Journal of Selling
Running an Effective Induction Program for New Sales Recruits:
Lessons from the Financial Services Industry
By Zahed Subhan, Roger Brooksbank, Scott Rader, Duncan Steel, and Kimberley Mackey
Little research to date has considered how best to deploy the training and coaching activities that typically combine to
form the basis of a salesperson induction program. Accordingly, set within the context of the embattled financial services
industry, this paper seeks to profile the key characteristics of a successful induction program for new sales recruits.
Based on depth interviews with senior business development executives from two “matched pairs” of higher and lower
performing financial services companies in the United Kingdom and New Zealand respectively, the study identifies
a number of practical “how-to-do-its” for planning and executing a successful induction program. In particular, the
findings indicate that above all else, the higher performers are differentiated from their lower performing counterparts
by the extent to which they have sought to properly integrate and align their sales training and sales coaching activities.
Key Words: Sales training, salesperson induction, coaching, financial services selling, depth interviews
Introduction
The bar has been raised. In a world where businesses
are becoming increasingly proficient at managing a
wide range of multi-channel, multi-touch customer
interactions, how can we help new salespeople to measure
up to customers’ expectations? Across many industries,
professional salespeople perform a dizzying number of
essential tasks such as prospecting for new customers,
selling goods and services that are well matched to
each customer’s requirements and, through providing
customer service and undertaking other customer care
and relationship building activities, facilitating longer
term “repeat selling,” “up selling,” and “cross selling”
opportunities (Ennew and Waite 2012; Kaishev, Nielsen
Zahed Subhan (Ph.D., University of Leeds, UK), Assistant
Professor of Entrepreneurship, Sales and Marketing, Western
Carolina University, zsubhan@wcu.edu.
Roger Brooksbank (Ph.D., University of Bradford, UK),
Associate Professor of Marketing, Waikato Management
School, University of Waikato, rogerb@waikato.ac.nz.
Scott Rader (Ph.D., University of Tennessee, USA), Assistant
Professor of Entrepreneurship, Sales and Marketing, Western
Carolina University, srader@wcu.edu.
Duncan Steel (Master of Sales Management, University of
Portsmouth, UK), Managing Director, Sales Training IQ,
duncanwsteel@gmail.com.
Kimberley Mackey (Bachelor of Management Science,
University of Waikato, New Zealand), Marketing
Communications and Events Coordinator, Combined Insurance
Limited, kimberley.mackey@combined.com.
20
and Thuring 2013; Thuring et al. 2012). Toward this
end, firms invest in what is usually, if somewhat loosely,
referred to as “sales training” (a processual concept that
often includes a blend of different teaching and learning
methods). Here, both conventional wisdom (Futrrell
2005) and empirical evidence (Aberdeen Group 2012;
Boehle 2010; Valencius 2009) combine to suggest
that, to the extent that a sales training program is well
funded and properly planned and executed, it can have
a dramatically positive, if not transformative impact on
sales performance, both at the individual salesperson
and sales team level.
Despite an emerging recognition of the strategic
importance of leveraging personal selling and sales
training initiatives amid the increasingly complex and
competitive business environments of today (Adamson,
Dixon and Toman 2012; Fogel et al. 2012; Lassk et
al. 2012; Sarin et al. 2010), little research to date has
considered how best to deploy the training and coaching
activities that typically combine to form the basis of a
salesperson introductory (i.e., “induction”) program.
Yet such programs, designed for on-boarding new sales
recruits, typically require a good deal of investment
(Martini 2012). Moreover, when properly executed
they can prove to be an invaluable source of strategic
advantage. By reducing the downstream churn rate
among new recruits compared with competitors, any
potentially negative downstream effects associated with a
loss of consistency in the quality of the customer’s buying
experience can be mitigated (Callender and Reid 1993;
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
Jagodic 2012). Hence, the overall purpose of the research
reported upon in this paper is to explore and profile the
key training and coaching characteristics associated with
an effective induction program for new sales recruits
in the financial services industry. Specifically, through
comparing and contrasting the induction programs
used by higher and lower performing financial services
companies competing directly with each other in the
same marketplace, the research aims to:
1. Identify the key determinants of “best practice”
when running an effective sales training program for
new recruits.
2. Identify the key determinants of “best practice”
when running an effective sales coaching program
for new recruits.
A research spotlight on the financial services industry
can be viewed as both timely and appropriate for a
number of reasons. Most notably, in the wake of the 2008
global financial crisis, financial services companies
around the world have been facing an extraordinarily
difficult strategic environment (Akinbami 2011;
Heckl and Moormann 2010). Like other businesses,
they have had to navigate their way amid widespread
economic recession and some of the most difficult
trading conditions on record (Mayer-Foulkes 2009).
However, in many respects their macroenvironmental
situation has been especially challenging. Under the
microscope of much public scrutiny and some criticism
of their operational norms, in most Western financial
markets there has been a power shift towards political
and regulatory bodies, all of which has led to a newly
regulated external business environment (Chambers
2010; Lempka and Stallard 2013; Steel 2013). In
addition, and primarily due to the Eurozone crisis, a
financial power shift from “West” to “East” is currently
underway, with new financial services organizations
from countries such as China and South Korea further
intensifying what is already an ultra-competitive and
increasingly internationally competitive marketplace
(Cox 2012; Gritten 2011; Hosono, Sakai and Tsuru
2009). Further, unlike many other types of businesses,
within a financial services business the selling function
typically integrates both horizontally and vertically
across all market segments served as well as all of the
various divisions or operating units of the organization
(Farquhar and Meidan 2010; Steel 2013; Thuring
et al. 2012). Consequently, for a financial services
company, the personal selling function directly affects
virtually every single customer’s buying experience
(Rajaobelina and Bergeron 2009). As such, personal
selling plays a uniquely crucial role within a financial
service company’s overall marketing strategy. Indeed,
throughout the industry it is widely regarded as being
a key driver of long-term business success (Brenkert
2011; Drew, Walk and Bianchi 2013).
In light of the above it is arguable that across the
financial services industry of today, as companies
grapple to maintain market share and seek to re-establish
themselves within the turbulent “new era” of financial
services marketing, an efficient and effective selling
effort is more important than ever before. Thus, with
these issues in mind, attention next turns to a baseline
review of the literature relating to sales training and
sales coaching. After this, the exploratory methodology
employed in this research is explained, followed by a
presentation of the research findings, conclusions, and
practitioner implications.
Literature Review
In order to more accurately define the mix of teaching
and learning methods involved in a sales induction
program, it is useful to differentiate between two distinct
subcomponents or categories of activities, both of which
are typically employed to a greater or lesser extent: 1)
a sales “training program,” and; 2) a sales “coaching
program” (Lambert 2009a, 2009b). The term “training
program” refers to a planned and formally organized group
activity aimed at imparting information and instructions
to facilitate participants’ acquisition of a required level of
sales-related knowledge (Mackey 2013). The perceived
importance of such training among practitioners is well
documented (Steel 2013). Indeed, it is estimated that U.S.
companies, for example, spend $7.1 billion annually on
training programs and devote more than 33 hours per
year training the average salesperson (Lorge 1998). This
figure increases to 73.4 training days for an average
entry-level sales representative (Kaydo 1998), and in
technical markets (e.g., computers, imaging systems, and
chemicals), the costs associated with the development of
a single salesperson can exceed $100,000 (Dubinsky
1996; Johnston and Marshall 2009). Today more than
21
Journal of Selling
ever, salespeople must have a working knowledge across
numerous topics in order to meet increasing customer
expectations (e.g., changes in market dynamics, business
enabling technologies, and business ethics) and firms are
utilizing training programs to achieve and maintain high
levels of salesperson competence in these areas (Galvin
2001; Steel 2013).
Moreover, many firms are using a variety of
training evaluation procedures in order to gauge the
effectiveness of such programs (Mackey 2013). These
range from self-administered reports completed by
the trainees, to informal debriefing sessions, to more
elaborate calculations of enhanced sales revenue (Attia,
Honeycutt and Leach 2005). Certainly, the information
and feedback emanating from such evaluation
procedures can be considered as central to the
successful implementation of strategic organizational
initiatives (Moore and Seidner 1998). However, it
is noteworthy that over recent years little empirical
research that ties sales training (either that which is
included within an induction program or that which is
carried out on an ongoing basis) to performance has
been undertaken (Attia, Honeycutt and Attia 2002;
Hill and Allaway 1993; Lassk et al. 2012), although
managerial perceptions certainly tend to support the
efficacy of such endeavors (Jantan et al. 2004).
In contrast to sales training, a “coaching program” is
concerned with helping each individual salesperson
embark upon a journey of self-improvement within
an on-the-job, results-oriented context, and through
a process of ongoing one-on-one conversations and
dialogue with their coach (Mosca, Fazzari and Buzza
2010; Somers 2012). Here, an analogy is often drawn
between the competitive worlds of sports and business
sales. Just as an athlete must compete against opposing
players to win games, salespeople compete against
other companies’ salespeople to win accounts (Rich
1998). As such, rather like the athletic coach, the sales
manager plays a similarly critical role in developing the
skills of his or her sales team. In fact, the extent to which
athletic success stems from natural ability is usually
unquestioned, while sales management textbooks often
report the idea of the natural-born salesperson as myth
(e.g., Stanton, Buskirk and Spiro 1991).
22
Many salespeople reach their full potential through
effective coaching and supervision activities that involve
continual guidance and feedback by the sales manager
at “branch” level (Rich 1998), and practitioners widely
recognize this sales coaching process to be critical to
the competitive success of the firm (Agarwal, Angst and
Magni 2009; Corcoran et al. 1995; Dubinsky and Barry
1982; Mosca, Fazzari and Buzza 2010; Richardson
2009). Accordingly, it is therefore surprising to note
that few empirical studies into the beneficial effects of
sales coaching on productivity have been reported in the
literature. Interestingly however, in the wider domain of
executive coaching, Olivero et al. (1997) have reported
that coaching (which included goal setting, problem
solving, practice, feedback, supervisory involvement,
evaluation of end results, and public presentation)
increased productivity fourfold over training alone.
Moreover, in this particular context (executive
coaching in a public sector municipal agency), the
authors proposed a qualitative difference in the type of
learning that takes place in training and coaching, each
phase serving a unique purpose. Whereas the training
provided a period of abstract learning principles, the
coaching facilitated concrete involvement in a project
specific to each participant’s work unit (Olivero, Bane
and Kopelman 1997). Thus, in this case, some attempt
was made by the authors to distinguish the objectives
and outcomes of training versus coaching.
Similarly, Bright and Crockett (2012) sought to
evaluate the beneficial effects of a classroom-based
training session followed by an individual coaching
session directed at healthcare executives. The
researchers reported a significant difference in an
experimental group (that had received training plus
coaching), compared to a control group (that did
not receive training and coaching) in their ability to
identify solutions to issues that positively impacted
their work responsibilities, their effectiveness when
under pressure, their heightened capacity to deal with
changing priorities, and a greater effectiveness in
dealing with tight deadlines. The experimental group
also showed an increased adeptness for articulating
ideas more clearly and concisely when compared to the
control group.
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
In summary, a review of the literature reveals that
historically, research has focused on (sales) training and
coaching as discrete endeavours. Further, it seems there
have been no empirical studies designed to tease out the
relative contribution of each to sales performance nor
has there been any research that seeks to elucidate any
potential synergistic effects of training and coaching
within the context of a salesperson induction program.
Methodology
For decades, a methodological precedent has been
established whereby a variety of authors (e.g., Gardner
and Levy 1955; Gill and Johnson 1991; Mintzberg
1979; November 2004; Tapp 2004; Wells 1993) have
argued that the best way to study business practice is
“from the inside” such that researchers get “closer to
the action” and consequently gain meaningful insights
into how companies go about doing what they do.
This insider’s perspective typically manifests through
qualitative models of research design, often inspired
by interpretive, naturalistic and immersive methods
(Arnould and Wallendorf 1994; Fetterman 2010; Guba
and Lincoln 1994; Hirschman 1986; Lincoln and Guba
1985; Polkinghorne 1989). Accordingly, this paper
reports the findings obtained from exploratory, depth
interviews conducted in late 2012 and early 2013 with
senior executives, at the director and vice president
levels, with responsibility for business development,
sales force management and sales force training in four
large financial services companies.
Research participants were recruited via two matched
pairs of companies (one defined as “low-performing”
and the other as “high performing”) competing head-tohead in seeking to serve essentially the same market(s)
with a similar range of financial product/service
offerings: one matched pair being located in the United
Kingdom and the other in New Zealand. The use of
matched pairs as the basis for a comparative study is
a form of research design that is well established (cf.
Brooksbank and Taylor 2007; Doyle, Saunders and
Wong 1985) and was chosen because it is a model that
allows for a sharp contrast to be drawn between the
induction programs of higher and lower performing
firms competing with one another in the same market.
Note as well that per dicta of qualitative methodologies
(Creswell 2003; Krueger 2008; McCracken 1988),
a relatively small number of in-depth participant
interactions is typically sufficient to generate enough
data to ascertain the pertinent elements (i.e. the
“phenomenological essence” or “core categories”)
of an investigated social-psychological phenomenon.
Therefore, a quest for representative “sample size” that
might achieve statistical conclusion validity (i.e. an
effort more germane to hypothetico-deductive research
paradigms) was not pursued.
The four participant companies were selected using
a three-step process. The first step involved asking a
knowledgeable and experienced “industry expert” in
each country to compile a short list of companies to
approach (two likely high performers and two likely
low performers all competing against each other in
the same marketplace). The second step entailed
contacting these firms by telephone and email with an
invitation to respond initially to a short questionnaire,
with the promise that information given would be kept
confidential. In essence, the questionnaire attempted to
ascertain two main pieces of information: (i) the extent
to which each company carried out at least some form of
induction program for new sales recruits, and whether
this program had exceeded, met, or failed to meet its
overall objectives during the previous financial year,
and; (ii) how the company had performed during the
previous financial year relative to its major competitors
(“better,” “the same,” “worse,” or “don’t know”) and
against four specified performance measures: profit,
sales volume, market share and return on investment.
Notably, this type of performance measurement has
been previously employed by other researchers such as
Hooley and Lynch (1985) and Law et al. (1998) and
although self-reported measures of relative performance
have the potential to contain bias, these and other
authors contend that in the absence of objective criteria,
they can be both appropriate and reliable (Dess and
Robinson 1984; Matear and Garrett 2004). Thus, by
using the answers given in the questionnaire as a filter,
the third and final step in the process involved inviting
executives from one self-reported high performing
company and one self-reported low performer in each
matched pair (one pair based in the United Kingdom
and the other based in New Zealand) to participate in a
follow-up interview.
23
Journal of Selling
The self-reported performance characteristics for each
“matched pair” of firms are shown in Table 1. In a
tact similar to Ferrell et al. (2010), subsequent depth
interviews with executive participants lasted from 60
to 75 minutes each, with the scope of inquiry aimed
largely at encompassing the phenomena of both broad
and specific characteristics about each participating
company’s planning and execution of their sales training
and sales coaching induction program activities. These
depth interviews were facilitated by a semi-structured,
discovery-oriented interview guidelines developed in the
tradition of both broad, initial “grand tour” techniques
(Fetterman 2010; McCracken 1988) and more specific
and acute phenomenological inquiry (Kvale 1983;
Polkinghorne 1989; Rader 2007; Thompson, Locander
and Pollio 1989). Interviewees steered the conversations
(Morrison, Haley and Sheehan 2002) in a flexible and
“informal, interactive process” utilizing “open-ended
comments and questions” (Moustakas 1994, p. 114).
Responses were recorded and transcribed for analysis.
Selected supporting verbatim extracts are included in
the body of the paper.
Table 1: Self Reported Sample Performance Characteristics
High Performer
UK Matched
Pair
Failed to meet induction program
Induction program objectives
objectives. Performed the “same”
“met.” Performed “better” than its
or “worse” than major
major competitors across the
competitors across the measures
measures specified.
specified.
NZ Matched
Pair
Induction program objectives
“exceeded.” Performed “better”
than its major competitors across
the measures specified.
Findings
Best practice for running an effective sales training
program
In the questionnaire, all four participating companies
reported that they conducted a formal, classroombased sales training program for their new recruits. The
depth interviews further revealed that typically, these
programs were run at least twice per year, are of 5-10
days in duration, included a cohort of 8-15 trainees,
and are ideally held within the first few weeks of a new
recruit’s job commencement. Indeed, in these areas
there were no obvious differences between the higher
and lower performers. Interestingly, however, whereas
24
Low Performer
Failed to meet its induction
program objectives. Performed
“worse” (or “don’t know”) than
major competitors across the
measures specified.
executives from the lower performing companies said
they outsourced a trainer/instructor on an as-required
basis, by contrast, it seems the higher performers prefer
to use in-house trainers: one or more staff members who
typically carry out this duty from time to time alongside
their other functional responsibilities within corporate
business development. As one executive explained:
We like to use our own people, usually senior
managers who have been there done that...we don’t
want some off the peg, once size fits all course
that’s the same as all the rest.... it’s a matter of
branding, credibility and being the best.
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
When asked to identify the key objectives for their sales
training program three of the four interviewees were
unable to specify precise metrics. For both the lower
performers, training objectives were largely relegated
to the seemingly obvious need for recruits to be able to
“learn how to do their new job” whereas in the case of
the other higher performer, at least it was claimed that
training objectives were “under review.” Perhaps this
overall profile of response was somewhat surprising
in light of the widely received view in learning and
pedagogy theory that objectives are paramount to the
success of any educational/training curriculum (Bloom
1956; Dean et al. 2012; Mager 1997). However, one
executive from a high performing firm was much more
forthcoming and explicit in her response to the question
relating to setting training objectives. She explained
that by the end of her company’s formal sales training
program, all new recruits will have taken a series of
tests to prove that they could recall and comprehend key
information to “an acceptable level,” further elaborating:
Pretty much the sole purpose of our training
program is the acquisition of basic knowledge...
from there, professional skills can go on to be
developed and finessed.
As might have been expected, one of the most important
elements of an effective sales training program, according
to all four interviewees, related to the need to design
program content in a logical, progressive, step-by-step
sequence. There was also general agreement about the
key topic areas to cover, which included the following:
product knowledge, industry knowledge, customer and
market knowledge; the sales process (incorporating
a range of selling skills, tools and techniques such
as interviewing, presenting, benefit selling, closing
and objection-handling); new business prospecting
methods; customer service and relationship building
procedures; and self-management. Nonetheless, the
interviews did indicate that the higher performers were
differentiated from their lower performing counterparts
by their inclusion of an additional topic: the provision of
a detailed understanding of the sales coaching process
that was planned to follow-up and build upon the initial
sales training program inputs. As one executive put it:
Our recruits need to know that learning doesn’t
stop when the formal training is over... they also
need to understand what’s going to happen next
when they get to meet their field manager and all
the ins and outs of how they’re going to be managed
and coached to become superstars.
Interestingly, another topic highlighted by one
interviewee from a higher performing company
(although not by any of the others), was the need to
spend sufficient time on introducing new recruits to
their company’s culture. Culture was described as
referring to the company’s traditions, values, beliefs,
and ethics. In their own words, in short:
Right from the start, every new staff member has
to understand how we do things around here... it’s
what defines us.
This interviewee went on to explain that this part of the
training program was now considered essential in the
post-global financial crisis era because of the imperative
for his company to strive to conduct its business to the
highest possible professional standards, and to facilitate
its ability to attract and retain people of excellence.
Another strong theme of agreement among all
interviewees related to the need to ensure that the
program encompassed a wide range of delivery methods
conducive to a “classroom” environment, on the basis
that this serves to accommodate the many different
preferred learning styles among trainees. Methods
highlighted included traditional “chalk and talk”
teaching alongside group discussion and brainstorming
sessions, individual and group exercises, films, roleplays, online games and simulations, and such like.
However, upon further questioning, it became apparent
that with regard to the use and application of computer
technology, the higher performers were well ahead
of their counterparts. Both the interviewees from the
higher performing companies explained in detail and
with some enthusiasm that their companies had recently
developed, or were at least currently in the process
of developing, a dedicated intranet-based learning
environment. The logic behind these initiatives was
succinctly articulated when one executive commented:
25
Journal of Selling
We’ve read the tea leaves just like everybody else.
So the future is a fully integrated online-offline
learning environment that promotes ongoing
self-improvement, interfaces with line managers’
performance reviews, with HR, and does the whole
nine yards.
Thus, with specific regard to the role this system
plays in the sales training room, in simple terms it
provides a convenient, centrally accessible source of
backup teaching and learning support materials such as
course notes, fact sheets, checklists, workbooks, selfevaluation tools, video clips and so on. Its real value,
however, was much more that of being an “enabling”
technology (Lambert 2009a), providing a means by
which each trainee’s subsequent experiences of being
coached on-the-job could, over time, benefit from
previous training inputs and via a process of ongoing
application and evaluation, help turn them into wellhoned practical skills and behaviors.
Best practice for running an effective sales coaching
program
In the questionnaire, the four participating companies
had indicated that their company’s induction course
included some form of sales coaching program.
Indeed, the interviews revealed that although the
term “coaching” meant different things to different
companies, all four companies viewed it as a critically
important “in the field” follow-up, complementary
activity, to their sales training program -- and one that
made up the remainder of a set induction program lasting
either three months (one, lower performing company)
or six months (one lower performing and the two
higher performing companies). Interestingly, however,
for the lower performing companies it seems that at the
conclusion of this period the new recruit was deemed
to have successfully “passed” their probationary period
simply on the authority of their field office/branch
manager. By contrast, the interviewees from the higher
performing companies insisted that achieving the status
of a “professional XXXXX” (read here the formal
job title used by each company) was dependent upon
adherence to a strict assessment procedure including,
in both cases, the results of a formal customer service
satisfaction survey completed by clients, together with
26
the systematic review of various written assessments
and progress reports. As one interviewee asserted:
It’s no cake walk. Our recruits know exactly what
hoops they have to jump through before they
can consider themselves to be a graduate of our
academy.
As indicated earlier, the interviews also revealed that the
higher performing companies were differentiated from
their lower performing counterparts by their depth of
understanding and application of the term “coaching.”
In fact, for the lower performers it was seemingly an
extremely loosely defined term that merely meant their
office/branch sales manager had been assigned the task
of “showing a new recruit the ropes” often by taking
him or her out with them on customer visits so that
they could learn by “sitting next to Nellie” and/or quite
simply, as one interviewee stated:
It requires always being on the spot to offer further
information, advice, support, guidance and so forth.
In sharp contrast, an executive from a higher performing
firm commented:
Being a coach is not the same as being a manager.
It’s a different set of skills that our managers have
to learn in order that they can perform the role [of
a coach] to the benefit of each new staff member.
Indeed, for this high performer the coaching role might
be characterized as “textbook” in that it was described
by an executive to be an experiential-based, facilitated
self-learning process, necessitating that the coach
encourages and challenges his or her recruit to develop
their own ever-evolving learning goals and sales targets.
The coach here helps them to analyse, plan, implement
and evaluate incremental improvements to their overall
skill set as time goes by. Interestingly, it also became
apparent that (at least for the company that was using
its own purpose-built online learning platform), each
coach was expected to post regular progress reports so
that whenever a need arose for additional training on a
specific topic, it could easily be spotted and a dedicated,
short (half or one day) in-house training course could
be arranged in a timely fashion.
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
In view of the combination of findings reported above,
perhaps it was not too surprising that when the four
interviewees were asked to identify the main objectives
of their company’s sales coaching program, the
executives from the higher performing companies were
noticeably more assertive in explicating their response.
For them, during the first few weeks and months of work,
coaching was a means to help cultivate and develop all
the necessary skills of the profession, systematically
attempting to apply all the tools and techniques that had
been learned in the classroom. Moreover, an important
secondary objective was to develop the skills of self
analysis so that each recruit was empowered to become
a lifelong self-learner. As one interviewee put it:
Ultimately, we want our people to be all they are
capable of becoming, and more!
Despite a number of clear differences in the role that
sales coaching played among our four participating
companies (and notwithstanding the differences in their
understanding of the term itself), the interviews did
reveal one commonly held perception about the nature of
an effective sales coaching program. All four executives
stressed that it was up to every new recruit to drive
the process. For each recruit, the intrinsic motivation
to want to be a success, and the willingness to accept
full responsibility and accountability for making the
coaching process an effective one, is paramount.
Conclusions and Managerial Research
This study has served to validate much of the
conventional wisdom typically espoused in the
literature about the nature of effective sales training
(Attia, Honeycutt and Leach 2005; Ricks, Williams
and Weeks 2008). In particular, the balance of the
reported evidence suggests that when planning and
executing a sales training program it is important to:
set clear objectives that relate primarily to knowledge
acquisition; employ a structured curriculum (to cover
company knowledge, product knowledge, industry
knowledge, market knowledge, the selling process,
new business prospecting methods, customer service/
relationship building procedures, self-management,
and the coaching process), adopt a timeline long
enough to enable trainees to fully engage in the learning
experience; employ a range of pedagogical delivery
techniques that cater to varied learning styles; provide
trainees with plenty of supporting documentation, and;
check that knowledge transfer is actually occurring at
frequent intervals throughout the program.
However, a number of other key success factors have
emerged that appear to be uniquely associated with
the training activities of the higher performers. For
example, it might well be preferable to use in-house
trainers/instructors who will have credibility in the
eyes of trainees by virtue of a track record of sales
achievement. It might also be necessary to ensure two
extra items are included in the training agenda: 1) the
provision of a thorough appreciation of the importance
of, and the processes involved in, the company’s onthe-job sales coaching program that typically follows
as part of the overall salesperson induction period,
and; 2) the provision of a thorough understanding of
the company’s “culture,” especially those aspects of the
company’s operations that are required to be in keeping
with the customer-centric ethical standards that are
widely expected to be upheld in today’s marketplace.
Another distinctive dimension of the higher performers’
training activities lies in the area of technology. It seems
that a purpose-built online learning environment is
integral to their ability to enable each trainee, his or her
line manager/coach, and others within the company, to
maximize the exchange of information about progress
made to the mutual benefit of all parties. The successful
adoption of such computer technologies (for use in sales
training programs) may also be indicative of a changing
workforce, increasingly comprised of “digital natives”
who feel at ease with computer-mediated learning
modalities (Palfrey and Gasser 2013).
The study findings have also served to validate much
of the conventional wisdom typically espoused in the
literature about the nature of effective sales coaching
(cf. Graham and Renshaw 2005; Rosen 2008). In
particular, it has highlighted the very different, yet
entirely complementary, role that a sales coaching
program plays when compared with a sales training
program, as summarized in Table 2.
Certainly, the interviews served to confirm that when
running a sales coaching program, some of the basic
success factors to observe include: the setting of
clear objectives and especially those that relate to the
27
Journal of Selling
Table 2: Key Features of Sales Training Versus Sales Coaching
Table 2: Key Features of Sales Training Versus Sales Coaching
Sales Training Program
Sales Coaching Program
Infrequent
/ occasional
Sales
Training
Program
Frequent
/ on-going
Sales
Coaching
Program
Generalized/ occasional
to sales team
Infrequent
Individualized
one on one
Frequent / on-going
Knowledge acquisition
focus
Generalized
to sales team
Skill acquisition
Individualized
onefocus
on one
Classroom-based learning
Knowledge
acquisition focus
Experiential-based learning
Fixed / planned agenda
Classroom-based learning
Dynamic / adaptive agenda
Experiential-based learning
Instructor - led
Fixed / planned agenda
Mandatory
Instructor - led
Shorter term goals
Mandatory
Salesperson - led
Dynamic / adaptive agenda
Voluntary
Salesperson - led
Longer term goals
Voluntary
Shorter term goals
Longer term goals
Skill acquisition focus
cultivation of selling skills and self-appraisal; the need for a coach to be constantly questioning, encouraging and
challenging their recruits to develop their own ever-evolving learning goals and sales targets and to provide them
with ongoing feedback and progress reports, and; the requirement for the recruit to be a self-starter and take full
responsibility and accountability for their learning as time goes by. Perhaps the most important and distinctive attribute
associated with the higher performers, however, is the extent to which they have sought to properly integrate and align
their sales coaching activities with their sales training activities. As the diagram in Figure 1 attempts to illustrate,
it seems that the higher performers model the whole of their induction program on an underlying logic that can be
directly related to, and explained by, Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of learning domains.
Figure 1: An Integrated Sales Training/Coaching Model
Figure 1: An Integrated Sales Training/Coaching Model
29
29
28
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
As Figure 1 indicates, at the outset of the induction
program the new recruit requires an almost exclusive
focus on basic knowledge acquisition and the ability
to be able to recall that knowledge (i.e., those domains
that relate to the lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy)
in order to provide a strong platform for his or her
future development. Then, as time goes by and they
gain on-the-job experience, sales coaching assumes
an increasingly more important role in taking the
salesperson to the next level (i.e., the development of
selling skills through knowledge application). To put it
another way, it would appear that the higher performers
aim to pursue an appropriate and evolving balance
of both sales training and coaching throughout the
duration of their induction programs -- ideally all the
way through to a conclusion which leaves the recruit
capable of ongoing independent learning, having by
this time reached, at least in theory, the highest levels
of Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy (i.e., the skills of analysis,
synthesis and evaluation).
flourish within a supportive and enabling environment.
Certainly, an audit of each sales manager’s ability to
effectively coach their staff should be conducted, with
a view to upgrading knowledge and skills as necessary.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the degree to
which the firm’s training and coaching activities are
properly integrated and aligned requires consideration.
Here it will be necessary to revise the overall objectives
of the firms’ induction program. Again, using Bloom’s
(1956) taxonomy of learning as a guide (see Figure 1), the
aim should be to ensure that all elements of the program
are geared towards encouraging new recruits to build
a long term career in sales by “learning how to learn”
(Argyris 1991). In pursuit of this goal, a review of the
firm’s technological infrastructure is also recommended.
The deployment of technology as a means of enhancing
all aspects of the leaning process was found to be a key
success factor that clearly differentiated the induction
programs of the higher performers in our sample from
those of their lower performing counterparts.
These conclusions give rise to a number of implications
for practitioners. It is advised that senior executives at
the director and vice president level with responsibility
for sales force management and training undertake a
comprehensive appraisal of their firm’s salesperson
induction program in order to ensure that it aligns with
the key determinants of best practice identified above.
In particular, attention should be focussed upon the
following areas. Firstly, an evaluation of the formal
“sales training” component of the firm’s induction
program should be conducted. This evaluation should
review all aspects of the firm’s training program,
including: its stated objectives; the mix, timing and
sequencing of topics covered; the range of teaching and
learning activities employed, assessment procedures,
and; the type of documentation and other supporting
materials offered. Secondly, an evaluation of the
“sales coaching” component of the firm’s induction
program should be undertaken. For many managers it is
envisaged that this evaluation might well reveal a need
to attach more importance to the role that sales coaching
plays within their firm’s induction program. In such
cases it might even be necessary to question the firms’
prevailing culture with respect to salesperson learning
and development since the evidence reported in this
study strongly indicates that effective coaching can only
Limitations and Future Research
Despite the attributes of the adopted methodology, this
study’s findings should nonetheless be viewed in light
of a number of potential limitations. As is the case with
much social-psychological research, the validity of
self-reporting should be kept in mind. That is to say,
when questions are used in personal interview studies,
researchers are limited by the respondents’ willingness
to answer such questions in a forthright manner.
However, since the topics covered in the interviews
were not of a sensitive nature, concern for the accuracy
of the responses may be less of an issue in this case.
Another limitation relates to the generalizability of the
findings given the small representation of participants.
If findings were to be inferred to a greater population
then an additional, larger study, using quantitative
methods would need to be pursued (i.e. likely surveybased research). Equally an issue meriting further
inquiry relates to the generalizability of the findings to
firms outside the United Kingdom and New Zealand.
Although there is no reason to suspect that executives in
companies outside these territories might adopt different
or contrary perspectives, clearly the findings in the
study might more readily impute to countries exhibiting
similar social, regulatory and economic profiles.
29
Journal of Selling
From an academic perspective, this study also indicates
that more research into this much neglected arena is
needed. For example, further qualitative research could
usefully examine, in greater depth than the present
study, the underlying “how-to-do–its” of effective
sales coaching, including the various ways and means
by which it can be best integrated and aligned with a
company’s sales training activities. Equally useful would
be a follow-up, survey-based (i.e., quantitative) research
program designed to validate this study’s findings
both within and beyond the financial services industry.
Providing this research retains a practical focus it would
likely prove to be extremely valuable in serving to raise
standards across the sales profession, and to the ultimate
benefit of customers, salespeople, businesses and society.
REFERENCES
Aberdeen Group (2012), “Train, Coach, Reinforce, Best
Practices in Maximising Sales Productivity,” Aberdeen
Group Research Library Vault.
Adamson, Brent, Matthew Dixon, and Nicholas N.
Toman (2012), “The End of Solution Sales,” Harvard
Business Review (July-August), 61-68.
Agarwal, Ritu, Corey M. Angst, and Massimo Magni
(2009), “The Performance Effects of Coaching:
A Multilevel Analysis Using Hierarchical Linear
Modeling,” The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 20 (10), 2110-2134.
Akinbami, Folarin (2011), “Financial Services and
Consumer Protection after the Crisis,” International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 29 (2), 134-147.
Argyris, Chris (1991), “Teaching Smart People How to
Learn,” Reflections, 4 (2), 4-15.
Arnould, Eric J. and Melanie Wallendorf (1994),
“Market-Oriented Ethnography: Interpretation Building
and Marketing Strategy Formulation,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 31 (November), 484-504.
Attia, Ashraf M., Earl D. Honeycutt, and Magdy M.
Attia (2002), “The Difficulties of Evaluating Sales
Training,” Industrial Marketing Management, 31 (3),
253-259.
Attia, Ashraf M., Earl D. Honeycutt, and Mark P.
Leach (2005), “A Three-Stage Model for Assessing and
Improving Sales Force Training and Development,”
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 25
(3), 253-268.
30
Bloom, Benjamin S. (1956), Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New
York: David McKay Co, Inc.
Boehle, Sarah (2010), “Global Sales Training’s
Balancing Act,” Training (January), 29-31.
Brenkert, George G. (2011), “Marketing of Financial
Services,” in Finance Ethics: Critical Issues in Theory
and Practice, John R. Boatright and George G.
Brenkert, Eds. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Bright, Deborah and Anita Crockett (2012), “Training
Combined with Coaching Can Make a Significant
Difference in Job Performance and Satisfaction,”
Coaching: An International Journal of Theory,
Research and Practice, 5 (1), 1-18.
Brooksbank, Roger and David Taylor (2007), “Strategic
Marketing in Action: A Comparison of Higher and
Lower Performing Manufacturing Firms in the UK,”
Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 25 (1), 31-44.
Callender, Guy and Kevin P. Reid (1993), Australian
Sales Management. Melbourne, Australia.
Chambers, Clare (2010), “Banking on Reform in
2010: Is Regulatory Change Ever Enough and Will the
General Election Hold the Answers for the Financial
Services Industry?,” The Law Teacher, 44 (2), 218-234.
Corcoran, Kevin J., Laura K. Petersen, Daniel B.
Baitch, and Mark F. Barrett (1995), High Performance
Sales Organizations: Achieving Competitive Advantage
in the Global Marketplace. Irwin, New York.
Cox, Michael (2012), “Power Shifts, Economic Change
and the Decline of the West?,” International Relations,
26 (4), 369-388.
Creswell, John W. (2003), Research Design: Qualitative,
Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dean, Ceri B., Elizabeth R. Hubbell, Howard Pitler, and
B. J. Stone (2012), Classroom Instruction That Works:
Research-Based Strategies (2nd ed.). Alexandria,
Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Dess, Gregory and Richard Robinson (1984),
“Measuring Organizational Performance in the Absence
of Objective Measures: The Case of Privately Held
Firms and Conglomerate Business Units,” Strategic
Management Journal, 5 (3), 264-273.
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
Doyle, Peter, John Saunders, and Veronica Wong
(1985), “Investigation of Japanese Marketing Strategies
in the British Market,” Report to the Economic and
Scientific Research Council.
Drew, Michael, Adam Walk, and Robert Bianchi
(2013), “Financial Product Complexity and the Limits
of Financial Literacy: A Special Issue of the Journal of
Financial Services Marketing,” Journal of Financial
Services Marketing, 18 (3), 153-157.
Dubinsky, Alan J. and Thomas E. Barry (1982), “A
Survey of Sales Management Practices,” Industrial
Marketing Management, 11 (2), 133-141.
Dubinsky, Alan J. (1996), “Some Assumptions About
the Effectiveness of Sales Training,” Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 16 (3), 67-76.
Ennew, Christine and Nigel Waite (2012), Financial
Services Marketing: An International Guide to
Principles and Practice (1st ed.). New York: Routledge.
Farquhar, Jillian and Arthur Meidan (2010), Marketing
Financial Services (2nd ed.). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Ferrell, Linda, Tracy L. Gonzalez-Padron, and O.
C. Ferrell (2010), “An Assessment of the Use of
Technology in the Direct Selling Industry,” Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30 (2), 157-165.
Fetterman, David M. (2010), Ethnography (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Fogel, Suzanne, David Hoffmeister, Richard Rocco,
and Daniel Strunk (2012), “Teaching Sales,” Harvard
Business Review (July-August), 94-99.
Futrrell, Charles M. (2005), Abc’s of Relationship Selling
through Service. Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Galvin, Tammy (2001), “Training Industry Report
2001,” Training, 38 (10), 40-65.
Gardner, Burleigh B. and Sidney J. Levy (1955), “The
Product and the Brand,” Harvard Business Review, 33
(2), 33-39.
Guba, Egon G. and Yvonna S. Lincoln (1994),
“Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research,” in
Handbook of Qualitative Research, Norman K. Denzin
and Yvonna S. Lincoln, Eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Heckl, Diana and Jurgen Moormann (2010),
“Operational Process Management in the Financial
Services Industry,” in Handbook of Research on
Complex Dynamic Process Management Techniques
for Adaptability in Turbulent Environments, Minhong
Wang and Zhaohao Sun, Eds. Hershey, PA: Business
Science Reference.
Hill, John S. and Arthur W. Allaway (1993), “How U.S.Based Companies Manage Sales in Foreign Countries,”
Industrial Marketing Management, 22 (1), 7-16.
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1986), “Humanistic Inquiry
in Marketing Research: Philosophy, Method, and
Criteria,” Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 23
(3), 237-249.
Hooley, Graham J. and James E. Lynch (1985),
“Marketing Lesson from the UK’s High-Flying
Companies “ Journal of Marketing Management, 1 (1),
65-74.
Hosono, Kaoru, Koji Sakai, and Kotaro Tsuru (2009),
“Consolidation of Banks in Japan: Causes and
Consequences,” RIETI Discussion Paper, 07-E-059.
Jagodic,
Gregor
(2012),
“Effectiveness
of
Communication in Relation to Training of Sales Staff,”
in Management, Knowledge and Learning International
Conference. Celje, Slovenia.
Jantan, Asri, Earl D. Honeycutt, Shawn Thelen, and
Ashraf M. Attia (2004), “Managerial Perceptions of
Sales Training and Performance,” Industrial Marketing
Management, 33 (7), 667-673.
Johnston, Mark W. and Greg W. Marshall (2009),
Relationship Selling and Sales Management (3rd ed.).
Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gill, John and Philip Johnson (1991), Research Methods
for Managers (2nd ed.). London: Paul Chapman.
Kaishev, Vladimir. K., Jens P. Nielsen, and Fredrik
Thuring (2013), “Optimal Customer Selection for
Cross-Selling of Financial Services Products,” Expert
Systems with Applications, 40 (5), 1748-1757.
Graham, Alexander and Ben Renshaw (2005),
Super Coaching: The Missing Ingredient for High
Performance. London: Random House.
Kaydo, Chad (1998), “Should You Speed up Sales
Training,” Sales and Marketing Management, 150
(10), 33.
Gritten, Adéle (2011), “New Insights into Consumer
Confidence in Financial Services,” International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 29 (2), 90-106.
Krueger, Richard A. (2008), Focus Groups: A Practical
Guide for Applied Research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
31
Journal of Selling
Kvale, Steinar (1983), “The Qualitative Research
Interview: A Phenomenological and Hermeneutical
Mode of Understanding,” Journal of Phenomenological
Psychology, 14 (2), 171-196.
Lambert, Brian (2009a), “Barriers to Appropriate Sales
Training,” Training and Development, 64 (6), 22.
Lambert, Brian (2009b), “Sales Training Takes Center
Stage,” Training and Development, 3 (6), 62-63.
Lassk, Felicia G., Thomas N. Ingram, Florian Kraus,
and Rita Di Mascio (2012), “The Future of Sales
Training: Challenges and Related Research Questions,”
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 32
(1), 141-154.
McCracken, Grant (1988), The Long Interview.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Mintzberg, Henry (1979), “An Emerging Strategy of
Direct Research,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24
(4), 582-589.
Moore, Carol A. and Constance J. Seidner (1998),
“Organizational Strategy and Training Evaluation,” in
Evaluating Corporate Training: Models and Issues,
Stephen M. Brown and Constance J. Seidner, Eds.
Vol. 46.
Morrison, Margaret A., J. Eric Haley, and Kim Bartel
Sheehan (2002), Using Qualitative Research in
Advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Law, Kenneth S., Chi-Sum Wong, and William H. Mobley
(1998), “Toward a Taxonomy of Multidimensional
Constructs,” Academy of Management Review, 24 (4),
741-755.
Mosca, Joseph B., Alan Fazzari, and John Buzza
(2010), “Coaching to Win: A Systematic Approach to
Achieving Productivity through Coaching,” Journal of
Business Economics Research, 8 (5), 115-130.
Lempka, Robert and Paul D. Stallard (2013), Next
Generation Finance: Adapting the Financial Services
Industry to Changes in Technology, Regulation and
Consumer Behaviour. Hampshire, UK: Harriman House.
Moustakas, Clark (1994), Phenomenological Research
Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lincoln, Yvonna S. and Egon G. Guba (1985),
“Designing a Naturalistic Inquiry,” in Naturalistic
Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Lorge, Sarah (1998), “Getting into Their Heads,” Sales
and Marketing Management, 150 (February), 58-64.
Mackey, Kimberley (2013), “An Investigation into
the Salesperson’s Induction Program,” Unpublished
Master’s Dissertation, University of Waikato.
Mager, Robert F. (1997), Preparing Instructional
Objectives: A Critical Tool in the Development of
Effective Instruction (3rd ed.). Atlanta, Georgia: Center
for Effective Performance
Martini, Nancy (2012), Scientific Selling: Creating
High Performance Teams through Applied Psychology
and Testing. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Matear, Sheelagh M., Tony Garrett, and Brendon J. Gray
(2004), “Market Orientation, Brand Investment, New
Service Development, Market Position, and Performance
for Service Organisations,” International Journal of
Service Industry Management, 15 (3), 284-301.
Mayer-Foulkes, David A. (2009), “Long-Term
Fundamentals of the 2008 Economic Crisis,” Global
Economy Journal, 9 (4).
32
November, Peter (2004), “Seven Reasons Why
Marketing Practitioners Should Ignore Marketing
Academic Research,” Australian Marketing Journal,
12 (2), 39-50.
Olivero, Gerald, K. Denise Bane, and Richard E.
Kopelman (1997), “Executive Coaching as a Transfer
of Training Tool: Effects on Productivity in a Public
Agency,” Public Personnel Management, 26 (4),
461-470.
Palfrey, John G. and Urs Gasser (2013), Born Digital:
Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives.
New York: Perseus Books Group.
Polkinghorne, Donald E. (1989), “Phenomenological
Research Methods,” in Existential Phenomenology
Perspectives in Psychology, Ronald S. Valle and Steen
Halling, Eds. Vol. 41-60. New York: Plenum Press.
Rader, Scott (2007), “A Phenomenological Inquiry into
the Essence of the Technologically Extended Self,”
in Academy of Marketing Science World Congress.
Verona, Italy: Academy of Marketing Science.
Rajaobelina, Lova and Jasmin Bergeron (2009),
“Antecedents and Consequences of Buyer-Seller
Relationship Quality in the Financial Services
Industry,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27
(5), 359-380.
Northern Illinois University
Volume 14, Number 1
Rich, Gregory A. (1998), “The Constructs of Sales
Coaching: Supervisory Feedback, Role Modeling
and Trust,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, 18 (1), 53-63.
Steel, Duncan (2013), “The Effectiveness of
Integrated Sales Training and Sales Coaching within
Private Banking,” Master’s Thesis, The University of
Portsmouth.
Richardson, Linda (2009), Sales Coaching: Making the
Great Leap from Sales Manager to Sales Coach (2nd
ed.). Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tapp, Alan (2004), “A Call to Arms for Applied
Marketing Academics,” Marketing Intelligence and
Planning, 22 (5), 579-590.
Ricks, Joe M., Jacqueline A. Williams, and William A.
Weeks (2008), “Sales Trainer Roles, Competencies,
Skills and Behaviors: A Case Study,” Industrial
Marketing Management, 37 (5), 593-603.
Thompson, Craig J., William B. Locander, and Howard
R. Pollio (1989), “Putting Consumer Experience Back
into Consumer Research: The Philosophy and Method
of Existential-Phenomenology,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 16 (2), 133.
Rosen, Keith (2008), Coaching Salespeople into Sales
Champions. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Sarin, Shikhar, Trina Sego, Ajay K. Kohli, and Goutam
Challagalla (2010), “Characteristics That Enhance
Training in Implementing Technological Change in
Sales Strategy: A Field-Based Exploratory Study,”
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30
(2), 143-156.
Somers, Matt (2012), Successful Coaching. London:
Hodder Education.
Stanton, William J., Richard H. Buskirk, and Rosann
L. Spiro (1991), Management of the Sales Force. Irwin,
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Thuring, Fredrik, Jens P. Nielsen, Montserrat Guillén,
and Catalina Bolancé (2012), “Selecting Prospects for
Cross-Selling Financial Products Using Multivariate
Credibility,” Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (10),
8809-8816.
Valencius, Matthew G. (2009), “Better, Cheaper,
Faster: Ibm Identifies Designs, Deploys and Measures
Sales Training to Fit an Accelerated World,” Training
and Development, 63 (June), 60-63.
Wells, William D. (1993), “Discovery-Oriented
Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research,
19 (4), 489-504.
33