
				<pub-date pub-type="epub-ppub">
				<year>2021</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>18</volume>
			<issue>3</issue>
			<fpage>278</fpage>
			<lpage>296</lpage>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>08</day>
					<month>04</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="rev-recd">
					<day>29</day>
					<month>06</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>14</day>
					<month>07</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="pub">
					<day>15</day>
					<month>03</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xml:lang="en">
					<license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>ABSTRACT</title>
				<p>Similarity of values influences the relationship between companies. However, even if organizational decisions are made by people, the role played by similarity of personal values for those involved in the trade is little explored in the B2B context. Based on the similarity-attraction theory, we developed a model that explores the effect that similar of personal values between buyer and seller has in the B2B relationship value. Using a sample composed of 25 sellers and 317 buyers, we tested the hypotheses by means of polynomial regression with a response surface analysis. The results demonstrate that similarity of personal values, in regards to a social focus, between seller and buyer has a positive effect on the B2B relationship value. However, when individuals are more similar relation to personal values, the lower value the buyer perceives in the relationship with his provider. The paper also addresses implications for the theory, and B2B management theory. Relationship Implications.</p>
			</abstract>
			<trans-abstract xml:lang="pt">
				<title>RESUMO</title>
				<p>A similaridade de valores influencia o relacionamento entre empresas. No entanto, mesmo que as decisões organizacionais sejam tomadas por pessoas, o papel da similaridade entre valores pessoais dos envolvidos nas trocas comerciais é pouco explorado no contexto B2B. Com base na teoria da similaridade-atração, desenvolvemos um modelo que explora o efeito da similaridade entre valores pessoais de vendedores e compradores no valor do relacionamento B2B. Utilizando uma amostra composta por 25 vendedores e 317 compradores, testamos as hipóteses por meio de regressão polinomial com análise de superfície de resposta. Os resultados demonstram que a similaridade de valores pessoais de foco social entre vendedor-comprador tem efeito positivo no valor do relacionamento B2B, mas quanto mais similares os indivíduos em relação à valores de foco pessoal, menor o valor que o comprador percebe no relacionamento com seu fornecedor. Implicações para a teoria e para a gestão de relacionamentos B2B são encaminhadas.</p>
			</trans-abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords</title>
				<kwd>Values Similarity</kwd>
				<kwd>Personal Values</kwd>
				<kwd>B2B Relationship</kwd>
				<kwd>Relationship Value</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="pt">
				<title>Palavras-chave</title>
				<kwd>Similaridade de Valores</kwd>
				<kwd>Valores Pessoais</kwd>
				<kwd>Relacionamento B2B</kwd>
				<kwd>Valor do Relacionamento</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="2"/>
				<table-count count="3"/>
				<equation-count count="2"/>
				<ref-count count="41"/>
				<page-count count="19"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>1. Introduction</title>
			<p>Decisions in business-to-business (B2B) markets are made by people, not by organizations. The ultimate decision-making authority typically resides in a single individual or small executive group (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Grewal et al., 2015</xref>). Researchers engaged in studying the micro context of interorganizational relationships investigate how the characteristics of members of the organizations impact the functioning and results of the B2B relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Cropper et al., 2014</xref>).</p>
			<p>In general, the literature shows that individuals can have their own goals and experiences, which can affect their behavior and, consequently, influence relationships between companies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Manosso &amp; Antoni, 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>). Among the fundamentals often used to predict behaviors, trends and individual choices are examples of personal values (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>). Personal values are deep and powerful motivators of social actions, and represent an organizing principle, not just in personal life, but also in the organizations into which individuals are inserted (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz's (1992</xref>) structural approach to human values is shown as one of the main contemporary references on the topic, used in research to understand human behavior (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>).</p>
			<p>Just as personal values guide individuals' decisions, it is believed that another type of value determines the success of interorganizational relationships: the relationship value (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ulaga &amp; Eggert, 2006</xref>). From a unidirectional perspective, the value perceived by the customer is seen as a trade-off between benefits and sacrifices in relation to the relationship with a supplier, taking into account the alternative offers available (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Eggert &amp; Ulaga, 2002</xref>).</p>
			<p>The similarity-attraction theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>) indicates that, in order to achieve a higher level of value in the relationship, there must be significant similarity on the part of the partners, and that buyers can perceive different levels of value when evaluating the supplier as a whole, as well as an individual (e.g., manager, salesperson) that symbolizes this supplier company (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Lilien, 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al., 2011</xref>). Although this notion of the importance of similar values is ubiquitous in research at an individual level (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Edwards &amp; Cable, 2009</xref>), surprisingly, as far as we understand , research at an interorganizational level focuses only on the effects generated by the similarity between organizational values (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>), ignoring how personal values similarity between buyer andseller can impact the perceived relationship value (see <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>). </p>
			<p>We believe that this gap is worrying for two reasons. First, since decision making at the organizational level ultimately falls to the decision making of an individual (or small group of individuals), the scarcity of research on the impact of human values on the relationship between companies makes our view limited about B2B relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Zhu &amp; Chang, 2013</xref>). This limitation restricts the B2B relationship marketing literature from providing more accurate insights to improve relationships between companies. </p>
			<p>Second, there is still no consensus among researchers about the antecedents, moderators or consequences of the relationship value (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic &amp; Zabkar, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Hohenschwert &amp; Geiger, 2015</xref>), nor about the effect of similar values values similarity between individuals on the B2B relationship. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">He et al., 2018</xref>). As <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al. (2018</xref>, p. 280) highlights, &quot;a relatively small number of studies investigate the role of the relationship value in interorganizational relationships&quot;. In this sense, this research can shine a light on this theme, since our proposal seeks to investigate how similar values between individuals impacts the B2B relationship value. The literature provides consistent evidence that salespeople are crucial to creating value, as they are in a prominent position to understand customer value drivers, communicate the value propositions, and provide customer insights to the company (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Blocker et al., 2011</xref>). For <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), the role and relevance of those responsible for direct contact with the client justifies further examination. We present the research gap in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>.</p>
			<p>Given this scenario, the objective proposed by this study is to evaluate the effect of potential similarities in the personal values of sellers and buyers on the B2B relationship value. We collected data on human values on both sides of the dyad (sellers-buyers) to obtain the values similarity between both; and, subsequently, we evaluated the effect of this similarity on the value perceived by the buyer in the relationship with the supplier company. Data was obtained from 317 farmers (buyers) and 25 salespeople from a retailer of agricultural inputs, machines and implements (sellers). To provide robustness to our analysis, we used polynomial regression with a response surface analysis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). Although this analysis has a high degree of precision when performing simultaneous tests of effects, its use does not seem common in research regarding similar values, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>.</p>
			<p>This research contributes to the literature on B2B relationship marketing since the current literature considers only organizational values and not the personal values of the people involved in the commercial exchanges between companies. Therefore, researchers often say that it is beneficial to have a business partner with similar values. This study shows that, when it comes to personal relationships, it is not always advantageous for the seller to have similar personal values as their buyer, as this can cause friction in the relationship. Our study also contributes to the similarity-attraction theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>), by showing that only the similarity between socio-personal values of the individuals involved in B2B exchanges improves the B2B relationship. Personal values are likely to impair the perceived relationship value by generating conflict between the parties.</p>
			<p>As a practical contribution, we show how important it is to get to know buyers before providing a seller to serve them, and which traditional segmentation means can be improved, while also taking into account the profile of the buyer’s market and the sales team. In addition, the importance of the constant search for the creation and maintenance of the value that the buyer perceives in the relationship with their supplier is highlighted, and the crucial role that the seller has in this perception. </p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>2. Theoretical Background</title>
			<sec>
				<title>2.1. Personal values</title>
				<p>Human, individual, or personal values can be defined as &quot;a lasting belief that a specific mode of conduct or final state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or reverse mode of conduct or final state of existence&quot; (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Rokeach, 1973</xref>, p. 5). Values provide individuals with a kind of criterion for choosing and justifying actions and evaluating people and events (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz, 1992</xref>). For <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>), personal values are beliefs or ideas about what is desirable in a given context and situation. An individual's basic value system does not change easily and can be used to direct the activities of market-oriented companies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Schwartz, 1992</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Rokeach, 1973</xref>). </p>
				<p>
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz's (1992</xref>) theory of human values, based on <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Rokeach's (1973</xref>) original propositions, is considered to be the main contemporary reference on the subject. In order to expand the heuristic capacity and the predictive and explanatory power of the theory, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) presented a refined version, as well as a new instrument for measuring personal values, the PVQ-Refined (PVQ-RR), which divides the continuum into a finer set of nineteen values, which are conceptually distinct (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) The study by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>) translated and validated the PVQ-RR in the context of Brazilians, in addition to testing the usefulness and validity of the predictive power of the 19 values for behavior.</p>
				<p>
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) presented a refined theory of personal values in which two broader underlying categories were identified: social focus values (Self-transcendence and Conservation), which indicate concern for results for others or for established institutions; and personal focus values (Openness to change and Self-promotion), which reflect concern for results for oneself (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Although personal values are reliable predictors of human behavior, and organizational decisions are made by people, individual values are hardly incorporated into B2B relationship research.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2.2. Similarity-attraction theory and Values Similarity</title>
				<p>When postulating the similarity-attraction theory, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne (1971</xref>) proposes the paradigm that higher levels of similarity between individuals generates positive affection and increased attraction and harmony. The more similar, the greater the preference for similar parts and the desire to interact with these parts is more frequent (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>).</p>
				<p>When explaining the mechanisms of the similarity-attraction theory, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cable and Edwards (2004</xref>) highlight that people have difficulty in dealing with what is different and, for this reason, they tend to approach and prefer individuals who judge and act in a similar way to them. Thus, the similarity between individuals tends to be beneficial in the relations between companies, since the greater the similarity between the people representing the organizations, the better the resolution of problems together and the higher the satisfaction with the decisions made by the other (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Wilson et al., 2016</xref>). On the contrary, dissimilarity alienates people, making them more prone to conflicts and social distancing, which can impair the performance of companies involved in B2B relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cable &amp; Edwards, 2004</xref>).</p>
				<p>The benefits of values similarity occur because of a supplementary adjustment in which two individuals “share similar fundamental characteristics” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Verquer et al., 2003</xref>, p. 474). The values similarity between partners tends to generate positive perceptions of the relationship, because both share common aspects of cognitive processing and common methods of interpreting events, which helps to reduce uncertainty and conflict in their interactions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Ostroff et al., 2005</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Palmatier et al. (2006</xref>) highlights that similarity can be measured between individuals or between organizations. Given the importance of values for organizations, the literature commonly examined the relationship between organizational values and employee values (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Arieli et al., 2020</xref>), values between customers and brands (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Krystallis et al., 2012</xref>) and the impact of the congruence of leaders and their team with their values on the performance of organizations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al., 2017</xref>). Although research shows that similar values between members of a commercial exchange has a positive effect on the relationship between buyer and supplier (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>), the potential effects of personal values similarity on B2B exchanges is still little explored (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>).</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2.3. Relationship Value</title>
				<p>Value, from the customer's perspective, can be defined as the “trade-off between the multiple benefits and sacrifices of a supplier's offer, as perceived by the main decision makers in the customer's organization, and taking into account the offers available from alternative suppliers” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Eggert &amp; Ulaga, 2002</xref>). Customer value surveys followed the transition of the marketing discipline, adopting the definition of “relationship value”, previously known as and still commonly called customer value or perceived value (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Eggert et al., 2006</xref>).</p>
				<p>According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ulaga and Eggert (2006</xref>), the relationship value has a significant and positive effect on customer satisfaction, which, consequently, increases the likelihood of business retention and positive word of mouth. Likewise, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic and Zabkar (2015</xref>) state that the perception of value in the relationship with a supplier helps to form attitudinal and behavioral results for the customer and influences the performance of the supplier, which are reflections of the customer's loyalty and repurchase. As for <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), people seem to perceive greater value in a relationship when they evaluate an individual, and not an organization. </p>
				<p>Some authors have used, among other constructs, relationship value to measure the success and quality of B2B relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic &amp; Zabkar, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>). Even so, it is believed that value has not received its due attention in B2B relationship research, considering that providing value to the customer is essential to creating and maintaining long-term relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ulaga &amp; Eggert, 2006</xref>). As previously highlighted, this research seeks to fill the gap in the B2B relationship marketing literature by examining the effects of the personal values similarity between business partners on the relationship value, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t1">
						<label>Table 1.</label>
						<caption>
							<title><italic>Literature related to the personal values similarity in B2B contexts and the relationship value</italic></title>
						</caption>
						<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Authors</th>
									<th align="center">Values Similarity between...</th>
									<th align="center">B2B</th>
									<th align="center">Human Values</th>
									<th align="center">Relationship Value</th>
									<th align="center">Polynomial Regression and ASR</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Zhang &amp; Bloemer (2008</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Consumers and Brand</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas (2012</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Channel Companies</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Sabbir &amp; Nazrul (2014</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Clients and Organization</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al. (2017</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Employees and Leaders</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang (2017</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Suppliers and Distributors</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">He et al. (2018</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Buyers and Brand</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">
										<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al. (2019</xref>)</td>
									<td align="left">Employees and Leaders</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">This study</td>
									<td align="left">Sellers and Buyers</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
									<td align="center">✓</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN1">
								<p><bold><italic>Source:</italic></bold> Developed by the authors.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2.4. Theoretical model and research hypotheses
				</title>
				<p>First, according to the similarity-attraction paradigm (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>) we suggest that values of social focus (Self-transcendence and Conservation) positively impact the relationship value.</p>
				<p>Specifically, the Self-transcendence dimension indicates the change of one's interests for the benefit of others, and includes values such as concern for the well-being, loyalty, and dependence of people with whom frequent personal contact is maintained, as well as values of tolerance and social equality (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz, 1992</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). These values, inherent to Self-transcendence, highlight an individual's preference for privileging social focus values, in which collective aspects are important (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Thus, considering a B2B relationship in which the seller and buyer report high self-transcendence, we expect the buyer to evaluate their relationship with the seller as being valuable. Formally:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p> • <bold>H1.</bold>
 <italic>In similarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when the Buyer's Self-Transcendence is high and the Seller's Self-Transcendence is high.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>It is also important to distinguish between the two scenarios of dissimilarity between the values, that is, when the buyer's Self-transcendence is greater than that of the seller or vice versa. If the Self-transcendence values are dissimilar, it is expected that the relationship value will be higher when the buyer's self-transcendence is high and that of the seller is low.</p>
				<p>In the scenario where the buyer has greater Self-transcendence than the seller, the buyer's willingness to develop loyalty and dependency in relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) is likely to make this buyer realize that the relationship with the seller is valuable, even if the seller is not reciprocal in respect to Self-transcendence. However, if the seller expresses high values of Self-transcendence in the relationship with the buyer, but the buyer does not share those same values (i.e., low Self-transcendence of the buyer), the buyer is likely to not validate his or her prospects of value in the interaction with the seller, reducing his/her perception of relationship value. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p> • <bold>H2.</bold>
 <italic>In dissimilarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when the Buyer's Self-Transcendence is high and the Seller's Self-Transcendence is low.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>Conservation is also a dimension of social focus, which represents self-restraint, order, and avoiding changes. It encompasses personal values that represent an individual's sense of belonging, the importance of having others care about him/her, as well as values of concern for social security, compliance with rules and obligations, courtesy, respect, doing what is right, and respecting traditions, for example (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Therefore, in situations of similarity, conservative buyers are expected to perceive greater value in the relationship if the seller also has high Conservation values. Formally:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p> • <bold>H3.</bold>
 <italic>In similarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when the Buyer's level of Conservation is high and the Seller's level of Conservation is high.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>In dissimilarity scenarios, we expect the relationship value to be higher when the buyer has a high level of Conservation and the seller has a low level of Conservation. In line with the arguments described in the previous hypothesis, we believe that the buyer's Conservation values make him or her want to maintain the status quo of the relationship with the seller, regardless of whether the seller has a low sense of Conservation. However, if the seller shows high Conservation and the buyer low Conservation, these buyers may not fulfill their perspectives on the relationship, reducing their perception of its value. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p> • <bold>H4.</bold>
 <italic>In dissimilarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when the Buyer's level of Conservation is high and the Seller's level of Conservation is low.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>Second, personal focus values involve an individual's concern about the results for themselves (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Thus, individuals with high levels of personal values tend to value relationships that provide opportunities for self-improvement, that is, relationships that improve or reinforce self-concept (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Sirgy, 1982</xref>). </p>
				<p>Specifically, the Openness to Change reflects the readiness for new ideas, actions, and experiences. Autonomy to think and act, search for individual purposes, curiosity, own decisions, yearning for novelties and emotions, taking risks, and pleasure are some of the values related to Openness to change (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). These personal motivations are the result of the need to express self-concept (i.e., individuality). For this reason, we believe that the similarity-attraction paradigm does not apply to personal focus values (i.e., Openness to change and Self-promotion). In a relationship in which buyers and sellers are highly open to change, the need to express individuality can generate conflict in the relationship, since both seek to be competent and skilled in meeting other people (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Lalwani &amp; Shavitt, 2009</xref>). Thus, in situations where both the buyer and the seller are highly open to change, the buyer is likely to report that there is less value in the relationship. Formally:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p>• <bold>H5.</bold>
 <italic>In similarity situations, the Relationship value will be lower when the Openness to change in the buyer is high and the Openness to change in the seller is high.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>In dissimilarity situations, we believe that the relationship value will be greater when the openness to change of the buyer is high and that of the seller is low. Buyers with great openness to change seek relationships that favor experiences to express their individuality (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) and sellers with low openness to change do not offer a point of conflict for the self-improvement of the buyer. However, in situations where the seller has a high level and the buyer has a low level of Openness to change, the buyer can interpret that the search for self-improvement of the seller during the relationship is a sign of a threat, since people with high openness to change can be narcissistic or individualistic (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Campbell et al., 2000</xref>). Thus, if the values of Openness to change are dissimilar, it is expected that the relationship value will be greater when the openness to change of the buyer is high and the seller is low. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p>• <bold>H6.</bold>
 <italic>In dissimilarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when the Openness to change in the buyer is high and the Openness to change in the seller is low.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>The second dimension of personal focus is Self-Promotion. Values that involve having power over things and over others, prestige, material wealth, social influence, status, being someone that is admired, concern for one´s public image, success (according to society's standards) and demonstration of skills represent Self-promotion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>).</p>
				<p>In line with the Openness to change argument, we believe that in situations of similarity between Self-promotion in the relationship of buyer and seller, the relationship value will be perceived as less valuable to the buyer. Thus, the search to express power, prestige, status and admiration of people with high Self-promotion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) can generate conflict in the relationship if these motivations are simultaneous for buyers and sellers, that is, when both present high Self-promotion. Formally:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p>• <bold>H7.</bold>
 <italic>In similarity situations, the Relationship value will be lower when the Buyer's level of Self-promotion is high and the Seller's level of Self-promotion is high.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>In dissimilarity scenarios, if the Buyer's Self-promotion is high and the Seller is low, the seller will not offer a sign of possible conflict with the buyer's motivations, therefore, it will not negatively affect the relationship value. However, if the seller’s Self-promotion is high, his motivation to express power, status, prestige and admiration can send a sign of arrogance to the buyer who has low Self-promotion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Campbell et al., 2000</xref>), reducing the buyer's perceived relationship value. Based on this argument, we propose the following hypothesis:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="bullet">
						<list-item>
							<p>• <bold>H8.</bold>
 <italic>In dissimilarity situations, the Relationship value will be higher when Self-promotion in the buyer is high and the Openness to change in the seller is low.</italic></p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>
					<fig id="f1">
						<label><italic>Figure 1.</italic></label>
						<caption>
							<title>Proposed theoretical model</title>
						</caption>
						<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-18-03-278-gf1.jpg"/>
						<attrib><bold><italic>Source:</italic></bold> Developed by the authors.</attrib>
					</fig>
				</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="methods">
			<title>3. Method</title>
			<p><italic>Data Collection.</italic> We applied our research to a retailer of agricultural inputs, machines, and implements, which has six branches located in the southern region of Brazil. To analyze the personal values similarity, data was collected from both sides of the dyad: from the sellers and the buyers (farmers). The sample selection of salespeople was random, and all 27 salespeople answered the questionnaire. The sample of buyers was non-random for convenience, and collected by the salespeople themselves, who received adequate training to perform it. In total, 342 farmers answered the questionnaires. After the treatment of missing data and atypical observations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Hair et al., 2009</xref>), the final samples were composed of 317 farmers and 25 salespeople.</p>
			<p><italic>Measurement of the variables.</italic> We used the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) <italic>Personal Values</italic> scale, the PVQ-RR, translated and validated in Brazil by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>), which consists of 57 descriptions in which the respondent indicates his resemblance to the individual described on a six-point <italic>Likert</italic> scale, being 1 “It doesn't resemble me at all” and 6 “It resembles me a lot”. We used the <italic>Relationship Value</italic> scale by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), composed of 5 items and a six-point <italic>Likert</italic> scale, where 1 corresponds to “I totally disagree” and 6 to “I totally agree”. </p>
			<p><italic>Control variables.</italic> Knowing that farmers have personal and organizational characteristics (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Prado &amp; Martinelli, 2018</xref>), we collected data on age, education level, respondent's position, the size (in hectares) of the farm, and the number of employees on the rural property.</p>
			<p><italic>Statistical analysis.</italic> As the relationship and personal value scales are already validated in Brazil and in the B2B context, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for both scales. Personal values were verified through multidimensional scaling (MDS), as recommended by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>). The variables also passed through the sieve of normality and multicollinearity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Hair et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
			<p>To evaluate the effect of personal values similarity on the relationship value, the polynomial regression technique with a response surface analysis (ASR) was used (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). Polynomial regression with response surface testing allows for comparing the effects of two variables in four different scenarios in the same equation: (1) X and Y high, (2) X and Y low, (3) X high and Y low, and (4) X low and Y high. This procedure prevents the use of different scores, since difference scores generate misleading results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). Details of the equations are described in <xref ref-type="app" rid="app1">Appendix A</xref>. For an in-depth review and the analysis procedures, see <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Faia et al. (2019</xref>).</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results">
			<title>4. Results</title>
			<p>In the sample of salespeople, less than 20% have been with the company for more than 8 years and the overall average working time is 6.32 years (σ = 6.81). The average age was 38 years old (σ =11.4) and the dominant level of education was the completion of high school. The hierarchy of the dimensions of personal values in the sample of salespeople followed this order: Conservation (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
5.02); Self-transcendence (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4.86); Openness to Changes (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4.61); and Self-promotion (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4.11).</p>
			<p>As for the organizational characteristics of buyers, only one case (.3%) had more than 10 employees and the average area of rural properties was 243.38 hectares (ha). As for personal characteristics, 59% of respondents were partners/owners of the farms and 33% were the children of the owners. The average general age was 41.32 years old (σ =13.02), and 79% had completed high school. </p>
			<p>Regarding the validation of the constructs, the Relationship Value scale obtained AVE = .674 and CR = .839, which configures the convergent validity of the model, and MSV = .616, validating the discrimination of factors. The model's adjustment measures were also proven to be adequate: CMIN/DF = 2.636 (<italic>p</italic> = .005); CFI = .995; GFI = .992; RMSEA = .72; and α = .825.</p>
			<p>The validation of personal values followed the model presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>), where the authors performed the CFAs of each dimension separately. This procedure provides better indexes of adjustment in situations where there is a wide set of latent factors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>), as is the case of the PVQ-RR. The adjustment coefficients obtained from the resulting models, by type of second order are shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Table 2</xref>.</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t2">
					<label>Table 2.</label>
					<caption>
						<title><italic>Adjustment coefficients of personal values, by second order types</italic></title>
					</caption>
					<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="center"> </th>
								<th align="center">Self-transcendence</th>
								<th align="center">Conservation</th>
								<th align="center">Openness to Change</th>
								<th align="center">Self-promotion</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">CMIN/DF</td>
								<td align="center">2.907</td>
								<td align="center">2.622</td>
								<td align="center">2.245</td>
								<td align="center">2.683</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">CFI</td>
								<td align="center">.906</td>
								<td align="center">.900</td>
								<td align="center">.954</td>
								<td align="center">.930</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">GFI</td>
								<td align="center">.914</td>
								<td align="center">.913</td>
								<td align="center">.955</td>
								<td align="center">.939</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">RMSEA</td>
								<td align="center">.075</td>
								<td align="center">.069</td>
								<td align="center">.060</td>
								<td align="center">.070</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">α</td>
								<td align="center">.847</td>
								<td align="center">.865</td>
								<td align="center">.779</td>
								<td align="center">.778</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN2">
							<p><bold><italic>Source:</italic></bold> Developed by the authors.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>The MDS is, in turn, configured the ordering of the 19 values, with a stress index-1 = .125, DAF = .985 and TCC = .992. The adjustment coefficients obtained from the resulting models, by type of second order, presented CFI&gt; .90, GFI&gt; .90 and RMSEA &lt; .08.</p>
			<p>
				<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Table 2</xref> shows the results of the regressions, where the dependent variable is the Relationship value and the independent variables are the similarity and dissimilarity between each of the four dimensions of personal values (Self-transcendence, Conservation, Openness to change and Self-promotion) separately. First, the data shows that no control variable directly affects the relationship value. In other words, the relationship value does not vary according to the buyer's age, education, title, size of property, or number of employees. </p>
			<p>In the analysis of direct effects, we show that the relationship value is positively influenced by the Self-transcendence (β = .40; p &lt; .01), Conservation (β = .38; p &lt; .01) and Openness to change (β =.26; p &lt; .01) of the buyer. Furthermore, we show that two dimensions of the seller's personal values, Openness to change (β = -.14; p &lt; .01) and Self-promotion (β = -.39; p &lt; .01) negatively impact the relationship value. Although we have not elaborated hypotheses of direct effects, these positive effects of the buyer and negative effects of the seller are consistent with our argument of social focus values and personal focus.</p>
			<p>To ascertain the similarity effects, we can see in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>, the slope coefficients (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> ) and the curvature coefficients (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ) of the symmetry line (X = Y). To ascertain the dissimilarity effects, we can see the slope coefficients (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> ) and the curvature coefficients (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> ) of the asymmetry line (X = Y).</p>
			<p>As shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>, we found that there is a positive and significant slope along the similarity line on the response surface for Self-transcendence (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : .34; p &lt; .01) and Conservation (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : .30; p &lt;.01). Therefore, when the values of Self-transcendence and Conservation are high for both buyers and sellers, the relationship value perceived by the buyer will be greater, <bold>supporting hypotheses H</bold>
 <sub>1</sub>
 <bold>and H</bold>
 <sub>3</sub>
 <bold>.</bold> When analyzing the symmetry line, we also found that there is a negative and significant slope on the response surface for Self-promotion (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : -.32; p &lt; .01) and a non-significant inclination for Openness to change (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : .11; <italic>ns</italic>) in the relationship value. <bold>These results allow for the rejection of H</bold>
 <sub>5</sub> 
 <bold>and supports H</bold>
 <sub>7</sub>
 <bold>.</bold></p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t3">
					<label>Table 3.</label>
					<caption>
						<title><italic>Results of the polynomial regressions by dimension of personal value</italic></title>
					</caption>
					<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
                            <col/>
                            <col/>
                            <col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="left" rowspan="2"> </th>
								<th align="center" colspan="4">Dependent variable = Relationship Value </th>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<th align="center">Self-transcendence</th>
								<th align="center">Conservation</th>
								<th align="center">Openness to change</th>
								<th align="center">Self-promotion </th>
							</tr>
    					</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="left"><bold>Variable</bold></td>
								<td align="center">β <bold>(t-value)</bold></td>
								<td align="center">β <bold>(t-value)</bold></td>
								<td align="center">β <bold>(t-value)</bold></td>
								<td align="center">β <bold>(t-value)</bold></td>
                            </tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Constant</td>
								<td align="center">-.07 (-.94)</td>
								<td align="center">-.02 (-.29)</td>
								<td align="center">-.06 (-.76)</td>
								<td align="center">-.05 (-.60)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Personal values of the buyers (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.40 (6.17)<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.38 (5.55)<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.26 (4.13)<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.08 (1.05)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Personal values of the sellers (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">-.07 (-1.19)</td>
								<td align="center">-.08 (-1.38)</td>
								<td align="center">-.14 (-2.67)<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">-.39 (-5.99)<sup>**</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify"><italic>Personal values of the buyers</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic> 
</sup> (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.01 (.16)</td>
								<td align="center">.03 (.75)</td>
								<td align="center">.03 (.83)</td>
								<td align="center">.08 (1.23)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Personal values of the sellers <italic>x</italic> Personal values of the buyers (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.06 (.99)</td>
								<td align="center">.06 (.92)</td>
								<td align="center">.10 (1.99)<sup>*</sup></td>
								<td align="center">-.03 (-.46)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify"><italic>Personal values of the sellers</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic> 
</sup> (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.06 (1.46)</td>
								<td align="center">-.01 (-.3)</td>
								<td align="center">.01 (.23)</td>
								<td align="center">-.11 (-2.31)<sup>*</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify"><bold>Control variables</bold></td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Buyer's age</td>
								<td align="center">-.06 (-.90)</td>
								<td align="center">-.09 (-1.39)</td>
								<td align="center">-.03 (-.52)</td>
								<td align="center">-.06 (-.91)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Buyer's education</td>
								<td align="center">.04 (.61)</td>
								<td align="center">.05 (.85)</td>
								<td align="center">.02 (.27)</td>
								<td align="center">.04 (.56)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Buyer's position</td>
								<td align="center">-.05 (-.90)</td>
								<td align="center">-.07 (-1.19)</td>
								<td align="center">-.05 (-.89)</td>
								<td align="center">-.04 (-.78)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Property size</td>
								<td align="center">.08 (1.34)</td>
								<td align="center">.03 (.56)</td>
								<td align="center">.06 (.96)</td>
								<td align="center">.05 (.76)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Number of employees</td>
								<td align="center">.01 (-.08)</td>
								<td align="center">.02 (.38)</td>
								<td align="center">.02 (.30)</td>
								<td align="center">.06 (1.03)</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify"><bold>Response surface test</bold></td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Symmetry line X = Y</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Inclination (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.34<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.30<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.11</td>
								<td align="center">-.32<sup>**</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Curvature (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.13<sup>*</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.08</td>
								<td align="center">.14<sup>*</sup></td>
								<td align="center">-.06</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Asymmetry line X = Y</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Inclination (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">.47<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.46<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.40<sup>**</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.50<sup>**</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Curvature (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> )</td>
								<td align="center">-.01</td>
								<td align="center">-.05</td>
								<td align="center">-.06</td>
								<td align="center">.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">VIF<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.56</td>
								<td align="center">2.20</td>
								<td align="center">1.47</td>
								<td align="center">3.77</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left"><italic>R</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sup></td>
								<td align="center">.18</td>
								<td align="center">.15</td>
								<td align="center">.08</td>
								<td align="center">.14</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN3">
							<p><bold>
 <italic>Note</italic>.</bold> β = Nonstandard regression coefficient; ª highest VIF found in the model. N = 317 dyads.</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN4">
                            <p><bold><italic>a</italic></bold>
 <sub>
     <bold><italic>1</italic></bold>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ), where <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> is the beta coefficient for buyers’ personal values and <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> is the beta coefficient for sellers' personal values. <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ), where <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> is the beta coefficient for the buyers' personal values squared, <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> is the beta coefficient for the product of the multiplication between the buyers' personal values and the sellers' personal values and <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> is the beta coefficient for the sellers' personal values squared. <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> - <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ). <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> - <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ).</p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN5">
                            <p><bold><italic>**p</italic></bold> &lt;.01; *p &lt; .05</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>The asymmetry line in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref> shows the effects of the dissimilarity between the personal values of the buyers and the personal values of the sellers. The asymmetry line shows that Self-transcendence (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> :.46; p &lt;.01) and Conservation (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> :.47; p &lt; .01), Open to changes (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : .40; p &lt; .01) and Self-promotion (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : .50; p &lt; .01) have positive and significant effects on the relationship value. As the asymmetry line <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> is a product of the subtraction of the coefficients <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> (personal values of buyers) and <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> (personal values of sellers), the positive values indicate the dissimilarity in scenarios where the personal values of the buyers are higher than the personal values of the sellers. These results <bold>support hypotheses H</bold>
 <sub>2</sub>
 <bold>, H</bold>
 <sub>4</sub>
 <bold>, H</bold>
 <sub>6</sub>
 <bold>e H</bold>
 <sub>8</sub>.</p>
			<p>The response surfaces in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 2</xref> illustrate the level of the dependent variable (relationship value) on the response surface when two independent variables are combined (personal values of buyers [X] and personal values of sellers [Y]). The graphs are generated with the non-standard regression coefficients (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>) and the equations described in <xref ref-type="app" rid="app1">Appendix A</xref>.</p>
			<p>
				<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 2A</xref> shows that the symmetry line where the combination between the buyer and seller’s self-transcendence is high, the Z axis (relationship value) is also high. However, when analyzing the dissimilarity along the asymmetry line, it is noted that the relationship value is greater when the Buyer's Self-transcendence is high and the Seller's Self-transcendence is low. The effects of the symmetry and asymmetry line in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 2B</xref> are similar to <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 2A</xref>, which indicates that the similarity between the Conservation values of buyers and sellers has a positive effect on the relationship value, but when there is dissimilarity, the relationship value is higher when the Conservation of the buyer is high and the seller is low. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure 2D</xref> shows that on the symmetry line, where the combination between the buyer and seller’s self-promotion are high, the Z axis (relationship value) is low. However, when analyzing the dissimilarity along the asymmetry line, it is noted that the relationship value is greater when the Buyer's Self-promotion is high and the Seller's Self-promotion is low.</p>
			<p>
				<fig id="f2">
					<label><italic>Figure 2.</italic></label>
					<caption>
						<title>Response Surface Graphs</title>
					</caption>
					<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-18-03-278-gf2.jpg"/>
                    <attrib><bold><italic>Source:</italic></bold> Developed by the authors.</attrib>
				</fig>
			</p>
			<p>In addition, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figures 2A</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">2C</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref> show a U-shaped curvilinear effect for the symmetry line (i.e., similarity) between Self-transcendence values (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> :.13; p &lt; .05), and Open to changes (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> :.14; p &lt; .05) of the buyer and seller. These results indicate a marginal effect not described in our hypotheses. The congruence value literature provides a plausible explanation for these unexpected results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>). The congruence of values in which two individuals have strong beliefs (for example, they consider an extremely important or extremely unimportant value) is more strongly related to the behavioral results of these individuals than the congruence in values in which these individuals have moderate beliefs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Edwards &amp; Cable, 2009</xref>). This indicates that, for a similarity of value between partners to have an effect on people's actions, only similarities of values at their ends will indicate whether the people involved in the relationship will act according to their values (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>).</p>
			<p>Thus, for the similarity of Self-transcendence and Openness to change to have an effect on the relationship value, these values must be extremely high on both sides (buyer and seller attach great importance to these values) or extremely low (buyer and seller attribute little importance to these values). A moderate expression of these values will not allow for further adjustment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Verquer et al., 2003</xref>), as it will not provide clarity that both share common aspects of cognitive processing and common methods of interpreting events (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Ostroff et al., 2005</xref>). As a result, the effects of similarity between Self-transcendence and Openness to changes at moderate levels impair the perceived value of the buyer's relationship.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="discussion">
			<title>5. Discussion</title>
			<p>The similarity and dissimilarity of the personal values of the seller-buyer dyad operate differently in the opposite dimensions of a social focus (Self-transcendence and Conservation) and those of a personal focus (Openness to Change and Self-Promotion). </p>
			<p>The dimensions of social focus include values of tolerance and understanding, of respect and acceptance, of concern for the well-being of people who are close and of the stability and harmony of relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). When the seller and the buyer engage in a commercial exchange, and have these same values values, the perception that the benefits are more than the sacrifices involved (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Eggert et al., 2006</xref>) is generated with the buyers. The dimensions of social focus also include values of protection, preservation, commitment, fulfillment of expectations and security (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Therefore, even in the absence of these personal social values on the part of the seller, the valorization of collaborative relationships (Self-transcendence) and maintenance of the status quo (Conservation) on the part of the buyer (scenario in which the values of the buyers are high and of the sellers are low), the relationship value will be perceived as being valuable to the buyer. However, when the seller tries to create a relationship with a buyer that does not have a social focus (a scenario in which the buyers' values are low and sellers are high), the seller may end up wearing down the commercial and personal life between them, leaving the buyer uncomfortable and pressured, resulting in a lower perception of the benefits of the relationship.</p>
			<p>In contrast to the dimensions of a social focus, personal focus values reflect the concern for oneself. Self-promotion values are more related to self-satisfaction than to the relationship as a whole (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). This reflects the results found, that the similarity between the buyer and seller’s self-promotion affects the relationship value in a negative way. This indicates that, when a seller has values that indicate a search for status, prestige, and personal success (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>), the value perceived by the buyer tends to be lower. That is, the dispute for autonomy, the need to control people and resources, and the need to demonstrate competence (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>), manifested by the seller compromises the relationship, which reflects in a decrease of value perceived by the buyer. However, when only the buyer has high Self-promotion, and the seller does not express a belief in this value, there will probably be no conflicts in the relationship, generating a positive perception of value in the relationship.</p>
			<p>The results, therefore, corroborate in part with the conclusions that similarity is beneficial for theperceived value of a B2B relationship, and confirms the thesis that the dissimilarity of personal values is unfavorable to the value of the B2B relationship when the seller expresses strong belief in personal values but the buyer does not share the same belief.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>6. Conclusions</title>
			<sec>
				<title>6.1. Theoretical contributions</title>
				<p>We contribute to the literature in two main aspects. First, in relation to B2B relationship marketing, we analyze how the values of individuals involved in commercial exchanges can influence perceived relationship value between companies. Previous studies have already investigated the role of other relationship variables (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">De Toni et al., 2015</xref>) or personal interactions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Hohenschwert &amp; Geiger, 2015</xref>) in the value of relationships in B2B markets. But research that investigates the effect of personal values on the perceived value of a relationship between companies is scarce. Furthermore, in the marketing literature, similarity is usually studied by the similarity between organizational values in the investigations of relationships between companies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>), or by the alignment between the values of employees and leaders (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>) and between organizational values and employee values in intra-organizational research (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>). As far as we know, our research is the first to assess the relationship between companies from the perspective of the similarity between the personal values of the individuals involved in these relationships.</p>
				<p>Second, we shine a light on the similarity-attraction theory. Using the grounded theory of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) that there is a distinction between social focus values and personal focus values, and that these dimensions are positioned in opposite sides of the continuum (i.e., an individual almost never holds opposite values), we argue that the idea that similarity always promotes harmony in relationships (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Zhang &amp; Bloemer, 2008</xref>) can be mistaken, at least in the B2B context. Our results demonstrate that, just as social focus values can contribute to a greater perception of value in the relationship, there is also a contrary side where thesimilarity between personal focus values can harm the perceived value, and possibly other relationship variables.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>6.2. Managerial implications</title>
				<p>The empirical importance of the study is related to the establishment of interpersonal relationships with a view to the greater performance of companies. In the surveyed dyad, conservative farmers (i.e., a predominant resale audience) avoid changes, and prefer to feel safe and stable in their relationships, which can impact the resale performance, since a salesperson's average working time is only a little longer than six years. If the buyer has social focus values, the values of the salesperson are less important, since both similarity and dissimilarity are beneficial to the Relationship value. But, if the buyer has a more personal focus, the more opposite the salespeople can be, the greater the perceived value of the farmers in regards to the relationship. Therefore, sales teams can be adjusted in relation to the values of their buyers, either through the replacement of current salespeople, or in the selection of new salespeople.</p>
				<p>In general, companies that supply products and services in B2B markets must be attentive to the personal characteristics of salespeople, not only to similarities in relation to their buyers, but also to the dissimilarities. These results have primary implications for the concepts of strategic marketing planning, from the structuring of the company to the selection of the target market to be served and the form of segmentation adopted.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>6.3. Limitations and Future Research</title>
				<p>The results cannot be generalized and, therefore, other studies must be developed with the variables and the method used, in order to consolidate the proposed theory. As farmers have both personal and organizational characteristics, the effects of Personal Values on the relationship can vary according to the researched dyad.</p>
				<p>An interesting form of research would be to understand the impact or mediation of the values similarity in the relationship between the Relationship value and other performance variables, which was not incorporated in this research due to the complexity of the current model. Future research can also test what the effect of the similarity of opposite value dimensions on the relationship value, such as, for example, the impact that similarity between the seller's Self-transcendence and the Buyer's Self-promotion has, for example, on the relationship value.</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ref-list>
			<title>REFERENCES</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation>Alejandro, T. B., Souza, D. V., Boles, J. S., Ribeiro, Á. H. P., &amp; Monteiro, P. R. R. (2011). The outcome of company and account manager relationship quality on loyalty, relationship value and performance. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>40</italic>(1), 36-43. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Alejandro</surname>
							<given-names>T. B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Souza</surname>
							<given-names>D. V.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Boles</surname>
							<given-names>J. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ribeiro</surname>
							<given-names>Á. H. P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Monteiro</surname>
							<given-names>P. R. R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>The outcome of company and account manager relationship quality on loyalty, relationship value and performance</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>40</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>36</fpage>
					<lpage>43</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.09.008</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation>Arieli, S., Sagiv, L., &amp; Roccas, S. (2020). Values at work: The impact of personal values in organisations. <italic>Applied Psychology</italic>, <italic>69</italic>(2), 230-275. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12181">https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12181</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Arieli</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sagiv</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Roccas</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2020</year>
					<article-title>Values at work: The impact of personal values in organisations</article-title>
					<source>Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>69</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>230</fpage>
					<lpage>275</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12181">https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12181</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation>Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, M., &amp; Zabkar, V. (2015). The external effect of marketing accountability in business relationships: Exploring the role of customer perceived value. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>46</italic>, 83-97. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.03.002">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.03.002</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Arslanagic-Kalajdzic</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zabkar</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<article-title>The external effect of marketing accountability in business relationships: Exploring the role of customer perceived value</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>46</volume>
					<fpage>83</fpage>
					<lpage>97</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.03.002">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.03.002</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation>Blocker, C. P., Flint, D. J., Myers, M. B., &amp; Slater, S. F. (2011). Proactive customer orientation and its role for creating customer value in global markets. <italic>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</italic>, <italic>39</italic>(2), 216-233. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0202-9">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0202-9</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Blocker</surname>
							<given-names>C. P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Flint</surname>
							<given-names>D. J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Myers</surname>
							<given-names>M. B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Slater</surname>
							<given-names>S. F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Proactive customer orientation and its role for creating customer value in global markets</article-title>
					<source>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</source>
					<volume>39</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>216</fpage>
					<lpage>233</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0202-9">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0202-9</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation>Byrne, D. (1971). <italic>The Attraction paradigm</italic>. Academic Press: New York.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Byrne</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1971</year>
					<source>The Attraction paradigm</source>
					<publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation>Byza, O. A. U., Dörr, S. L., Schuh, S. C., &amp; Maier, G. W. (2019). When leaders and followers match: The impact of objective value congruence, value extremity, and empowerment on employee commitment and job satisfaction. <italic>Journal of Business Ethics</italic>, <italic>158</italic>(4), 1097-1112. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3748-3">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3748-3</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Byza</surname>
							<given-names>O. A. U.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dörr</surname>
							<given-names>S. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Schuh</surname>
							<given-names>S. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Maier</surname>
							<given-names>G. W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2019</year>
					<article-title>When leaders and followers match: The impact of objective value congruence, value extremity, and empowerment on employee commitment and job satisfaction</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Ethics</source>
					<volume>158</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>1097</fpage>
					<lpage>1112</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3748-3">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3748-3</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation>Cable, D. M., &amp; Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: a theoretical and empirical integration. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, <italic>89</italic>(5), 822. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822">https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Cable</surname>
							<given-names>D. M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Edwards</surname>
							<given-names>J. R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2004</year>
					<article-title>Complementary and supplementary fit: a theoretical and empirical integration</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>89</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<size units="pages">822</size>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822">https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation>Campbell, W. K., Reeder, G. D., Sedikides, C., &amp; Elliot, A. J. (2000). Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies. <italic>Journal of Research in Personality</italic>, <italic>34</italic>(3), 329-347. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282">https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Campbell</surname>
							<given-names>W. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Reeder</surname>
							<given-names>G. D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sedikides</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Elliot</surname>
							<given-names>A. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2000</year>
					<article-title>Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Research in Personality</source>
					<volume>34</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>329</fpage>
					<lpage>347</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282">https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation>Cropper, S., Ebers, M., Huxham, C., &amp; Ring, P. S. (2014). <italic>Handbook de relações interorganizacionais da Oxford</italic>. Porto Alegre: Bookman. </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Cropper</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ebers</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Huxham</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ring</surname>
							<given-names>P. S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2014</year>
					<source>Handbook de relações interorganizacionais da Oxford</source>
					<publisher-loc>Porto Alegre</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Bookman</publisher-name>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation>De Toni, D., Milan, G. S., Costa, G. C., &amp; Larentis, F. (2015). Existing relational practice between a manufacturer and its distributors and the perception of the relationship value in the dyad. <italic>Brasilian Business Review</italic>, <italic>12</italic>(6), 48-71. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2015.12.6.3">https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2015.12.6.3</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>De Toni</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Milan</surname>
							<given-names>G. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Costa</surname>
							<given-names>G. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Larentis</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<article-title>Existing relational practice between a manufacturer and its distributors and the perception of the relationship value in the dyad</article-title>
					<source>Brasilian Business Review</source>
					<volume>12</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>48</fpage>
					<lpage>71</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2015.12.6.3">https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2015.12.6.3</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation>Edwards, J.R., &amp; Cable, D.M. (2009). The value of value congruence. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, <italic>94</italic>(3), 654-677. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014891">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014891</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Edwards</surname>
							<given-names>J.R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Cable</surname>
							<given-names>D.M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2009</year>
					<article-title>The value of value congruence</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>94</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>654</fpage>
					<lpage>677</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014891">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014891</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation>Edwards, J. R., &amp; Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. <italic>Academy of Management Journal</italic>, <italic>36</italic>(6), 1577-1613. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5465/256822">https://doi.org/10.5465/256822</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Edwards</surname>
							<given-names>J. R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Parry</surname>
							<given-names>M. E.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1993</year>
					<article-title>On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Journal</source>
					<volume>36</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>1577</fpage>
					<lpage>1613</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5465/256822">https://doi.org/10.5465/256822</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation>Eggert, A., &amp; Ulaga, W. (2002). Customer perceived value: A substitute for satisfaction in business markets? <italic>Journal of Business &amp; Industrial Marketing</italic>, <italic>17</italic>(2/3), 107-118. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620210419754">https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620210419754</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Eggert</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ulaga</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2002</year>
					<article-title>Customer perceived value: A substitute for satisfaction in business markets?</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business &amp; Industrial Marketing</source>
					<volume>17</volume>
					<issue>2/3</issue>
					<fpage>107</fpage>
					<lpage>118</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620210419754">https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620210419754</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation>Eggert, A., Ulaga, W., &amp; Schultz, F. (2006). Value creation in the relationship life cycle: A quasi-longitudinal analysis. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>35</italic>(1), 20-27. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.07.003">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.07.003</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Eggert</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ulaga</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Schultz</surname>
							<given-names>F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2006</year>
					<article-title>Value creation in the relationship life cycle: A quasi-longitudinal analysis</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>20</fpage>
					<lpage>27</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.07.003">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.07.003</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation>Faia, V.S., Negreiros, L.F., Vieira, V.A. (2019). <italic>Polynomial Regression and Response Surface Analysis using SPSS</italic>. Publisher: Autor. ISBN: 9781703428353</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Faia</surname>
							<given-names>V.S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Negreiros</surname>
							<given-names>L.F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vieira</surname>
							<given-names>V.A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2019</year>
					<source>Polynomial Regression and Response Surface Analysis using SPSS</source>
					<comment>Publisher: Autor</comment>
					<isbn>9781703428353</isbn>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation>Grewal, R., G. L., Bharadwaj, S., Jindal, P., Kayande, U., Lusch, R. F., Mantrala, M., Palmatier, R. W., Rindfleisch, A., Scheer, L. K., Spekman, R., &amp; Sridhar, S. (2015). Business-to-Business Buying: Challenges and Opportunities. <italic>Customer Needs and Solutions</italic>, 2(3), 193-208. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0040-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0040-5</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Grewal</surname>
							<given-names>R., G. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bharadwaj</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Jindal</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kayande</surname>
							<given-names>U.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lusch</surname>
							<given-names>R. F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mantrala</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Palmatier</surname>
							<given-names>R. W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rindfleisch</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Scheer</surname>
							<given-names>L. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Spekman</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sridhar</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<article-title>Business-to-Business Buying: Challenges and Opportunities</article-title>
					<source>Customer Needs and Solutions</source>
					<volume>2</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>193</fpage>
					<lpage>208</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0040-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-0040-5</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation>Hair, J. F, Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., &amp; Tatham, R. L. (2009). <italic>Multivariate data analysis</italic> (6a ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Hair</surname>
							<given-names>J. F</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Black</surname>
							<given-names>W. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Babin</surname>
							<given-names>B. J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Anderson</surname>
							<given-names>R. E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Tatham</surname>
							<given-names>R. L.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2009</year>
					<source>Multivariate data analysis</source>
					<edition>6</edition>
					<publisher-loc>Upper Saddle River</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Pearson Prentice Hall</publisher-name>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation>He, J., Huang, H., &amp; Wu, W. (2018). Influence of interfirm brand values congruence on relationship qualities in B2B contexts. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>72</italic>, 161-173. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.015">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.015</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>He</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Huang</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Wu</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Influence of interfirm brand values congruence on relationship qualities in B2B contexts</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>72</volume>
					<fpage>161</fpage>
					<lpage>173</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.015">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.015</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation>Hohenschwert, L., &amp; Geiger, S. (2015). Interpersonal influence strategies in complex B2B sales and the socio-cognitive construction of relationship value. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>49</italic>, 139-150. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.027">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.027</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Hohenschwert</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Geiger</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<article-title>Interpersonal influence strategies in complex B2B sales and the socio-cognitive construction of relationship value</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>49</volume>
					<fpage>139</fpage>
					<lpage>150</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.027">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.027</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation>Kashyap, V., &amp; Sivadas, E. (2012). An exploratory examination of shared values in channel relationships. <italic>Journal of Business Research</italic>, <italic>65</italic>(5), 586-593. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.008">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.008</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Kashyap</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sivadas</surname>
							<given-names>E.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2012</year>
					<article-title>An exploratory examination of shared values in channel relationships</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Research</source>
					<volume>65</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>586</fpage>
					<lpage>593</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.008">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.008</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation>Krystallis, A., Vassallo, M., &amp; Chryssohoidis, G. (2012). The usefulness of Schwartz’s ‘Values Theory’in understanding consumer behaviour towards differentiated products. <italic>Journal of Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>28</italic>(11-12), 1438-1463. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.715091">https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.715091</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Krystallis</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vassallo</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Chryssohoidis</surname>
							<given-names>G.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2012</year>
					<article-title>The usefulness of Schwartz’s ‘Values Theory’in understanding consumer behaviour towards differentiated products</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>28</volume>
					<issue>11-12</issue>
					<fpage>1438</fpage>
					<lpage>1463</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.715091">https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.715091</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation>Lalwani, A. K., &amp; Shavitt, S. (2009). The “me” I claim to be: Cultural self-construal elicits self-presentational goal pursuit. <italic>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</italic>, <italic>97</italic>(1), 88. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014100">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014100</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Lalwani</surname>
							<given-names>A. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Shavitt</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2009</year>
					<article-title>The “me” I claim to be: Cultural self-construal elicits self-presentational goal pursuit</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</source>
					<volume>97</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<size units="pages">88</size>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014100">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014100</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<mixed-citation>Lilien, G. L. (2016). The B2B Knowledge Gap. <italic>International Journal of Research in Marketing</italic>, <italic>33</italic>(3), 543-556. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.01.003">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.01.003</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Lilien</surname>
							<given-names>G. L.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>The B2B Knowledge Gap</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Research in Marketing</source>
					<volume>33</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>543</fpage>
					<lpage>556</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.01.003">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.01.003</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<mixed-citation>Manosso, T. W. S., &amp; Antoni, V. L. (2018). Da congruência de valor entre boundary spanners à satisfação em mercados B2B: uma perspectiva teórica. <italic>Revista Alcance</italic>, 25(2), 194-210.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Manosso</surname>
							<given-names>T. W. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Antoni</surname>
							<given-names>V. L.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Da congruência de valor entre boundary spanners à satisfação em mercados B2B: uma perspectiva teórica</article-title>
					<source>Revista Alcance</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>194</fpage>
					<lpage>210</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B25">
				<mixed-citation>Ostroff, C., Shin, Y., &amp; Kinicki, A. J. (2005). Multiple perspectives of congruence: Relationships between value congruence and employee attitudes. <italic>Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior</italic>, <italic>26</italic>(6), 591-623. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/job.333">https://doi.org/10.1002/job.333</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Ostroff</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Shin</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kinicki</surname>
							<given-names>A. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2005</year>
					<article-title>Multiple perspectives of congruence: Relationships between value congruence and employee attitudes</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior</source>
					<volume>26</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>591</fpage>
					<lpage>623</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/job.333">https://doi.org/10.1002/job.333</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B26">
				<mixed-citation>Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., Grewal, D., &amp; Evans, K. R. (2006). Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: a meta-analysis. <italic>Journal of Marketing</italic>, <italic>70</italic>, 136-153. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.136">https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.136</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Palmatier</surname>
							<given-names>R. W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dant</surname>
							<given-names>R. P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Grewal</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Evans</surname>
							<given-names>K. R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2006</year>
					<article-title>Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: a meta-analysis</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>70</volume>
					<fpage>136</fpage>
					<lpage>153</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.136">https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.136</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B27">
				<mixed-citation>Prado, L. S., &amp; Martinelli, D. P. (2018). Analysis of negotiation strategies between buyers and sellers: an applied study on crop protection products distribution. <italic>RAUSP Management Journal</italic>, <italic>53</italic>(2), 225-240. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rauspm.2018.01.001">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rauspm.2018.01.001</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Prado</surname>
							<given-names>L. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Martinelli</surname>
							<given-names>D. P.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Analysis of negotiation strategies between buyers and sellers: an applied study on crop protection products distribution</article-title>
					<source>RAUSP Management Journal</source>
					<volume>53</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>225</fpage>
					<lpage>240</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rauspm.2018.01.001">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rauspm.2018.01.001</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B28">
				<mixed-citation>Qu, Y. E., Dasborough, M. T., Zhou, M., &amp; Todorova, G. (2017). Should authentic leaders value power? A study of leaders’ values and perceived value congruence. <italic>Journal of Business Ethics</italic>, 1-18. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3617-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3617-0</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Qu</surname>
							<given-names>Y. E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dasborough</surname>
							<given-names>M. T.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zhou</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Todorova</surname>
							<given-names>G.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>Should authentic leaders value power? A study of leaders’ values and perceived value congruence</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Ethics</source>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>18</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3617-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3617-0</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B29">
				<mixed-citation>Rokeach, M. (1973). <italic>The nature of human values</italic>. New York: Free Press.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Rokeach</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1973</year>
					<source>The nature of human values</source>
					<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Free Press</publisher-name>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B30">
				<mixed-citation>Sabbir, R.M. &amp; Nazrul, I. (2014). Value congruence and consumer’s satisfaction towards online banking - the mediation role of affective commitment. <italic>Management &amp; Marketing</italic>, 9(3), 347-358.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Sabbir</surname>
							<given-names>R.M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nazrul</surname>
							<given-names>I.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2014</year>
					<article-title>Value congruence and consumer’s satisfaction towards online banking - the mediation role of affective commitment</article-title>
					<source>Management &amp; Marketing</source>
					<volume>9</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>347</fpage>
					<lpage>358</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B31">
				<mixed-citation>Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. <italic>Advances in experimental social Psychology</italic>, <italic>25</italic>(1), 1-65. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Schwartz</surname>
							<given-names>S. H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1992</year>
					<article-title>Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries</article-title>
					<source>Advances in experimental social Psychology</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>65</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B32">
				<mixed-citation>Schwartz, S. H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Davidov, E., Fischer, R., Beierlein, C., Ramos, A., Verkasalo, M., Lönnqvist, J.-E., Demirutku, K., Dirilen-Gumus, O., &amp; Konty, M. (2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. <italic>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</italic>, <italic>103</italic>(4), 663-688. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029393">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029393</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Schwartz</surname>
							<given-names>S. H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Cieciuch</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vecchione</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Davidov</surname>
							<given-names>E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Fischer</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Beierlein</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ramos</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Verkasalo</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lönnqvist</surname>
							<given-names>J.-E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Demirutku</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dirilen-Gumus</surname>
							<given-names>O.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Konty</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2012</year>
					<article-title>Refining the theory of basic individual values</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</source>
					<volume>103</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>663</fpage>
					<lpage>688</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029393">https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029393</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B33">
				<mixed-citation>Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. <italic>Journal of Consumer Research</italic>, 9(3), 287-300. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1086/208924">https://doi.org/10.1086/208924</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Sirgy</surname>
							<given-names>M. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1982</year>
					<article-title>Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Consumer Research</source>
					<volume>9</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>287</fpage>
					<lpage>300</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1086/208924">https://doi.org/10.1086/208924</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B34">
				<mixed-citation>Skarmeas, D., Saridakis, C., &amp; Leonidou, C. N. (2018). Examining relationship value in cross-border business relationships: A comparison between correlational and configurational approaches. <italic>Journal of Business Research</italic>, <italic>89</italic>, 280-286. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.039">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.039</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Skarmeas</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Saridakis</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Leonidou</surname>
							<given-names>C. N.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Examining relationship value in cross-border business relationships: A comparison between correlational and configurational approaches</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Research</source>
					<volume>89</volume>
					<fpage>280</fpage>
					<lpage>286</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.039">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.039</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B35">
				<mixed-citation>Torres, C. V., Schwartz, S. H., &amp; Nascimento, T. G. (2016). A Teoria de Valores Refinada: associações com comportamento e evidências de validade discriminante e preditiva. <italic>Psicologia USP</italic>, <italic>27</italic>(2), 341-356. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-656420150045">http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-656420150045</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Torres</surname>
							<given-names>C. V.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Schwartz</surname>
							<given-names>S. H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nascimento</surname>
							<given-names>T. G.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>A Teoria de Valores Refinada: associações com comportamento e evidências de validade discriminante e preditiva</article-title>
					<source>Psicologia USP</source>
					<volume>27</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>341</fpage>
					<lpage>356</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-656420150045">http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-656420150045</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B36">
				<mixed-citation>Ulaga, W., &amp; Eggert, A. (2006). Relationship value and relationship quality: Broadening the nomological network of business-to-business relationships. <italic>European Journal of Marketing</italic>, <italic>40</italic>(3-4), 311-327. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075">https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Ulaga</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Eggert</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2006</year>
					<article-title>Relationship value and relationship quality: Broadening the nomological network of business-to-business relationships</article-title>
					<source>European Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>40</volume>
					<issue>3-4</issue>
					<fpage>311</fpage>
					<lpage>327</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075">https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B37">
				<mixed-citation>Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., &amp; Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes. <italic>Journal of Vocational Behavior</italic>
 <italic>, 63</italic>(3), 473-489. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Verquer</surname>
							<given-names>M. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Beehr</surname>
							<given-names>T. A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Wagner</surname>
							<given-names>S. H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2003</year>
					<article-title>A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Vocational Behavior</source>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B38">
				<mixed-citation>Wang, J. J., &amp; Zhang, C. (2017). The impact of value congruence on marketing channel relationship. <italic>Industrial Marketing Management</italic>, <italic>62</italic>, 118-127. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.004">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.004</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Wang</surname>
							<given-names>J. J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zhang</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>The impact of value congruence on marketing channel relationship</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>62</volume>
					<fpage>118</fpage>
					<lpage>127</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.004">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.004</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B39">
				<mixed-citation>Wilson, K. S., DeRue, D. S., Matta, F. K., Howe, M., &amp; Conlon, D. E. (2016). Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes. <italic>Journal of applied psychology</italic>, <italic>101</italic>(10), 1405-1421. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000132">https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000132</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Wilson</surname>
							<given-names>K. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DeRue</surname>
							<given-names>D. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Matta</surname>
							<given-names>F. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Howe</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Conlon</surname>
							<given-names>D. E.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Personality similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes</article-title>
					<source>Journal of applied psychology</source>
					<volume>101</volume>
					<issue>10</issue>
					<fpage>1405</fpage>
					<lpage>1421</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000132">https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000132</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B40">
				<mixed-citation>Zhang, J., &amp; Bloemer, J. M. (2008). The impact of value congruence on consumer-service brand relationships. <italic>Journal of Service Research</italic>, <italic>11</italic>(2), 161-178. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670508322561">https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670508322561</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Zhang</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bloemer</surname>
							<given-names>J. M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2008</year>
					<article-title>The impact of value congruence on consumer-service brand relationships</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Service Research</source>
					<volume>11</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>161</fpage>
					<lpage>178</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670508322561">https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670508322561</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B41">
				<mixed-citation>Zhu, D. H., &amp; Chang, Y. P. (2013). Negative publicity effect of the business founder’s unethical behavior on corporate image: evidence from China. <italic>Journal of Business Ethics</italic>, <italic>117</italic>(1), 111-121. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1512-2">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1512-2</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Zhu</surname>
							<given-names>D. H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Chang</surname>
							<given-names>Y. P.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2013</year>
					<article-title>Negative publicity effect of the business founder’s unethical behavior on corporate image: evidence from China</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Ethics</source>
					<volume>117</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>111</fpage>
					<lpage>121</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1512-2">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1512-2</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
		<fn-group>
			<fn fn-type="supported-by" id="fn2">
				<label>FINANCIAL SUPPORT</label>
				<p> This work was carried out with the support of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) - financing code 001. </p>
			</fn>
		</fn-group>
		<app-group>
			<app id="app1">
				<title>Appendix A</title>
				<p>An ASR is recommended when performing simultaneous tests of effects, such as values similarity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). The coefficients generated by the polynomial regression equation describes how two variables (for example, Self-transcendence of the buyer and Self-transcendence of the seller) are related together with the outcome variables based on surface response techniques.</p>
				<p>Specifically, the relationship between component X (e.g., buyer’s self-transcendence), Y (e.g., seller’s self-transcendence) and the outcome variable Z (e.g., relationship value) can be written as:</p>
				<p>
	<disp-formula id="e1">
					<alternatives>
					<graphic xlink:href="e1.jpg"/>
        <mml:math id="m1" display="block">
            
<mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:math>  
</alternatives>
        <label>(1)</label>
    </disp-formula> 
</p>

				<p>To test whether the outcome variable varies along the line where the personal values of buyers and sellers are similar, we model the polynomial regression with Y = X. Replacing Y = in <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="e1">Equation (1</xref>), the line for perfect symmetry is expressed as:</p>
				<p>
	<disp-formula id="e2">
					<alternatives>
					<graphic xlink:href="e2.jpg"/>
        <mml:math id="m2" display="block">
            
<mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced separators="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced separators="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>β</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:math>  
</alternatives>
        <label>(2)</label>
    </disp-formula> 
</p>
				<p>Therefore, the slope of the effect on the result is denoted by (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic> 
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ) and, respectively, the curvature is (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ). If the curvature (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ) does not differ significantly from zero, but the slope does, the perfect symmetry line is linear. In such cases, a positive slope ([<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ]&gt; 0) would indicate a linear increase in the result (Z) as the magnitude of similar values increases. If the curvature is significantly positive (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> )&gt; 0, the shape of the symmetry line values is U-shaped. On the other hand, if the curvature is significantly negative (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ) &lt;0, the line follows an inverted U shape. In ASR, the regression coefficients of the equations are not directly interpreted, but are used to examine the response surface pattern. In the graph, the slopes of the symmetry and asymmetry lines are interpreted. For a more in-depth review, see <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Faia et al. (2019</xref>).</p>
			</app>
		</app-group>
	</back>
	<!--<sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="pt">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Artigo</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Efeito da Similaridade de Valores Pessoais no Valor do Relacionamento B2B</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-9932-5520</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Manosso</surname>
						<given-names>Thayane</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff10"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-7599-0617</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Silva</surname>
						<given-names>Juliano</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff20"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Antoni</surname>
						<given-names>Verner</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff10"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Damacena</surname>
						<given-names>Claudio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff30"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff10">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade de Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade de Passo Fundo</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Passo Fundo</city>
					<state>RS</state>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff20">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, PR, Brasil</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade Estadual de Maringá</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Maringá</city>
					<state>PR</state>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff30">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul, Santa Cruz do Sul, RS, Brasil</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Santa Cruz do Sul</city>
					<state>RS</state>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c10">
					<email>thay_thay3@hotmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c20">
					<email>jdomingues8@gmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c30">
					<email>antoni@upf.br</email>
				</corresp>
				<corresp id="c40">
					<email>damacena.claudio@gmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
				<fn fn-type="con" id="fn10">
					<label>CONTRIBUIÇÕES DE AUTORIA</label>
					<p><bold>TM -</bold> Conceitualização, Curadoria de dados, Análise formal, Investigação, Metodologia, Recursos, Software e Redação do rascunho original. <bold>JS -</bold> Curadoria de dados, Análise formal, Investigação, Metodologia, Software, Revisão e redação. <bold>VA -</bold> Administração de projetos, Supervisão, Validação, Revisão e redação. <bold>CD -</bold> Supervisão, Validação, Revisão e redação.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="conflict" id="fn30">
					<label>CONFLITO DE INTERESSE</label>
					<p> Os autores declaram que não há conflito de interesses na publicação desta pesquisa.</p>
				</fn>
			</author-notes>
			<abstract>
				<title>Resumo </title>
				<p>A similaridade de valores influencia o relacionamento entre empresas. No entanto, mesmo que as decisões organizacionais sejam tomadas por pessoas, o papel da similaridade entre valores pessoais dos envolvidos nas trocas comerciais é pouco explorado no contexto B2B. Com base na teoria da similaridade-atração, desenvolvemos um modelo que explora o efeito da similaridade entre valores pessoais de vendedores e compradores no valor do relacionamento B2B. Utilizando uma amostra composta por 25 vendedores e 317 compradores, testamos as hipóteses por meio de regressão polinomial com análise de superfície de resposta. Os resultados demonstram que a similaridade de valores pessoais de foco social entre vendedor-comprador tem efeito positivo no valor do relacionamento B2B, mas quanto mais similares os indivíduos em relação à valores de foco pessoal, menor o valor que o comprador percebe no relacionamento com seu fornecedor. Implicações para a teoria e para a gestão de relacionamentos B2B são encaminhadas.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="pt">
				<title>Palavras-chave</title>
				<kwd>Similaridade de Valores</kwd>
				<kwd>Valores Pessoais</kwd>
				<kwd>Relacionamento B2B</kwd>
				<kwd>Valor do Relacionamento</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>1. Introdução</title>
				<p>As decisões em mercados <italic>business-to-business</italic> (B2B) são tomadas por pessoas, e não por organizações, residindo a autoridade decisória final tipicamente em um único indivíduo ou pequeno grupo executivo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Grewal et al., 2015</xref>). Pesquisadores engajados em estudar o micro contexto das relações interorganizacionais investigam como características de membros de organizações impactam o funcionamento e os resultados dos relacionamentos B2B (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Cropper et al., 2014</xref>).</p>
				<p>De maneira geral, a literatura mostra que os indivíduos podem ter seus próprios objetivos e experiências, os quais podem afetar seu comportamento e, consequentemente, influenciar as relações entre empresas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Manosso &amp; Antoni, 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>). Dentre os fundamentos frequentemente utilizados para prever comportamentos, tendências e escolhas individuais, estão os valores pessoais (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>). Motivadores profundos e poderosos das ações sociais, os valores pessoais representam um princípio organizador, não só na vida pessoal, mas também nas organizações em que os indivíduos estão inseridos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>). A abordagem estrutural dos valores humanos de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz (1992</xref>) se mostra como uma das principais referências contemporâneas sobre o tema, utilizada nas pesquisas para compreender o comportamento humano (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>).</p>
				<p>Assim como os valores pessoais guiam as decisões dos indivíduos, acredita-se que um outro tipo de valor determina o sucesso das relações interorganizacionais: o valor do relacionamento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ulaga &amp; Eggert, 2006</xref>). De uma perspectiva unidirecional, o valor percebido pelo cliente é visto como uma compensação entre benefícios e sacrifícios em relação ao relacionamento com um fornecedor, levando em consideração as ofertas alternativas disponíveis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Eggert &amp; Ulaga, 2002</xref>).</p>
				<p>A Teoria da Similaridade-atração (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>) indica que para alcançar um nível mais alto de valor no relacionamento, é necessário que haja uma similaridade significativa por parte dos parceiros, e que os compradores podem perceber níveis diferentes de valor ao avaliar o fornecedor como um todo ou um indivíduo (e.g., gerente, vendedor) que simbolize essa empresa fornecedora (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Lilien, 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al., 2011</xref>). Embora essa noção da importância da similaridade de valores seja ubíqua em pesquisas no nível individual (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Edwards &amp; Cable, 2009</xref>), surpreendentemente, até onde sabemos, as pesquisas em nível interorganizacional focam apenas nos efeitos gerados pela similaridade entre valores organizacionais (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>), ignorando como a similaridade de valores pessoais entre comprador-vendedor podem impactar a percepção de valor do relacionamento (ver <xref ref-type="table" rid="t10">Tabela 1</xref>). </p>
				<p>Acreditamos que essa lacuna é preocupante por duas razões. Primeiro, uma vez que a tomada de decisão em nível organizacional recai em última instância na tomada de decisão de um indivíduo (ou pequeno grupo de indivíduos), a escassez de pesquisas sobre o impacto de valores humanos no relacionamento entre empresas torna a nossa visão limitada a respeito de relacionamentos B2B (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Zhu &amp; Chang, 2013</xref>). Essa limitação restringe que a literatura de marketing de relacionamento B2B forneça <italic>insights</italic> mais precisos para melhorar as relações entre empresas. </p>
				<p>Segundo, ainda não há consenso entre os pesquisadores sobre os antecedentes, moderadores ou consequências do valor do relacionamento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic &amp; Zabkar, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Hohenschwert &amp; Geiger, 2015</xref>), nem sobre o efeito da similaridade de valores entre indivíduos para o relacionamento B2B (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">He et al., 2018</xref>). Como <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al. (2018</xref>, p. 280) destacam, “um número relativamente pequeno de estudos investiga o papel do valor do relacionamento em relações interorganizacionais”. Nesse sentido, esta pesquisa pode trazer luz para essa temática, uma vez que nossa proposta busca investigar como a similaridade de valores entre indivíduos impacta o valor do relacionamento B2B. A literatura fornece evidências consistentes de que vendedores são cruciais para criar valor, pois estão em posição de destaque para entender os direcionadores de valor do cliente, comunicar propostas de valor e fornecer <italic>insights</italic> do cliente à empresa (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Blocker et al., 2011</xref>). Para <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), o papel e a relevância dos responsáveis pelo contato direto com o cliente justificam um exame adicional. Apresentamos a lacuna de pesquisa na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t10">Tabela 1</xref>.</p>
				<p>Diante desse cenário, o objetivo proposto por este estudo é avaliar o efeito da similaridade entre valores pessoais de vendedores e compradores no valor do relacionamento B2B. Coletamos dados de valores humanos dos dois lados da díade (vendedores-compradores) para auferir a similaridade de valores entre ambos; e na sequência foi avaliado o efeito dessa similaridade no valor percebido pelo comprador no relacionamento com a empresa fornecedora. Os dados foram obtidos de 317 agricultores (compradores) e 25 vendedores de uma revenda de insumos, máquinas e implementos agrícolas. Para conferir robustez para nossa análise, utilizamos regressão polinomial com análise de superfície de resposta (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). Apesar de essa análise ter um alto grau de precisão quando se realizam testes simultâneos de efeitos, seu uso não parece comum nas pesquisas de similaridade de valores, conforme mostra a <xref ref-type="table" rid="t10">Tabela 1</xref>.</p>
				<p>Essa pesquisa contribui com a literatura de marketing de relacionamento B2B, uma vez que a literatura atual considera apenas valores organizacionais e não valores das pessoas envolvidas nas trocas comerciais entre empresas. Por isso, muitas vezes, pesquisadores afirmam que é sempre benéfico ter um parceiro comercial com valores parecidos. Este estudo mostra que, no que tange às relações pessoais, nem sempre é vantajoso que o vendedor seja parecido com seu comprador em relação a seus valores pessoais, pois isso pode causar atrito no relacionamento. Nosso estudo também contribui para a teoria de similaridade-atração (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>), por evidenciar que apenas a similaridade entre valores pessoais de foco social dos indivíduos envolvidos em trocas B2B melhora o relacionamento B2B. É provável que valores de foco pessoal prejudiquem a percepção de valor do relacionamento por gerar conflito entre as partes.</p>
				<p>Como contribuição prática, mostramos o quanto é importante conhecer os compradores antes de posicionar um vendedor para atendê-lo, e que meios de segmentação tradicionais podem ser aprimorados, levando-se em conta também o perfil do mercado comprador e da equipe de vendas. Além disso, destaca-se a importância da busca constante pela criação e manutenção do valor que o comprador percebe no relacionamento com seu fornecedor, e o papel crucial que o vendedor tem nessa percepção. </p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2. Referencial Teórico</title>
				<sec>
					<title>2.1. Valores pessoais</title>
					<p>Valores humanos, individuais ou pessoais podem ser definidos como “uma crença duradoura de que um modo específico de conduta ou estado final de existência é pessoalmente ou socialmente preferível a um modo oposto ou inverso de conduta ou estado final de existência” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Rokeach, 1973</xref>, p. 5). Os valores fornecem aos indivíduos uma espécie de critério para escolher e justificar ações e avaliar pessoas e eventos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz, 1992</xref>). Para <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>), os valores pessoais são crenças ou ideias sobre o que é desejável em um determinado contexto e situação. O sistema básico de valores de um indivíduo não muda facilmente, podendo ser usado para direcionar as atividades de empresas orientadas ao mercado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz, 1992</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Rokeach, 1973</xref>). </p>
					<p>A teoria dos valores humanos de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz (1992</xref>), baseada nas proposições originais de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Rokeach (1973</xref>), é considerada a principal referência contemporânea sobre o tema. Visando ampliar a capacidade heurística e o poder preditivo e explanatório da teoria, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al<italic>.</italic> (2012</xref>) apresentaram uma versão refinada e um novo instrumento de mensuração de valores pessoais, o PVQ- <italic>Refined</italic> (PVQ-RR), que divide o <italic>continuum</italic> em um conjunto mais fino de dezenove valores, conceitualmente distintos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). O estudo de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>) traduziu e validou o PVQ-RR junto aos brasileiros, além de testar a utilidade e validade do poder preditivo dos 19 valores para comportamentos.</p>
					<p>
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) apresentaram uma teoria refinada dos valores pessoais em que duas categorias subjacentes mais amplas foram identificadas: valores de foco social (Autotranscendência e Conservação), que indicam preocupação com resultados para outros ou para instituições estabelecidas; e valores de foco pessoal (Abertura a mudanças e Autopromoção), que refletem preocupação com os resultados para si próprio (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Embora os valores pessoais sejam confiáveis preditores do comportamento humano, e as decisões organizacionais sejam tomadas por pessoas, os valores individuais dificilmente são incorporados nas pesquisas de relações B2B.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>2.2. Teoria da Similaridade-atração e Similaridades de valores</title>
					<p>Ao postular a teoria de similaridade-atração, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne (1971</xref>) propõe o paradigma de que níveis mais altos de similaridade entre indivíduos geram afeto positivo e aumento da atração e harmonia entre as partes. Quanto mais parecidos, maior a preferência por partes semelhantes, e o desejo de interagir com essas partes é mais frequente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>).</p>
					<p>Ao explanar os mecanismos da teoria de similaridade-atração, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cable e Edwards (2004</xref>) destacam que as pessoas têm dificuldade em lidar com o que é diferente e, por isso, costumam se aproximar e preferir indivíduos que julgam e agem de forma similar a elas mesmas. Assim, a similaridade entre indivíduos tende a ser benéfica nas relações entre empresas, já que quanto maior a similaridade entre as pessoas representantes das organizações envolvidas na relação, melhor a resolução de problemas em conjunto e a satisfação com as decisões do outro (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Wilson et al., 2016</xref>). Ao contrário, a dissimilaridade afasta as pessoas, tornando-as mais propensas a conflitos e ao distanciamento social, o que pode prejudicar o desempenho das empresas envolvidas em relacionamentos B2B (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cable &amp; Edwards, 2004</xref>).</p>
					<p>Os benefícios da similaridade de valores ocorrem por causa de um ajuste suplementar em que dois indivíduos “compartilham características fundamentais semelhantes” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Verquer et al., 2003</xref>, p. 474). A similaridade de valores entre parceiros tende a gerar percepções positivas do relacionamento, porque ambos compartilham aspectos comuns do processamento cognitivo e métodos comuns de interpretação de eventos, que ajudam a reduzir a incerteza e o conflito nas interações (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Ostroff et al., 2005</xref>).</p>
					<p>
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Palmatier et al. (2006</xref>) destacam que a semelhança pode ser medida entre indivíduos ou entre organizações. Dada a importância dos valores para as organizações, a literatura examinou a relação entre os valores organizacionais e os valores dos funcionários (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Arieli et al., 2020</xref>), valores entre clientes e marcas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Krystallis et al., 2012</xref>) e o impacto da congruência de valores dos líderes e de sua equipe no desempenho das organizações (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al., 2017</xref>). Apesar de pesquisas apontarem que a similaridade de valores entre os membros de uma troca comercial possui um efeito positivo no relacionamento entre comprador e fornecedor (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>), os efeitos potenciais da similaridade de valores pessoais nas trocas B2B é ainda pouco explorado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>).</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>2.3. Valor do Relacionamento</title>
					<p>Valor, sob a perspectiva do cliente, pode ser definido como o “<italic>trade-off</italic> entre os múltiplos benefícios e sacrifícios da oferta de um fornecedor, conforme percebido pelos principais tomadores de decisão na organização do cliente, e levando em consideração as ofertas de fornecedores alternativos disponíveis” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Eggert &amp; Ulaga, 2002</xref>). As pesquisas de valor para o cliente acompanharam a transição da disciplina do marketing, adotando a definição de “valor do relacionamento”, conhecido anteriormente e ainda comumente intitulado como valor do cliente ou valor percebido (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Eggert et al., 2006</xref>).</p>
					<p>Segundo Ulaga e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Eggert (2006</xref>), o valor do relacionamento tem um efeito significativo e positivo sobre a satisfação do cliente o que, consequentemente, aumenta a probabilidade de retenção de negócios e boca a boca positivo. Da mesma forma, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic e Zabkar (2015</xref>) afirmam que a percepção de valor no relacionamento com um fornecedor ajuda a formar resultados atitudinais e comportamentais no cliente e influenciam o desempenho do fornecedor, que são reflexos da lealdade e recompra do cliente. Já para <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), as pessoas parecem perceber um valor maior em um relacionamento quando avaliam um indivíduo, e não uma organização. </p>
					<p>Alguns autores têm utilizado, entre outros construtos, o valor do relacionamento para medir o sucesso e a qualidade de relações B2B (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Arslanagic-Kalajdzic &amp; Zabkar, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>). Mesmo assim, acredita-se que o valor não tem recebido a devida atenção nas pesquisas de relacionamento B2B, considerando que fornecer valor ao cliente é fundamental para criar e manter relacionamentos de longo prazo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ulaga &amp; Eggert, 2006</xref>). Como destacado previamente, a presente pesquisa busca preencher a lacuna na literatura de marketing de relacionamento B2B ao examinar os efeitos da similaridade de valores pessoais entre parceiros comerciais no valor do relacionamento, conforme indicado na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t10">Tabela 1</xref>.</p>
					<p>
						<table-wrap id="t10">
							<label>Tabela 1.</label>
							<caption>
								<title><italic>Literatura relacionada à similaridade de valores pessoais em contextos B2B e valor do relacionamento</italic></title>
							</caption>
							<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
								<colgroup>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
								</colgroup>
								<thead>
									<tr>
										<th align="left">Autores</th>
										<th align="center">Similaridade de Valores entre...</th>
										<th align="center">B2B</th>
										<th align="center">Valores Humanos</th>
										<th align="center">Valor do Relacionamento</th>
										<th align="center">Regressão Polinomial e ASR</th>
									</tr>
								</thead>
								<tbody>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Zhang &amp; Bloemer (2008</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Consumidores e Marca</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas (2012</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Empresas do Canal</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Sabbir &amp; Nazrul (2014</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Clientes e Organização</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Qu et al. (2017</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Funcionários e Líderes</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang (2017</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Fornecedor e Distribuidores</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">He et al. (2018</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Compradores e Marca</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">
											<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al. (2019</xref>)</td>
										<td align="left">Funcionários e Líderes</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center"> </td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Este estudo</td>
										<td align="left">Vendedores e Compradores</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
										<td align="center">✓</td>
									</tr>
								</tbody>
							</table>
							<table-wrap-foot>
								<fn id="TFN6">
                                    <p><bold><italic>Fonte:</italic></bold> Elaborado pelos autores.</p>
								</fn>
							</table-wrap-foot>
						</table-wrap>
					</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>2.4. Modelo teórico e hipóteses da pesquisa</title>
					<p>Primeiro, de acordo com o paradigma da similaridade-atração (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Byrne, 1971</xref>) sugerimos que valores de foco social (Autotranscendência e Conservação) impactam positivamente o valor do relacionamento.</p>
					<p>Especificamente, a dimensão Autotranscendência indica a transição dos próprios interesses em benefício dos outros, e inclui valores de preocupação com o bem-estar, lealdade e dependência de pessoas com quem se mantém contato pessoal frequente, assim como valores de tolerância e igualdade social (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Schwartz, 1992</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Esses valores, inerentes à Autotranscendência, destacam uma preferência do indivíduo por privilegiar valores de foco social, em que aspectos coletivos são importantes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Assim, considerando um relacionamento B2B em que vendedor e comprador reportam elevada Autotranscendência, esperamos que o comprador avalie como valioso seu relacionamento com o vendedor. Formalmente:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H1.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de similaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Autotranscendência do comprador for alta e a Autotranscendência do vendedor for alta.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>É importante também distinguir entre os dois cenários de dissimilaridade entre os valores, isto é, quando a Autotranscendência do comprador é maior do que a do vendedor ou vice-versa. Caso os valores de Autotranscendência sejam dissimilares, espera-se que o valor do relacionamento seja maior quando a Autotranscendência do comprador for alta e a do vendedor for baixa.</p>
					<p>No cenário em que o comprador tem Autotranscendência maior do que a do vendedor, a pré-disposição do comprador para desenvolver lealdade e dependência nos relacionamentos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) provavelmente fará com que esse comprador tenha uma percepção de que o relacionamento com o vendedor seja valioso, mesmo que o vendedor não seja recíproco em relação à Autotranscendência. Contudo, caso o vendedor expresse altos valores de Autotranscendência no relacionamento com o comprador, mas o comprador não compartilhe desses mesmos valores (i.e., baixa Autotranscendência do comprador), é provável que o comprador não valide suas perspectivas de valor na interação com o vendedor, reduzindo sua percepção de valor no relacionamento. Assim, propomos a seguinte hipótese:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H2.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de dissimilaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Autotranscendência do comprador for alta e a Autotranscendência do vendedor for baixa.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>A Conservação também é uma dimensão de foco social, que representa autorrestrição, ordem e evitar mudanças. Engloba valores pessoais que representam sensação de pertença de um indivíduo e de que os outros se preocupam com ele, além de valores de preocupação com a segurança social, cumprimento de regras e obrigações, cortesia, respeito, fazer o que é certo e respeitar tradições, por exemplo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Portanto, em situações de similaridade, espera-se que compradores conservadores percebam maior valor no relacionamento caso o vendedor também tenha altos valores de Conservação. Formalmente:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H3.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de similaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Conservação do comprador for alta e a Conservação do vendedor for alta.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>Nos cenários de dissimilaridade, esperamos que o valor do relacionamento seja maior quando o comprador tem alta Conservação e o vendedor tem baixa Conservação. Em linha com a argumentação descrita na hipótese anterior, acreditamos que os valores de Conservação do comprador fazem com que ele busque manter o <italic>status quo</italic> do relacionamento com o vendedor, independentemente de se o vendedor possui baixo senso de Conservação. Contudo, caso o vendedor apresente alta Conservação, e o comprador baixa Conservação, esses compradores podem não cumprir suas perspectivas acerca do relacionamento, diminuindo sua percepção de valor dele. Assim, propomos a seguinte hipótese:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H4.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de dissimilaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Conservação do comprador for alta e a Conservação do vendedor for baixa.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>Segundo, os valores de foco pessoal envolvem uma preocupação dos indivíduos com os resultados para si próprio (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Desse modo, indivíduos com elevados índices de valores de foco pessoal tendem a valorizar relações que proporcionem oportunidades para autoaperfeioamento, ou seja, relações que melhorem ou reforcem o autoconceito (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Sirgy, 1982</xref>). </p>
					<p>Especificamente, a Abertura a mudanças reflete a prontidão para novas ideias, ações e experiências. Autonomia para pensar e agir, busca de propósitos individuais, curiosidade, decisões próprias, anseio por novidades e emoções, correr riscos e prazer são alguns dos valores de Abertura a mudanças (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Essas motivações pessoais são resultantes da necessidade de expressar o autoconceito (i.e., a individualidade). Por essa razão, acreditamos que o paradigma da similaridade-atração não se aplique para valores de foco pessoal (i.e., Abertura a mudanças e Autopromoção). Em um relacionamento em que compradores e vendedores possuem elevada Abertura a mudanças, a necessidade de expressar a individualidade pode gerar um conflito no relacionamento, uma vez que ambos buscam se mostrar competentes e hábeis em encontros com outras pessoas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Lalwani &amp; Shavitt, 2009</xref>). Desse modo, em situações em que tanto o comprador quanto o vendedor tenham elevada Abertura a mudanças, o comprador provavelmente relatará um menor valor no relacionamento. Formalmente:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H5.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de similaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será menor quando a Abertura a mudanças do comprador for alta e a Abertura a mudanças do vendedor for alta.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>Nos cenários de dissimilaridade, acreditamos que o valor do relacionamento será maior quando a Abertura a mudanças do comprador é alta e do vendedor é baixa. Compradores com alta Abertura a mudanças buscam relações que favoreçam experiências para expressar sua individualidade (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) e vendedores com baixa Abertura a mudanças não oferecem um ponto de conflito para o autoaperfeiçoamento do comprador. Contudo, em situações que o vendedor tem elevada, e o comprador tem baixa Abertura a mudanças, este pode interpretar que a busca por autoaperfeiçoamento do vendedor durante o relacionamento é um sinal de ameaça, uma vez que pessoas com alta Abertura a mudanças podem ser narcisistas ou individualistas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Campbell et al., 2000</xref>). Desse modo, caso os valores de Abertura a mudanças sejam dissimilares, espera-se que o valor do relacionamento seja maior quando a Abertura a mudanças do comprador for alta e a do vendedor for baixa. Assim, propomos a seguinte hipótese:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H6.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de dissimilaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Abertura a mudanças do comprador for alta e a Abertura a mudanças do vendedor for baixa.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>A segunda dimensão de foco pessoal é a Autopromoção. Valores que envolvem ter poder sobre os outros e sobre as coisas, prestígio, riqueza material, influência social, <italic>status</italic>, ser alguém admirado, preocupação com a imagem pública, sucesso (de acordo com os padrões da sociedade) e demonstração de habilidades representam a Autopromoção (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>).</p>
					<p>Em consonância com a argumentação da Abertura a mudanças, acreditamos que em situações de similaridade de Autopromoção entre comprador e vendedor, o valor do relacionamento será percebido como menos valioso para o comprador. Destarte, a busca por expressar poder, prestígio, <italic>status</italic> e admiração das pessoas com elevada Autopromoção (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>) pode gerar conflito no relacionamento caso essas motivações sejam simultâneas para compradores e vendedores, isto é, quando ambos apresentam elevada Autopromoção. Formalmente:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H7.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de similaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será menor quando a Autopromoção do comprador for alta e a Autopromoção do vendedor for alta.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>Em cenários de dissimilaridade, caso a Autopromoção do comprador seja elevada e a do vendedor seja baixa, o vendedor não oferecerá um sinal de possível conflito com as motivações do comprador, portanto, não afetará negativamente o valor do relacionamento. Contudo, caso o vendedor tenha elevada Autopromoção, sua motivação para expressar poder, <italic>status</italic>, prestígio e admiração pode enviar um sinal de arrogância para o comprador que tenha baixa Autopromoção (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Campbell et al., 2000</xref>), reduzindo a percepção de valor do relacionamento do comprador. Com base nessa argumentação, propomos a seguinte hipótese:</p>
					<p>
						<list list-type="bullet">
							<list-item>
								<p>• <bold>H8.</bold>
 <italic>Em situações de dissimilaridade, o Valor do Relacionamento será maior quando a Autopromoção do comprador for alta, e a Abertura à mudança do vendedor for baixa.</italic></p>
							</list-item>
						</list>
					</p>
					<p>Na <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f10">Figura 1</xref> ilustramos nossas hipóteses de pesquisa.</p>
					<p>
						<fig id="f10">
							<label><italic>Figura 1.</italic></label>
							<caption>
								<title>Modelo teórico proposto</title>
							</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-18-03-278-gf10.jpg"/>
                            <attrib><bold><italic>Fonte:</italic></bold> Elaborado pelos autores.</attrib>
						</fig>
					</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="methods">
				<title>3. Método</title>
				<p><italic>Coleta de Dados.</italic> Aplicamos nossa pesquisa em uma revenda de insumos, máquinas e implementos agrícolas, que possui seis filiais distribuídas na região Sul do Brasil. Para analisar a similaridade de valores pessoais, foram coletados dados de ambos os lados da díade: dos vendedores e dos compradores (agricultores). A amostra de vendedores foi feita por julgamento, e todos os 27 vendedores responderam ao questionário. A amostra de compradores foi não aleatória por conveniência, coletada pelos próprios vendedores, que receberam treinamento adequado para realizá-la. Ao total, 342 questionários de agricultores foram respondidos. Após o tratamento de dados omissos e observações atípicas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Hair et al., 2009</xref>), as amostras finais foram compostas por 317 agricultores e 25 vendedores.</p>
				<p><italic>Mensuração das variáveis.</italic> Utilizamos a escala de <italic>Valores pessoais</italic> de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>), a PVQ-RR, traduzida e validada no Brasil por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>), que consta de 57 descrições nas quais o respondente indica sua semelhança ao indivíduo descrito em uma escala <italic>likert</italic> de seis pontos, sendo 1 “Não se parece nada comigo” e 6 “Se parece muito comigo”. Utilizamos a escala de <italic>Valor do relacionamento</italic> de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Alejandro et al. (2011</xref>), composta de 5 itens e uma escala <italic>likert</italic> de seis pontos, onde 1 corresponde a “Discordo totalmente” e 6 a “Concordo totalmente”. </p>
				<p><italic>Variáveis de controle.</italic> Sabendo que os agricultores possuem características pessoais e organizacionais (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Prado &amp; Martinelli, 2018</xref>), coletamos dados de idade, grau de escolaridade e cargo do respondente e tamanho (em hectares) e número de funcionários da propriedade rural.</p>
				<p><italic>Análise estatística.</italic> Como as escalas de valor do relacionamento e de valores pessoais já são validadas no Brasil e no contexto B2B, realizou-se uma análise fatorial confirmatória (AFC) para as duas escalas. Os valores pessoais foram verificados pelo escalonamento multidimensional (MDS), conforme recomendado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>). As variáveis passaram também pelo crivo de normalidade e multicolinearidade (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Hair et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
				<p>Para avaliar o efeito da similaridade de valores pessoais no valor do relacionamento foi utilizada a técnica de regressão polinomial com análise de superfície de resposta (ASR) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). A regressão polinomial com teste de superfície de resposta permite comparar na mesma equação os efeitos de duas variáveis em quatro cenários distintos: (1) X e Y altos, (2) X e Y baixos, (3) X alto e Y baixo, e (4) X baixo e Y alto. Esse procedimento evita que escores de diferença sejam utilizados, uma vez que eles geram resultados equivocados (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Edwards &amp; Parry, 1993</xref>). Detalhes das equações são descritos no <xref ref-type="app" rid="app10">Apêndice A</xref>. Para uma revisão aprofundada e procedimentos de análise, consultar <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Faia et al. (2019</xref>).</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results">
				<title>4. Resultados</title>
				<p>Na amostra de vendedores, menos de 20% estão na empresa há mais de 8 anos, e a média geral de tempo de trabalho é de 6,32 anos (σ = 6,81). A idade média foi de 38 anos (σ =11,4), e o grau de escolaridade dominante foi o ensino médio completo. A hierarquia das dimensões de valores pessoais da amostra de vendedores seguiu a ordem: Conservação (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
5,02); Autotranscendência (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4,86); Abertura a Mudanças (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4,61); e Autopromoção (<inline-formula> 
<mml:math display='block'>
<mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math>
</inline-formula>
4,11).</p>
				<p>Quanto às características organizacionais dos compradores, apenas um caso (0,3%) possui mais de 10 funcionários, e a área média das propriedades rurais foi de 243,38 hectares (ha). Quanto às características pessoais, 59% dos respondentes foram sócios/ proprietários das fazendas e 33%, filhos de proprietários. A idade média geral foi de 41,32 anos (σ =13,02), e 79% possuem até ensino médio completo. </p>
				<p>Em relação à validação dos construtos, a escala de Valor do Relacionamento obteve AVE= 0,674 e CR= 0,839, o que configura a validade convergente do modelo, e MSV= 0,616, validando a discriminação dos fatores. As medidas de ajuste do modelo também se mostraram adequadas: CMIN/DF= 2,636 (<italic>p</italic>= 0,005); CFI= 0,995; GFI= 0,992; RMSEA= 0,72; e α= 0,825.</p>
                <p>A validação dos valores pessoais seguiu o modelo apresentado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al. (2016</xref>), onde os autores realizam as AFCs de cada dimensão separadamente. Esse procedimento fornece melhores índices de ajuste em situações nas quais há um conjunto amplo de fatores latentes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Torres et al., 2016</xref>), como é o caso da PVQ-RR. Os coeficientes de ajuste obtidos dos modelos resultantes, por tipo de segunda ordem, são apresentados na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t20">Tabela 2</xref>.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t20">
						<label>Tabela 2.</label>
						<caption>
							<title><italic>Coeficientes de ajuste dos valores pessoais, por tipos de segunda ordem</italic></title>
						</caption>
						<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="center"> </th>
									<th align="center">Autotranscendência</th>
									<th align="center">Conservação</th>
									<th align="center">Abertura a Mudanças</th>
									<th align="center">Autopromoção</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">CMIN/DF</td>
									<td align="center">2,907</td>
									<td align="center">2,622</td>
									<td align="center">2,245</td>
									<td align="center">2,683</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">CFI</td>
									<td align="center">0,906</td>
									<td align="center">0,900</td>
									<td align="center">0,954</td>
									<td align="center">0,930</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">GFI</td>
									<td align="center">0,914</td>
									<td align="center">0,913</td>
									<td align="center">0,955</td>
									<td align="center">0,939</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">RMSEA</td>
									<td align="center">0,075</td>
									<td align="center">0,069</td>
									<td align="center">0,060</td>
									<td align="center">0,070</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">α</td>
									<td align="center">0,847</td>
									<td align="center">0,865</td>
									<td align="center">0,779</td>
									<td align="center">0,778</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN7">
								<p><bold><italic>Fonte:</italic></bold> Elaborado pelos autores.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>O MDS, por sua vez, configurou o ordenamento dos 19 valores, com índice de stress-1= 0,125, DAF=0,985 e TCC= 0,992. Os coeficientes de ajuste obtidos dos modelos resultantes, por tipo de segunda ordem, apresentaram CFI &gt; 0,90, GFI &gt; 0,90 e RMSEA &lt; 0,08.</p>
				<p>A <xref ref-type="table" rid="t20">Tabela 2</xref> demonstra os resultados das regressões, onde a variável dependente é o Valor do relacionamento e as variáveis independentes são a similaridade e a dissimilaridade entre cada uma das quatro dimensões de valores pessoais (Autotranscendência, Conservação, Abertura a mudanças e Autopromoção) separadamente. Primeiramente, os dados mostram que nenhuma variável de controle afeta diretamente o valor do relacionamento. Em outras palavras, o valor do relacionamento não varia de acordo com a idade, escolaridade, cargo, tamanho da propriedade e número de funcionários do comprador. </p>
				<p>Na análise dos efeitos diretos, mostramos que o valor do relacionamento é influenciado positivamente por Autotranscendência (β = 0,40; p &lt; 0,01), Conservação (β = 0,38; p &lt; 0,01) e Abertura a mudanças (β = 0,26; p &lt; 0,01) do comprador. Ademais, mostramos que duas dimensões de valores pessoais do vendedor, Abertura à mudança (β = -0,14; p &lt; 0,01) e Autopromoção (β = -0,39; p &lt; 0,01) impactam negativamente o valor do relacionamento. Embora não tenhamos elaborado hipóteses de efeitos diretos, esses efeitos positivos do comprador e negativo do vendedor são consistentes com nossa argumentação de valores de foco social e foco pessoal.</p>
				<p>Para averiguar os efeitos de similaridade, observamos na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t30">Tabela 3</xref>, os coeficientes de inclinação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> ) e os coeficientes de curvatura (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ) da linha de simetria (X = Y). Para averiguar os efeitos de dissimilaridade, observamos os coeficientes de inclinação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> ) e curvatura (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> ) da linha de assimetria (X = -Y).</p>
				<p>Conforme <xref ref-type="table" rid="t30">Tabela 3</xref>, descobrimos que há uma inclinação positiva e significativa ao longo da linha de similaridade na superfície de resposta para Autotranscendência (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : 0,34; p &lt; 0,01) e Conservação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : 0,30; p &lt; 0,01). Portanto, quando os valores de Autotranscendência e Conservação são altos tanto para os compradores quanto para os vendedores, o valor do relacionamento percebido pelo comprador será maior, <bold>suportando as hipóteses H</bold>
 <sub>1</sub>
 <bold>e H</bold>
 <sub>3</sub>. Ao analisar a linha de simetria, também descobrimos que há uma inclinação negativa e significativa na superfície de resposta para Autopromoção (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : -0,32; p &lt; 0,01) e uma inclinação não significativa para Abertura a mudanças (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> : 0,11; <italic>ns</italic>) no valor do relacionamento. <bold>Esses resultados permitem rejeitar H</bold>
 <sub>5</sub>
 <bold>e suportar H</bold>
 <sub>7</sub>.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t30">
						<label>Tabela 3.</label>
						<caption>
							<title><italic>Resultados das regressões polinomiais por dimensão de valores pessoais</italic></title>
						</caption>
						<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
                                <col/>
                                <col/>
                                <col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left" rowspan="2"> </th>
									<th align="center" colspan="4">Variável dependente = Valor do relacionamento </th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th align="center">Auto-transcendência</th>
									<th align="center">Conservação</th>
									<th align="center">Abertura à mudanças</th>
									<th align="center">Auto-promoção</th>
								</tr>
                                </thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left"><bold>Variável</bold></td>
                                    <td align="center">β <bold>(t-valor)</bold></td>
                                    <td align="center">β <bold>(t-valor)</bold></td>
                                    <td align="center">β <bold>(t-valor)</bold></td>
                                    <td align="center">β <bold>(t-valor)</bold></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Constante</td>
									<td align="center">-0,07 (-0,94)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,02 (-0,29)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,06 (-0,76)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,05 (-0,60)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Valores pessoais dos compradores (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,40 (6,17)<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,38 (5,55)<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,26 (4,13)<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,08 (1,05)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Valores pessoais dos vendedores (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">-0,07 (-1,19)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,08 (-1,38)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,14 (-2,67)<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">-0,39 (-5,99)<sup>**</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify"><italic>Valores pessoais dos compradores</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic> 
</sup> (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,01 (0,16)</td>
									<td align="center">0,03 (0,75)</td>
									<td align="center">0,03 (0,83)</td>
									<td align="center">0,08 (1,23)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Valores pessoais dos vendedores <italic>x</italic> Valores pessoais dos compradores (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,06 (0,99)</td>
									<td align="center">0,06 (0,92)</td>
									<td align="center">0,10 (1,99)<sup>*</sup></td>
									<td align="center">-0,03 (-0,46)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify"><italic>Valores pessoais dos vendedores</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic> 
</sup> (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,06 (1,46)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,01 (-0,3)</td>
									<td align="center">0,01 (0,23)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,11 (-2,31)<sup>*</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
                                    <td align="left"><bold>Variáveis de controle</bold></td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Idade do comprador</td>
									<td align="center">-0,06 (-0,90)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,09 (-1,39)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,03 (-0,52)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,06 (-0,91)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Escolaridade do comprador</td>
									<td align="center">0,04 (0,61)</td>
									<td align="center">0,05 (0,85)</td>
									<td align="center">0,02 (0,27)</td>
									<td align="center">0,04 (0,56)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Cargo do comprador</td>
									<td align="center">-0,05 (-0,90)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,07 (-1,19)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,05 (-0,89)</td>
									<td align="center">-0,04 (-0,78)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Tamanho da propriedade</td>
									<td align="center">0,08 (1,34)</td>
									<td align="center">0,03 (0,56)</td>
									<td align="center">0,06 (0,96)</td>
									<td align="center">0,05 (0,76)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Número de funcionários</td>
									<td align="center">0,01 (-0,08)</td>
									<td align="center">0,02 (0,38)</td>
									<td align="center">0,02 (0,30)</td>
									<td align="center">0,06 (1,03)</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
                                    <td align="left"><bold>Teste de superfície de resposta</bold></td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Linha de simetria X = Y</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Inclinação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,34<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,30<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,11</td>
									<td align="center">-0,32<sup>**</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Curvatura (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,13<sup>*</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,08</td>
									<td align="center">0,14<sup>*</sup></td>
									<td align="center">-0,06</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Linha de assimetria X = - Y</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Inclinação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">0,47<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,46<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,40<sup>**</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,50<sup>**</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Curvatura (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> )</td>
									<td align="center">-0,01</td>
									<td align="center">-0,05</td>
									<td align="center">-0,06</td>
									<td align="center">0,01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">VIF<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">1,56</td>
									<td align="center">2,20</td>
									<td align="center">1,47</td>
									<td align="center">3,77</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify"><italic>R</italic>
 <sup>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0,18</td>
									<td align="center">0,15</td>
									<td align="center">0,08</td>
									<td align="center">0,14</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN8">
								<p><bold>
 <italic>Nota</italic>.</bold> β = Coeficiente de regressão não padronizado; ª maior VIF encontrado no modelo. N = 317 díades.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN9">
                                <p><bold><italic>a</italic></bold>
 <sub>
     <bold><italic>1</italic></bold>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ), em que <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> é coeficiente beta para valores pessoais dos compradores e <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> é coeficiente beta para valores pessoais dos vendedores. <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ), em que <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> é coeficiente beta para valores pessoais dos compradores ao quadrado, <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> é um coeficiente beta para o produto da multiplicação entre os valores pessoais dos compradores e valores pessoais dos vendedores e <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> é coeficiente beta para valores pessoais dos vendedores ao quadrado. <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> - <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> ). <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> = (<italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> - <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>4</italic>
</sub> + <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>5</italic>
</sub> ).</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN10">
                                <p><bold><italic>**p</italic></bold> &lt; 0,01; *p &lt; 0,05</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>A linha de assimetria da <xref ref-type="table" rid="t30">Tabela 3</xref> mostra os efeitos da dissimilaridade entre valores pessoais dos compradores e valores pessoais dos vendedores. A linha de assimetria mostra que Autotranscendência (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : 0,46; p &lt; 0,01), Conservação (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : 0,47; p &lt; 0,01), Abertura a mudanças (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : 0,40; p &lt; 0,01) e Autopromoção (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> : 0,50; p &lt; 0,01) apresentam efeitos positivos e significativos no valor do relacionamento. Como a linha de assimetria <italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>3</italic>
</sub> é um produto da subtração dos coeficientes <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>1</italic>
</sub> (valores pessoais dos compradores) e <italic>b</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> (valores pessoais dos vendedores), os valores positivos indicam a dissimilaridade nos cenários em que os valores dos pessoais dos compradores são maiores do que os valores pessoais dos vendedores. Esses resultados <bold>suportam as hipóteses H</bold>
 <sub>2</sub>
 <bold>, H</bold>
 <sub>4</sub>
 <bold>, H</bold>
 <sub>6</sub>
 <bold>e H</bold>
 <sub>8</sub>.</p>
				<p>As superfícies de resposta na <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figura 2</xref> ilustram o nível da variável dependente (valor do relacionamento) na superfície de resposta quando são combinadas duas variáveis independentes (valores pessoais dos compradores [X] e valores pessoais dos vendedores [Y]). Os gráficos são gerados com os coeficientes de regressão não padronizados (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t30">Tabela 3</xref>) e as equações descritas no <xref ref-type="app" rid="app10">Apêndice A</xref>.</p>
				<p>
					<fig id="f20">
						<label><italic>Figura 2.</italic></label>
						<caption>
							<title>Gráficos de Superfície de Resposta </title>
						</caption>
						<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-18-03-278-gf20.jpg"/>
                        <attrib><bold><italic>Fonte:</italic></bold> Elaborado pelos autores.</attrib>
					</fig>
				</p>
				<p>A <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figura 2A</xref> mostra que a linha de simetria onde a combinação entre Autotranscendência do comprador e a do vendedor é alta, o eixo Z (valor do relacionamento) também é alto. Porém, ao analisar a dissimilaridade ao longo da linha de assimetria, nota-se que o valor do relacionamento é maior quando a Autotranscendência do comprador é alta e a Autotranscendência do vendedor é baixa. Os efeitos da linha de simetria e assimetria da <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figura 2B</xref> são semelhantes à <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figura 2A</xref>, o que indica que a similaridade entre os valores de Conservação dos compradores e vendedores tem efeito positivo no valor do relacionamento, mas quando há dissimilaridade, o valor do relacionamento é maior quando a Conservação do comprador é alta e a do vendedor é baixa. A <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figura 2D</xref> mostra que a linha de simetria onde a combinação entre Autopromoção do comprador e a do vendedor é alta, o eixo Z (valor do relacionamento) é baixo. Porém, ao analisar a dissimilaridade ao longo da linha de assimetria, nota-se que o valor do relacionamento é maior quando a Autopromoção do comprador é alta e a Autopromoção do vendedor é baixa.</p>
				<p>Ademais, as <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">Figuras 2A</xref> e <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f20">2C</xref> e a <xref ref-type="table" rid="t30">Tabela 3</xref> mostram um efeito curvilinear em formato de U para a linha de simetria (i.e., similaridade) entre valores de Autotranscendência (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> : 0,13; p &lt; 0,05) e Abertura a mudanças (<italic>a</italic>
 <sub>
 <italic>2</italic>
</sub> : 0,14; p &lt; 0,05) do comprador e do vendedor. Esses resultados indicam um efeito marginal não descrito em nossas hipóteses. A literatura sobre valor da congruência fornece uma explicação plausível para esses resultados não esperados (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>). A congruência de valores em que dois indivíduos tenham fortes crenças (por exemplo, consideram um valor extremamente importante ou extremamente sem importância) se relaciona mais forte com os resultados comportamentais desses indivíduos do que a congruência em valores em que esses indivíduos têm crenças moderadas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Edwards &amp; Cable, 2009</xref>). Isso indica que para uma similaridade de valor entre parceiros ter efeito nas ações das pessoas, apenas as similaridades de valores em suas extremidades indicarão se as pessoas envolvidas na relação agirão de acordo com seus valores (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>).</p>
				<p>Desse modo, para que a similaridade de Autotranscendência e Abertura a mudanças tenha efeito no valor do relacionamento, esses valores devem ser extremamente altos em ambas as partes (comprador e vendedor atribuem grande importância para esses valores) ou extremamente baixos (comprador e vendedor atribuem pequena importância para esses valores). Uma expressão moderada desses valores não permitirá o ajuste suplementar (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Verquer et al., 2003</xref>), pois não fornecerá clareza de que ambos compartilham aspectos comuns do processamento cognitivo e métodos comuns de interpretação de eventos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Ostroff et al., 2005</xref>). Com isso, os efeitos da similaridade entre Autotranscendência e Abertura a mudanças em níveis moderados prejudicam a percepção de valor do relacionamento do comprador.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="discussion">
				<title>5. Discussões</title>
				<p>A similaridade e a dissimilaridade dos valores pessoais da díade vendedor-compradores operam de maneira diferente nas dimensões opostas de foco social (Autotranscendência e Conservação) e nas de foco pessoal (Abertura à Mudanças e Autopromoção). </p>
				<p>As dimensões de foco social englobam valores de tolerância e compreensão, de respeito e aceitação, de preocupação com o bem-estar de pessoas próximas e de estabilidade e harmonia dos relacionamentos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Quando o vendedor e o comprador que se relacionam em uma troca comercial possuem esses valores, a percepção de que os benefícios estão acima dos sacrifícios envolvidos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Eggert et al., 2006</xref>) é gerada nos compradores. As dimensões de foco social também compreendem valores de proteção, de preservação, de compromisso, de cumprimento de expectativas e de segurança (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Portanto, mesmo na ausência desses valores pessoais de foco social por parte do vendedor, a valorização de relações colaborativas (Autotranscendência) e manutenção do <italic>status quo</italic> (Conservação) por parte do comprador (cenário em que os valores dos compradores são altos e dos vendedores são baixos), o valor do relacionamento será percebido como valioso para o comprador. Contudo, quando o vendedor tenta criar um relacionamento com um comprador que não possui foco social (cenário em que os valores dos compradores são baixos e dos vendedores são altos), o vendedor pode acabar desgastando o convívio comercial e pessoal entre eles, deixando o comprador desconfortável e pressionado, o que resulta em uma percepção mais baixa dos benefícios da relação.</p>
				<p>Antagonicamente às dimensões de foco social, os valores de foco pessoal refletem a preocupação consigo. Valores de Autopromoção estão relacionados mais à satisfação para si próprio do que com o relacionamento como um todo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>). Isso reflete os resultados encontrados de que a similaridade entre Autopromoção do comprador e a do vendedor afetam o valor do relacionamento de forma negativa. Isso indica que quando um vendedor possui valores que indicam busca por <italic>status</italic>, prestígio e sucesso pessoal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>), o valor percebido pelo comprador tende a ser menor. Ou seja, a disputa pela autonomia, o controle e domínio de pessoas e recursos e a necessidade de demonstração de competência (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al., 2012</xref>), manifestados pelo vendedor compromete o relacionamento, o que reflete na diminuição do valor percebido pelo comprador. No entanto, quando apenas o comprador possui Autopromoção elevada, mas o vendedor não expressa crença para esse valor, provavelmente não haverá conflitos na relação, gerando uma percepção de valor positiva no relacionamento.</p>
				<p>Os resultados, portanto, corroboram em parte as conclusões de que a similaridade é benéfica para o valor percebido no relacionamento B2B, e confirma a tese de que a dissimilaridade de valores pessoais é desfavorável ao valor do relacionamento B2B quando o vendedor expressa forte crença nos valores pessoais, mas o comprador não compartilha da mesma crença.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>6. Conclusões</title>
				<sec>
					<title>6.1. Contribuições teóricas</title>
					<p>Contribuímos com a literatura em dois principais aspectos. Primeiro, em relação ao marketing de relacionamento B2B, analisando como os valores dos indivíduos envolvidos nas trocas comerciais podem exercer influência sobre a percepção de valor do relacionamento entre empresas. Estudos anteriores já investigaram o papel de outras variáveis de relacionamento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Skarmeas et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">De Toni et al., 2015</xref>) ou da interação pessoal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Hohenschwert &amp; Geiger, 2015</xref>) no valor do relacionamento em mercados B2B. Mas pesquisas que investigam o efeito dos valores pessoais na percepção de valor de um relacionamento entre empresas são escassas. Além disso, na literatura do marketing, a similaridade é normalmente estudada pela semelhança entre valores organizacionais nas investigações de relações entre empresas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Wang &amp; Zhang, 2017</xref>), ou pelo alinhamento entre valores de funcionários e líderes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Byza et al., 2019</xref>) e entre valores organizacionais e valores dos funcionários nas pesquisas intraorganizacionais (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Kashyap &amp; Sivadas, 2012</xref>). Até onde sabemos, nossa pesquisa é a primeira que avalia a relação entre empresas pela ótica da similaridade entre os valores pessoais dos indivíduos envolvidos nesses relacionamentos.</p>
					<p>Segundo, trazemos luz para a teoria da similaridade-atração. Usando a teoria fundamentada de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Schwartz et al. (2012</xref>) de que existe uma distinção de valores pessoais de foco social e de foco pessoal, e que essas dimensões ficam posicionadas em locais opostos do <italic>continuum</italic> (i.e., um indivíduo dificilmente detém valores opostos), argumentamos que a ideia de que a similaridade sempre promove harmonia nas relações (e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Zhang &amp; Bloemer, 2008</xref>) pode ser equivocada, ao menos no contexto B2B. Nossos resultados demonstram que, assim como valores de foco social podem contribuir com uma maior percepção de valor no relacionamento, ao contrário, a similaridade entre valores de foco pessoal pode prejudicar o valor percebido, e possivelmente outras variáveis de relacionamento.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>6.2. Implicações gerenciais</title>
					<p>A importância empírica do estudo se relaciona ao estabelecimento de relações interpessoais com vista a um maior desempenho das empresas. Na díade pesquisada, agricultores conservadores (i.e., público predominante da revenda) evitam mudanças, e preferem se sentir seguros e estáveis em relacionamentos, o que pode impactar o desempenho da revenda, já que o tempo médio de trabalho de um vendedor é de pouco mais de seis anos. Se o comprador tem valores de foco social, os valores do vendedor são menos importantes, já que tanto a similaridade quanto a dissimilaridade são benéficas ao Valor do Relacionamento. Mas se o comprador possui um foco mais pessoal, quanto mais opostos os vendedores possam ser, maior o valor percebido dos agricultores quanto ao relacionamento. Portanto, as equipes de vendas podem ser ajustadas em relação aos valores de seus compradores, seja na recolocação dos vendedores atuais, seja na seleção de novos vendedores.</p>
					<p>De maneira geral, empresas fornecedoras de produtos e serviços em mercados B2B devem estar atentas às características pessoais de vendedores, não só às similaridades em relação a seus compradores, mas também quanto às dissimilaridades. Esses resultados têm implicações primordiais nos conceitos de planejamento de marketing estratégico, desde a estruturação da empresa até a seleção do mercado-alvo a ser atendido e da forma de segmentação adotada.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>6.3. Limitações e Pesquisas Futuras</title>
					<p>Os resultados não podem ser generalizados e, por isso, outros estudos devem ser desenvolvidos com as variáveis e o método utilizado, para consolidar a teoria proposta. Como os agricultores possuem características tanto pessoais quanto organizacionais, os efeitos dos Valores pessoais no relacionamento podem variar de acordo com a díade pesquisada.</p>
					<p>Uma via interessante de pesquisa seria entender o impacto ou a mediação da similaridade de valores na relação entre o Valor do relacionamento e outras variáveis de desempenho, o que não foi incorporado nesta pesquisa devido à complexidade do atual modelo. Futuras pesquisas também podem testar qual o efeito da similaridade de dimensões de valores opostas no valor do relacionamento, por exemplo, o impacto que a similaridade entre a Autotranscendência do vendedor e a Autopromoção do comprador tem no valor do relacionamento.</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
		</body>
		<back>
			<fn-group>
				<fn fn-type="supported-by" id="fn20">
					<label>FINANCIAMENTO</label>
					<p> O presente trabalho foi realizado com apoio da coordenação de aperfeiçoamento de pessoal de nível superior - Brasil (CAPES) - código de financiamento 001. </p>
				</fn>
			</fn-group>
		</back>
	</sub-article>-->
</article>